text:
Falcons vs. Patriots
When: 8:30 p.m. Sunday
Where: Georgia Dome, Atlanta
On TV: NBC
ATLANTA — Tom Brady usually makes it look so easy.
Year after year, he churned out staggering offensive numbers with such regularity it was hard to envision much of a drop-off, even when he lost two of his most trusted receivers.
But here we are, three weeks into the season, and Brady is struggling to get in sync with his new guys.
Sure, the Patriots (3-0) are off to a strong start in the standings, but defense and the running game have largely carried the load. Brady turns up in some very unfamiliar spots on the stat sheet: 24th in passer rating, 26th in completion percentage, 33rd in average gain per attempt.
"We've definitely left some points on the board," he said heading into Sunday's prime-time game against the Atlanta Falcons.
Brady knew things would be a bit different after Wes Welker signed with the Broncos and Brandon Lloyd was released. A year ago, those two combined for 192 receptions, 2,265 yards and 10 touchdowns.
Also, receiver Danny Amendola missed the last two games with a groin injury, while two-time Pro Bowl tight end Rob Gronkowski has yet to play while recovering from forearm and back surgeries. In the meantime, rookies Kenbrell Thompkins and Aaron Dobson have become Brady's main receivers, a transition that hasn't gone all that smoothly.
The Patriots have really struggled in the red zone, scoring only four times in 13 trips inside the 20-yard line.
Brady and the passing game will need to pick up against the Falcons (1-2), a team that has another of the league's top quarterbacks, Matt Ryan, and plenty of offensive weapons.
Atlanta has an extra sense of urgency after a pair of last-minute losses, leaving the team in danger of falling two games below .500 for the first time under coach Mike Smith.
The Falcons have been outscored 48-24 in the second half.
Especially if Gronkowski is able to play.
He practiced during the week but was coy about whether he'd return against the Falcons.
Here are five things to watch for when the Falcons host the Patriots:
WHERE'S RODDY? Falcons WR Roddy White is still trying to get back to full speed after spraining his right ankle during the preseason. White played in the first three games but wasn't very effective with seven catches for 56 yards and no touchdowns.
That puts him on pace for 37 catches and 299 yards over a full season. White's infectiveness has made it easier for defenses to cover Gonzalez, who has 93 yards on 11 receptions.
GIVE US A D: New England has long been known for its high-scoring offense, but the other side of the line has carried the Patriots over the first three weeks. They have allowed only three touchdowns (another scored on a fumble return) and are tied with Kansas City for the fewest points allowed (34) in the AFC.
But the early success comes with a caveat: The Patriots have yet to face an elite quarterback, feasting on a pair of rookies — Buffalo's EJ Manuel and Geno Smith of the New York Jets — along with Tampa Bay's struggling and now-benched Josh Freeman.
FALCONS BOUNCE BACK: Under Smith, the Falcons have had only three losing streaks over the past five-plus seasons, all of them two-game skids during the 2009 season. Atlanta is riding a streak of 14 straight wins after losses and can't afford to lose any more ground to first-place New Orleans in the NFC South.
SEE PATS RUN: New England doesn't have a go-to runner, but the committee approach is working just fine.
Stevan Ridley tops the Patriots with 121 yards. LeGarrette Blount and Brandon Bolden took the lead in last week's victory over Tampa Bay. The Patriots rank 12th in the league in rushing (122.7 yards per game), 10 spots higher than their vaunted passing game.
SACK MASTERS: Pressuring the quarterback has been a major Falcons weakness over the past few seasons, but they're coming off a five-sack performance against Miami. Atlanta defensive coordinator Mike Nolan relies on stunts, blitzes and other deceptive schemes to make up for the lack of a big-time end.


text:
'Lincoln' plays a little too safe
For anyone who cringed just a little while watching the trailer for "Lincoln" and worried that it might be a near-parody of a Steven Spielberg film, with its heartfelt proclamations, sentimental tones and inspiring John Williams score, fret not.
The movie itself is actually a lot more reserved than that — more a wonky, nutsand-bolts lesson about the way political machinery operates than a sweeping historical epic that tries to encapsulate the entirety of the revered 16th president's life. That was a smart move on the part of Spielberg and screenwriter Tony Kushner, a Pulitzer prize-winner for the play "Angels in America" who also wrote the script for Spielberg's "Munich."
Talky and intimate but also surprisingly funny, "Lincoln" focuses on the final four months of Abraham Lincoln's life as he fought for the passage of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution, abolishing slavery, and strove to unite a nation torn apart by the Civil War. (It is based partly on Doris Kearns Goodwin's best-seller "Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln.") This tumultuous period provides a crucible to display everything Lincoln was made of, both his folksiness and fortitude. He tells long, winding anecdotes to enlighten and charm those around him but also forcefully hammers home his points to get what he wants.
Totally unsurprisingly, Daniel Day-Lewis inhabits the role fully. He disappears into it with small details and grand gestures, from his carriage to the cadence of his speech, and the Academy should probably just give him the bestactor Oscar now and get it over with. Although "Lincoln" itself often feels too conservative, stagey and safe, Day-Lewis' performances is full of so many clever choices that he keeps it compelling.
Of course, the film has all the top-notch technical hallmarks we've come to expect from Spielberg: It's handsomely staged and impeccable in its production design. But despite the dramatic streaks of misty white light streaming from the outdoors into these dark, solemn rooms of power — a signature of his longtime collaboration with Oscar-winning cinematographer Janusz Kaminski — "Lincoln" is much more muted from an aesthetic standpoint than last year's equally old-fashioned "War Horse." This is a movie that's easier to admire than love; it's impressive but not exactly moving.
But it is unexpectedly humorous. The process of cajoling and coercing members of Congress to vote for passage of the amendment provides several estimable character actors with wonderfully showy roles. Tommy Lee Jones does a spin on his cantankerous screen persona as the quick-witted, fiercely verbal Republican congressman from Pennsylvania, Thaddeus Stevens, a strong proponent of abolition. David Strathairn is the sharpminded and condescending Secretary of State William Seward, who was Lincoln's foe before becoming a member of his cabinet.
There are almost too many great supporting players in juicy, tantalizingly small parts. You'd love to see more from all of them, including Lee Pace as a grandstanding Democrat railing against the amendment on the House of Representatives floor, Michael Stuhlbarg as a conflicted congressman, Hal Holbrook as the powerful Lincoln ally Preston Blair and Jackie Earle Haley as the vice president of the Confederacy. And then there are James Spader, John Hawkes and Tim Blake Nelson as the cynical, gladhanding trio hired to lobby the toughest Democrats and secure those final, crucial votes; their banter is a consistent source of laughs.
It gets to the point where major figures in Lincoln's life — Sally Field as his wife, Mary Todd Lincoln, and Joseph Gordon-Levitt as his elder son who's eager to see combat — don't register as powerfully as they should because the script is just so packed. And that effort to contain so much history in one feature film especially extends to the ending. This is no spoiler — we all know what happened to Lincoln — but there's a beautifully photographed moment that occurs before his assassination that would have left the film on the most perfectly lovely, poignant note. Instead, it keeps going — and becomes the movie you might have feared "Lincoln" would be

subset: commoncrawl


text:
If you're a customer, please fill out our form below to contact us:
... loading ...
We take your privacy seriously and will only use your personal information to
administer your account and to provide the products and services you have requested from us.
However, from time to time, we would like to contact you with details of other services
and offers we provide. If you consent to us contacting you for this purpose please tick to
say how you would like us to contact you:


text:
Report: An alleged extended recording of Donald Sterling offers more racial comments (Video)
A recently released 15-minute version of the alleged conversation between Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling and his reported girlfriend shows the beleaguered longtime NBA executive – if this is indeed proved to be him, as many have presumed – to be just as inscrutable and misogynistic as he is racist and downright clueless.
The tape, first obtained by Deadspin on Sunday morning, includes a conversation that alleges Sterling asked his girlfriend to take pictures of African-American friends off her Instagram account. V. Stiviano, who is half African-American herself, seems baffled as to the degrees and generalizations behind Sterling's alleged racism, and Deadspin's find produced these strange nuggets:
Man: It's the world! You go to Israel, the blacks are just treated like dogs.
Woman: So do you have to treat them like that too?
Man: The white Jews, there's white Jews and black Jews, do you understand?
Woman: And are the black Jews less than the white Jews?
Man: A 100 percent, fifty, a 100 percent.
Woman: And is that right?
Man: It isn't a question—we don't evaluate what's right and wrong, we live in a society. We live in a culture. We have to live within that culture.
Woman: But shouldn't we take a stand for what's wrong? And be the change and the difference?
Man: I don't want to change the culture, because I can't. It's too big and too [unknown].
Then there's this lovely bit of plantation-esque rationalization, coming from a voice alleged to be that of Sterling:
Woman: I don't understand, I don't see your views. I wasn't raised the way you were raised.
Man: Well then, if you don't feel—don't come to my games. Don't bring black people, and don't come.
Woman: Do you know that you have a whole team that's black that plays for you?
Man: You just, do I know? I support them and give them food and clothes and cars and houses. Who gives it to them? Does someone else give it to them? Do I know that I have – who makes the game? Do I make the game, or do they make the game? Is there 30 owners that created the league?
Sterling also went on to chide his girlfriend, who is being sued by Sterling's longtime wife, for having an "evil heart." And his views on women in general can probably be tidily summed up with this alleged exchange from Sterling:
Man: I don't want to change. If my girl can't do what I want, I don't want the girl. I'll find a girl that will do what I want! Believe me. I thought you were that girl—because I tried to do what you want. But you're not that girl.
The quickness and alacrity in which Sterling, allegedly, gets to his talking points suggests this is not the first time he has had conversations along these lines. Just as surprising as it is to hear comments like these come from sentient human beings in 2014, it's also more than a little shocking alleged tapes of Sterling like these haven't been produced prior to 2014.
A shorter, five-minute version of the new video can be found here:
Thanks to Deadspin for both the find and the transcription.
- - - - - - -
is an editor for Ball Don't Lie on Yahoo Sports. Have a tip? Email him at firstname.lastname@example.com or follow him on Twitter! Follow @KDonhoops


text:
It's of course free to create a student profile and use Studiz
Please provide a valid e-mail address
This e-mail is already in use - please choose "login" instead
This e-mail is already in use - please use a different e-mail til create your student-profile. Contact customer service if you have any questions.
E-mails do not match
First name and surname with a capital letter
Date format should be dd/mm-yyyy
This zip code doesn't exist in our system
Please state your field of study
Please select the year you started your education
Enter phone number
Keep me updated with monthly discount mail
Agree to
Terms and conditions
Please accept the Terms of use
This e-mail is already in use - please select "login" instead
If you forgot your password you can get a mail with a link to change it here:
We offer 15% discount on all our treatments (ONLY the free services that are not regulated by the state, such as inspection and dental cleanings, etc.).


text:
Satin Bridal Party Robe
A stunning satin robe for the bride to wear on her wedding day while getting ready or to enjoy during her happily ever after. This satin robe has Bride beautifully spelled out across the back in clear crystals. Available in over 32 robe colors and 29 rhinestone colors.
Please allow production time for your custom satin bridal party robes as we meticulously embellished each robe to your specifications one at a time! Rush service is available should you need your item/order quickly. Rush service will decrease the personalization time. Rush service is not the same as expedited shipping such as 3-day air, 2-day air, or overnight. These expedited shipping methods and time in transit begin when your order leaves our warehouse. Please make your selections with care as custom items cannot be returned or exchanged.
Questions & Answers about Satin Bridal Party Robe Embellished with Crystals
Shop more gifts and apparel
at our sister store Zynotti
- For the Bride
- Bridal Brooches & Pins
- Bridal Garters
- Gloves
- Bride & Bachelorette Sashes
- Hair Accessories
- Handkerchiefs
- Headpieces and Tiaras
- Veils
- Slips and Body Shapers
- Wedding Socks
- Bustiers & Bras
- Bridal Lingerie
- CLEARANCE Ed Hardy
- Body Shapers
- I Do Shoe Stickers
- Jewelry
- Purses & Money Bags
- Bouquet Jewelry
- Something Blue
- Personalized Shoe Bags
- Emergency Kits
- Shawls, Furs & Pashminas
- Ceremony Accessories
- Will You Be My Cards
- DIY Invitations
- Flower Girl Baskets
- Ring Pillows
- Unity Sand Sets
- Unity Candles & Stands
- Wedding Signs
- Wedding Accessory Collections
- DIY T-Shirt Transfers
- Fun Wedding Stuff
- Cake Toppers
- Monogram Cake Toppers
- Bride and Groom Figurine Toppers
- Personalized Cake Tops
- Traditional Cake Toppers
- Anniversary Cake Toppers
- Cake Top Initials
- Birthday Cake Toppers
- Reception Accessories
- Personalized Hand Sanitizers
- Wedding Favors & Supplies
- Guest Signature Mats
- Toasting Flutes
- Cake Tops & Monograms
- Cake Servers
- Renaissance Pewter Accessories
- Placecards & Table Numbers
- Napkins & Matches
- Dance Floor Decals
- Groomsman Accessories
- Money Dance Bags
- Bow Ties for the Guys
- Bridal Shower


text:
DineOnCampus is the hub for all of your dining needs! Within these pages you will find a wide range of information available from what's on our menu to upcoming events and promotions, as well as our hours of operation and contact information. Everything you need is easily accessible with just one click.
We look forward to seeing you!
Can't find something? Need to send along a great idea? Need more information on a topic? We would love to hear from you.
At your service,
Foodservice Director
Chartwells at UPEI
(902) 628-4338


text:
Trial to decide fate of Andy Warhol portrait of Farrah Fawcett
Andy Warhol's artwork has always grabbed attention and sparked discussion, but one of his portraits of Farrah Fawcett is about to receive scrutiny of a different kind in a Los Angeles courtroom.
The case centers on a relatively simple question: does one of Warhol's depictions of Fawcett belong to her longtime lover, Ryan O'Neal, or should it join its twin at her alma mater, the University of Texas at Austin?
To decide the case, jurors will hear testimony and see evidence focused on Warhol and O'Neal's friendship, his relationship with Fawcett and the actress' final wishes. The panel will likely get insight into Warhol's creation of the Fawcett image, which was based on a Polaroid photo the artist took of the "Charlie's Angels" star in 1980.
The image, one of the main attractions in a 2011 exhibit on portraiture at UT's Blanton Museum of Art, features an unsmiling Fawcett looking out from the canvas. Warhol painted her lips red and her eyes green in an otherwise uncolored image.
Jury selection in the trial is expected to begin this week, with O'Neal and possibly Fawcett's "Charlie's Angels" co-star Jaclyn Smith taking the witness stand. The case resumes on Wednesday, when lawyers will argue what evidence will be admitted during the trial, which is expected to take two weeks.
Fawcett decreed in her will that all her artwork go to the school, yet O'Neal insists that Warhol gave him a copy of the portrait as a gift and it belongs to him.
Warhol's art continues to garner attention and high prices. His painting of the immediate aftermath of a car crash sold for $105 million at auction last week, although the value of his Fawcett portrait is at dispute in the case. Estimates range from $600,000 to more than $10 million, according to filings in the case.
University of Texas' lawyers contend O'Neal improperly removed the portrait from Fawcett's condominium after her 2009 death. The Oscar-nominated actor had the artwork moved there to prevent it from being damaged by the salty air at his beachside home and had the right to retrieve it, his lawyers argue.
O'Neal has countersued the university, seeking the return of a cloth napkin that Warhol drew hearts on and gave as a gift to Fawcett and the actor.
"It is a precious memento of his life with Ms. Fawcett, the love of his life, with whom he was romantically involved for 30 years up until the time of her death," O'Neal's lawyers wrote in a trial brief. "Because O'Neal's Warhol portrait is an heirloom, he never intends to, nor will sell it."
The university says the case is about honoring Fawcett's final wishes.
"We simply want to honor and respect the charitable intent and wishes of Farrah Fawcett," UT's Vice Chancellor for External Relations Randa S. Safady wrote in a statement. "It is indisputable that in Ms. Fawcett's living trust, she named the University of Texas at Austin as the sole beneficiary of all of her works of art, including artwork she created and all objects of art that she owned, for charitable purposes."
Court fights over assets frequently occur and are likely to increase as people gain greater understanding of their rights in estate cases, said Bradford Cohen, an estate and tax attorney in Venable LLC's Los Angeles office.
"What comes up a lot in the estate area is that it's not clear what the intentions of the deceased were and what the deceased owned," Cohen said. "These things get slugged out a lot in litigation."
Despite Fawcett's notoriety and interest in her and O'Neal's relationship, Cohen said the case really centers on a basic question, "What did she own and where did she want it to go to?"


text:
Are you tired of reading about what a hard time publishers are having? Do you wish that somebody would write about what a hard time we, the readers, are having with some of the clinkers they've thrown at us?
Stay right here. Tomorrow One-Minute Book Reviews will post the shortlist for the Third Annual Delete Key Awards for the year's worst writing in books for adults or children. The finalists will be named in random order and numbered in reverse order, from No. 10 through No. 1, at roughly half hour intervals, beginning at 10 a.m. Eastern Time. The full shortlist will be posted by 5 p.m.
Last year John Brockman said on the blog for the Powell's Books:
"Arguably the second-best online literary award after the TOB's Rooster [co-sponsored by Powell's] is the 2008 Delete Key Awards for 'the year's worst writing in books,' awarded by the One-Minute Book Reviews blog."
Please check back tomorrow to learn the finalists for this year's booby prizes for clichés, bad grammar, psychobabble, stereotypes, mispunctuation, incoherence, dumbing-down and more.
One-Minute Book Reviews does not accept free books or other promotional materials from editors, publishers, authors, agents or others with ties to the industry.
© 2009 Janice Harayda


text:
City moves toward a hybrid retirement plan
In hopes of curbing rising pension costs, the Ocala City Council on Tuesday formed a consensus to change the city's General Employees' Retirement Plan to a hybrid plan, but will wait until the actuarial consultant presents the numbers of what each of the three proposed hybrid plans will cost the city. Those numbers should be available in 30-60 days.
The consensus, too, was that the new hires and current employees would be treated the same.
The old plan will be frozen and employees will be entitled to whatever benefits they had accumulated to that point under the current plan.
Those employees who have five or less years until retirement would be allowed to stay in the current defined benefit plan. But those employees could possibly be given the option to change to the new plan going forward.
The council's chambers and hallways at City Hall were crowded with employees waiting to hear the fate of their retirement benefits.
"I think current employees should be left in the current or the 1999 Plan as Mr. McLeod suggested or given the option if they wanted to go into the hybrid plan," Lisa Mauldin, who sits on the General Employees Pension Board said after the meeting about Councilman John McLeod.
Mauldin said that the figures on which the council is making its decision are from Oct. 1, 2011. She said the plan earned more than 12 percent in 2012, for a gain of $9.8 million. She said the council should include those numbers when making its decision.
Based on the 2011 numbers, the General Employees plan had an unfunded liability of $92.6 million and the average pension cost per employee is $18,789. The plan has a funding ration of 46.7 percent or 46-47 cents in actuarial assets for every $1 of liability.
Many of the employees asked that the benefit not be changed for current employees and that any changes to the plan be made for new hires.
Chris Drivas, a supervisor for the electric utility, said he relies on the experience of his crews when he gets in the bucket to shield him from life-threatening mistakes. He said if the benefits are not competitive, people will leave the city.
"In this line of work, experience is everything," Drivas said. "We keep pushing everybody out the door. That's not good."
He said it takes a long time to train a lineman. He said there are employees who have waited eight years to become an apprentice.
Drivas told the council that the utility earns a lot of money for the city.
"We need these guys, Drivas said.
Councilman Daniel Owen was growing impatient.
"Let's keep waiting, let's keep waiting, let's keep waiting," he said. "We have done our homework here."
But there was no clear consensus among the council members on which hybrid plan to choose. That will be based on the numbers the actuary brings to them.
Two of the proposed hybrid plans being considered would be a combination of a defined benefit plan, which guarantees a certain benefit, but lower than the current benefit, plus a defined contribution plan, in which the employees would contribute to the plan.
Under the defined contribution plan, employees could make their own investment choices and, as a result, the employee would accept some of the risk for their benefit performance.
The third hybrid plan that is proposed would be a variable annuity defined benefit plan, which means that when the cost of the plan goes up, the benefit goes down, so employees would share in the cost.
"There are some people that want a hybrid and defined contribution in their plan and they can take advantage of the market gains," McLeod said about giving employees a choice.
The actuary, Jim Rizzo of Gabriel, Roeder, Smith & Company, will be doing the new calculations to provide council with the 30-year cost projection for the three hybrid plans, with the defined benefit portion mirroring the Florida Retirement System's plan and the defined contribution portion based on 8 percent of pay. He said he could include the 2012 return on investment while using the old census data.
Rizzo told the council that because they have been using a "5-year smoothing method," the 2012 gains likely would not make a large difference in the numbers.
"One year return will be a phantom," Rizzo said, cautioning the council not to make a decision based on one year's return on investment.
Contact Susan Latham Carr at 352-867-4156 or firstname.lastname@example.com.


text:
Land Rover Discovery EMI starts at Rs. 1,74,078 per month for a tenure of 60 months for a loan amount of Rs. 80,89,642.
By default, the car loan values shown are, car loan amount (80% of the car's on-road price), interest rate (10.5%), and tenure period (5-years).
The car loan EMI, which you calculate from this EMI calculator, helps as a guide only. The resulting calculations from our end do not constitute a loan application or offer. The figures and formulae used by DriveSpark may change at any time without notice. The car loan EMI calculation does not take into account any government taxes or charges, which may apply to monthly repayments or the calculation of the car loan. DriveSpark accepts no responsibility for any loses or conclusion reached using the car loan EMI calculator.


text:
Up the middle talent is always at a premium and center field is no exception. Center field has not been a weakness for the Phillies up until the trade of Shane Victorino in July, this offseason the Phillies traded for a young center fielder in Ben Revere. In the system there are some interesting toolsy players who have questions ranging from their hitting, to fielding, to their injury history. Revere should give time for one of these players to unseat him as the center fielder of the future.
Like shortstop, it is not good enough to average defensively in center field and a player must be either plus defensively or plus at the plate. If a player cannot stick in center field there hope is that they have enough bat that they can stick as a fourth or fifth outfielder that can play occasionally in center.
As always if you have not read gregg's end of year recaps for would like the refresher here is the upper half and the lower half of all outfielders in the system.
Tyson Gillies (24) – Gillies was acquired in 2009 for Cliff Lee and his career with the Phillies has never really gotten off to a good start, having played only 129 games in those three years. Gillies before the injuries had easy 80 speed and above average raw power, but his injuries have diminished both of those skills. Gillies is still a plus defensive center fielder defensively, and he has a good approach at the plate. Gillies still can drive the ball and has ok power for a center fielder (mostly gap and not home run power). All of the tools add up to a major league regular but the injury history has hindered him from reaching his ceiling. Gillies will likely be the CF in Leigh Valley to start 2013.
Jiwan James (23) – Jiwan James is the best defensive center fielder in the in the system, where he uses above average speed and an above average arm. At the plate James has struggled with switch hitting, he has good raw power from his natural left side, but overall James struggles to recognize off speed pitches leading to poor contact rates and high strikeout rates. James has made it through the Rule 5 draft unpicked twice and will be a minor league free agent after the 2013 season. James will likely return to AA where he will once again be forced to an outfield corner in deference to a better prospect.
Zach Collier (22) – A former first round pick, Collier has struggled with injuries up until 2012. Collier has started to show at least below average power to go with improving contact skills, additionally Collier has maintained good walk rates without sacrificing strike out rate. Defensively Collier is adequate in center field but not a special defensive player. Collier is still tapping into his potential and he had an impressive showing in the Arizona Fall League, earning himself a spot on the 40 man roster. Collier likely profiles as a 4th outfielder but there is a chance that he could be a major league regular. He will likely spend 2013 playing center field in Reading.
Aaron Altherr (21) – Altherr was raw when he was drafted in 2009 and is only now starting to show what kind of player he can be. At the plate Altherr has some contact abilities but has some good plate discipline. Altherr has below average power now but there is enough to profile as average to a little above. Altherr has plus speed and steals bases at a good pace. Altherr might not profile defensively in center long term but if he can develop power he can stick in a corner. If Altherr can stick in center he can profile as a BJ Upton light profile in center field, if not there will be pressure on his bat to develop enough to be a a corner outfielder. Altherr will move on to man center field in Clearwater during 2013
Guantlet Eldemire (23) – Eldemire was a 6th round pick in 2010 as a raw college outfielder, but injuries caused his debut to be delayed until 2012. Eldemire is not burner but is a pretty good defensive outfielder. At the plate Eldemire has shown below average power (despite reports saying that he may have plus raw power) and contact ability. He did show a good walk rate against much younger competition before an injury ended his season. Eldemire will have to prove a lot to stay in the organization let alone have a starting spot on any level.
Kyrell Hudson (22) – Hudson has plenty of talent but injuries and inconsistencies have derailed his career so far. Hudson has plus plus speed and is a plus plus defender in center with an above average arm. In 2011 Hudson but up good contact numbers and little power but he regressed at the plate in 2012. Hudson will have to come out strong in spring training to have a starting spot in the outfield in 2013, additionally Hudson will be eligible for the Rule 5 in 2013 so he will have to move quickly.
Carlos Tocci (17) – Tocci was one of the youngest players in all of minor league baseball in 2012. Tocci is an incredible defensive player already with incredible instincts to go with plus plus speed and a good arm. At the plate Tocci can drive the ball to all fields but not very far, with his power a 20. There is plenty of debate on how much power he can add to his frame, if he can add average power he is a potential superstar if he can add enough power to not have the bat knocked out of his hand he could be newly acquired center fielder Ben Revere. The lack of a center field in front of him coupled with an advanced approach could see Tocci start the year in Lakewood with a demotion to Williamsport if necessary.
The Recently Acquired:
Ben Revere (24) – The Phillies traded Vance Worley and Trevor May for Revere to fill their center field hole. Revere has 20 power and a well below average arm, but otherwise he has plus plus speed which he uses to be a good defensive outfielder. At the plate Revere makes good contact and steals bases at an efficient clip, and he has good plate discipline, which is undermined by the fact that pitchers are willing to challenge him due to his lack of power.
Ender Inciarte (22) – The Phillies Rule 5 selection in 2012, Inciarte has never played above A-ball. Offensively Inciarte will be hopelessly overmatched as he doesn't have the strength or experience to deal with premium velocity and his plate discipline which has been good so far will be irrelevant as pitchers will not pitch around him. Defensively Inciarte is plus in all three outfield positions where he has plus plus speed and a good arm. If he can make it through the year and get another couple years of minor league development he may be able to stick as a 4th or 5th outfielder long term.
Some Questions Facing this Group:
Can any of James, Gillies, and Collier bump newly acquired Ben Revere out of the center field job?
Will Eldemire, Hudson, or Gillies stay healthy for a full season?
Can Altherr or James but their tools into game action?
How good can Carlos Tocci be?


text:
Request Information
We're Sorry
There was an unexpected error with the form (your web browser was unable to retrieve some required data from our servers). This kind of error may occur if you have temporarily lost your internet connection. If you're able to verify that your internet connection is stable and the error persists, the Franklin University Help Desk is available to assist you at email@example.com, 614.947.6682 (local), or 1.866.435.7006 (toll free).
Just a moment while we process your submission.
Delaware Online Healthcare Management Degrees by the Numbers
Online healthcare management degrees in Delaware have been declining at institutions over the past 5 years. In 2020, students completed 18 healthcare management-related degree programs that were offered 100% online by Delaware colleges and universities. That was a decrease of 89% from completions reported in 2016.


text:
Chanel Tote
Estimated Delivery:Feb 13 - Feb 17
Free Shipping & Returns on all orders
Brand: Chanel
Colour: Multicolor
Material: Canvas
Included: Dust bag
Dimensions: W:60cm x H:36cm x D:24cm
Serial number: 7226689
Country of origin: Italy
Condition: Good
Outside:The bottom and the corners of the bag are partly rubbed.The handles are slightly stained.
Inside:There are some small stainsBefore purchasing, please refer to the images for the exact condition of the item.
At Open for Vintage, product authenticity and customer trust is at the heart of everything we do. That's why we only source our products from highly respected luxury boutiques around the world. We believe that these established businesses are better equipped to seek out authentic, high quality and rare designer pieces.
In addition, we provide a 100% guarantee that the items on our website are authentic. If for any reason you are not satisfied with the authenticity of your purchase, we will provide a full refund.
Our commitment to product authenticity is one of the many things that sets us apart from our competitors.
Open for Vintage ship worldwide.
All deliveries are handled exclusively by our Logistics Partner DHL.
As part of our commitment to a more sustainable business, all of our delivery and returns are completely carbon neutral. Utilising DHL's GoGreen shipping initiative, Open for Vintage neutralise any CO2 emissions by investing in recognised carbon protection projects, including biomass, landfill and wind farms.
We also offer free returns via DHL, so you can shop with confidence knowing that you can return anything you're not happy with.
Please visit our Shipping & Returns page for more details on order processing and delivery times.
We are committed to providing our customers with the best possible prices, regardless of where they or the items they are buying are located in the world.
All prices on our website include customs and duties, so what you see is all you'll have to pay.
This guarantees that our prices are always competitive, and that you'll never have to worry about hidden fees or unexpected charges. When you shop with us, you can be confident that you're getting the best possible value for your money.


text:
Football fans are rarely happy. After all, there are only so many trophies that can be won, so the majority of teams will end the season empty handed. That said, Everton's fans seem to be particularly despondent these days, so much so that a coalition of supporters' groups known as the Blue Union initiated a protest march before last week's home game against Aston Villa.
Their principal complaint is that the club is stagnating under the current ownership, but their objective is rather more sophisticated than the customary "sack the board" knee-jerk reaction to adversity of crowds the world over. Instead, this campaign is more about freeing up Everton's executives to focus on operational issues, such as growing revenue and cutting costs, while a "fully autonomous group of professional individuals" is brought in to expedite the sale of the club to a buyer who can drive the club forward.
Everton have effectively been on the market for many years, but the chairman Bill Kenwright has so far failed to attract the new investment that the club so badly needs. Therefore, the Blue Union's suggestion is that the club introduces a similar arrangement to the one that (eventually) worked at neighbours Liverpool, when independent chairman Martin Broughton identified John W. Henry as the Reds' potential saviour.
"Phil Jagielka prays for investment"
Specifically, they are not seeking Kenwright's departure, though this would not have come as a complete surprise after details of their extraordinary meeting with the chairman were published. Even if the release of a detailed transcript of a private meeting was ethically dubious, it was to a large extent justified by Kenwright's admission that the club's financial situation was every bit as bad as many fans had feared.
Although this was nothing new to seasoned observers of Everton's finances, the explicit revelation that the bank had forced the club to reduce its overdraft facility and was effectively preventing manager David Moyes from signing new players was still shocking news. Indeed, Kenwright confirmed that the proceeds from the sale of players and the club's old training ground at Bellefield had gone towards reducing the club's £45 million debt.
Kenwright is clearly a genuine Everton fan, but at times he seemed completely out of his depth during the discussion. Not only was he vague about the long-standing issue of a new stadium, but he was essentially clueless about the club's financials. OK, maybe that's a bit too harsh, but he was clearly confused and really should know a great deal more after so many years as chairman.
"Tim Cahill - up for the fight"
In fairness to Kenwright, in the past he has appreciated the main issue facing Everton, which is how to keep the team challenging at the top end of the Premier League without new investment. However, his strategy, for want of a better word, has seemingly consisted of little more than relying on David Moyes to continue to work minor miracles on a shoestring budget.
With some justification, Kenwright calls Moyes "the most important figure at the club", describing him as "a manager who will go down as one of our all time greats." Moyes himself is proud of his achievements, pointing out that in the 10 years he has been at the club, Everton have finished in the top 10 seven times. In fact, they have done rather better than that under his guidance, as his record includes two fifth places and a memorable fourth place in 2004/05, when the team qualified for the Champions League.
However, although Moyes refuted the fans' charge of stagnation, even he admitted that he was operating under severe financial constraints, "Of course we want to be top of the league and winning cups, but at our club, we have got a level of finances, wages we can pay and stuff that we can do. We try and then get the best team and the best performances we can out of the players we have got." It is fair to say that Moyes has got the most out of his resources, consistently outperforming teams that have spent more.
"David Moyes - a lot on his mind"
However, these results are slim pickings to a "grand old team" with Everton's fine tradition. Only Arsenal have a longer unbroken spell in the top flight than the Blues, who have won the old First Division nine times, the FA Cup (when it meant something) five times and the European Cup-Winners Cup once. Four of those trophies came during a memorable period between 1984 and 1987, but the problem is that even though this might seem like yesterday to Everton supporters, it is nearly 25 years ago.
Since the introduction of the Premier League in 1992, Everton have struggled to live up to their glorious past, only winning the FA Cup in 1995. After the death of former owner John Moores, the club began to struggle both on and off the pitch. The Moores family shareholding was bought in 1994 by Peter Johnson, whose tenure was fairly disastrous with the club frequently involved in a fight against relegation.
Five years later, leading theatrical producer Bill Kenwright headed a consortium named True Blue Holdings Limited that bought the club in a deal that valued it at £30 million, though the source of the funds has never been completely clear. A series of ugly boardroom disputes ensued between Kenwright and fellow directors, Paul and Anita Gregg. Both sides tried to win over the Everton fans with ambitious investment plans, Kenwright's version entitled the Fortress Sports Fund, but neither of these came to fruition. Finally, in 2006 the Greggs sold their shares to the entrepreneur Robert Earl, a friend of Kenwright, but all the infighting took its toll.
While professing to provide Moyes with "every available penny", the reality is that the level of funds available to the manager has been diminishing. Indeed, the net spend has been negative over the last three seasons, adding up to £20 million sales proceeds. During the meeting with the Blue Union, Kenwright said, "On average, we give him £5.6 million every year. Nine years – that's £45 million." Leaving aside the appalling arithmetic, that's palpably incorrect in recent times.
In fairness to Everton's board, they did break the club's transfer record three times between 2006 and 2008: first for speedy striker Andrew Johnson £8.6 million, then Nigerian international Yakubu £11.25 million and finally powerful Belgian midfielder Marouane Fellaini £15 million.
However, since then Moyes has had to sell to buy. Everton's last major splurge came in the summer of 2009 as the £22 million proceeds from Joleon Lescott's transfer to Manchester City was spent on Diniyar Bilyaletdinov £10 million, Johnny Heitinga £6 million and Sylvain Distin £4 million.
Everton's chief executive, Robert Elstone, summed up the club's approach, "We have to be astute in the transfer market and the manager and the chairman have a good record in doing that." He's not kidding, when you consider that Moyes managed to secure the services of Tim Cahill, Mikel Arteta, Phil Jagielka, Steven Pienaar and Seamus Coleman for less than £10 million in total.
However, the lack of activity has become really pronounced in the last two years with only Newcastle having a lower net spend than Everton in the Premier League over that period – and that was largely due to the extraordinary £35 million sale of Andy Carroll to Liverpool. No wonder that Elstone drily observed, "It is fair to say we have not got a big transfer war chest. I can't see us smashing our record transfer fee on a regular basis." Quite.
In fact, even the three sides just promoted from the Championship have comfortably outspent Everton. Closer to home, it must be especially galling that Liverpool have splashed out well over £100 million on new players in 2011. In stark contrast, Everton have seen the departures of Pienaar, Arteta, Yakubu, Jermaine Beckford and James Vaughan since the turn of the year, with only a couple of loan signings coming the other way: Dutch misfit Royston Drenthe and unheralded Argentine strike Denis Stracqualursi.
Moyes confessed his concerns after yet another frugal transfer window, "It will be really difficult to finish in the top 10. I think we are going to have a big struggle. Look at the spending of Stoke, Sunderland, Fulham and West Bromwich Albion." The only positive to take was that they did not also lose Jagielka, Fellaini and coveted left-back Leighton Baines.
Although Everton's financial problems may not have attracted the media coverage of some other clubs, the fact is that their business model is bust. Essentially, their strategy has been to run the club at a loss every year in a gamble to achieve success and to fund this by steadily increasing their debt, but now the banks have stopped extending them credit.
It is not too difficult to see why they have made this decision, as Everton's profit and loss account looks simply awful. Even with healthy turnover of £79 million, they reported a loss of £3 million. In fact, they have only managed to record a profit once in the last eight years – and that was only due to Wayne Rooney's big money transfer to Manchester United in 2004/05.
Since "Wazza" was sacrificed, the club has suffered £30 million of cumulative losses: 2006 £11 million, 2007 – £9 million, 2008 – zero, 2009 – £7 million, 2010 – £3 million. Over half of that has been due to interest payments, which have risen to £4.5 million in 2010. However, the fundamental problem is that cost growth is significantly outpacing revenue growth. The trend is clear with EBITDA (Earnings Before Interest, Taxation, Depreciation and Amortisation) declining from £12 million in 2005 to just £1 million in 2010.
Once non-cash items like player amortisation and depreciation are included, we can observe the deterioration in operating profits, which were at break-even in 2005, but are now showing a hefty loss of £18 million in 2010. In that period, revenue has grown by £19 million (32%) from £60 million to £79 million, while total expenses have shot up by £37 million (61%) from the same level of £60 million to £97 million. The situation is actually even worse than that, as revenue has hardly grown in the last two years, while the cost growth shows no sign of slowing down.
On the face of it, last season's £3 million loss does not look too bad, but this would have been much worse without the benefit of £19 million profit on player sales, almost entirely due to Lescott's departure. Without that once-off boost, the 2010 loss would have been a truly depressing £22 million.
Player sales have had a disproportionate impact on the club's results for many years, contributing £59 million profit since 2005. In other words, the losses would have been even higher if the club had not been selling players. The impact was most obvious in 2005 when Rooney's sale resulted in a net profit of £23m, but you can also see its importance the following year when the club reported an overall loss of £11 million, as there was no profit from player sales.
As operating losses have increased since then, the importance of player sales becomes even more evident. The key point is that if Everton do not repeat player sales at the same level as 2010, namely around £20 million, then it is extremely doubtful that they will break-even in future. This is unlikely to be music to the ears of Everton fans, but it's a harsh reality.
Given the above, it might seem a little bizarre that chief executive Robert Elstone said that this was "a healthy set of accounts", but in comparison with some other clubs, you can sort of see what he means. Everton are by no means the only football club that struggles to balance its books and their loss of £3 million in 2009/10 actually made them one of the better financial performers in the Premier League.
In fact, just four clubs were profitable that season (Arsenal £56 million, Wolverhampton Wanderers £9 million, WBA £0.5 million and Birmingham City £0.1 million), while only one club (Blackburn Rovers) made a smaller loss than Everton. Half of the Premier League made losses over £15 million, while the losses at the clubs that finished in the top three places in 2010/11 were stratospheric: Manchester City £121 million, Manchester United £80 million and Chelsea £70 million. However, the difference between those clubs and Everton is that their owners have largely covered these losses.
Everton's revenue of £79 million places them in a slightly strange position. On the one hand, this is the eighth highest in England and only one position behind Aston Villa, who enjoy the 20th largest revenue in Europe, according to the Deloitte Money League.
On the other hand, the problem is that their revenue lags way behind other major clubs. It's significantly behind the so-called "Sky Four" (Manchester United £286 million, Arsenal £224 million, Chelsea £201 million and Liverpool £185 million), who benefited from Champions League riches in 2009/10, but it's also a fair bit below Everton's natural challengers (Manchester City £125 million, Tottenham £120 million and Aston Villa £90 million) with the gap expected to grow still wider when the 2010/11 results are published.
This disparity is important, as money tends to equate to success in football. For example, in 2009/10 the seven clubs that finished ahead of Everton in the Premier League were exactly the same as those above them in the Money League. Arguably, Everton could be described as being the "best of the rest", though their revenue was only £3 million higher than Fulham's.
The other major issue with Everton's revenue is that it is not really growing. Elstone recently boasted, "We have signed record sponsorship deals and hugely increased our income", but the reality is that any growth is almost entirely due to broadcasting revenue. This has risen from £28 million in 2007 to £50 million in 2010, but this has little to do with the club, being almost entirely due to the distributions from the collective sale of Premier League TV rights.
Those revenue streams under the club's control have essentially remained flat for the last three seasons with commercial income growing slightly from £9 million to £10 million and gate receipts actually falling from £20 million to £19 million. This means that Everton, like many of the clubs in the Premier League, have become very reliant on television money, which now represents 63% of their total income.
In 2010 Everton's TV revenue of £50 million largely consisted of £43 million from the Premier League plus £4.2 million for reaching the last 32 in the Europa League. The Premier League distribution has risen every time a new three-year deal is signed, as can be seen by the substantial increase in 2008, and there will be a similar £7 million increase in 2011 to just under £50 million, mainly due to the substantial increase in overseas rights.
Given its importance to Everton's revenue, it is worth understanding how the Premier League allocation works. Each club gets an equal share of 50% of the domestic rights (£13.8 million) and 100% of the overseas rights (£17.9 million). However, facility fees (25% of domestic rights) depend on how many times each club is broadcast live, which hurts Everton, as they were only shown 13 times, a lot less than other clubs. This meant that they received £7.3 million, compared to Manchester United's £13.5 million. Finally, merit payments (25% of domestic rights) are worth £757,000 per place in the table, leading to £10.6 million for Everton's seventh position.
Of course, Everton's 2010/11 TV money will be adversely impacted by the lack of European competition, though it's only Champions League teams that receive the big bucks, e.g. last season the four English entrants boosted their coffers by an average of £35 million. Although the money was not so high 20 years ago, the ban on English clubs following the Heysel tragedy has undoubtedly cost Everton dearly. In fact, in his own slightly chaotic fashion, Kenwright pinpointed this issue in his chat with the supporters, "You can see the problem in football. United, Arsenal, Chelsea, they get double our TV money, placement money plus Champions League."
Of course, that's not Everton's only problem, as can easily be seen by looking at their mach day revenue of £20 million, which is about one-fifth of Manchester United and Arsenal. Fair enough, their stadiums are considerably larger than Goodison Park, whose capacity is only 40,600. However, Anfield is not that much larger and Liverpool still earn more than twice as much as Everton. Even more striking is that Spurs generate nearly double Everton's gate receipts, though their ground is actually smaller.
Looked at another way, each home game at Everton produces less than £750,000, compared to more than £3.5 million at United and Arsenal, despite what Kenwright described as a "magnificent level of support." Average attendances have indeed held reasonably steady, though they did fall to 36,039 in 2010/11, but it's the lack of decent corporate facilities that has really hurt Everton's match day income, which actually fell £3 million in 2010 to £19 million. Even though there were three more home games, the previous season included a fair bit of money for the run to the FA Cup Final.
Although Everton have improved their commercial operations in the last few years, the revenue remains fairly feeble at £10 million. To place that into perspective, this is less than a third of Tottenham's £32 million. Although the club complained that it was difficult to compete commercially with clubs "regarded as having a greater international profile", such as Manchester United, Liverpool and Arsenal, Everton are surely at least as attractive a proposition as clubs like Spurs and Villa.
To be fair, the club outsourced its merchandising and catering operations in 2006 and its retail business to Kitbag in 2009, which means that their reported income is around £7 million lower than it would be if these activities were still in-house, but the relatively small sponsorship deals should still be questioned.
Everton have enjoyed a long-term shirt sponsorship deal with Chang Beer, which has been extended no fewer than four times, the latest running until 2014. This increased the annual payment from £2.6 million to £4 million (partly performance-related), but this is still only half as much as Aston Villa's new £8 million deal with Genting and a lot less than Tottenham's £10 million deal with Auresma. Of course, Liverpool and Manchester United are in a different commercial league altogether with their deals worth £20 million per annum.
The 10-year Kitbag deal is expected to generate more than £30 million over the duration of the contract. As part of the agreement, Everton switched kit suppliers from Umbro to Le Coq Sportif, the brand worn by the team during one of its most successful season in 1984/85, which should generate a further £3 million. This also led to the refurbishment of the megastore opposite Goodison and the Everton Two store, which boasts the inspired address of "Everton Two, Liverpool One", as the latter is the name of its shopping complex location.
Like all other football clubs, the main reason for the cost growth is the wage bill, which has surged 76% (£23 million) from £31 million in 2005 to £54 million in 2010. This has caused the crucial wages to turnover ratio to rise during this period from 51% to an uncomfortable 69%, which is only just below UEFA's recommended upper limit of 70%, though it would come down to "only" 64% if the outsourced operations were included in the club's turnover.
Elstone commented that this "simply serves to underline our commitment to both signing the best available players and to securing the long-term future of those already at the club." In 2009/10 Everton effectively replaced one international player (Lescott) with three arrivals (Bilyaletdinov, Distin and Heitinga), so had to cover two new salaries plus the loan cost of Landon Donovan. In addition, there were new contracts for Louis Saha, Tim Howard, Jack Rodwell, Joseph Yobo and Phil Jagielka.
There's no doubt that it would be difficult for any club to remain competitive without participating in the salary "arms' race", a point that Moyes stressed in the summer of 2010, when he warned the directors that Everton risked losing their key players unless they broke the wage structure. This led to more contract extensions for Mikel Arteta, Tim Cahill, Leighton Baines, Seamus Coleman and Victor Anichebe. Arteta's salary alone was reported to have increased from £45,000 to £75,000 a week.
It is therefore likely that the wage bill for 2010/11 will show a further increase (the Blue Union is estimating £58 million), before falling the following season due to numerous player departures and loans.
In fairness, Everton's wages of £54 million are nowhere near the highest in the Premier League with five teams having wage bills more than twice that level: Chelsea £173 million, Manchester City £133 million, Manchester United £132 million, Liverpool £114 million and Arsenal £111 million. Other teams challenging for Europa League places also pay a lot more, such as Aston Villa £80 million and Tottenham £67 million. In short, Everton's wage bill could be described as mid-table, so any league placing higher than this should be considered a bonus.
The other aspect of player costs, namely amortisation, has also been rising – from £10 million in 2007 to £17 million in 2010. When a new players is bought, football clubs do not write-off the cost immediately, but instead book it onto the balance sheet as an intangible asset and write it off over the length of the contract, as the assumption is that the player would have no value after his contract expires, since he could then leave on a "free".
As an example, John Heitinga was bought for £6 million in 2009 on a 5-year contract, so £1.2 million amortisation is booked to the accounts in each of the next five years. Over time amortisation costs can have a real impact, which is what has happened at Everton. The 2010 charge of £17 million might be low compared to a big spending club like Manchester City (£71 million), but it's a lot in the context of Everton's £79 million revenue, though it's likely to fall following the lack of transfer activity.
Everton's other operating costs of £24 million are a similar level to Tottenham £27 million and Aston Villa £25 million, but they seem very high in relation to the size of the club. They represent 25% of total costs, only surpassed by Arsenal (due to the Emirates effect) among the leading eight clubs, and 30% of revenue, only below Manchester City, whose ratio will fall following their certain revenue growth.
The massive increase from £12 million in 2007 to £21 million in 2008 is unexplained, though it should be noted that theses costs averaged £17 million in 2005 and 2006. Part of the rise is certainly due to higher expenses at the Finch Farm training facility compared to Bellefield, but the lease here is no higher than £1.5 million. Kenwright did not exactly clear up the ambiguity of what is included here, when the Blue Union put the question to him, "When you say other operating costs what do you mean? I don't know, I have no idea."
The chairman was equally vague last year when discussing the club's debt, "I do not understand why football clubs have such big debts, it is a mystery. Our debt is a big debt and a worrying debt, but it is manageable because of our performance on the field… but it is too much debt that every year is going to be added to." That part's certainly true, as the net debt has more than doubled from £20 million in 2005 to £45 million in 2010. It rose £7 million last year alone.
The debt has been rising because the club has been spending money that it does not have on strengthening the team. As Elstone put it, "our pursuit of success has stretched our finances." The result of this risky strategy is clear to see, as the club is burdened with a 25-year loan from Bear Sterns (now at £25 million), which has the advantage of being long-term, but carries a high interest-rate of 7.79%, leading to annual payments of £2.8 million. The only way that Everton can manage to pay this is by increasing its bank debt, so the club has built up bank loans of £17 million and an overdraft of £5 million.
Although Everton's debt is by no means excessive compared to other football clubs, the problem is that they appear to have no realistic way of paying it off. That is why the bank has capped the club's overdraft at £25 million, which has meant that the £8 million received for the sale of Bellefield last December and the proceeds from this year's player sales have gone directly to the bank.
"Tim Howard - shout, shout, let it all out"
Furthermore, the loans are covered by the securitisation of future revenue (TV money and ticket sales). The accounts also note a potential sting in the tail with up to £12 million of contingent liabilities for transfers, which are payable dependent on future appearances and loyalty bonuses.
Everton's total liabilities are actually £95 million, leading to net liabilities of £30 million, so £50 million of value has been lost in just over a decade, as the balance sheet had net assets of £19 million in 1999. Most of the club's assets have been sold off, which also increases costs for higher rents, while Goodison's value is declining.
The only substantial assets left are the players themselves with a book value of £45 million, though Elstone points out that accounting conventions mean that players are recorded in the balance sheet way below market value. This is certainly true, especially as nothing has been included for home grown players, and the respected Transfermarkt website lists a value of £120 million. However, the problem is that for the club to access that value, they would have to sell those players.
The cash flow statement underlines the fundamental problems with Everton's business model, as the cash flow has been negative for the last five years. Take last year, when the club's revenue was just about at record levels, they sold Lescott for an incredible £22 million, they took out net new loans of £6 million – and yet there was still a net cash outflow of £1 million.
So is there anything that Everton can do? Is there a blueprint for success?
I can see five possibilities: (a) be successful on the pitch; (b) cut costs; (c) build a new stadium; (d) find a wealthy benefactor; (e) focus on youth.
"Marouane Fellaini has a hair-raising experience"
(a) As we have seen, higher places in the Premier League produce higher merit payments, but to make a meaningful difference to the revenue, Everton would have to qualify for the Champions League on a regular basis. Although they have managed that once during Moyes' tenure, thus proving that it's not impossible, this objective seems further away than ever today with the traditional "Big Four" being supplemented by Manchester City and Spurs.
Furthermore, fourth place does not guarantee qualification to the lucrative group stages, but only to a qualifying match, where the luck of the draw plays a huge part. Everton would be only too aware of that, as they were (unluckily) eliminated by Villarreal in such a tie in 2005.
(b) All football clubs could cut costs, but this approach would almost certainly condemn Everton to a regular struggle against relegation. To achieve break-even, Everton would have to reduce the cost base by £15 million, assuming that £10 million profit is made on player sales each year.
Assuming that operating expenses are reasonably fixed, that would mean cutting the wage bill by nearly 30% to £39 million. Only three clubs had a lower wage bill that that in the 2009/10 Premier League – and two of those were relegated. If Moyes has been fighting with one arm tied behind his back up to now, this would be tantamount to also binding his legs together.
(c) A new stadium would help address the low match day income, but it appears no closer now than when the search first started 15 years ago. A proposal to build a stadium as part of the King's Dock regeneration was scrapped in 2003 when the club failed to raise sufficient money, while the government rejected the planning application to build a new 55,000 capacity ground as part of a retail park in Kirkby, on the outskirts of Liverpool.
On the face of it, this was a real blow to the club, as they had been putting all their energies into this scheme with former chief executive Keith Wyness going so far as to describe it as "the deal of the century", because Tesco were going to pay a proportion of the construction costs, leaving Everton to fund the remainder by selling Goodison Park and Bellefield and charging for naming rights at the new stadium.
However, the rejection might just have been a blessing in disguise, as many fans never warmed to the idea of moving to Kirkby, prompting the formation of the "Keep Everton In Our City" (KEIOC) campaign. In addition, the financials did not seem to add up, as the assumptions behind the funding looked optimistic, while a study performed by Deloitte on behalf of Everton estimated a paltry £6 million extra profit a year and that was based on the club almost filling the 50,000 stadium every match.
"A man of Distin-ction"
The focus appeared to have switched to improving Goodison, especially after the announcement of a £9 million office and retail development, funded by partners, that will free up space inside the stadium for profitable corporate facilities. Elstone admitted that it was unrealistic to expect the club to be inside a new stadium within five years, later adding, "there is a shortage of a viable funding model", which had always been obvious to most rational analysts.
However, to the surprise of nobody, this viewpoint was contradicted by Kenwright, who recently said, "There are six sites we're looking at, three of which we're really keen on: Edge Lane, Speke and another one." Even with the support of Liverpool Council, who have proposed using the rapid transit Merseyrail line to ease transport access, the only viable way forward for a new stadium would be if a new owner were prepared to fund the construction.
(d) Although Bill Kenwright might be a great bloke, as he admitted himself, he is "a pauper when it comes to other chairmen." The harsh reality is that the current owners have not put any money into Everton football club, which is in stark contrast to other benevolent owners, e.g. £187 million at Fulham, £115 million at Sunderland, £85 million at Bolton, £52 million at Wigan and £43 million at Stoke.
"Bill Kenwright - True Blue"
In the last annual report, Kenwright stated, "I continue to work tirelessly to find that rich and generous benefactor", but he has been looking to attract other investors for years without success. He maintains that "no-one can sell the club better than me", despite all evidence to the contrary, such as the recent admission that Everton allowed one potential investor to conduct due diligence in the belief that he was the head of ICI in the Far East, even though that company was taken over three years ago.
Some have questioned whether Kenwright is actually serious about selling the club, but, in fairness, there are many clubs searching for a benefactor and the tough economic climate has not helped.
Even David Moyes has got involved, suggesting that Everton would be an attractive investment, as they "could be very close to being very good for not an awful lot of outlay. It might not be one of those clubs that needs £300-400 million to turn it around."
"Seamus Coleman - he's mustard"
He might have a point, but to do the job properly would require investors with very deep pockets. First, they would have to buy out the directors' shares, which an investment bank estimated would cost £75 million, but they would also have to repay the loans £45 million, fund a new stadium £250 million, buy new players £50 million and inject working capital to cover losses £50 million. That doesn't leave much change from half a billion.
(e) Probably the most realistic policy would be to focus on developing young players at the technically advanced Finch Farm academy, counting on profitable sales at a later stage. Everton are renowned for having a brilliant youth system that has produced the likes of Rooney, Rodwell and Ross Barkley. As Moyes pointed out, the flip side of not spending money on buying new players is that youngsters will always get an opportunity at Goodison.
Clearly, a selling policy would not prove universally popular with the fans, but it is not necessarily a negative strategy, as plenty of clubs have flourished by adopting such a business model, e.g. Porto, Lyon and Udinese. The other advantage for Everton is that they are quite close to operating this way in any case. At least it would be more under their control, rather than crossing their fingers and hoping for a new owner and/or stadium.
"Ross Barkley - here's to future days"
For many years, Everton under Moyes have been punching above their weight, but even the manager has embraced a new sense of caution, suggesting that it would be "a struggle" for his team to finish in the top half of the table this season. He added, "We have to be careful in what we believe Everton are capable of achieving."
No matter how much Everton's passionate following wants the club to return to its former glories, this will be virtually impossible unless there is a dramatic improvement in the financial position. The fans really do deserve better from the board: a clear, coherent strategy would be a step in the right direction.


text:
Letters: January/February 2012
Diagnosing an IAQ Problem
I read your article in Home Energy and thought I would try to contact you about a problem ("Safe Air at Home" Sept/Oct '11, p. 6).
I had a contractor (not a blown—insulation specialist) install Owens Corning Attic Cat loose—fill fiberglass last spring in the two exterior walls of a room that I am planning to use for a home office. After the insulation and before painting the drywall (paint = Behr Premium Plus Ultra paint/primer combo), I smelled an odor that has persisted for several months even with the windows open continuously. Just after completion of the room refinish, I tried working in it but became lightheaded after several hours and noticed some teeth gnashing. There does not appear to be any additional dust present (that is, same level of dust that accumulates in the other rooms, which isn't a problem). I have moved the office to a different room. I have read that odors from VOC related to fiberglass insulation can cause lightheadedness and teeth gnashing, and can take some time (amount not specified) to dissipate. However, as winter approaches, the smell persists, so it's time for action, as I don't want to leave the windows open in that room all winter, and it would be good to use the room for its intended purpose.
I am thinking the best course of action is to
- rip out the drywall on the two exterior walls;
- collect and dispose of the insulation;
- do a thorough vacuuming (perhaps two or three passes) of the exposed exterior wall cavity, carpet, and other interior wall surfaces and ceiling;
- let the room set (with cavity exposed) for a couple weeks and see if that takes care of the odor; and
- refinish the exterior walls using some type of less—toxic insulation material.
- Does that sound like a good approach?
- Should I first try to find an environmental consultant with a VOC sensor to check if the odor corresponds to something that may be emitted by the fiberglass insulation (and related binder)?
- Any other advice?
Thanks for any help you can provide.
— Joel Neymark P.E. J. Neymark & Associates Golden, Colorado
Author A. Tamasin Sterner replies:
Thanks for contacting me. I feel for you.
Without seeing your house, I can only guess what is going on. These are my suggestions:
- Get the material safety data sheet (MSDS) for the materials used in your home, including the Sheetrock, and see if there are warnings about exposure and ventilation suggestions.
- If you determine that the best solution is to remove what was installed, I think your approach sounds reasonable. Just protect yourself.
- If you choose to reinsulate, spend a day with the materials before installing them to see how you feel and react to the materials.
Another idea you could consider is this: Put the room under slight pressurization. Supply air to the room and don't allow much air to leave the room. This should push air into the walls and to the outside (under the best circumstances), and that will ventilate the walls. Keep the room dry while you do this so you don't push moisture into the walls as well.
Another thought is this: Was the paint moldy? What does the odor smell like? You may be dealing with a mold problem, which means you have moisture in the walls.
Good luck, and please let me know what works for you.
The Down—Low on Downlights
Here is a question for the experts. My house was built in 1912, and it is generally as leaky as a sieve. However, I had recessed—can downlights put in the kitchen about 20 years ago. They take a 100W incandescent flood. When it is installed, the surface of the bulb is about flush with the outside edge of the can. Today I couldn't find any regular floods, so I bought a 90W halogen flood instead. I notice that when this flood is installed, the surface of the bulb is recessed about 2 inches inside the can.
So my question is, Will this create excessive heat inside the can (I believe that halogens are hotter than regular incandescents.)? Or in other words, should I switch this bulb out before I burn my house down? Thanks for any advice that you can provide.
—In the Dark About Halogens
Home Energy editor Jim Gunshinan replies:
That is a great question. Since recessed—can lights are so prominent in homes, new homes especially, and since these can lights are notorious leak sites, the topic comes up frequently for discussion on the Home Energy Pros web site and other sites.
When we had our home retrofit in 2007, while the house was depressurized with a blower door, the contractor had me put my hand below a recessed—can light in our living room. It felt like my hand was in front of a powerful fan! Lots of air was coming from the attic into my house. The fix was to put a foam board box around the fixtures in the attic, to seal the can light fixture, and to insulate it so that we wouldn't be losing heat into the attic from the light. But when we turned on the lights after that (incandescent downlights), after an hour and a half the lights switched off. There is a safety feature in new downlight fixtures—a thermal cutoff switch. Instead of our house burning down, when the temperature in the light fixture reached above a certain temperature (194°F), the lights switch off.
We replaced the incandescents with cool CFL downlights, and that fixed the problem.
If you have leaky downlights, then you probably won't have problems of heat buildup. If they are sealed and insulated, you should have problems—lights turning off but not the house burning down!
The CFLs work well. They don't dim as smoothly as the incandescents and the light is not so bright. We kept an incandescent light in one can because we need a brighter light, but we don't use that light for long. I understand that there are pretty good, and cool, LED downlights available now and the prices are falling as I write this. Last I checked, you could purchase a dimming LED flood for about $40. LED downlights could be a very energy—efficient and economical choice.
Hope this helps!


text:
We're All Mad Here
Title: We're All Mad Here
Artist: Heather Theurer
Dimensions: 20″ x 10″
Limited Edition 1500
Includes Certificate of Authenticity
This beautiful giclee canvas print uses archival inks and materials resulting in a high quality, faithful reproduction of the original painting, created by Heather Theurer.
Each canvas art piece is stretched on wooden stretcher bars, a presentation called "Gallery Wrapped" which presents the canvas art in a similar fashion to an original painting, and provides a modern and elegant way to showcase the artwork. Each piece is affixed with a hanging wire on the back, so it will arrive to you fully ready to hang!
Ships in 1-3 weeks
Made in the USA


text:
Zac Efron has reportedly been to rehab twice this year for cocaine addiction, according to TMZ.
Sources told the website Efron was doing the drug for more than two years, and had used Molly, a type of Ecstasy. He left California in March and entered an outpatient program.
He returned to Los Angeles in May and begin filming Seth Rogen's film "Neighbors." He apparently relapsed during shooting, which, reports say became obvious on the set because he wasn't showing up for work.
He went through a second program after filming and has apparently been clean since.
Sources told TMZ four things are driving his drug use. He has issues with his parents, who are still trying to control his life.
Well OK — everyone's parents do that. If that was a reason to do drugs, lots of people would … oh.
Also, sources told TMZ Efron's upset about his movie career, which hasn't gone as well as he wanted.
So he gets upset, does drugs, doesn't show up for work, and hurts his career even more. Irony can be so ironic.
He has "girl issues." Well OK — every guy does. If that was a reason to do drugs, lots of people would … oh.
He's been hanging around "a bad group of friends" who introduced him to cocaine. It's always that "bad group of friends," isn't it? TMZ reports, though, that the bad people are no longer in Efron's life.


text:
Three major movie studios are about to try an interesting experiment. They are launching a new TV network called Epix that will show their own recent films in HD, but they're going a step beyond by bundling it with an online, on-demand service that offers HD streaming of the same films over the Internet. Think of it like Hulu for movies that aren't yet out on DVD. Oh—and did we mention that the service will have no advertising and won't appear on your cable bill?
A new business model
The music industry was never much good at being a digital retailer—anyone remember MusicNet and Pressplay?—but TV networks and movie studios now seem to think they have learned the lessons of the past.
Like Hulu, the Epix movie service is a joint venture formed by the content owners; in this case, the service is powered by the movie studios Lionsgate, Paramount, and MGM. The Epix TV network will air movies that are in the "pay-TV" window, those weeks before a film appears on DVD in which it is available on pay-per-view or HBO, among others.
That doesn't sound so new, but Epix will be bundled directly into cable packages; under the current business model, it will never appear as a separate charge on the bill and will never have to be added to a package. If Epix can convince enough cable operators to sign on (it isn't yet announcing partners), the service will have an immediate competitive advantage over pay-TV channels with an additional monthly fee.
But the best part is that Epix viewers can access the same material online, on demand, at Epixhd.com. Ars spoke with Emil Rensing, chief digital office at Epix, who says that watching films online will be a two-click experience with full support for 720p streaming.
The video is offered through Flash and is multi-bitrate enabled; the player checks the available bandwidth every ten seconds to see if a larger or smaller stream is required. Epix currently creates six different encodings of each film which range from full HD support all the way down to 500Kbps (cell phone quality). In our own test preview of Iron Man, video was the best we have ever seen in a mainstream streaming service.
Pushing out that sort of data is bandwidth-intensive, and Epix would love to avoid streaming HD content across the public Internet wherever possible. One way to make that happen, which the company is currently pursuing, is to install caching servers directly in the data centers of ISPs with whom Epix has a relationship. (Rensing says that Epix does not require any sort of quality of service guarantees or bandwidth prioritization from ISPs.)
These "relationships" are one of the unique points about Epix. The company currently has no plans to offer content directly to consumers; it only wants to sign deals with TV distributors. These distributors certainly include the cable companies, but now also include Verizon's FiOS, AT&T's U-verse, and satellite services.
Epixhd.com will only be available to people who subscribe to one provider's TV offering and also subscribe to that same provider's Internet offering. That is, if Comcast were to offer Epix, users would need to pay for both Comcast cable and Comcast Internet in order to access the streaming, on-demand service. That's good for Comcast, and it helps them cover the cost of the service.
Do you Hulu?
Given that services like Hulu and Netflix On Demand work well and are increasingly popular, the real question is why the studios would launch their own distribution network instead of just offloading the films to partners already equipped to handle them?
Rensing insists that the services are just too different. While Hulu does offer some films, it's focused almost exclusively on TV at the moment and is ad-supported. Netflix On Demand doesn't have access to the same super-recent hit titles.
Left unsaid is the fact that controlling distribution is also a chance to make more money, if it's done right. Epix is pursuing a strategy that has similarities with ESPN's streaming service, ESPN 360, which is also sold directly to ISPs and not available to end users directly. Again, the charge for the service never shows up on a customer's bill but instead looks like a nice added bonus that ISPs can use to differentiate their service from rivals.
The downside is that those who like the Epixhd.com site (which looks fairly slick at the moment, even though development continues) and would gladly pay some monthly fee for access—well, they're out of luck.
An invite-only beta of Epixhd.com begins today, with a sign-up form for rolling admission over the next few months.


text:
Group encourages U.P. churches to conserve energy
An interfaith organization in the Upper Peninsula is planning a two-year campaign encouraging houses of worship to conserve energy.
Leaders are announcing the EarthKeepers II initiative during a news conference in Marquette today.
It's sponsored by 10 faith communities that previously collected tons of electronic and pharmaceutical waste across the U.P.
The new program will perform energy audits at 40 churches or temples and provide grants of up to $1,000 toward the costs of upgrades such as installing more efficient lighting and heating systems.
Organizers also want to plant two community gardens in each of the peninsula's 15 counties. They will grow native plants and vegetables for distribution to food pantries.
Religious community leaders signed a covenant in 2004 pledging to work with other faiths on U.P. environmental protection projects.


text:
Did this coupon
work for you?
work for you?
Your vote will help the community find the best deals.
RevOne | Staff posted this deal
Giving Reputation Points is a great way to show your appreciation for their work.
Slickdeals is community-supported. We may get paid by brands or deals, including promoted items.


text: Mega Man Legends - Overview Jump to a section: Home Releases Credits Characters List Overview Walkthrough Achievements Cheats Share Overview with others Next: Walkthrough > Do you want to earn money creating pages just like this? Gamewise is currently looking for writers, find out more here. Around the Network Mega Man Legends Brainwaves View all →


text:
Every Saturday night, Randy Seaver posts a "Saturday Night Genealogy Fun" assignment. I have participated in these from time to time (when I have the time), as can be seen in these posts–from its previous incarnation as "Tricks of the Tree":
- "Saturday Night Genealogy Fun: Paternal Grandmother's Patrilinear Line" (21 Mar 2009)
- "Another Brick in the Wall? or Brickwall in the Tree?" (29 Mar 2009)
- "Saturday Night Genealogy Fun" (9 Aug 2009)
- "Sunday Morning Genealogy Fun: My Favorite Song" (27 Sep 2009)
- "Saturday Night Genealogy Fun: I Write Like" (18 July 2010)
This past Saturday, 18 June 2011, Randy posted his weekly SNGF assignment, entitled "Saturday Night Genealogy Fun – Who is Your Most Recent Unknown Ancestor?" The assignment read,
1) Determine who your most recent unknown ancestor is – the one that you don't even know his or her name.
2) Summarize what you know about his or her family, including resources that you have searched and the resources you should search but haven't searched yet.
3) Tell us about it in your own blog post, in a comment to this post, or in a status on Facebook.
What seems a rather simple task was challenged in the comments to the post by a blogger named Tamura Jones, who wrote,
I am disappointed that neither Randy nor any of his respondent gave the correct answer.
It is so hard to leave the dogmas and misconceptions of traditional genealogy behind and become a scientific genealogist?
The scientific genealogy truth is simple: for most of you, your most recent unknown ancestors are your parents.
Neither family stories nor vital records constitute any proof of a biological relationship.
Only if a DNA test confirmed who your biological parents are, does the MRU ["most recent unknown"] status move from your parents to your grandparents, etc.
It may be hard to face that fact, it may be an unpopular truth, but it is not less true because of that…
Tamura wrote on a similar subject in his own blog back on 21 March 2011, in "'Start with what you know.'" [Please note, this site will not open using Internet Explorer 8 or lower.] In this post, he asserts that "Start with what you know," often the first advice given to beginning genealogists, is inaccurate. He continues,
The first thing a beginning genealogists needs to be told isn't to write down who their parents and grandparents are. The first thing a beginning genealogists needs to be told is that you have to question what you think you know. The first thing beginning genealogists need to be reminded of is that assumptions aren't facts.
In today's world, where few people have done DNA tests, that does not mean telling them to write down who their parents and grandparents are, it means explaining to them that they do know who their parents and grandparents are.
Despite the conviction with which Tamura states his opinions, they remain opinions. And where there are opinions, there are differences in opinion. Below I will describe my opinion.
There is a standard of proof in genealogy, aptly called the "Genealogical Proof Standard." This standard, briefly stated, requires (1) the collection of evidence, (2) the analysis of evidence, and (3) the formation of a logical conclusion based on the evidence. The Standard does not require specifically biological (DNA) evidence in order to form a conclusion. It does not even require direct evidence. Published case studies provide numerous examples of logical conclusions based solely on indirect evidence.
To assert that DNA testing is the only way to "prove" parental connections may seem cutting-edge, but is in fact rather naive and, in my opinion, rather lazy. It is equivalent to those beginning genealogists who require direct evidence to "prove" a parental connection. Requiring DNA evidence takes this reliance on direct evidence to its strictest possible extreme. In my professional experience, I have worked on hundreds of different client research projects, and in every single one of them, there was at least one parental connection where direct evidence simply did not exist. This would be even more frequent if DNA evidence were required. If I were to guess, I believe that most ancestral lines simply have no DNA-testing option.
How can documentary evidence be as effective as biological (DNA) evidence?
Here is the documentary evidence that my parents are my parents:
1. My birth certificate names my parents as my parents. This is direct evidence created contemporaneously with the event by parties directly involved in the event (assuming my parents filled out the birth certificate themselves).
2. My parents have both independently, and on many separate occasions, told me directly that they are my parents and that I am their son. This is again primary information providing direct evidence.
3. Other witnesses, including my grandparents and my parents' siblings, have independently, and on many separate occasions, told me directly that my parents are my parents. This is secondary information providing corroborating direct evidence.
4. I personally remember living with my parents as a child. This is primary information, though indirect evidence of who my parents are.
5. I bear a striking physical resemblance to my father. This may be an opinion, but is commonly shared by many independent observers. Even as recently as ten years ago, when I would walk down the street in my grandparents' neighborhood, neighbors who knew my father recognized me as being his son.
6. No evidence that my parents are not my parents has ever been located. This provides negative evidence that my parents are my parents.
Of course, with all of the involved parties still living, evidence is available for this case that will not be available for many cases. But none of the evidence cited above involved swabbing my cheek or otherwise providing a DNA sample. Yet the assertion that my parents are my parents is a logical conclusion based on this evidence. I could make similar arguments for my relationships to my grandparents, and though the evidence changes with each generation, all of my "proven" ancestors.
How reliable is this documentary evidence? Well, it just so happens that I did take a Y-DNA test (37 markers) several years ago. All of my close DNA matches bore the surnames HOYT or HAIGHT, both "proven" variants of my surname HAIT. My closest DNA matches shared my great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandfather. DNA testing confirmed ten generations of my ancestry, previously proved with documentary evidence.
So if Tamura's assertions were as "true" as he claims, I would not have been able to prove any of these generations with any certainty prior to taking the DNA test. Not having tested any of my other lines through DNA surrogates, I still feel confident in my conclusions.
There is, of course, one caveat that supports Tamura's "scientific" opinion. Occasionally, DNA testing reveals what is called a "non-paternity event" (NPE). This is most often concluded when a Y-DNA test leads to a surname other than the one that the testing male bears. Though I do not have exact statistics, I believe that these are relatively rare when compared with the total number of testers.
Contradictory evidence is not a new concept, however. The Genealogical Proof Standard requires that researchers incorporate any newly-acquired evidence into each conclusion. A non-paternal event revealed by DNA testing is not the only evidence that one might discover that overturns one's previous conclusions. It would be treated in the same way that any contradictory documentary evidence would be.
Genealogists must consider and evaluate all evidence when forming conclusions. DNA testing provides one form of evidence, but by no means the only reliable evidence. At least in my opinion, this is a fact.