Category Archives: Advertising and Marketing

Trump worth what he feels

Posted on by

Long before the current fraud trial in New York state, Donald Trump was known to play shenanigans with his net worth. Notably, he said in a legal deposition his net worth changes depending on how he feels. Call me old fashioned, but I believe your net worth varies on your liquid assets.

Anyway. I’m posting this so I can easily find it, in case it disappears elsewhere.

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) — Below are excerpts from Donald Trump’s deposition conducted on Dec. 19-20, 2007, in his lawsuit against author Timothy O’Brien and Warner Books, then owned by Time Warner, CNN’s parent company. 

Andrew Ceresney served as the attorney for the defense.

On the damage the book did:

Ceresney: Mr. Trump, you also claim that the book damaged your reputation, correct?

Trump: Yes.

Trump: I’m worth whatever I feel

Ceresney: And that’s because you are perceived publicly, you believe, as a billionaire, correct?

Trump: That’s correct.

Ceresney: And the book —

Trump: I am a billionaire. I’m not perceived. I mean, I am a billionaire. Of course, if you read Tim O’Brien’s writings and what was then transposed into the The New York Times, you would certainly not think that. But I am a billionaire, many times over, on a conservative basis.

Ceresney: And you believe that because the book, at least according to you, suggested that you were not a billionaire that damaged your reputation, correct?

Trump: Yes.

Ceresney: And you think that that has hurt you in your business dealings? Is that what you’ve said?

Trump: Well, I’ve lost deals. I’ve lost specific deals because of it.

On calculating his own net worth:

Ceresney: Mr. Trump, have you always been completely truthful in your public statements about your net worth of properties?

Trump: I try.

Ceresney: Have you ever not been truthful?

Trump: My net worth fluctuates, and it goes up and down with the markets and with attitudes and with feelings, even my own feelings, but I try.

Ceresney: Let me just understand that a little. You said your net worth goes up and down based upon your own feelings?

Trump: Yes, even my own feelings, as to where the world is, where the world is going, and that can change rapidly from day to day…

Ceresney: When you publicly state a net worth number, what do you base that number on?

Trump: I would say it’s my general attitude at the time that the question may be asked. And as I say, it varies.

On having a thin skin:

Trump: I’m very thick-skinned if they tell the truth. In other words, I’ve had many bad articles over the years, and if they’re accurately bad — I mean, some things are bad, some things are good — I can really handle it well … Where I do become thin-skinned is when somebody writes bad things that are untrue.”

On his valuations of his properties:

Ceresney: Have you ever done an analysis to determine whether the amount that you have contributed in cash to these golf courses is more or less than the amount that you have made from these golf courses?

Trump: It will be. They will all be very good investments in the future. This is … this is a business that you start off slow, and then you get more and more members, and all of a sudden it becomes extremely profitable.

Ceresney: Mr. Trump, I asked you have you ever done an analysis?

Trump: No, I have never done an analysis.

Ceresney: Have you ever done a projection as to how much you anticipate you will profit on these courses over time in light of the contributions that you’re making in cash?

Trump: Yes, I’ve done mental projections.

Ceresney: Mental projections?

Trump: Yes.

Ceresney: These are projections that you’ve done in your head?

Trump: Yes. 

How video streaming got fragmented, in a picture

Posted on by
Reply

There’s a version of this RIAA infographic going around that’s a) total revenues, and b) not adjusted for inflation. “Total revenues” includes subscription revenues, ie Spotify (or as Ulrika calls the model, ransomware).

This is sales only, and also unadjusted for inflation. But I’m calling your attention to it for two reasons:

  • iTunes was a big deal. iTunes really did replace CDs, for a while. But that meant Apple got a 30% cut. It is difficult to overstate how much resentment this caused at the labels. And a few labels were owned by movie studios (Sony/Columbia, Warner Bros., MCA/Universal). Which leads to…
  • When Netflix was small, the studios didn’t care. But when Netflix kept growing, and looked like it was going to become an iTunes-like gatekeeper… Well, this graph shows why they decided to setup their own streaming sites. They were damned if they were going to get snookered again (from their point of view).

Now, it looks like video streaming really does benefit from economies of scale, and fragmenting the market is probably going to lead to everyone except Netflix imploding. Had the studios just stayed out of things, let Netflix take their cut, and kept everything consolidated, vast amounts of capital expenditures using shareholder cash wouldn’t have been wasted. Everyone would have been fat cats.

But there’s that damned ego problem. Faced with a second gatekeeper, the studio execs had to give it a try, other people’s cash be damned.

Oh, well.

Apple Vision Pro

Posted on by
Reply

This is going to be a copy/paste of a Facebook post, and a comment thread with Andrew Laurence, a friend of mine. Mostly to stick my flag in the ground… how often do you get to scoop John Gruber?

Regarding Apple’s new $3500 Augmented Reality headset they’ve named Vision Pro that was revealed today: Did you notice how no one in the meetings the wearer is connecting to is also shown using a Vision Pro? No? I noticed that.

I do like the Bank of America Circle-Vision 360 panoramas, though.

Thinking in the long-term, though, they might be prototyping a brainwave sensitive UI. I mean, doesn’t this look like an Oath of Fealty/Minority Report mash-up?

Andrew: I noticed that no users were wearing eyeglasses. They eventually mentioned the Zeiss-provided prescription inserts.

Andrew: I’m skeptical of this entire category.

Me: I am, too. It’s very Dilbert-esque — because they have the tech, they’re doing it, even though it solves no problem. OTOH, in terms of prototyping a UI in preparation for a future physical interface (read: implants), it’s interesting.

Hm. Maybe I’m wrong. They’re positioning it as entertainment (so far). Well… Being a passenger. Either car or plane. Better than those damned tray tables and a laptop — if you can get the wireless pipes to the vehicle. But if driverless cars come about, we’ll all be passengers.

Oh, and I’ll say this before Gruber does: given Apple’s use of the word Pro for products, that implies a cheaper version is in the pipeline. (Checks: yeah, he hasn’t posted on Vision Pro yet. But I’ll bet the Jobs estate he’ll mention this when he does.)

Andrew: Like the Watch’s introduction, I was struck that yes it does new things, but how is it useful? What problems does it solve? The Watch eventually found its market and footing. I‘m sure these AR/VR thingies will too, eventually. (I don’t own a wear any wrist-device. I stopped wearing them nearly 20 years ago and have yet to find a set of usecases that earns back the spot on my wrist.)

Me: Just about every health professional I’ve seen (and I’ve seen many since 2022-01-08) wears one. They’ve got the health sector (not unlike the educational sector with students) locked on the Watch.

The phones are listening.

Posted on by
Reply

My wife and I were driving in our car. I was an IT contractor, and working with a client migrating from Windows 7 to Windows 10.

My team would hire someone, and this would involve getting a variety of network permissions, and equipment for them. The new hires would always have to sit around doing nothing, because their permissions hadn’t come through yet, and we didn’t have the equipment to give them if they had.

“You know what these guys need? They need to use Gantt charts, figure out how long the different paths take, and then tell new hires to show up on the day everything’s ready for them… Instead of having them lurk about. Fun as that can be, depending on the person.”

Ulrika looked at me. She then echoed Joan Kroc’s reported answer to Ray Kroc when he told her he’d bought the Padres (“Honey, what’s a Padre?”) — “Honey, what’s a Gantt chart?”

“You know. A Gantt chart. Stacked horizontal lines? Used to manage a project? You use Office… They’re in Excel, I’m pretty sure.”

“Well, you’re driving, so don’t try to show me just now.”

Now, normally, this would just be a very minor anecdote… except for one thing:

I started seeing ads for Gantt charts in both GMail and Facebook. Ulrika started seeing ads for Gantt charts in both GMail and Facebook.

It’s been four years since I was on that contract, and Facebook still shows me this:


We both have Android phones. We weren’t using them at the time.

It’s really unlikely Ulrika would have been a target audience, given that she didn’t know what they were until that conversation. And it’s a very specialized product.

Don’t tell me the phones don’t listen.

Bob Watterlond

Posted on by
Reply

So. In a splendid case of “verbing weirds language,” what does it mean to “Bob Watterlond {someone}.”?

Bob Watterlond was an unassuming man. Somewhat stringy brown hair. Large glasses, with thick, square frames. Perhaps a little thick around the middle. A mustache much in favor today, but not in the late ‘80s/early ’90s when I knew him.

Which was at the LA distributorship of Gallo Wine.

Bob was the Credit Manager. Among his duties, he would collect delinquent accounts.

His method was charmingly simple. Bob would call the liquor store (or restaurant) and go, “Hello, Mrs. Kim. How are things today? The children are doing well? Great, great, glad to hear it. I was calling to remind you you owe Gallo Wine $167.47, and we’re not going to ship new product to you until you pay. OK, Mrs.Kim, hope you have a nice day.”

And then he’d call the next day, sweet as could be.

And the next.

And the next.

I guess things went to a formal collection agency after 28 days. But he’d remind you if you didn’t pay before then, his hands were tied when it came to what happened afterwards.

I’m reminded of all this because I’m Bob Watterlond-ing someone right now, trying to get them to produce a document to me.

Lexicon, of course.

“I think I need a bigger box”

Posted on by
Reply

Taco Bell used to have a whole series of commercials featuring a talking Chihuahua. This was my favorite, a movie tie-in with a US Godzilla:

I like this particular one because of the ‘tude. “I can take him… I just need a bigger box.”

This reminds me of a prank pulled by Harvey Mudd College against CalTech. The two colleges have a longstanding rivalry, both being engineering schools. (A rivalry Tech’ers insist doesn’t exist — even as they think up their next prank.)

There’s a large cannon in the middle of CalTech’s campus. A group of enterprising Mudders decided it would be fun to steal it. They consulted a recent alum on how to do this. He reportedly got a faraway look and said:

“You guys are going to need a big crane.”

Not, “No, that would be wrong.” Not, “Have you considered what the jail terms might be?” No… You guys can take ‘em. You just need a big enough box. Er, um, crane.

The spirit that builds great things.

“Pleeeeease!”

Posted on by
Reply

Lexicon. Comes from Robert Klein’s comedy album, Child of the Fifties.

I was watching TV this morning, when I saw an ad for a Budweiser product. It had the slug line, “100% Hard Seltzer. 0% Beer.” So at least they know their beer has a perception problem, and a product having nothing to do with their beer is an attractive feature.

But once you hear Klein, you’ll understand why the desperation of the ad (and a great deal of ads by many other people as well) reminded me of the bit.

How to not make money in the movies

Posted on by
Reply

The title says it all: “How Zyzzyx Road only grossed $30.00.”
TL;DR —

Zyzzyx ran for seven days at Dallas’ Highland Park Village Theater, with a single screening each day at noon. When it closed, exactly six people had gone to see it, for a total gross of, yes, $30.

I was talking to a friend who works intricately in entertainment, and they say this wouldn’t be regarded as “released” today (unlike its 2006 run) as one now needs a minimum of 10 theaters. Possibly because of this film. So it’s unlikely ever to be… well, “surpassed” seems the wrong word. “Displaced”? — from this curious record.