General

There is this giant gap in my blogging between the months of June 2007 and January 2008.  No,...I didn't give up on blogging.  The problem was that several things converged at once to limit my ability to blog.  First, I started a new job.  Second, marathon and cycling training began in earnest.  As the summer progressed, every waking moment was occupied.  So,...this single post will have to suffice.  Here are some highlights:

• Jun 10, 2007 - Furry Fun Run (5K)
• Jun 24, 2007 - 47 Mile Cycle Training Ride
• Jun 29, 2007 - iPhone Released
• Jul 01, 2007 - 60 Mile Cycle Training Ride
• Jul 02, 2007 - Start @ Microsoft
• Jul 04, 2007 - 80 Mile Cycle Training Ride
• Jul 07, 2007 - Host Gavin & Elaine's Wedding Shower
• Jul 08, 2007 - Laptop Stolen
• Jul 14-15, 2007 - Seattle To Portland Cycle (204 Miles)
• Jul 21, 2007 - Volunteer @ TrailsFest
• Jul 28, 2007 - 6 Mile Run
• Aug 05, 2007 - 3 Mile Run
• Aug 06, 2007 - Host Gavin's Bachelor Party
• Aug 11, 2007 - 11 Mile Run
• Aug 18, 2007 - 13.5 Mile Run
• Aug 24-26, 2007 - Hood to Coast Support
• Aug 29, 2007 - Tooth Crown Installed
• Sep 01, 2007 - 17 Mile Run
• Sep 03, 2007 - 3 Mile Run
• Sep 07, 2007 - Gavin & Elaine's Wedding Rehearsal
• Sep 08, 2007 - 12 Mile Run
• Sep 08, 2007 - Gavin & Elaine's Wedding
• Sep 15, 2007 - 17 Mile Run
• Sep 29, 2007 - 8 Mile Run
• Oct 06-07, 2007 - Royal Victoria Marathon
• Oct 08-12, 2007 - Raleigh, NC
• Oct 13, 2007 - 8.5 Mile Run
• Oct 28, 2008 - 6 Mile Run
• Nov 03-07, 2007 - New York, NY
• Nov 21-23, 2007 - Thanksgiving in Portland
• Nov 25, 2007 - Seattle Half Marathon

The bottom line is that I was hyper-busy during the second half of 2007, and it hasn't slowed down too much since then.  There's been no cycling this year, but I have several races on the calendar for September, November, and January.

[The photo was taken by Chuck of the RunChuckIt Running Group when I was running the 2007 Seattle Half Marathon.]

Melissa and I have secured the location for our wedding.  It's the incredibly beautiful Zenith Vineyard's in Oregon's famous Willamette Valley.  Believe me when I say that picking the place is one of the most difficult first tasks.  We were lucky enough to have a friend and professional photographer in the area recommend this particular venue.  Now it's time to get back to picking colors, invitations, cake, food, flowers, and all of the other difficult decisions that will surely occupy most of our time for the next year.

Melissa finally agreed to marry me, a little more than a year and a half after we started dating.  The proposal was made on Manhattan Beach, California following a week in the Palm Desert and a day at Disney Land.  (Too many of my friends have proposed at Disney, so I held off for a more unique setting.)  The honest truth is that the proposal was not really a surprise -- Melissa was a very active participant in picking the ring.  She wasn't, however, expecting the exact time and place. We had just finished breakfast at a little cafe before walking the waterfront with Tapas.  I'm happy to report that she answered in the affirmative. The proposal date? June 1, 2008.

When you're way too old for Hasbro's Tonka Toys, you can rent the adult version and have more fun than you ever did as a child.  That's exactly what we did this weekend in McCall, Idaho.  The little "bobcat" provided two full days of excitment as we did some much needed work around Sadie's new garage.  Now all I need is a couple acres of bare land and a bobcat of my own.

The power of a brand can be substantial. In a marketplace where differentiation is exceedingly nuanced, a brand can represent THE criteria on which consumers invest their desires and dollars. Although brand prestige can enter the calculation, I'd argue that it is only a byproduct of the brand's integrity to the idea it expresses. For example, owning a Porsche may impart some level of prestige, but the prestige is dependent on Porsche's past and current fulfillment of a very specific form and function. In other words, prestige never precedes brand expression. This brings me to the point of this post.

I've been noticing more and more of what I'll call "brand betrayal". It occurs when a brand is intentionally leveraged to sell a product that expressly fails to attain the implied brand idea. It's insidious, exploitative, and can only be for the purpose of creating short-term profit. After all, betrayal is the antithesis of the integrity that "brand" embodies.

J.A. Henckels, a German cutlery manufacturer, is a case in point. For 275 years, they've claimed to make the finest knifes you can buy. In fact, they do manufacture astoundingly great knifes. The problem is that they've taken to selling at least one set of knifes (under the J.A. Henckels moniker) that is quite terrible. I'm being completely serious when I say that any amount of money you'd pay for this poorly crafted set of knifes, carrying the J.A. Henckels name, would be too much. You could surely buy the same set of knifes -- sans the J.A. Henckels logo -- for a tiny fraction of the cost. The company is leveraging their brand identity to inflate the value of a product that fails to attain the brand's promise.

The recent pet food catastrophe is another case in point. Someone please explain to me how a company, such as Iams/Eukanuba, can survive the plublicity of the fact that some of their products are the exact same products manufactured by Menu Foods and sold under a hundred other low-cost grocery store brand names. Eukanuba's web site makes the grandiose claim:

From the beginning, Eukanuba has stood for producing our highest quality dog food product to help nurture the best qualities in dogs. [Source]

The people who work at Eukanuba love the breed - and all its details. It's understanding the subtle nuances that help us make quality, customized dog food. [Source]

Brand betrayal is different from outright lying about the quality of their products, which you could normally verify. Instead, it's giving you plenty of evidence that their products are superior, and then substituting an inferior product at a superior price.

I'm left to wonder how much brand betrayal can occur in a market place before "brand" loses its advantage for consumers as an inexpensive alternative to exhaustive research.

I don't understand the problem pedestrians seem have with the concept of simply obeying traffic signals. I've already checked -- there isn't a memo that excuses pedestrians from RCW 46.61.050 ("Obedience to and required traffic control devices"), which governs BOTH automobile and pedestrian obedience of said signals. Most drivers wouldn't feel it appropriate to ignore the meaning of a red light at a signal-controlled intersection. Why then do those same individuals criminally flaunt the exact same law when on foot?

Let's first dispel the myth that it isn't against the law to cross an intersection against the light. It is against the law. Not only does RCW 46.61.050 make that clear, the 1,964 citations issued by police in 2006 should calcify the matter for you. The law, however, doesn't have to be the only motivation for crossing with the light. Bodily harm is what motivates me. The area's rate for pedestrian fatalities is nearly twice the national average. Although jaywalking isn't responsible for all the pedestrian accidents, why would anyone want to add to the statistic?

Don't cross against the light. It's that simple. Civil disobedience is a poor excuse. Find a more significant cause.