2017 Super Bowl of Advertising: A Preview


Of course you’ll have your own opinions, but the Budweiser, Ford and Kia ads are awesome.

Evans on Marketing

This Sunday is the Super Bowl of advertising (oh yeah, there’s a football game, too). It’s the time when advertisers pay $5 million per 30 second spot — besides production costs — and try to stand out in the crowd.

Today, we are previewing the upcoming February 5, Super Bowl. Next week, we’ll do a postmortem of the 2017 ads.

Here are some things to expect for this Super Bowl:

  • Starting February 1, YOU can vote atUSA Today’s Super Bowl Ad Meterfor your favorites.
  • All ad time slots will be sold out for the game, which is on Fox TV.
  • There will be 110+ million U.S. viewers.
  • Pre-game and post-game advertising will be bigger than ever.
  • Pepsi’s half-time show featuring Lady Gaga will be a spectacle aimed at younger adults more at than older ones.
  • The NFL has turned down GNC’s advertisement.As Judann Pollack and Nathan Skid…

View original post 115 more words

More Poetry


Connection with Authors I Enjoy Standing in front of my desk, I looked at the different books. Clearly, I am an eclectic reader but my passion lies with poetry. Poetry for me is excising our inner demons and every poet has a signature style. I love entering a poet’s domain. I study initially what they […]

via Author Connections 1 — lyncrain

More on the War in Ukraine


Emboldened by the conciliatory approach of President Trump, Russians have subjected to heavy shelling the Ukrainian town of Avdievka. They have destroyed the water lines and the electrical plant, leaving the town without water and heating. It’s 20 degrees below freezing in Avdievka right now. There are 2,500 children in the freezing town.

via The Whole World Will Pay — Clarissa’s Blog 

Because the US guaranteed to help Ukraine protect its borders in exchange for control of Ukraine’s nuclear arsenal, this is very much Trump’s war.

Land of Opportunity, Revisited


In a post earlier this month, I commented on the declining mobility of American society.  Why that matters is that job growth in the recovery from the Great Recession of 2008 has been uneven. So has growth in personal income.  Is where you are the best place to be?

The areas with the highest rate of job growth, for the most part, simply aren’t where the people are.

The five largest states in terms of population are (Census, July 1, 2016 estimate)

  1. California  39,250,017
  2. Texas  27,862,596
  3. Florida  20,612,439
  4. New York  19,745,289
  5. Illinois 12,801,539

The five top states for job growth are

  1. North Dakota  20.7%
  2. Texas  15.3%
  3. Utah  13.6%
  4. Colorado  11.8%
  5. Washington  9.8%

Washington is the anomaly.  There has been sufficient migration, largely from California, such that despite growth, the unemployment rate has increased.

If we rank the states in actual numbers of jobs gained, the big winners are

  1. Texas  1,612,800 jobs
  2. California  1,134,100
  3. New York  644,800
  4. Florida  531,100
  5. Massachusetts  272,000

For every winner, there’s a loser.  The five states that have lost the most jobs since the Great Recession are

  1. Wyoming   -5.2%
  2. Mississippi  -2.3%
  3. New Mexico -2.2%
  4. Alabama  -1.9%
  5. Connecticut  -1.6%

Of course, percentages don’t tell the whole story.  Wyoming has a smaller economy than Connecticut, so a loss of 15,400 jobs is a high percentage of total jobs in Wyoming than a loss of 27,300 jobs is in Connecticut.

Job growth doesn’t correspond to income growth.  Texas shows high job growth spi0616coupled recently with declining per capita income.  Maine has a declining population but is showing good per capita income growth, in part due to a shortage of workers.

In some states, there’s a clear logic to people staying put.  In California, the out-migration is probably more due to housing costs than jobs, even though it will make it harder for employers to keep jobs filled.  However, there are good reasons for people to be leaving the deep South and areas of the Plains and West.  Mississippi is a particular problem as the data I’ve posted shows that they don’t fund social services, don’t fund schools and don’t do an adequate job of providing work for residents.

What we don’t know is the size of the Gray Economy in each state.  That’s employment that’s off the books — that people try to hide from the IRS.  It exists and is potentially large.  A poster child for that is a news stand in NYC that was reporting $30,000 in annual sales and conducting $800,000 in off the books drug sales annually.  (Sadly, I read this years ago in The New York Times and can’t find the citation for it.)



Alcohol — Statistical Oddity


24/7WallStreet has people who browse public data and can be fun reading.  (No, I don’t pay steinattention to their stock tips, so I can’t comment on them.)

The latest is a review of “self-reported binge and heavy drinking rates among adults in U.S. metro areas from County Health Rankings & Roadmaps, a Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute joint program.”

You can understand the involvement of UW in this when you notice that 11 of the 20 heaviest drinking Metropolitan Statistical Areas in the US are in Wisconsin.  The number 1 MSA in the country for excessive alcohol use is Appleton, WI.

In context, there are more than 3300 MSAs in the US.  Having this concentration in Wisconsin is not a random event.

I grew up aware of an association between Milwaukee and beer, but this is ridiculous.


Sources:  http://247wallst.com/special-report/2016/05/14/the-drunkest-and-driest-cities-in-america/2/

There are ethics in Washington?


Sally Yates just did something extremely rare.  She made a decision based on principle rather than on political party or personal gain/risk.  She had to know she would be dismissed for doing what she did, but she did it anyway.

We don’t see that very often in politics in the US.  Members of both parties need to take note.  So should  voters.

Maybe Yates should be the next president.

A Dose of Reality


Bloomberg points at a large gap between consumer expectations and fiscal reality that has ben_franklindeveloped since the November election.

Consumers have embraced the idea of a massive improvement in the economy and in their finances as a result of Trump taking office.  However, actual measures of economic performance to date have been “disappointing.”

It’s too soon to know if this gap will continue.  The last time it was this large was in 2011.

Economic bulls are citing the reduction in regulatory burden as lifting the US economy.  A notable example is Alejandro Chafuen, writing in Forbes.  The first problem with his analysis is that under current rules, it can take upwards of one year for regulatory changes to take effect.  Companies are being advised to maintain compliance woith ACA rules even though healthcare is changing.  The second problem is that the economy depends on consumer spending.  The 1% can’t carry the US economy.

There’s no reason to assume that Trump’s policies include fiscal stimulus.  If anything, the early indication is an increase in taxes on the remnant of the Middle Class and workers coupled with rising health costs that will make most consumers worse off financially than they are today. 

So will some economic magic happen, or will consumers have to come to terms with disappointment?  Stay tuned.