I'm away on holiday for the next week and a bit.
I'm going to see my dad for a bit of it, but the rest is basically just relaxing. I'm going away, which has cost me more money, but unfortunately I was kinda forced into it because my landlord needs to replace the shower in the bedsit. It's the enclosure, rather than the shower unit, but it's a pretty hefty job. It also means he'll have to turn the water off to the bathroom.
I don't; mind too much as I could do with a bit of a change of scenery, even if it is going to be about as cheap a holiday as I can possibly achieve (so no days out anywhere).
I've taken the Monday off as well, even though I'll be back on Saturday. This just gives me a bit of a chance to sort things out and get back into the groove before I'm back to work. I generally don't like to come back to a full week anyway, as I find it a bit much after a holiday.
Friday, 4 October 2013
Thursday, 3 October 2013
cockneys versus zombies
I seemed to go through a terrible stretch of movies during this period.
Having not enjoyed Fanboys and The Raid, I then received Cockneys versus Zombies. I'd heard this wasn't very good, but was hoping it would be a bit of humorous relief.
Unfortunately, it wasn't all that funny.
One of the problems with it is that it doesn't actually seem to have much of a grasp on what it wants to do with "cockneys" side of things. Yes, it's set in the East End of London and the older characters are definitely getting into "proper" cockneys territory, but the younger element of the cast could almost have been anywhere. And it's the younger element of the cast that's really carrying the story.
Well, I mean, obviously the story is a bit thin, but it takes up most of the time, so they're obviously on screen more of the time.
It almost feels like the whole "Snakes on a Plane" grand-concept thing. They've come up with a title and then tried to work a plot up so that they can call it Cockney's versus Zombies, but in reality haven't really achieved that as it could have been set anywhere - there's nothing all that cockney about it
It also fails to really hit the mark in terms of scares and laughs. I'm guessing one of the inspirations for the film was Shawn of the Dead, but the problem of course is it's not as well written and not as funny. Also, one of the things that's probably not obvious with Shawn of the Dead is that it's actually a RomCom in structure with Zombies added as a twist.
CvZ lacks this as its core, which is okay, there are other types of films, but it's replaced it with something along the lines of a heist movie, and it doesn't do a very good job at being a reasonable heist movie.
The effects were okay, if a little thin - I'm guessing that they couldn't quite scrape up enough budget to do everything they wanted and the horror side of it ended up without enough cash to do lots of good, gorey kills. It doesn't make up for that by being scary - there are some good jumps, but it's not really a horror movie-proper.
And as I say, it doesn't achieve the trick of being a comedy either, so it was very disappointing.
Having not enjoyed Fanboys and The Raid, I then received Cockneys versus Zombies. I'd heard this wasn't very good, but was hoping it would be a bit of humorous relief.
Unfortunately, it wasn't all that funny.
One of the problems with it is that it doesn't actually seem to have much of a grasp on what it wants to do with "cockneys" side of things. Yes, it's set in the East End of London and the older characters are definitely getting into "proper" cockneys territory, but the younger element of the cast could almost have been anywhere. And it's the younger element of the cast that's really carrying the story.
Well, I mean, obviously the story is a bit thin, but it takes up most of the time, so they're obviously on screen more of the time.
It almost feels like the whole "Snakes on a Plane" grand-concept thing. They've come up with a title and then tried to work a plot up so that they can call it Cockney's versus Zombies, but in reality haven't really achieved that as it could have been set anywhere - there's nothing all that cockney about it
It also fails to really hit the mark in terms of scares and laughs. I'm guessing one of the inspirations for the film was Shawn of the Dead, but the problem of course is it's not as well written and not as funny. Also, one of the things that's probably not obvious with Shawn of the Dead is that it's actually a RomCom in structure with Zombies added as a twist.
CvZ lacks this as its core, which is okay, there are other types of films, but it's replaced it with something along the lines of a heist movie, and it doesn't do a very good job at being a reasonable heist movie.
The effects were okay, if a little thin - I'm guessing that they couldn't quite scrape up enough budget to do everything they wanted and the horror side of it ended up without enough cash to do lots of good, gorey kills. It doesn't make up for that by being scary - there are some good jumps, but it's not really a horror movie-proper.
And as I say, it doesn't achieve the trick of being a comedy either, so it was very disappointing.
Wednesday, 2 October 2013
the raid
I'd heard good things about the raid.
Specifically I'd heard it was an entertaining, somewhat old-skool martial arts film, that had loads of great action.
Well it had loads of action, I will give it that, but I have to confess I found a lot of it a bit dull. No, that's not quite right - it's more that I got rather bored of it.
One of the things I say in quite a lot of my reviews is that they've taken a perfectly good 1hr 30min film and made it 2hr long. Well, the raid is only 1hr 30min (ish) long, but it felt like it should probably have been 1hr long.
A lot of the fights just drag on, and I know they're brutal and harsh and well filmed and all that, but I just found myself fast-forwarding through them.
A big part of the problem was that I found the whole film ludicrous. The plot makes no sense whatsoever. There are also some twists in it, and these just make things confusing and undermine whatever little sense it had.
Now, don't get me wrong, I wasn't expecting it to be sensible, it's just that some of the stuff that happens doesn't actually hang together, even within the logic of the film.
I dunno - I guess I'm being harsh again, but I just found it boring. Maybe if I'd watched it back when I went through that traditional phase most young guys go through of loving all things martial arts (Bruce Lee, Jackie Chan, et al) then I'd have liked it more?
Specifically I'd heard it was an entertaining, somewhat old-skool martial arts film, that had loads of great action.
Well it had loads of action, I will give it that, but I have to confess I found a lot of it a bit dull. No, that's not quite right - it's more that I got rather bored of it.
One of the things I say in quite a lot of my reviews is that they've taken a perfectly good 1hr 30min film and made it 2hr long. Well, the raid is only 1hr 30min (ish) long, but it felt like it should probably have been 1hr long.
A lot of the fights just drag on, and I know they're brutal and harsh and well filmed and all that, but I just found myself fast-forwarding through them.
A big part of the problem was that I found the whole film ludicrous. The plot makes no sense whatsoever. There are also some twists in it, and these just make things confusing and undermine whatever little sense it had.
Now, don't get me wrong, I wasn't expecting it to be sensible, it's just that some of the stuff that happens doesn't actually hang together, even within the logic of the film.
I dunno - I guess I'm being harsh again, but I just found it boring. Maybe if I'd watched it back when I went through that traditional phase most young guys go through of loving all things martial arts (Bruce Lee, Jackie Chan, et al) then I'd have liked it more?
Tuesday, 1 October 2013
simcity
So... simcity.
They released the game back at the beginning of August and the 7th (I think - I've lost track a bit) patch came out in August/September. That's 6 months. And I think it's only now that they've finally addressed all of the stuff that was either broken or (more depressingly) badly designed/implemented.
In some ways this isn't uncommon nowadays. Modern games are super complicated things that have to excel both in terms of visuals as well as content. During the early days it was all about the content - the game itself - but nowadays there's an expectation that games will look great too.
That obviously makes them expensive to develop, so there's always going to be a temptation to rush them out before they're really ready.
This is particularly the case for testing. It must be very tempting to just do some basic testing, rather than big-scale betas. It must be quite expensive to do proper testing and fix the game before it some out. The temptation to release it quickly and effectively treat the first few months an extended test (one where they're paying you to test the game!) and then fix stuff later in patches.
Which is pretty much what's happened with SimCity. Some of the stuff they've finally fixed with the last few patches makes the game operate like it probably should have done at the beginning. Don't get me wrong - I think plenty of the stuff they've put out was probably always intended to come out as extra content and some of it has occurred to them after release (like the road height thing), it's more that some of the stuff is effectively the final version of the code that simply wasn't ready at release, or they've had to come up with because their original design was broken.
I find it all a bit disheartening and the time this has all taken and my desire not to waste time on a game that wasn't ready has meant I've not played it a great deal recently.
However, they've just announced the first proper expansion for the game, and it looks rather interesting. It's basically a raft of things to make your cities "future cities", and includes some nice stuff
The problem is that I also think he fundamental "model" is broken. It was clearly the intention to make a multiplayer SimCity, which is fine as it goes, but the problem is that SimCity isn't a multi-player game. The mechanic they've chosen to achieve multiplayer seems okay - smaller cities that are interconnected, but the problem is that when you play single player, the method they've used for "simulating" other cities is just a mess. You have to keep exiting the game (this is the only way you can force it to save) simply in order for the other cities to look even vaguely like they did when you last played them, and even then they still don't work like they should.
I mean, this whole notion they had of one city "doing garbage" another "doing industry" another "doing education/research" only looks like it might work in proper multiplayer, with all the players playing at the same time. I say this, because I've never played multiplayer and have no interest in doing so. I've therefore only played single player, and I can assure you this mechanic doesn't work like it should when played that way.
The thing I find bizarre is that it seems like such a simple thing to achieve. We're simply talking about storing some basic numbers for each city - they don't need complex simulation, you just store the fact a city has x litres water spare somewhere. Why do I have to exit the game for it to even save that number in a place that my other cities can see it updating?
They released the game back at the beginning of August and the 7th (I think - I've lost track a bit) patch came out in August/September. That's 6 months. And I think it's only now that they've finally addressed all of the stuff that was either broken or (more depressingly) badly designed/implemented.
In some ways this isn't uncommon nowadays. Modern games are super complicated things that have to excel both in terms of visuals as well as content. During the early days it was all about the content - the game itself - but nowadays there's an expectation that games will look great too.
That obviously makes them expensive to develop, so there's always going to be a temptation to rush them out before they're really ready.
This is particularly the case for testing. It must be very tempting to just do some basic testing, rather than big-scale betas. It must be quite expensive to do proper testing and fix the game before it some out. The temptation to release it quickly and effectively treat the first few months an extended test (one where they're paying you to test the game!) and then fix stuff later in patches.
Which is pretty much what's happened with SimCity. Some of the stuff they've finally fixed with the last few patches makes the game operate like it probably should have done at the beginning. Don't get me wrong - I think plenty of the stuff they've put out was probably always intended to come out as extra content and some of it has occurred to them after release (like the road height thing), it's more that some of the stuff is effectively the final version of the code that simply wasn't ready at release, or they've had to come up with because their original design was broken.
I find it all a bit disheartening and the time this has all taken and my desire not to waste time on a game that wasn't ready has meant I've not played it a great deal recently.
However, they've just announced the first proper expansion for the game, and it looks rather interesting. It's basically a raft of things to make your cities "future cities", and includes some nice stuff
The problem is that I also think he fundamental "model" is broken. It was clearly the intention to make a multiplayer SimCity, which is fine as it goes, but the problem is that SimCity isn't a multi-player game. The mechanic they've chosen to achieve multiplayer seems okay - smaller cities that are interconnected, but the problem is that when you play single player, the method they've used for "simulating" other cities is just a mess. You have to keep exiting the game (this is the only way you can force it to save) simply in order for the other cities to look even vaguely like they did when you last played them, and even then they still don't work like they should.
I mean, this whole notion they had of one city "doing garbage" another "doing industry" another "doing education/research" only looks like it might work in proper multiplayer, with all the players playing at the same time. I say this, because I've never played multiplayer and have no interest in doing so. I've therefore only played single player, and I can assure you this mechanic doesn't work like it should when played that way.
The thing I find bizarre is that it seems like such a simple thing to achieve. We're simply talking about storing some basic numbers for each city - they don't need complex simulation, you just store the fact a city has x litres water spare somewhere. Why do I have to exit the game for it to even save that number in a place that my other cities can see it updating?
Monday, 30 September 2013
eBay fun
I mentioned eBay the other week, but I thought I'd do a separate blood about their latest scam - the racket that is e-bay appears to have come up with yet another way to rip everyone off.
They've now started charging for postage. Yes, that's right, if you enter the correct amount of postage on your item, you're now going to be 10% worse off. Well done you cunts.
They've stated some bullshit about this being to "encourage people to offer free postage" and to "provide better value for buyers".
Now don't get me wrong - there is a giant loophole in the system as was. If you selected "other courier" then it allows you to enter whatever value you want. And of course, auctions up to 99p are free, so by putting 99p and then, say, £30 for postage, you could sell quite expensive items and not pay e-bay a penny.
Of course, this is playing the system, and it was something I never engaged in. Indeed, until Royal Mails more recent price hikes, I was relatively happy to charge less for postage than it actually cost me.
For cheaper items (genuine 99p, not worth much, just want to get rid of it but don't want to throw it away type ones) I would try to get roughly the right postage, but didn't factor in cost of envelope and all that. I didn't mind too much as 99p auctions are free to list (well, you can do 100 a month free) and then they charge 10% (10p) at the end and PayPal take 4%+20p (25p-ish), so the postage was made up by what was left.
But now let's look at the economics. The 35p it costs on the item is still the same, but you now pay 10% of postage. Well, for one of the White Dwarf magazines I've been selling recently, for example, the postage is a staggering £1.40. So if you put £1.40, you're now effectively being charged 50p total, and suddenly the economics don't make a lot of sense.
But if you increase the cost of the item about 99p you're suddenly going to start being charged the insertion fee, which for a magazine is 10p.
So if you raise the initial price to £1.15 cover the additional fee, now you're being charged 10p to post the auction, and of course the end fees rise a bit too! It's the classic vicious circle that means you end up having to post the thing at £2 to make your money back, but then of course nobody wants to bid!
So why not add the extra on to the postage? Well technically it says that you're not allowed to raise your postage cost to cover this fee!
And what about offering free postage? Have they looked at the cost of postage nowadays? It costs 60 p just to send a letter. Well if you add 60p to the 35p of charges, that's 95p of a 99p auction!
Oh, and another thing that amused me (if you didn't laugh you'd have to kill somebody) - e-bay now trumpets that they offer a money back guarantee if you're not happy with the item. Yes, that's right; e-bay offers a money back guarantee on your item. You've got no say in the matter...
They've now started charging for postage. Yes, that's right, if you enter the correct amount of postage on your item, you're now going to be 10% worse off. Well done you cunts.
They've stated some bullshit about this being to "encourage people to offer free postage" and to "provide better value for buyers".
Now don't get me wrong - there is a giant loophole in the system as was. If you selected "other courier" then it allows you to enter whatever value you want. And of course, auctions up to 99p are free, so by putting 99p and then, say, £30 for postage, you could sell quite expensive items and not pay e-bay a penny.
Of course, this is playing the system, and it was something I never engaged in. Indeed, until Royal Mails more recent price hikes, I was relatively happy to charge less for postage than it actually cost me.
For cheaper items (genuine 99p, not worth much, just want to get rid of it but don't want to throw it away type ones) I would try to get roughly the right postage, but didn't factor in cost of envelope and all that. I didn't mind too much as 99p auctions are free to list (well, you can do 100 a month free) and then they charge 10% (10p) at the end and PayPal take 4%+20p (25p-ish), so the postage was made up by what was left.
But now let's look at the economics. The 35p it costs on the item is still the same, but you now pay 10% of postage. Well, for one of the White Dwarf magazines I've been selling recently, for example, the postage is a staggering £1.40. So if you put £1.40, you're now effectively being charged 50p total, and suddenly the economics don't make a lot of sense.
But if you increase the cost of the item about 99p you're suddenly going to start being charged the insertion fee, which for a magazine is 10p.
So if you raise the initial price to £1.15 cover the additional fee, now you're being charged 10p to post the auction, and of course the end fees rise a bit too! It's the classic vicious circle that means you end up having to post the thing at £2 to make your money back, but then of course nobody wants to bid!
So why not add the extra on to the postage? Well technically it says that you're not allowed to raise your postage cost to cover this fee!
And what about offering free postage? Have they looked at the cost of postage nowadays? It costs 60 p just to send a letter. Well if you add 60p to the 35p of charges, that's 95p of a 99p auction!
Oh, and another thing that amused me (if you didn't laugh you'd have to kill somebody) - e-bay now trumpets that they offer a money back guarantee if you're not happy with the item. Yes, that's right; e-bay offers a money back guarantee on your item. You've got no say in the matter...
Friday, 27 September 2013
landlord returns
My landlord came back the other day.
I'd obviously set myself a list of things I wanted to get done, which included:
I cleaned the car, but it was only a "normal" clean, rather than being a full-on polish. This wasn't so bad, as I'd polished the car a few weeks back. However, I did also top up things like the oil, washer fluid and tyre pressure, and it was while doing the last of these that my old foot pump finally gave up the ghost.
I've had it ages, and it's been a bit temperamental for a while, but it's just typical of the recent months that it's another thing that's broken that I have to replace. I've blogged about this recently, but I've had some more things go as well. For example, I broke the Ethernet switch I use to connect my computers to the BT hub, so I had to replace that, and some of the buttons on my printer are dodgy (you have to press really hard and they don't always work) so I'll need to replace that.
Anyway, I'm waiting until I get paid this month before replacing the pump, which means I've actually been running on slightly low pressure tyres, as it was the connector to the tyre that broke. This meant it was bleeding out air and whenever I tried to pump it would pop off, so it's deflated the tyres a little - nothing disastrous, but it needs sorting.
I attempted to sort the stuff in the shed, but there were a couple of problems with this.
The first was that my landlord didn't actually go until Saturday lunch. I also missed him leaving, so it was quite late in the afternoon before I ventured out to the shed.
The second was that I had also decided to try to stay up all night. I've mentioned before that I have been having trouble staying asleep and waking in the middle of the night. While I still think stress is a part of this, I think the whole "habit formation" I also talked about is a big part of it. One of the ways I've found to sort this is to basically stay up all night, which totally disrupts my body clock and allows me to reset it.
However, when you're doing that after having spent all day shifting big heavy boxes around, it doesn't quite work. You're not only tired from being up; you're physically shattered from the exercise. And of course, it's not a 1 day job, so going into the night sorting boxes became quite a chore and I wasn't really alert and thinking straight.
In the end I did go to sleep for a couple of hours that night. The night time waking is still not sorted - I am waking up early, but it's early morning (5AM-ish), rather than middle of the night (1AM-ish) so I'm just a bit tired, rather than the walking dead.
However, I did generate a lot of stuff to go on e-bay. And I mean a lot of stuff. So much that I was too tired to put it on that first weekend and instead left it for this weekend, which also turned out to be a free-listing weekend.
This wasn't such a great idea. I'd used the Saturday to clean the car and do other bits in order to leave the Sunday for it, but partly because of the Interview earlier in the week I was so tired I had to have a lie in on the Sunday and it was late before I started.
I then just launched into it without really thinking I would "do x, but not y" so I ended up doing it all day, and even then I had only put on about two thirds of it all. I've also apparently been missing a trick with my auctions - I knew Sunday was the best day for them to end, but apparently he evening is the best and I was ending mine mid-afternoon.
By the time I'd finished I had 85 active auctions. Now to be fair, some of these were re-lists I was doing to take advantage of the free listing, but still, that's an awful lot of stuff!
I'd obviously set myself a list of things I wanted to get done, which included:
- Sort stuff in the shed
- Put some of the shed stuff on e-bay, including some of my figurines, old art books and DVDs
- Clean my car
I cleaned the car, but it was only a "normal" clean, rather than being a full-on polish. This wasn't so bad, as I'd polished the car a few weeks back. However, I did also top up things like the oil, washer fluid and tyre pressure, and it was while doing the last of these that my old foot pump finally gave up the ghost.
I've had it ages, and it's been a bit temperamental for a while, but it's just typical of the recent months that it's another thing that's broken that I have to replace. I've blogged about this recently, but I've had some more things go as well. For example, I broke the Ethernet switch I use to connect my computers to the BT hub, so I had to replace that, and some of the buttons on my printer are dodgy (you have to press really hard and they don't always work) so I'll need to replace that.
Anyway, I'm waiting until I get paid this month before replacing the pump, which means I've actually been running on slightly low pressure tyres, as it was the connector to the tyre that broke. This meant it was bleeding out air and whenever I tried to pump it would pop off, so it's deflated the tyres a little - nothing disastrous, but it needs sorting.
I attempted to sort the stuff in the shed, but there were a couple of problems with this.
The first was that my landlord didn't actually go until Saturday lunch. I also missed him leaving, so it was quite late in the afternoon before I ventured out to the shed.
The second was that I had also decided to try to stay up all night. I've mentioned before that I have been having trouble staying asleep and waking in the middle of the night. While I still think stress is a part of this, I think the whole "habit formation" I also talked about is a big part of it. One of the ways I've found to sort this is to basically stay up all night, which totally disrupts my body clock and allows me to reset it.
However, when you're doing that after having spent all day shifting big heavy boxes around, it doesn't quite work. You're not only tired from being up; you're physically shattered from the exercise. And of course, it's not a 1 day job, so going into the night sorting boxes became quite a chore and I wasn't really alert and thinking straight.
In the end I did go to sleep for a couple of hours that night. The night time waking is still not sorted - I am waking up early, but it's early morning (5AM-ish), rather than middle of the night (1AM-ish) so I'm just a bit tired, rather than the walking dead.
However, I did generate a lot of stuff to go on e-bay. And I mean a lot of stuff. So much that I was too tired to put it on that first weekend and instead left it for this weekend, which also turned out to be a free-listing weekend.
This wasn't such a great idea. I'd used the Saturday to clean the car and do other bits in order to leave the Sunday for it, but partly because of the Interview earlier in the week I was so tired I had to have a lie in on the Sunday and it was late before I started.
I then just launched into it without really thinking I would "do x, but not y" so I ended up doing it all day, and even then I had only put on about two thirds of it all. I've also apparently been missing a trick with my auctions - I knew Sunday was the best day for them to end, but apparently he evening is the best and I was ending mine mid-afternoon.
By the time I'd finished I had 85 active auctions. Now to be fair, some of these were re-lists I was doing to take advantage of the free listing, but still, that's an awful lot of stuff!
Thursday, 26 September 2013
fanboys
What a terrible film.
I thought it best to just come out and say it. The problem I had with fanboys is that it was just a sort of weak, thinned-down version of a Kevin smith film. Indeed if you take the dialogue of Clerks and mush it into Jay & silent Bob Strike back then you've basically got fanboys.
The idea behind it is of a bunch of nerds going to Skywalker Ranch to steal/view Star wars Episode 1 ahead of its release. So you're talking about a bunch of nerds and you're talking about a road movie. And that's basically it.
Unfortunately, the movie is just not as well written as a Kevin Smith film. The dialogue lacks real punch. It also seems to try to be "inclusive" of non-nerds - it felt a bit toned down and 'lite', instead of being full-on nerdy. It was like they felt they couldn't be too extreme with the jokes because they might alienate some of the non-nerd audience.
The characters also felt a bit thin - fairly loose stereotypes, without a great deal of interest or individuality to them.
And of course the plot is very minimal - more like a series of sketches than a plot. Given it's a road movie it could perhaps have had some saving graces in terms of how it was filmed, or the places they went to, for example, but it fell down thee too.
I'm being very harsh. It wasn't painful to watch, the acting is okay and it's watchable, it's just that it was supposed to be funny and I didn't laugh once.
I thought it best to just come out and say it. The problem I had with fanboys is that it was just a sort of weak, thinned-down version of a Kevin smith film. Indeed if you take the dialogue of Clerks and mush it into Jay & silent Bob Strike back then you've basically got fanboys.
The idea behind it is of a bunch of nerds going to Skywalker Ranch to steal/view Star wars Episode 1 ahead of its release. So you're talking about a bunch of nerds and you're talking about a road movie. And that's basically it.
Unfortunately, the movie is just not as well written as a Kevin Smith film. The dialogue lacks real punch. It also seems to try to be "inclusive" of non-nerds - it felt a bit toned down and 'lite', instead of being full-on nerdy. It was like they felt they couldn't be too extreme with the jokes because they might alienate some of the non-nerd audience.
The characters also felt a bit thin - fairly loose stereotypes, without a great deal of interest or individuality to them.
And of course the plot is very minimal - more like a series of sketches than a plot. Given it's a road movie it could perhaps have had some saving graces in terms of how it was filmed, or the places they went to, for example, but it fell down thee too.
I'm being very harsh. It wasn't painful to watch, the acting is okay and it's watchable, it's just that it was supposed to be funny and I didn't laugh once.
Wednesday, 25 September 2013
dad's dog & fraud
I mentioned that it wasn't just work that had been making my time just recently a bit rubbish.
One of the other things was unfortunately that my Dad's dog has died. He was a Labrador and apparently average life expectancy is around 10 years old. My dad's dog was about 13 or 14 I think, so it has been on the cards and therefore wasn't totally unexpected.
However, that's not to say it wasn't a shock.
Being a typical Labrador he was motivated by his stomach and when he went ill the first few symptoms were "loose stools" and he wouldn't eat his food. As such, my Dad took him to the vet promptly and they worked out that he was suffering from kidney failure.
Obviously you'll be aware kidney failure is pretty serious. When people get it they have to do dialysis (filtering the blood, which is the kidney's main function) and need a transplant fairly promptly as they don't tend to last too long.
For a dog that would be an extreme length to go to. They tried a few drugs in the hopes it might restart his kidneys but they eventually decided to put him down.
It's a shame - he was a nice dog (although to be totally fair he could have done with a few obedience classes). My Dad has obviously therefore been a bit down and of course I'm so far away I can't be there in person. I am going down to visit him for my holiday in a couple of weeks, though.
The other thing of note was that I suffered some internet fraud.
Well, I say that, I have a very strong suspicion they fucked up.
I have a PayPal account (you unfortunately can't get away from having one if you use e-bay) and what happened was that I received an e-mail saying that I'd made a payment to one of these online money things.
I hadn't, obviously, but the money had come out of my bank account (PayPal links to your bank & a credit card, in case you're not familiar). It was £42, so not a giant sum, but significant, particularly given my current financial situation.
I immediately flagged it and they solved the case in my favour.
However, what makes me think it was a cock-up is that it was a single sizeable payment (they often do lots of little payments with fraud), but also it was how it was how my account was described on the e-mail.
Initially I'd thought it was just a phishing thing, but as I say, I checked my accounts and it had come out of my account. But here's the thing - the account name given on the e-mail was not mine, but it was a sub-string of my account. So if my account was "RandomName123@gmail.com" then the account it said was "Name123@gmail.com".
So as I say, this leads me to think they fucked up and a genuine transaction for somebody accidentally came out of my account.
The most annoying thing, though, was how long it took them to process the actual refund. So I spotted about 6 hours after it happened (it was a weekend) and flagged it to all concerned. Within 24 hours it had been decided in my favour and I was informed it would be refunded. Within 48 hours I had received an e-mail telling me it had been refunded. However it was 2 weeks before the money actually made it back into my account.
I've said it before, but PayPal is a fucking racket.
One of the other things was unfortunately that my Dad's dog has died. He was a Labrador and apparently average life expectancy is around 10 years old. My dad's dog was about 13 or 14 I think, so it has been on the cards and therefore wasn't totally unexpected.
However, that's not to say it wasn't a shock.
Being a typical Labrador he was motivated by his stomach and when he went ill the first few symptoms were "loose stools" and he wouldn't eat his food. As such, my Dad took him to the vet promptly and they worked out that he was suffering from kidney failure.
Obviously you'll be aware kidney failure is pretty serious. When people get it they have to do dialysis (filtering the blood, which is the kidney's main function) and need a transplant fairly promptly as they don't tend to last too long.
For a dog that would be an extreme length to go to. They tried a few drugs in the hopes it might restart his kidneys but they eventually decided to put him down.
It's a shame - he was a nice dog (although to be totally fair he could have done with a few obedience classes). My Dad has obviously therefore been a bit down and of course I'm so far away I can't be there in person. I am going down to visit him for my holiday in a couple of weeks, though.
The other thing of note was that I suffered some internet fraud.
Well, I say that, I have a very strong suspicion they fucked up.
I have a PayPal account (you unfortunately can't get away from having one if you use e-bay) and what happened was that I received an e-mail saying that I'd made a payment to one of these online money things.
I hadn't, obviously, but the money had come out of my bank account (PayPal links to your bank & a credit card, in case you're not familiar). It was £42, so not a giant sum, but significant, particularly given my current financial situation.
I immediately flagged it and they solved the case in my favour.
However, what makes me think it was a cock-up is that it was a single sizeable payment (they often do lots of little payments with fraud), but also it was how it was how my account was described on the e-mail.
Initially I'd thought it was just a phishing thing, but as I say, I checked my accounts and it had come out of my account. But here's the thing - the account name given on the e-mail was not mine, but it was a sub-string of my account. So if my account was "RandomName123@gmail.com" then the account it said was "Name123@gmail.com".
So as I say, this leads me to think they fucked up and a genuine transaction for somebody accidentally came out of my account.
The most annoying thing, though, was how long it took them to process the actual refund. So I spotted about 6 hours after it happened (it was a weekend) and flagged it to all concerned. Within 24 hours it had been decided in my favour and I was informed it would be refunded. Within 48 hours I had received an e-mail telling me it had been refunded. However it was 2 weeks before the money actually made it back into my account.
I've said it before, but PayPal is a fucking racket.
Tuesday, 24 September 2013
and more moaning
I'm guessing it's not been fun to read for anyone that does, but it's felt quite cathartic to get all this stuff out in the air.
Hopefully today will be the last about work (well, for a while), but I'm certainly a long way from finishing with the moaning!
And this one's only a bit about work.
Around a month ago one of the Directors got married. Congratulations to him, but it also acted as a stark statement of my standing.
Basically, I've known him longer than all but two other members of staff, and one of those was a friendship from way before he started working here. However, most of the rest of the staff were invited to the wedding proper, whereas I was just invited to the evening reception.
Well, that's me told where I stand.
Anyway, when I arrived at the reception a bombshell was dropped on me. I would have to attend the redundancy meeting for a member of staff they're making redundant as their witness. Or shit-canning them as I like to call it. The reason I would have to do this was because the member of staff who was going to do it has had a tragedy (which has also really helped to improve the atmosphere in the office!)
They've actually made a complete mess of things with this employee, to be honest.
Now I will hold my hands up - I never really got on with this employee. They're not my sort of person, and I found them a bit annoying. I also found them quite unprofessional and borderline incompetent.
I honestly couldn't see why they'd been given a job, or, failing that, why they'd been kept on following the initial trial period.
But setting that aside, the reason for making them redundant was entirely about getting rid of them, and not about change in the business making that position redundant, which is what redundancy is supposed to be about.
And don't get me wrong, they did something that essentially made them useless to my company. Basically the company is (currently) about selling out people as consultants to work for our Customers. And this person initially was happy to do this, but then suddenly flipped and refused to do it.
Now instead of this being dealt with calmly and rationally, the MD flipped out. The redundancy was how they decided to get rid of them. But it's a poor decision, and I think the employee may take it all the way to a tribunal.
Anyway, the thing I was going to say is that the other element of why I had to attend this meeting was because there were fuck all other staff in the office. The MD who got married took three weeks honeymoon straight after. The other MD also had that week off and, in fact, there were only two members of staff in for the normal office for that first week and then it was hardly any better in the second week.
And to further underline my status: even though I was the only vaguely senior member of staff in the office, both of the MD's out of office messages said to contact other members of staff who were in the office for about 2 days during the whole period, but not me.
Hopefully today will be the last about work (well, for a while), but I'm certainly a long way from finishing with the moaning!
And this one's only a bit about work.
Around a month ago one of the Directors got married. Congratulations to him, but it also acted as a stark statement of my standing.
Basically, I've known him longer than all but two other members of staff, and one of those was a friendship from way before he started working here. However, most of the rest of the staff were invited to the wedding proper, whereas I was just invited to the evening reception.
Well, that's me told where I stand.
Anyway, when I arrived at the reception a bombshell was dropped on me. I would have to attend the redundancy meeting for a member of staff they're making redundant as their witness. Or shit-canning them as I like to call it. The reason I would have to do this was because the member of staff who was going to do it has had a tragedy (which has also really helped to improve the atmosphere in the office!)
They've actually made a complete mess of things with this employee, to be honest.
Now I will hold my hands up - I never really got on with this employee. They're not my sort of person, and I found them a bit annoying. I also found them quite unprofessional and borderline incompetent.
I honestly couldn't see why they'd been given a job, or, failing that, why they'd been kept on following the initial trial period.
But setting that aside, the reason for making them redundant was entirely about getting rid of them, and not about change in the business making that position redundant, which is what redundancy is supposed to be about.
And don't get me wrong, they did something that essentially made them useless to my company. Basically the company is (currently) about selling out people as consultants to work for our Customers. And this person initially was happy to do this, but then suddenly flipped and refused to do it.
Now instead of this being dealt with calmly and rationally, the MD flipped out. The redundancy was how they decided to get rid of them. But it's a poor decision, and I think the employee may take it all the way to a tribunal.
Anyway, the thing I was going to say is that the other element of why I had to attend this meeting was because there were fuck all other staff in the office. The MD who got married took three weeks honeymoon straight after. The other MD also had that week off and, in fact, there were only two members of staff in for the normal office for that first week and then it was hardly any better in the second week.
And to further underline my status: even though I was the only vaguely senior member of staff in the office, both of the MD's out of office messages said to contact other members of staff who were in the office for about 2 days during the whole period, but not me.
Monday, 23 September 2013
singapore grand prix
Singapore grand prix this last weekend.
The circuit used to have a rather notorious corner "turn 10" (why do none of the new circuits have proper names for the corners? I mean, I appreciate they also should have numbers, but giving them names too adds character.), which was essentially a chicane on a corner.
However, in order to make the drivers go around it properly it had really high curves. The idea behind it was that with it being a street circuit, there was no run off so they wanted to encourage them to take the corner properly.
But, of course, racing drivers being racing drivers, they would always push it to the limit and therefore run over the curbs. However, they were so high this launched the cars into the air and there were more than a few cars damaged by the subsequent landings.
This year they did away with the chicane element, so it was a normal corner. This shaved a good 5 seconds off the lap time, but it wasn't enough for the circuit to become a decent length.
The race itself wasn't actually too bad in the beginning and end sections, but it had quite a long middle period where very little happened. And because it was Singapore it meant it was banging up against the 2 hour limit. Of course, being Singapore it also had a safety car period after someone hit the wall, so I guess if it hadn't had that it would have been under 2 hours, but every time the race has been run they've had a safety car.
Unfortunately for the championship, Vettel won, making it almost certain that he will win. He has almost enough margin that he could miss a couple of races and still win. I mean that in a reliability sense, rather than him taking a holiday - if the car blows up and Alonso wins he would still have a huge margin.
But then, given how reliable all the cars are nowadays that's not very likely.
There was also finally the announcement that Raikkonen will be moving to Ferrari next year, which seems to mean Ferrari will have two number one drivers. This is very odd for them - they're a team that likes to have a clear number one and a number two.
Rumours therefore flew that Alonso might go to McLaren, but I doubt this, and, interestingly, Ron Dennis was at the race. Ron was the main part of McLaren that Alonso didn't like. Plus, given how things are changing next year, it's a bit of a crap shoot - even Adrian Newey at Red Bull might be wrong footed if the Renault engine isn't up to snuff.
Unfortunately the unluckiest man in Formula 1, Mark Webber, had a problem with his car that caused the engine to blow up (wasn't clear if it was engine or gear box) and to cap the weekend he then got a reprimand for running out onto the circuit to get a lift back from Alonso. It wasn't the lift that was the issue, but the going on to the circuit, but because he's now had 3 reprimands he gets an automatic 10-place grid penalty at the Korean Grand Prix!
It's weird how it's always Mark that has these issues - KERS failures seem to be particularly favourite.
The circuit used to have a rather notorious corner "turn 10" (why do none of the new circuits have proper names for the corners? I mean, I appreciate they also should have numbers, but giving them names too adds character.), which was essentially a chicane on a corner.
However, in order to make the drivers go around it properly it had really high curves. The idea behind it was that with it being a street circuit, there was no run off so they wanted to encourage them to take the corner properly.
But, of course, racing drivers being racing drivers, they would always push it to the limit and therefore run over the curbs. However, they were so high this launched the cars into the air and there were more than a few cars damaged by the subsequent landings.
This year they did away with the chicane element, so it was a normal corner. This shaved a good 5 seconds off the lap time, but it wasn't enough for the circuit to become a decent length.
The race itself wasn't actually too bad in the beginning and end sections, but it had quite a long middle period where very little happened. And because it was Singapore it meant it was banging up against the 2 hour limit. Of course, being Singapore it also had a safety car period after someone hit the wall, so I guess if it hadn't had that it would have been under 2 hours, but every time the race has been run they've had a safety car.
Unfortunately for the championship, Vettel won, making it almost certain that he will win. He has almost enough margin that he could miss a couple of races and still win. I mean that in a reliability sense, rather than him taking a holiday - if the car blows up and Alonso wins he would still have a huge margin.
But then, given how reliable all the cars are nowadays that's not very likely.
There was also finally the announcement that Raikkonen will be moving to Ferrari next year, which seems to mean Ferrari will have two number one drivers. This is very odd for them - they're a team that likes to have a clear number one and a number two.
Rumours therefore flew that Alonso might go to McLaren, but I doubt this, and, interestingly, Ron Dennis was at the race. Ron was the main part of McLaren that Alonso didn't like. Plus, given how things are changing next year, it's a bit of a crap shoot - even Adrian Newey at Red Bull might be wrong footed if the Renault engine isn't up to snuff.
Unfortunately the unluckiest man in Formula 1, Mark Webber, had a problem with his car that caused the engine to blow up (wasn't clear if it was engine or gear box) and to cap the weekend he then got a reprimand for running out onto the circuit to get a lift back from Alonso. It wasn't the lift that was the issue, but the going on to the circuit, but because he's now had 3 reprimands he gets an automatic 10-place grid penalty at the Korean Grand Prix!
It's weird how it's always Mark that has these issues - KERS failures seem to be particularly favourite.
Friday, 20 September 2013
singapore grand prix
I was away yesterday attending a job interview, so there was no post because of that, rather than me lapsing again!
Singapore Grand Prix this weekend.
Unfortunately, Singapore is usual one of the really dull races. It has some novelty appeal in that they hold it at night under great big lights. So far they've been lucky with the weather (artificial lights would be particularly bad if there was spray) and it's been a dry race.
The real problem with the track is that it's a street circuit. Street circuits have something of an appeal if you're at the track as you can get really close to the cars and the noise echoes around the buildings, but in terms of a race they're often quite dull. The problem is that roads are very different to circuits.
Circuits are generally a lot wider than roads and the corners and bends are much more organically shaped - following contours in the terrain or avoiding obstacles, etc., whereas streets are about taking you to somewhere as quickly and directly as possible.
It's also a very long, slow lap and therefore the whole race often rubs up against the two hour limit.
I think you can tell I'm not really looking forward to it. The BBC is only showing highlights, but I'll probably listen to it on the radio (if they're covering it).
Otherwise its' the last weekend before my landlord returns, so I will probably try to finish off stuff.
Singapore Grand Prix this weekend.
Unfortunately, Singapore is usual one of the really dull races. It has some novelty appeal in that they hold it at night under great big lights. So far they've been lucky with the weather (artificial lights would be particularly bad if there was spray) and it's been a dry race.
The real problem with the track is that it's a street circuit. Street circuits have something of an appeal if you're at the track as you can get really close to the cars and the noise echoes around the buildings, but in terms of a race they're often quite dull. The problem is that roads are very different to circuits.
Circuits are generally a lot wider than roads and the corners and bends are much more organically shaped - following contours in the terrain or avoiding obstacles, etc., whereas streets are about taking you to somewhere as quickly and directly as possible.
It's also a very long, slow lap and therefore the whole race often rubs up against the two hour limit.
I think you can tell I'm not really looking forward to it. The BBC is only showing highlights, but I'll probably listen to it on the radio (if they're covering it).
Otherwise its' the last weekend before my landlord returns, so I will probably try to finish off stuff.
Wednesday, 18 September 2013
starship troopers: invasion
Invasion is actually the fourth film in the Starship Troopers series.
It is a "canon" in the sense that it follows on from the events of the previous films and even includes some of the characters; however, there's a notable difference in that it is a CG film.
When I started watching I wasn't sure it was canon. It used the costumes and equipment from the previous films, as well as the bug designs, but that didn't necessarily mean it fit properly into that same universe. It also even included the Marauder suits, which appeared in the third film (one of the weird things with me getting so far behind with reviews is that I have watched this, but it was on TV, so it is a lower priority for me to write about, and there are now about 20 things I've rented and not blogged about!).
The marauder suits are the films finally incorporating the proper mobile infantry concept that is actually key to the original books. Indeed, the concept of powered suits was actually invented by Heinlein for the original book and it was always a bit odd that it wasn't included in the original film.
I mean, I understand why they took all the troopers out of the suits - expense, difficulty identified with people covered up in suits, reduced threat from the bugs - but they could have had them in it a little bit, like at the end or in a lab or something.
Anyway, this CG film is actually Japanese. I actually think it was made by the same group that put together the Appleseed CG films, but I'm not totally certain on that. It looks about similar to the second of the Appleseed films, so certainly better than the first of those, but not quite in the realms of so real you can't tell it from reality.
It's also a bit odd in that it was filmed in English. I mean, it was filmed in Japan by a Japanese Director, but many of the actors were American and spoke English and the VAs spoke English. This works okay, but felt a little odd if I'm totally honest, but I'm not sure why.
The film itself is okay. It continues quite a lot of the tongue in cheek over the top aspects, but manages to stay this side of pastiche. The plot is a bit hokey, though, and twists itself in a couple of knots.
The real question though is whether being filmed in CG really adds anything. I'm not sure it does, tbh. I mean, I guess it means they were able to produce a bigger film than they otherwise might be able to? However, it also makes it more of a niche product, which limits the degree to which they can distribute it.
It is a "canon" in the sense that it follows on from the events of the previous films and even includes some of the characters; however, there's a notable difference in that it is a CG film.
When I started watching I wasn't sure it was canon. It used the costumes and equipment from the previous films, as well as the bug designs, but that didn't necessarily mean it fit properly into that same universe. It also even included the Marauder suits, which appeared in the third film (one of the weird things with me getting so far behind with reviews is that I have watched this, but it was on TV, so it is a lower priority for me to write about, and there are now about 20 things I've rented and not blogged about!).
The marauder suits are the films finally incorporating the proper mobile infantry concept that is actually key to the original books. Indeed, the concept of powered suits was actually invented by Heinlein for the original book and it was always a bit odd that it wasn't included in the original film.
I mean, I understand why they took all the troopers out of the suits - expense, difficulty identified with people covered up in suits, reduced threat from the bugs - but they could have had them in it a little bit, like at the end or in a lab or something.
Anyway, this CG film is actually Japanese. I actually think it was made by the same group that put together the Appleseed CG films, but I'm not totally certain on that. It looks about similar to the second of the Appleseed films, so certainly better than the first of those, but not quite in the realms of so real you can't tell it from reality.
It's also a bit odd in that it was filmed in English. I mean, it was filmed in Japan by a Japanese Director, but many of the actors were American and spoke English and the VAs spoke English. This works okay, but felt a little odd if I'm totally honest, but I'm not sure why.
The film itself is okay. It continues quite a lot of the tongue in cheek over the top aspects, but manages to stay this side of pastiche. The plot is a bit hokey, though, and twists itself in a couple of knots.
The real question though is whether being filmed in CG really adds anything. I'm not sure it does, tbh. I mean, I guess it means they were able to produce a bigger film than they otherwise might be able to? However, it also makes it more of a niche product, which limits the degree to which they can distribute it.
Monday, 16 September 2013
landlord away
My landlord has gone away on holiday for about a week and a half.
This is good timing and bad.
The good part is that it means I can get into the shed. I've a lot of stuff I need to get rid of in there, both from a space point of view, but also from a getting some cash point of view.
He's basically blocked in all my stuff in a corner, which is staggeringly annoying if I want to get something out, but I mean, it's his shed, I shouldn't really expect to have easy access, should I?
I'm particularly expecting to sell a lot of the figures I've collected. I think these were one of my madder moments from the recent years. They take up quite a lot of room and I don't actually have anywhere to put them. Unfortunately they also lose value quite quickly - once a series is a few years old, people don't want the figures. In fact, they don't sell all that well even if they're a current series, in my experience.
Still, I've so many of them I should do okay with getting a bit of money, which I sorely need.
I'm struggling with the finances quite badly. I'm just about living within my means, but I really need to see about getting something done in terms of a loan to replace the credit card debt. The payments for the cards are killing me and obviously being credit cards you're mainly just paying off interest, rather than the debt itself.
It's not so good in that it's a bit late - I had thought he was going away last week, which would have worked a lot better from a timing point of view. It also means the weather is now proper autumn, so it's been raining a lot, making it difficult to do some of the stuff I want to / need to. So, for example, giving the car a clean will be a bit of a trick shot.
This is good timing and bad.
The good part is that it means I can get into the shed. I've a lot of stuff I need to get rid of in there, both from a space point of view, but also from a getting some cash point of view.
He's basically blocked in all my stuff in a corner, which is staggeringly annoying if I want to get something out, but I mean, it's his shed, I shouldn't really expect to have easy access, should I?
I'm particularly expecting to sell a lot of the figures I've collected. I think these were one of my madder moments from the recent years. They take up quite a lot of room and I don't actually have anywhere to put them. Unfortunately they also lose value quite quickly - once a series is a few years old, people don't want the figures. In fact, they don't sell all that well even if they're a current series, in my experience.
Still, I've so many of them I should do okay with getting a bit of money, which I sorely need.
I'm struggling with the finances quite badly. I'm just about living within my means, but I really need to see about getting something done in terms of a loan to replace the credit card debt. The payments for the cards are killing me and obviously being credit cards you're mainly just paying off interest, rather than the debt itself.
It's not so good in that it's a bit late - I had thought he was going away last week, which would have worked a lot better from a timing point of view. It also means the weather is now proper autumn, so it's been raining a lot, making it difficult to do some of the stuff I want to / need to. So, for example, giving the car a clean will be a bit of a trick shot.
Friday, 13 September 2013
for sale
I ended yesterday mentioning the sale of the company I work for.
At the time I talked a lot about "cake". I may have subsequently explained this, but the cake in question was actually an employee share scheme. Basically the Managing Director wants to retire. To do this she needs to sell the company so that she can release a nice pot of money for her to go away with.
However, if you say to all the employees "I'm selling the company so I can retire" they may not view that too kindly as it introduces a lot of uncertainty, particularly around who will take over and what the new conditions will be like. This would therefore generally encourage the employees to look for new jobs, so by having the share scheme you effectively promise to give away a chunk of that sale money so that those people hang around.
My problem is that basically I've ended up with a share option, rather than actual shares. This option means that I have the option to buy the shares at a later date at a reduced price. The idea therefore being I sell the shares immediately as part of the whole sale and the difference between what they pay and what I get is therefore a nice sum of money.
But there are some problems.
The company is currently worth nothing. Now this is deliberate as it's basically a way of minimising tax, but it also means that the shares I've got are next to worthless. If sold the next day I wouldn't even have been able to pay off my smallest credit card debt.
Now in some ways that's a good thing in that it means they have the potential for the maximum gain, but the real problem is that I have no idea how many shares there are total and what my proportion of those shares is, and I only have vague ideas what the company is currently worth, what it might sell for eventually, and there are no mechanisms to know how the company/share value is changing.
So, to use some simple numbers, it's all very well knowing that at the start I have the option to buy 1,000 at 10p each and sell them at 20p each. That means I would get £100. But I have no way of knowing if the value of the shares has doubled across the year or tripled, or halved or what.
The other issue over the proportion of shares makes things even more complicated. Basically, for example, there are actually 1,000 shares, and what they've done is take, say, 100 of those shares, turn that into 1,000 shares, revalue them, and then distribute them to the employees.
This makes things very complicated to calculate the actual value of the shares. With the above numbers, if they sold each original share for £1, that means that the 100 shares would be worth £100, but as I say, they've then made each of the actual shares distributed 1/10 of those shares, so actually we get shares worth 10p each. This means it might seem attractive to us to sell the shares at £1, but then we only get 10% of that. Or, remember, we need to buy these shares at 5p each, so really we get 5% of the value.
But of course I don't know the real numbers. So if I've been given 1,000 shares is that a big proportion of the total pot? Have I got 10% of the shares? Or 0.01%? And this really matters because it affects what I actually stand to make, but I can't know, so it's all a bit meaningless.
It's like if I give you a million spondulics, have I just given you a fortune or nothing at all? Of course you didn't have any spondulics to start with, so in a way you've got a fortune, but only in spondulic terms.
I've been with the company the longest, which from what I was told means I have a bigger proportion of the shares. But then I was told a lot about the share scheme when I agreed to stay on and only a small proportion of it has turned out to be true. Firstly I was told there would be dividends. Well, there are no dividends on share options. I don't own any shares, so I've nothing to receive a dividend on.
It also transpires that the shares have been divided up based on seniority as the most important factor, rather than length of service. I mean, that's a factor, but seniority is a more important factor and of course I'm in the "middle" tier, so I'm pretty sure I have less shares than the directors, even though they've only been here a couple of years and I've been here more than a decade.
And here's the other thing - I'm underpaid. I've also been underpaid for the last five years when I didn't have a single pay rise, despite the rapidly escalating cost of living.
I have debt because I was underpaid (well, that and me being a fucking moron). So what's better, getting a new job that pays the market rate now? Or gambling that the amount I get down the line is sufficient to make up for that underpayment+ a little more?
Well looking at some numbers I can't make the latter make sense. Plus, as mentioned, I don't really enjoy working here any more.
So why stay? Particularly since it will be at least three years before the company is actually sold. I can't stay here three years - I can't stay six months. Did I mention I don't enjoy working here any more?
At the time I talked a lot about "cake". I may have subsequently explained this, but the cake in question was actually an employee share scheme. Basically the Managing Director wants to retire. To do this she needs to sell the company so that she can release a nice pot of money for her to go away with.
However, if you say to all the employees "I'm selling the company so I can retire" they may not view that too kindly as it introduces a lot of uncertainty, particularly around who will take over and what the new conditions will be like. This would therefore generally encourage the employees to look for new jobs, so by having the share scheme you effectively promise to give away a chunk of that sale money so that those people hang around.
My problem is that basically I've ended up with a share option, rather than actual shares. This option means that I have the option to buy the shares at a later date at a reduced price. The idea therefore being I sell the shares immediately as part of the whole sale and the difference between what they pay and what I get is therefore a nice sum of money.
But there are some problems.
The company is currently worth nothing. Now this is deliberate as it's basically a way of minimising tax, but it also means that the shares I've got are next to worthless. If sold the next day I wouldn't even have been able to pay off my smallest credit card debt.
Now in some ways that's a good thing in that it means they have the potential for the maximum gain, but the real problem is that I have no idea how many shares there are total and what my proportion of those shares is, and I only have vague ideas what the company is currently worth, what it might sell for eventually, and there are no mechanisms to know how the company/share value is changing.
So, to use some simple numbers, it's all very well knowing that at the start I have the option to buy 1,000 at 10p each and sell them at 20p each. That means I would get £100. But I have no way of knowing if the value of the shares has doubled across the year or tripled, or halved or what.
The other issue over the proportion of shares makes things even more complicated. Basically, for example, there are actually 1,000 shares, and what they've done is take, say, 100 of those shares, turn that into 1,000 shares, revalue them, and then distribute them to the employees.
This makes things very complicated to calculate the actual value of the shares. With the above numbers, if they sold each original share for £1, that means that the 100 shares would be worth £100, but as I say, they've then made each of the actual shares distributed 1/10 of those shares, so actually we get shares worth 10p each. This means it might seem attractive to us to sell the shares at £1, but then we only get 10% of that. Or, remember, we need to buy these shares at 5p each, so really we get 5% of the value.
But of course I don't know the real numbers. So if I've been given 1,000 shares is that a big proportion of the total pot? Have I got 10% of the shares? Or 0.01%? And this really matters because it affects what I actually stand to make, but I can't know, so it's all a bit meaningless.
It's like if I give you a million spondulics, have I just given you a fortune or nothing at all? Of course you didn't have any spondulics to start with, so in a way you've got a fortune, but only in spondulic terms.
I've been with the company the longest, which from what I was told means I have a bigger proportion of the shares. But then I was told a lot about the share scheme when I agreed to stay on and only a small proportion of it has turned out to be true. Firstly I was told there would be dividends. Well, there are no dividends on share options. I don't own any shares, so I've nothing to receive a dividend on.
It also transpires that the shares have been divided up based on seniority as the most important factor, rather than length of service. I mean, that's a factor, but seniority is a more important factor and of course I'm in the "middle" tier, so I'm pretty sure I have less shares than the directors, even though they've only been here a couple of years and I've been here more than a decade.
And here's the other thing - I'm underpaid. I've also been underpaid for the last five years when I didn't have a single pay rise, despite the rapidly escalating cost of living.
I have debt because I was underpaid (well, that and me being a fucking moron). So what's better, getting a new job that pays the market rate now? Or gambling that the amount I get down the line is sufficient to make up for that underpayment+ a little more?
Well looking at some numbers I can't make the latter make sense. Plus, as mentioned, I don't really enjoy working here any more.
So why stay? Particularly since it will be at least three years before the company is actually sold. I can't stay here three years - I can't stay six months. Did I mention I don't enjoy working here any more?
Thursday, 12 September 2013
work
So I thought I'd do the first blog about why I've not been having much fun just recently.
Unfortunately it's become very apparent to me that my decision to stay on at my current employer last year was a big mistake.
I'm really not enjoying work.
All the same crap still seems to happen. I had thought that some of the reason for me staying on was to help introduce some better ways of doing things, but basically they've all been either ignored or actively disregarded.
I'll give you a very good example - we've recently introduced a new Contact Management System. Now, Contact Management is key to what I do - bid management.
However, at no stage have I been asked my opinion or in any way included in the process.
The old thing we used to use was a bespoke system put together by one of the employees and it was bobbins. It was full of fields that nobody understood, nobody used to fill it out anyway and there was never any training to explain anything. The problem being it wasn't properly designed - it was thrown together and packed full of "wouldn't it be nice if it" stuff.
Guess what's happened with the new system?
It's full of stupid fields that are either pointless or nobody understand the purpose of / what to put in there. And there's not been any training.
Part of the problem is they've bought something that is a product - it is an "out of the box" thing. Now there are a few ways they could have gone that would have worked:
Guess what they've done?
They've kept the out of the box product and added in loads of fields that mimic the crap the old system used to have. So the problem is they're trying to make it bespoke when the product itself is set up such that in other to make it bespoke in any useful sense you have to get a programmer in to change stuff.
A programmer who costs a lot of money. And they're not willing to spend any money.
This bespoking has also been done by someone who is not that way inclined - he's not a programmer, not an analyst and really not at all suited to the job. And it's been "managed" by the MD. Who has started taking loads of holidays and breaks like she has already retired and is focused on trying to sell the company.
Which is the other thing, but I will continue with that tomorrow.
Unfortunately it's become very apparent to me that my decision to stay on at my current employer last year was a big mistake.
I'm really not enjoying work.
All the same crap still seems to happen. I had thought that some of the reason for me staying on was to help introduce some better ways of doing things, but basically they've all been either ignored or actively disregarded.
I'll give you a very good example - we've recently introduced a new Contact Management System. Now, Contact Management is key to what I do - bid management.
However, at no stage have I been asked my opinion or in any way included in the process.
The old thing we used to use was a bespoke system put together by one of the employees and it was bobbins. It was full of fields that nobody understood, nobody used to fill it out anyway and there was never any training to explain anything. The problem being it wasn't properly designed - it was thrown together and packed full of "wouldn't it be nice if it" stuff.
Guess what's happened with the new system?
It's full of stupid fields that are either pointless or nobody understand the purpose of / what to put in there. And there's not been any training.
Part of the problem is they've bought something that is a product - it is an "out of the box" thing. Now there are a few ways they could have gone that would have worked:
- Get a complete bespoke solution, a bit like the old one, but made by professionals.
- Get an existing solution and either:
- Pay to make it bespoke
- Modify the processes and procedures of the company to match the product.
Guess what they've done?
They've kept the out of the box product and added in loads of fields that mimic the crap the old system used to have. So the problem is they're trying to make it bespoke when the product itself is set up such that in other to make it bespoke in any useful sense you have to get a programmer in to change stuff.
A programmer who costs a lot of money. And they're not willing to spend any money.
This bespoking has also been done by someone who is not that way inclined - he's not a programmer, not an analyst and really not at all suited to the job. And it's been "managed" by the MD. Who has started taking loads of holidays and breaks like she has already retired and is focused on trying to sell the company.
Which is the other thing, but I will continue with that tomorrow.
Wednesday, 11 September 2013
underworld: awakening
I wasn't sure what to expect with this fourth film in the underworld series.
I enjoyed the first one quite a bit, but found the second one underwhelming and a little confusing. The third film was actually a prequel and was okay, but really Selene (Beckinsale's character) was the only one that was interesting and she wasn't really in it.
This fourth one does star Selene, but also introduces a daughter (sort of). Now when actresses and characters get older there seems to be a bit of a thing for them acquiring children. I mean, don't get me wrong, obviously people get older and have children, but when those characters are odd (vampires or superheroes or whatever) the children thing is also normally odd (not really a child, but a clone or whatever).
I dunno, you can get some weird stuff in order to force the film down the whole maternal instinct path. And that's basically the case here - the maternal thing is pretty much crowbarred in.
However, if you set that aside, I actually quite enjoyed the film. Selene is still quite an interesting character and it doesn't hurt that Beckinsale seems even more gorgeous (she may be of equal gorgeousness, but the previous films were a long time ago!). I mean, don't get me wrong, the story was a bit poor, constructed of quite a lot of clichés, but then if you're watching the fourth Underworld film, why would you be expecting anything less?
No, what I enjoyed was the visual look of the film, the action and the special effects.
Now it's not all great the film was shot in 3D and there were a few of those stupid moment they always build in to have stuff flying out at the audience but then look daft when you watch them non-3D (and daft in 3D if you're of that persuasion) but it wasn't too bad here.
I enjoyed the first one quite a bit, but found the second one underwhelming and a little confusing. The third film was actually a prequel and was okay, but really Selene (Beckinsale's character) was the only one that was interesting and she wasn't really in it.
This fourth one does star Selene, but also introduces a daughter (sort of). Now when actresses and characters get older there seems to be a bit of a thing for them acquiring children. I mean, don't get me wrong, obviously people get older and have children, but when those characters are odd (vampires or superheroes or whatever) the children thing is also normally odd (not really a child, but a clone or whatever).
I dunno, you can get some weird stuff in order to force the film down the whole maternal instinct path. And that's basically the case here - the maternal thing is pretty much crowbarred in.
However, if you set that aside, I actually quite enjoyed the film. Selene is still quite an interesting character and it doesn't hurt that Beckinsale seems even more gorgeous (she may be of equal gorgeousness, but the previous films were a long time ago!). I mean, don't get me wrong, the story was a bit poor, constructed of quite a lot of clichés, but then if you're watching the fourth Underworld film, why would you be expecting anything less?
No, what I enjoyed was the visual look of the film, the action and the special effects.
Now it's not all great the film was shot in 3D and there were a few of those stupid moment they always build in to have stuff flying out at the audience but then look daft when you watch them non-3D (and daft in 3D if you're of that persuasion) but it wasn't too bad here.
Tuesday, 10 September 2013
sleepy
I've been having a terrible time sleeping just recently.
I've been doing a bit of research (always dangerous!) and there's a suggestion it might be a form of insomnia. It's not the sort of insomnia you generally think of, where you have trouble getting to sleep, but instead I keep waking up in the middle of the night.
Specifically I've been waking up at around 1AM-4AM for the last 2 weeks.
That's quite a range and what actually appears to be happening is the waking point is drifting earlier and earlier. So I was generally waking at about 4AM when it first started, but on Sunday night it was 1AM.
It seems to be happening irrespective of the actual time I go to sleep as well. So if I go to sleep at 8PM then it happens, but if I go to sleep at 12PM it also still happens. Of course in the former case that means I've gotten a good chunk of sleep and in the latter I've only gotten a few hours. However of course in the former it means having no life.
There's also the problem of reinforcement.
By that I mean that by playing to the timetable (going to bed early in the expectation I'll wake in the middle of the night) it will reinforce the pattern. And, indeed, instead of being insomnia there's a good chance that is what it really is. It's something I've always been susceptible too - over holidays and weekends I will wake up when my alarm would go off and start to fall asleep at my usual time.
The insomnia is called Middle-of-the-night insomnia, which is a rather uninspired name, but it is actually something that seems to be well known. There are some possible medical reasons, but basically it seems to be down to stress, which would match well with all the rubbish stuff that's been happening to me and I still haven't posted about yet.
The frustrating side of it is that I don't have any trouble getting to sleep. No actually, the frustrating side of it is that when I wake up in the middle of the night I initially feel great and rested like I've had a good night's sleep and I think Finally "I've slept through".
It's then only after about half an hour that I start to think "hang on, why is my alarm not going off?" and then look at my curtains for the tell-tale cracks of light that indicate daylight, which I don't see and then I think "oh for fuck's sake, not again".
I then go for a pee and check how bad it is by checking my phone, which is when it gets annoying.
If I get up then by normal day time I'll be shattered. If I try to watch a bit of telly or similar before going back to bed I'll have woken up enough to have the same effect. If I read for a bit I get bored and then lay there often not able to get back to sleep. And if I just try to go back to sleep my mind races and 9 times out of 10 it doesn't work properly.
Even if it does work, the quality of sleep seems to be poor and I am still tired all day.
I've been doing a bit of research (always dangerous!) and there's a suggestion it might be a form of insomnia. It's not the sort of insomnia you generally think of, where you have trouble getting to sleep, but instead I keep waking up in the middle of the night.
Specifically I've been waking up at around 1AM-4AM for the last 2 weeks.
That's quite a range and what actually appears to be happening is the waking point is drifting earlier and earlier. So I was generally waking at about 4AM when it first started, but on Sunday night it was 1AM.
It seems to be happening irrespective of the actual time I go to sleep as well. So if I go to sleep at 8PM then it happens, but if I go to sleep at 12PM it also still happens. Of course in the former case that means I've gotten a good chunk of sleep and in the latter I've only gotten a few hours. However of course in the former it means having no life.
There's also the problem of reinforcement.
By that I mean that by playing to the timetable (going to bed early in the expectation I'll wake in the middle of the night) it will reinforce the pattern. And, indeed, instead of being insomnia there's a good chance that is what it really is. It's something I've always been susceptible too - over holidays and weekends I will wake up when my alarm would go off and start to fall asleep at my usual time.
The insomnia is called Middle-of-the-night insomnia, which is a rather uninspired name, but it is actually something that seems to be well known. There are some possible medical reasons, but basically it seems to be down to stress, which would match well with all the rubbish stuff that's been happening to me and I still haven't posted about yet.
The frustrating side of it is that I don't have any trouble getting to sleep. No actually, the frustrating side of it is that when I wake up in the middle of the night I initially feel great and rested like I've had a good night's sleep and I think Finally "I've slept through".
It's then only after about half an hour that I start to think "hang on, why is my alarm not going off?" and then look at my curtains for the tell-tale cracks of light that indicate daylight, which I don't see and then I think "oh for fuck's sake, not again".
I then go for a pee and check how bad it is by checking my phone, which is when it gets annoying.
If I get up then by normal day time I'll be shattered. If I try to watch a bit of telly or similar before going back to bed I'll have woken up enough to have the same effect. If I read for a bit I get bored and then lay there often not able to get back to sleep. And if I just try to go back to sleep my mind races and 9 times out of 10 it doesn't work properly.
Even if it does work, the quality of sleep seems to be poor and I am still tired all day.
Monday, 9 September 2013
italian grand prix
Well, that was a lot better than I was expecting.
I have to confess I wasn't really looking forward to Monza as my memory of it is as a circuit where it's very difficult to overtake, but that didn't appear to be the case this weekend as there was a lot of action on the track. Indeed it also seemed to disprove what I was saying about the DRS, but that wasn't quite as it might have appeared.
Basically because Monza is so high speed (I think it only has about 6 corners!) they all use a special low-down force package, and of course that means the rear wing is quite skinny. As such the DRS (which basically opens a hole in the rear wing to reduce its drag) doesn't have a huge impact. That means it generally allowed them to get into overtaking position without just driving past.
I mean, that wasn't always the case - there were some drive pasts, but even these weren't as daft as they were at Spa, for example, with the drivers able to defend a bit and then fight back at the next corner.
Unfortunately it was also a bit of a weird weekend.
Riciardo was confirmed as Webber's replacement at Red Bull, but the whole rest of driver situation is quite messy. It seems like Raikonen is likely to go back to Ferrari, and Alonso wasn't happy. Well, the feeling was that that was a big part of why Alonso wasn't happy. He could easily have been unhappy at how the weekend went generally.
It's odd - the Mercedes has generally qualified well this season and then gone backwards on race day, where the Ferrari seems to qualify poorly then do really well during the race. Reliability issues aside, I think Alonso has always finished some way above where he qualified.
And mentioning Mercedes, they had a bit of a shocker. Hamilton said he made a mess of qualifying, but I think that was overly harsh. Rosberg didn't actually do that much better, it was more that Hamilton messed up his quick laps in 2nd qualifying.
However, his radio then failed during the race, so he couldn't hear them calling him in for his pit stops, for example. He did make up a couple of spots, taking him into the points, but it was clear he felt he could & should have done a lot better across the weekend.
I have to say it now looks like Vettel is going to take the driver's championship as the others just haven't been able to deliver a consistent challenge.
I have to confess I wasn't really looking forward to Monza as my memory of it is as a circuit where it's very difficult to overtake, but that didn't appear to be the case this weekend as there was a lot of action on the track. Indeed it also seemed to disprove what I was saying about the DRS, but that wasn't quite as it might have appeared.
Basically because Monza is so high speed (I think it only has about 6 corners!) they all use a special low-down force package, and of course that means the rear wing is quite skinny. As such the DRS (which basically opens a hole in the rear wing to reduce its drag) doesn't have a huge impact. That means it generally allowed them to get into overtaking position without just driving past.
I mean, that wasn't always the case - there were some drive pasts, but even these weren't as daft as they were at Spa, for example, with the drivers able to defend a bit and then fight back at the next corner.
Unfortunately it was also a bit of a weird weekend.
Riciardo was confirmed as Webber's replacement at Red Bull, but the whole rest of driver situation is quite messy. It seems like Raikonen is likely to go back to Ferrari, and Alonso wasn't happy. Well, the feeling was that that was a big part of why Alonso wasn't happy. He could easily have been unhappy at how the weekend went generally.
It's odd - the Mercedes has generally qualified well this season and then gone backwards on race day, where the Ferrari seems to qualify poorly then do really well during the race. Reliability issues aside, I think Alonso has always finished some way above where he qualified.
And mentioning Mercedes, they had a bit of a shocker. Hamilton said he made a mess of qualifying, but I think that was overly harsh. Rosberg didn't actually do that much better, it was more that Hamilton messed up his quick laps in 2nd qualifying.
However, his radio then failed during the race, so he couldn't hear them calling him in for his pit stops, for example. He did make up a couple of spots, taking him into the points, but it was clear he felt he could & should have done a lot better across the weekend.
I have to say it now looks like Vettel is going to take the driver's championship as the others just haven't been able to deliver a consistent challenge.
Friday, 6 September 2013
italian grand prix
It's the italian grand prix this weekend from Monza.
Monza is one of the fastest tracks on the current circuit and is not that far off being an Indi-car style oval circuit. Indeed, I seem to recall the old, banked circuit was an oval. I mean, it has a few chicanes and that, but if you were to take an oval and stretch it and put a dog leg in it, that wouldn't be too far off of Monza.
Anyway, the point is that it's a very fast circuit and the race often doesn't take much more than an hour to run.
It's normally an okay race. It doesn't tend to have a lot of overtaking, though it is possible. Part of the issue is that being so fast and having so few corners it's not often they make mistakes, so there's not much chance to take advantage of that.
Still, it's usually a good race for Ferrari who tend to build a car that does well on high speed circuits. Hopefully therefore Alonso should do well, which should keep the championship alive.
There's also the possibility that if the Mercedes can get on pole in qualifying then they'll be able to dominate and hold the others back. That was part of the key as to why they did well in Hungary - get on pole and stay there.
Of course that's also the general Red Bull tactic, but then the car (deliberately) doesn't tend to have the highest top speed so they may struggle to achieve it.
Monza is one of the fastest tracks on the current circuit and is not that far off being an Indi-car style oval circuit. Indeed, I seem to recall the old, banked circuit was an oval. I mean, it has a few chicanes and that, but if you were to take an oval and stretch it and put a dog leg in it, that wouldn't be too far off of Monza.
Anyway, the point is that it's a very fast circuit and the race often doesn't take much more than an hour to run.
It's normally an okay race. It doesn't tend to have a lot of overtaking, though it is possible. Part of the issue is that being so fast and having so few corners it's not often they make mistakes, so there's not much chance to take advantage of that.
Still, it's usually a good race for Ferrari who tend to build a car that does well on high speed circuits. Hopefully therefore Alonso should do well, which should keep the championship alive.
There's also the possibility that if the Mercedes can get on pole in qualifying then they'll be able to dominate and hold the others back. That was part of the key as to why they did well in Hungary - get on pole and stay there.
Of course that's also the general Red Bull tactic, but then the car (deliberately) doesn't tend to have the highest top speed so they may struggle to achieve it.
Wednesday, 4 September 2013
belgium grand prix
Thought so - I wrote this yesterday, but turns out I didn't post it!
During my absence I only missed blogging on the one grand prix, which was Spa Francochamps in Belgium.
Usually Spa is one of the best races of the year, as it has natural opportunities to overtake and the drivers enjoy racing there. It's also a place where it often rains, and unpredictably so. Because of the hills it has its own little micro-climate that can take the teams by surprise.
Having given it the big build-up this year's race was okay. Qualifying was good as it was quite exciting. The weather played a major part and parts of the sessions were wet. However, in the race it stayed dry throughout.
I also have to say I think DRS ruins a circuit like Spa. The problem is that there are good places to overtake, and they still use them, but because there's quite a big DRS section some of the time they wait until they can get on the DRS straight and simply overtake with the extra speed. Which is the worst form of overtaking.
Good overtaking is getting them into the corner (or I guess sometimes when coming out of a corner) but simply driving past the other guy on the straight because you have extra speed that he doesn't isn't overtaking. And there was a fair bit of that this year.
DRS does work on a handful of circuits (notably the circuits in the middle east) but the intention was meant to be that it aided overtaking, helping them get into an overtaking position, not that it allows them to drive past.
During my absence I only missed blogging on the one grand prix, which was Spa Francochamps in Belgium.
Usually Spa is one of the best races of the year, as it has natural opportunities to overtake and the drivers enjoy racing there. It's also a place where it often rains, and unpredictably so. Because of the hills it has its own little micro-climate that can take the teams by surprise.
Having given it the big build-up this year's race was okay. Qualifying was good as it was quite exciting. The weather played a major part and parts of the sessions were wet. However, in the race it stayed dry throughout.
I also have to say I think DRS ruins a circuit like Spa. The problem is that there are good places to overtake, and they still use them, but because there's quite a big DRS section some of the time they wait until they can get on the DRS straight and simply overtake with the extra speed. Which is the worst form of overtaking.
Good overtaking is getting them into the corner (or I guess sometimes when coming out of a corner) but simply driving past the other guy on the straight because you have extra speed that he doesn't isn't overtaking. And there was a fair bit of that this year.
DRS does work on a handful of circuits (notably the circuits in the middle east) but the intention was meant to be that it aided overtaking, helping them get into an overtaking position, not that it allows them to drive past.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)