I have noticed that with the summer months comes what I thought was something that went out of style years ago, and that is the ice cream truck. Yet, every day, at roughly the same time, I hear the piercing sound of music, which is the jingle jangle of the ice cream man.
I can remember buying ice cream from an ice cream truck when I was younger as well as lemonade from a lemonade stand. I also remember (and I'm not entirely sure how true this is because I have not chased after said ice cream truck) that the ice cream was sort of expensive. For something like an ice cream sandwich, which I could get at school for say 30 cents, the ice cream man charged something like $5. I can't imagine the prices have changed too much, but my thought about this subject is this: With gas approaching a level where people are starting to change driving habits, how much longer can this throwback to a simpler time continue to exist?
Maybe the ice cream man does well on these hot days to justify driving around for what seems like hours on end. I just wonder whether he is actually breaking even or driving himself to bankruptcy.
Showing posts with label delaware local news. Show all posts
Showing posts with label delaware local news. Show all posts
Sunday, July 6, 2008
Monday, February 18, 2008
Delaware Tag No. 6 goes for $675,000
As I discussed before, these low digit black tags, while nifty, are not really that great an investment for most Delawareans. Granted, the bulk of these people have held onto tags for thirty or forty years, and, much like a house, they have appreciated in value. But other than for the vanity of the vanity plate, how much are you really making on this "investment?"
As pointed out in the article in today's paper, Tag #6 sold for a whopping $675,000. (By comparison of apples to oranges, the No. 1 tag in UAE sold for $14 million). Here's one way to look at this investment, other than potentially being the envy of a very select group of people.
The auction commission for these types of things varies between the ebay cost of approximately 5% to the Wilson auction cost of about 20%. If this tag had sold on ebay, the fees would have been approximately $35,500. At a 20% rate, the fee would have been $135,000. I'm sure the auctioneers of this auction took a commission somewhere in the middle. So, for my argument's sake, let's say if you sold your plate at auction, it would cost you about 10% in commissions based on final sale price.
Even at a conservative 2% interest rate, compounded quarterly, your $675,000 investment would appreciate to about $825,000 over 10 years. Invested in long term safe investments yielding 5% gives you around $1.1 million. The question is really whether you can get that much for the same plate years from now. Maybe. But the ceiling to these auctions isn't at the UAE's ridiculously high selling point. It's probably not that much higher than this conservative interest calculation. Plus, after you sell it, you've got to deal with the commissions. If you only got $825,000 for it, you're only pulling in $742,500 after a 10% commission, which turns out to be a pretty lousy investment. Just to get to the net of $825,000, the plate would have to sell around $915,000. Is that really realistic? I can't imagine that is the case absent some sort of crazy inflation over the next decade.
Of course, if you have this kind of money in disposable income, what is the point?
As pointed out in the article in today's paper, Tag #6 sold for a whopping $675,000. (By comparison of apples to oranges, the No. 1 tag in UAE sold for $14 million). Here's one way to look at this investment, other than potentially being the envy of a very select group of people.
The auction commission for these types of things varies between the ebay cost of approximately 5% to the Wilson auction cost of about 20%. If this tag had sold on ebay, the fees would have been approximately $35,500. At a 20% rate, the fee would have been $135,000. I'm sure the auctioneers of this auction took a commission somewhere in the middle. So, for my argument's sake, let's say if you sold your plate at auction, it would cost you about 10% in commissions based on final sale price.
Even at a conservative 2% interest rate, compounded quarterly, your $675,000 investment would appreciate to about $825,000 over 10 years. Invested in long term safe investments yielding 5% gives you around $1.1 million. The question is really whether you can get that much for the same plate years from now. Maybe. But the ceiling to these auctions isn't at the UAE's ridiculously high selling point. It's probably not that much higher than this conservative interest calculation. Plus, after you sell it, you've got to deal with the commissions. If you only got $825,000 for it, you're only pulling in $742,500 after a 10% commission, which turns out to be a pretty lousy investment. Just to get to the net of $825,000, the plate would have to sell around $915,000. Is that really realistic? I can't imagine that is the case absent some sort of crazy inflation over the next decade.
Of course, if you have this kind of money in disposable income, what is the point?
Tags:
Tuesday, January 1, 2008
One way traffic in Dover can be fixed
As I mentioned the other day, I was down at the Camden Walmart the other day and couldn't help but notice what a mess of traffic the intersection beyond the light at 13 makes. My thought, quite simply, is that it can be fixed in the same way that the intersection at Lockmeath and 13 was fixed (albeit perhaps only temporarily). Google maps provides an outdated picture of the intersection I am talking about.
First, closing the Lockmeath way intersection solved a lot of problems. The state does not need to spend any money buying out that guy's liquor store in order to widen the intersection. Conversely, the liquor store owner can quit complaining that the fair market value that the state is offering for his property isn't fair. Despite this seemingly inexpensive solution, I would not be surprised if litigation about this property continues. My thought on this subject: Do you really need another light there now? My answer would be no. Let's use the resources for something more productive.
For the longest time before and even after they did anything to the intersection, the paper had been printing various rants and raves about why the intersection needs a light, what will happen if it closed, etc. Well, it closed and the number of accidents since then? Zero (as far as I can tell). If you need to get Northbound, you can go through the limited access roads to get to the Walmart light or do a u-turn down the road.
The foreseeable consequence of the new intersection pattern is that it has increased the traffic near Walmart. If you're trying to get to the light from the first road, sometimes it takes a little while to get out, and even then it poses the danger of some less patient driver zipping through and causing an accident. So here's my pitch how to fix it, with minimal costs to the state and the surrounding property owners: do the same thing there that you did at Lockmeath.
Effectively, this prevents anyone from going across that intersection. If you want to leave Walmart, you'll have to go to exit near the front of the store. Exiting traffic from Lowes would have to yield to any car in the intersection. Entering traffic from 13 to Walmart could still go straight or turn right. To get to Lowes from 13, they would have to enter at the intersection past the light. Also, my idea would close the second back entrance into that shopping complex before the light. It's way too confusing for the average driver.
So there's my first thoughts on how to make Dover a little better. We'll see what deaf ears it falls on.
Next time on Anonymous Delawarean: I'm going to do an entry about the types of jobs that are available to college graduates in Delaware. There was a rather uninformed letter in the State News recently about why the public high schools should not force kids to succeed academically because some people want to drop out and be a drag on our economy. That sort of letter begs for a response.
First, closing the Lockmeath way intersection solved a lot of problems. The state does not need to spend any money buying out that guy's liquor store in order to widen the intersection. Conversely, the liquor store owner can quit complaining that the fair market value that the state is offering for his property isn't fair. Despite this seemingly inexpensive solution, I would not be surprised if litigation about this property continues. My thought on this subject: Do you really need another light there now? My answer would be no. Let's use the resources for something more productive.
For the longest time before and even after they did anything to the intersection, the paper had been printing various rants and raves about why the intersection needs a light, what will happen if it closed, etc. Well, it closed and the number of accidents since then? Zero (as far as I can tell). If you need to get Northbound, you can go through the limited access roads to get to the Walmart light or do a u-turn down the road.
The foreseeable consequence of the new intersection pattern is that it has increased the traffic near Walmart. If you're trying to get to the light from the first road, sometimes it takes a little while to get out, and even then it poses the danger of some less patient driver zipping through and causing an accident. So here's my pitch how to fix it, with minimal costs to the state and the surrounding property owners: do the same thing there that you did at Lockmeath.
Effectively, this prevents anyone from going across that intersection. If you want to leave Walmart, you'll have to go to exit near the front of the store. Exiting traffic from Lowes would have to yield to any car in the intersection. Entering traffic from 13 to Walmart could still go straight or turn right. To get to Lowes from 13, they would have to enter at the intersection past the light. Also, my idea would close the second back entrance into that shopping complex before the light. It's way too confusing for the average driver.
So there's my first thoughts on how to make Dover a little better. We'll see what deaf ears it falls on.
Next time on Anonymous Delawarean: I'm going to do an entry about the types of jobs that are available to college graduates in Delaware. There was a rather uninformed letter in the State News recently about why the public high schools should not force kids to succeed academically because some people want to drop out and be a drag on our economy. That sort of letter begs for a response.
Tags:
Sunday, December 30, 2007
Traveling from downstate to upstate
I have a couple of thoughts based on things that have been in the paper lately, but I will save them for tomorrow. In the meantime, I will write a quick entry about how I think I'm beginning to understand, at least slightly, why there is a rift between upstate and downstate. I'll focus on driving, since that's something everyone above and below the canal is used to.
As I've mentioned more than once, drivers downstate are a little slower and tend to drive the speed limit on both lanes of the highway. After being down here for a few months now, I probably have started driving slower as well. Upstate, however, the drivers are maniacs. I was up in Wilmington over the weekend to enjoy the Patriots-Giants game with some friends up there and upon getting on 95, I was surprised at how fast people were going (and I was still going faster than the pace of traffic).
What was funny, to me anyway, was that I thought to myself that downstate drivers aren't nearly as reckless. Granted, some of these nuts were probably out-of-state, but still. Fast downstate is like 60 in a 50, as compared to 90 in a 55 upstate. Thankfully, I adjusted quickly and was able to get to my destination without any incidents. It's no wonder that most of downstate drivers appear to never want to travel beyond Kent or Sussex County. And now, I see why it's no wonder that upstate drivers hate the way downstate drivers drive and vice versa.
Tomorrow or next time I'm going to write about this Lockmeath and Wal-Mart intersection and why Dover should think about closing off more intersections and move toward a more limited access thruway system. And why the Levy Court or city of Camden needs to adjust the intersection within the Camden Walmart property.
As I've mentioned more than once, drivers downstate are a little slower and tend to drive the speed limit on both lanes of the highway. After being down here for a few months now, I probably have started driving slower as well. Upstate, however, the drivers are maniacs. I was up in Wilmington over the weekend to enjoy the Patriots-Giants game with some friends up there and upon getting on 95, I was surprised at how fast people were going (and I was still going faster than the pace of traffic).
What was funny, to me anyway, was that I thought to myself that downstate drivers aren't nearly as reckless. Granted, some of these nuts were probably out-of-state, but still. Fast downstate is like 60 in a 50, as compared to 90 in a 55 upstate. Thankfully, I adjusted quickly and was able to get to my destination without any incidents. It's no wonder that most of downstate drivers appear to never want to travel beyond Kent or Sussex County. And now, I see why it's no wonder that upstate drivers hate the way downstate drivers drive and vice versa.
Tomorrow or next time I'm going to write about this Lockmeath and Wal-Mart intersection and why Dover should think about closing off more intersections and move toward a more limited access thruway system. And why the Levy Court or city of Camden needs to adjust the intersection within the Camden Walmart property.
Tags:
Wednesday, December 26, 2007
Counterpoint: There is value in anonymity
This letter to the editor appeared in the November 28, 2007 edition of the Delaware State News on page 8. It appears to be a direct counterpoint to another letter to the editor (posted in its entirety here). My personal views are more in line with this author's. Maybe he will chime in and give his thoughts since he beat me to the punch in the paper.
There is Value in Anonymity
Andrew Alea, Dover, Delaware
Having followed the growth of internet communications, I read with interest Judson Bennett's letter ("Require bloggers to name themselves," Nov. 22). I, too, wonder how effective and influential anonymous speech or this "blogging phenomenon" can be. One conclusion is certain: there is value in anonymity.
In exercising my "worldwide expressions of opinion on the Internet," I respectfully disagree with Mr. Bennett's written points, particularly with his general belief that all anonymous commentary represents cowardice. Granted, some anonymous comments are inflammatory and generally uneducated. Others reflect more reasoned thought and value. In the end, all are merely exercises in public speech. Whether they are in so-called "anonymous Delawarean" blogs or by Delawareans or other citizens in anonymous or signed comments (either printed or online), the comments are afforded protection under the First Amendment.
I am neither going to attempt to give a history lesson on the freedom of speech, or give as an example the eighteenth century papers, published under anonymous pseudonyms, that received mass public attention in support or against ratification of the U.S. Constitution. Certainly Mr. Bennett did not mean to include those persons as "gutless phonies," although I am sure his position existed back then as well. Rather, I will simply quote from the U.S. Supreme Court in McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission to support my point of why his view is too narrow: "The decision in favor of anonymity may be motivated by fear of economic or official retaliation, by concern about social ostracism, or merely by a desire to preserve as much of one's privacy as possible. Whatever the motivation may be, at least in the field of literary endeavor, the interest in having anonymous works enter the marketplace of ideas unquestionably outweighs any public interest in requiring disclosure as a condition of entry."
Mr. Bennett's efforts at creating a more productive discourse by prohibiting free speech in these new "literary endeavors," while perfectly within his right to do so, misses the point behind the practice. Signing your name to something does not equate to legitimacy any more than by using a pseudonym. Any reader of online commentary recognizes the value differences in commentaries that are fraudulent, libelous, or otherwise uninformed and spiteful with those that are not. At the very least, if Mr. Bennett (or anyone else) is offended by or disagrees with a published comment, he should post the counterpoint on the same forum, which should publish it. Otherwise, the public has only one opinion and Mr. Bennett's hope for a "level of true legitimacy and a high standard that would be honorable and respected" has no hope of existing.
The point of anonymous free speech, according to McIntire, is to protect "unpopular individuals from retaliation-and their ideas from suppression-at the hand of an intolerant society." Mandating disclosure, as Mr. Bennett proposes, overlooks the value of anonymity.
There is Value in Anonymity
Andrew Alea, Dover, Delaware
Having followed the growth of internet communications, I read with interest Judson Bennett's letter ("Require bloggers to name themselves," Nov. 22). I, too, wonder how effective and influential anonymous speech or this "blogging phenomenon" can be. One conclusion is certain: there is value in anonymity.
In exercising my "worldwide expressions of opinion on the Internet," I respectfully disagree with Mr. Bennett's written points, particularly with his general belief that all anonymous commentary represents cowardice. Granted, some anonymous comments are inflammatory and generally uneducated. Others reflect more reasoned thought and value. In the end, all are merely exercises in public speech. Whether they are in so-called "anonymous Delawarean" blogs or by Delawareans or other citizens in anonymous or signed comments (either printed or online), the comments are afforded protection under the First Amendment.
I am neither going to attempt to give a history lesson on the freedom of speech, or give as an example the eighteenth century papers, published under anonymous pseudonyms, that received mass public attention in support or against ratification of the U.S. Constitution. Certainly Mr. Bennett did not mean to include those persons as "gutless phonies," although I am sure his position existed back then as well. Rather, I will simply quote from the U.S. Supreme Court in McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission to support my point of why his view is too narrow: "The decision in favor of anonymity may be motivated by fear of economic or official retaliation, by concern about social ostracism, or merely by a desire to preserve as much of one's privacy as possible. Whatever the motivation may be, at least in the field of literary endeavor, the interest in having anonymous works enter the marketplace of ideas unquestionably outweighs any public interest in requiring disclosure as a condition of entry."
Mr. Bennett's efforts at creating a more productive discourse by prohibiting free speech in these new "literary endeavors," while perfectly within his right to do so, misses the point behind the practice. Signing your name to something does not equate to legitimacy any more than by using a pseudonym. Any reader of online commentary recognizes the value differences in commentaries that are fraudulent, libelous, or otherwise uninformed and spiteful with those that are not. At the very least, if Mr. Bennett (or anyone else) is offended by or disagrees with a published comment, he should post the counterpoint on the same forum, which should publish it. Otherwise, the public has only one opinion and Mr. Bennett's hope for a "level of true legitimacy and a high standard that would be honorable and respected" has no hope of existing.
The point of anonymous free speech, according to McIntire, is to protect "unpopular individuals from retaliation-and their ideas from suppression-at the hand of an intolerant society." Mandating disclosure, as Mr. Bennett proposes, overlooks the value of anonymity.
Tags:
Point: Require Bloggers to Name Themselves
This commentary/letter to the editor was printed in the November 22, 2007 edition of the Delaware State News on page 7. In a two sentence summary, Judson Bennett argues that the only way for blogging to achieve a level of true legitimacy is for bloggers to identify themselves in their posts and commentary. According to Mr. Bennett, any anonymous blog or post (by virtue of its anonymity) is crap. I disagree, mainly because the implication of his position lumps this blog into the mix, despite my attempts at insightful commentary.
Consequently, I'll gladly debate the merits of this issue, and please feel free to post a comment for me to respond to if it's really a bigger issue than I think. Similarly, I'll gladly provide a link to his blog on this blog (turnabout, however, is fair play). Further commentary (although not the actual letter) is posted on this blog.
Require Bloggers to Name Themselves
Judson Bennett, Lewis, Delaware
The blogging phenomenon has reached a whole new level, and it is indeed addictive. It's a worldwide expression of opinion on the Internet, and it is interesting. I like it myself, and I do definitely participate. This remarkable situation definitely gives folks a venue to share opinions. However, I wonder how effective these venues are in changing people's minds, or if indeed they are truly influential?
The owners of some local Delaware blogs, Delaware folks like Dave Burris, Mike Mathews, Dana Garrett, Jason and others, are actually pure editorialists-interesting, amusing, irritating and provocative. They are much like weekly columnists in newspapers, with the exception of the comment sections. Herein lies the huge rub for me. When I write something, I do it as me-Judson Bennett. When I comment on someone else's blog, I do it as me, Judson Bennett. You know who I am and I take real responsibility for what I say.
Frankly, I hate published anonymity, especially when people take mean-spirited shots at others or about any significant issue. Those who write anything using a "handle" are cowards. Many of these people are, in reality, terrified, insignificant little pipsqueaks who make themselves feel 10 feet tall when they can say whatever they want, while hiding behind a pseudonym. I equate these jerks to some weak sister who gets behind the wheel of a car and suddenly becomes an omnipotent aggressive driver. Otherwise, they would be terrified to open their mouths, because in reality, they do not have the courage of their convictions.
When anybody writes something, they should be required to use their real names or not be permitted to blog. It's that way when someone writes a letter to the editor in a newspaper. The person's name, address and phone number are required by the paper before the comments are published. People who speak or write anonymously are fake, what they say is fake, and it should not ever be given any value or even be presented in the first place. In order to make blogging reach a true level of legitimacy, real names should be required in the comment section.
The bottom line is that those of you who comment, using your real names, are indeed courageous and legitimate citizens who deserve a lot of credit for speaking out. The rest of you handle-users are nothing more than gutless phonies who pump yourself up by throwing darts from the darkness. I challenge the blog owners of the world to make your operations absolutely significant by requiring those who log in to provide their real names before commenting. Indeed, then, blogging would achieve a level of true legitimacy and a high standard that would be honorable and respected.
Consequently, I'll gladly debate the merits of this issue, and please feel free to post a comment for me to respond to if it's really a bigger issue than I think. Similarly, I'll gladly provide a link to his blog on this blog (turnabout, however, is fair play). Further commentary (although not the actual letter) is posted on this blog.
Require Bloggers to Name Themselves
Judson Bennett, Lewis, Delaware
The blogging phenomenon has reached a whole new level, and it is indeed addictive. It's a worldwide expression of opinion on the Internet, and it is interesting. I like it myself, and I do definitely participate. This remarkable situation definitely gives folks a venue to share opinions. However, I wonder how effective these venues are in changing people's minds, or if indeed they are truly influential?
The owners of some local Delaware blogs, Delaware folks like Dave Burris, Mike Mathews, Dana Garrett, Jason and others, are actually pure editorialists-interesting, amusing, irritating and provocative. They are much like weekly columnists in newspapers, with the exception of the comment sections. Herein lies the huge rub for me. When I write something, I do it as me-Judson Bennett. When I comment on someone else's blog, I do it as me, Judson Bennett. You know who I am and I take real responsibility for what I say.
Frankly, I hate published anonymity, especially when people take mean-spirited shots at others or about any significant issue. Those who write anything using a "handle" are cowards. Many of these people are, in reality, terrified, insignificant little pipsqueaks who make themselves feel 10 feet tall when they can say whatever they want, while hiding behind a pseudonym. I equate these jerks to some weak sister who gets behind the wheel of a car and suddenly becomes an omnipotent aggressive driver. Otherwise, they would be terrified to open their mouths, because in reality, they do not have the courage of their convictions.
When anybody writes something, they should be required to use their real names or not be permitted to blog. It's that way when someone writes a letter to the editor in a newspaper. The person's name, address and phone number are required by the paper before the comments are published. People who speak or write anonymously are fake, what they say is fake, and it should not ever be given any value or even be presented in the first place. In order to make blogging reach a true level of legitimacy, real names should be required in the comment section.
The bottom line is that those of you who comment, using your real names, are indeed courageous and legitimate citizens who deserve a lot of credit for speaking out. The rest of you handle-users are nothing more than gutless phonies who pump yourself up by throwing darts from the darkness. I challenge the blog owners of the world to make your operations absolutely significant by requiring those who log in to provide their real names before commenting. Indeed, then, blogging would achieve a level of true legitimacy and a high standard that would be honorable and respected.
Tags:
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
Desk drawer veto bill
I saw an article yesterday that merits a quick comment. I would link the article, but I can't figure out the State News's new website. They say they are all for free speech and free ads, but without any free substance, it's hard to say what type of audience they are targeting. Unfortunately, I couldn't find this particular article on the News Journal's (arguably equally as bad) website either, but I did find two blog entries about the desk drawer veto currently at issue in our capital: Delaware Watch and First State Politics. There's also some opinion article from the News Journal about the issue here.
My point about this particular article has nothing to do with the desk drawer veto but rather, a simple question of voting. In the article, it states (perhaps overly so), that "Sen. Ennis noted that he voted for a House bill in June - while he still was a member of the chamber - that would subject the General Assembly to [the State's Freedom of Information Act], excluding party caucuses." Does this mean he voted on the bill that passed in the House, and now (by comedy of coincidences) can now vote on that same bill as a Senator?
Granted, this is probably not the case, and I'm just throwing it out there as an interesting hypothetical. First, I am assuming that Sen. Ennis had voted on this bill while he was in the House, and it passed in the House before the Senate sat on it, and now it is still eligible to be passed in the Senate. If these assumptions are correct, and Sen. Ennis votes on it and it now passes by a narrow majority, isn't this sort of cut against the one man, one vote concept?
More than likely, I am reading too into this whole article, and I'm certainly no expert on how bicameralism works in Delaware. In all likelihood, the Senate will simply pass another bill and avoid the gray issues. If my assumptions are correct, however, it certainly makes this much more interesting to follow. If I decide to form an opinion about the whole desk drawer veto issue, perhaps I will write about it at another point.
My point about this particular article has nothing to do with the desk drawer veto but rather, a simple question of voting. In the article, it states (perhaps overly so), that "Sen. Ennis noted that he voted for a House bill in June - while he still was a member of the chamber - that would subject the General Assembly to [the State's Freedom of Information Act], excluding party caucuses." Does this mean he voted on the bill that passed in the House, and now (by comedy of coincidences) can now vote on that same bill as a Senator?
Granted, this is probably not the case, and I'm just throwing it out there as an interesting hypothetical. First, I am assuming that Sen. Ennis had voted on this bill while he was in the House, and it passed in the House before the Senate sat on it, and now it is still eligible to be passed in the Senate. If these assumptions are correct, and Sen. Ennis votes on it and it now passes by a narrow majority, isn't this sort of cut against the one man, one vote concept?
More than likely, I am reading too into this whole article, and I'm certainly no expert on how bicameralism works in Delaware. In all likelihood, the Senate will simply pass another bill and avoid the gray issues. If my assumptions are correct, however, it certainly makes this much more interesting to follow. If I decide to form an opinion about the whole desk drawer veto issue, perhaps I will write about it at another point.
Tags:
Monday, December 17, 2007
Loockerman exchange closes
I heard on the radio this morning that the "world famous" Loockerman Exchange (also self-referred to as "the Lex") has closed its doors. Having visited this establishment a couple of times, I find this as no surprise. Rather than kick a man while he is down, however, I will point out what likely businesses would succeed in that prime piece of commercial real estate.
A few thoughts. First, there needs to be some sort of take out lunch place, like a Panera bread. I think even a local chain like Purebread Deli would do well. Or a Starbucks. In either case, part of that property would need to have that aspect to it in order to make money off the Dover lunch crowd.
I'll even tell you the key to success for any of these restaurants: Lunch under 60 minutes. Too many restaurants in Dover (the late Loockerman included) take far too long to serve your food. Most jobs don't appreciate taking lunch breaks that last longer than an hour (which includes driving). I thought that was a given, but there seems to be a shortage of restaurants in Dover that understand that concept. The non-exhaustive list, from my experience, includes: Lobby House, The Lex, 33 West, Smithers, and TGI Fridays, to name a few downtown. 33 West is the fastest of all of them by about 15 minutes (on a good day).
The second type of business that would succeed in the other half of this space would be a English pub, similar to Catherine Rooneys in Trolley Square or Kid Schellens. I also think an Iron Hill would do well down in Dover. My point is that these bars, unlike Lobby House or Smithers or Buffalo Wild Wings, could target a different crowd and capture an untapped market. Or they could segment the market. Either way, it's all about brand identity, of which the "world famous" Lex did not have.
While the article above cites to construction as costing them revenue, I find this excuse to be more of a red herring. The reason why that business failed is largely due to its business strategy (or lack thereof) and failure to understand the Dover market. I don't purport to say that I am an expert on these issues, but I do know that no business is going to work in that location unless it has multiple draws to get people to come back downtown at night. Parking is a whole other issue.
Perhaps if this new business worked with area businesses such as the Schwartz Center or Dover Downs, it could more effectively reach a more diverse market willing to part with both their time and hard earned money. I, for one, can't wait to see what business will try and succeed there next.
A few thoughts. First, there needs to be some sort of take out lunch place, like a Panera bread. I think even a local chain like Purebread Deli would do well. Or a Starbucks. In either case, part of that property would need to have that aspect to it in order to make money off the Dover lunch crowd.
I'll even tell you the key to success for any of these restaurants: Lunch under 60 minutes. Too many restaurants in Dover (the late Loockerman included) take far too long to serve your food. Most jobs don't appreciate taking lunch breaks that last longer than an hour (which includes driving). I thought that was a given, but there seems to be a shortage of restaurants in Dover that understand that concept. The non-exhaustive list, from my experience, includes: Lobby House, The Lex, 33 West, Smithers, and TGI Fridays, to name a few downtown. 33 West is the fastest of all of them by about 15 minutes (on a good day).
The second type of business that would succeed in the other half of this space would be a English pub, similar to Catherine Rooneys in Trolley Square or Kid Schellens. I also think an Iron Hill would do well down in Dover. My point is that these bars, unlike Lobby House or Smithers or Buffalo Wild Wings, could target a different crowd and capture an untapped market. Or they could segment the market. Either way, it's all about brand identity, of which the "world famous" Lex did not have.
While the article above cites to construction as costing them revenue, I find this excuse to be more of a red herring. The reason why that business failed is largely due to its business strategy (or lack thereof) and failure to understand the Dover market. I don't purport to say that I am an expert on these issues, but I do know that no business is going to work in that location unless it has multiple draws to get people to come back downtown at night. Parking is a whole other issue.
Perhaps if this new business worked with area businesses such as the Schwartz Center or Dover Downs, it could more effectively reach a more diverse market willing to part with both their time and hard earned money. I, for one, can't wait to see what business will try and succeed there next.
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Tommy the Hartly monkey
I must have missed an article in the paper at some point, or maybe this monkey is like the Jimmy Hoffa of Delaware. I saw in the paper yesterday about a demolition that reveals "Tommy's bones." It sounds interesting enough, so I read the story. Apparently there was some legend about a monkey being buried in a building and they found the monkey bones when they tore it down. What I am missing from this story (and maybe this was part 2 of an article that I simply overlooked), is who the heck is Tommy the monkey and why are so many people so worked up over this? I'm not one to criticize writing, but most informational news reporting provides at least some background to explain the point. This one did not.
All I get out of this story is that there was some legend of Tommy the monkey in Hartly and that he died of pneumonia in 1941 after the presently demolished building caught fire and the monkey and the firefighter's hose crossed swords. Presumably, the building's owners buried him in the walls of the rebuilt building. And that's all she wrote. Was this a town pet or something? I don't know.
Unsurprisingly, there's nothing on the internet about Tommy the monkey either. So I am left to my own assumptions about why this is such an interesting story, and perhaps some more enlightened reader can point me out to fill in the gaps this article certainly created in its report.
All I get out of this story is that there was some legend of Tommy the monkey in Hartly and that he died of pneumonia in 1941 after the presently demolished building caught fire and the monkey and the firefighter's hose crossed swords. Presumably, the building's owners buried him in the walls of the rebuilt building. And that's all she wrote. Was this a town pet or something? I don't know.
Unsurprisingly, there's nothing on the internet about Tommy the monkey either. So I am left to my own assumptions about why this is such an interesting story, and perhaps some more enlightened reader can point me out to fill in the gaps this article certainly created in its report.
Tags:
Sunday, November 11, 2007
Nobody's afraid of an Irish terrorist anymore
I went to the Second City players' show at the Schwartz Center yesterday. The whole experience was pretty enjoyable, despite the fact that I probably brought the average age in the theater down by about 15 years. In a lot of ways, the theater reminds me of similar theaters in Pennsylvania, New York, DC, and even Wilmington. For those of you looking for a little culture in the capital of this state, this theater is certainly a find.
Afterwards I checked out the "Lex" or "Loockerman Exchange." I would provide the link to their website, but it loads slower than their service. They bill themselves as world famous, which is a little bit of an overstatement. Compared to the service at some of the other bars in Dover (reviews to be forthcoming), it certainly is faster in some respects, and painfully slow in others. It was pretty fun also though, but after I called it a night, I'm still left wondering where the Trolley Square-type bars in Dover are. For being a college town with two schools within a few miles of each other, I'm surprised at how few people seem to go out on Friday and Saturday nights. I'll try Smithers and the Lobby House next.
I'm not sure what the next act to go through the Schwartz Center is, but according to the gentleman who sat next to me, he said that he and his wife go to shows there all the time, so I'm going to have to look into this more. Overall, I can cross "going to the Schwartz Center for a show" off my list of things to do while I'm in Dover. If anyone else ever gets a chance to go there, it's well worth the ticket price.
And for reference, the title of this entry refers to one of the Second City player's skits. I'm not going to presume to review the show, but there were definitely some funny parts (and some others that were only so-so funny), and overall, exactly what I expected. When interacting with the audience, they asked for some recent event and someone yelled out "mersa." It wasn't until I got back to my apartment that I realized that they were talking about "MRSA." It's no wonder that a general level of confusing arose, but they handled it pretty well.
Afterwards I checked out the "Lex" or "Loockerman Exchange." I would provide the link to their website, but it loads slower than their service. They bill themselves as world famous, which is a little bit of an overstatement. Compared to the service at some of the other bars in Dover (reviews to be forthcoming), it certainly is faster in some respects, and painfully slow in others. It was pretty fun also though, but after I called it a night, I'm still left wondering where the Trolley Square-type bars in Dover are. For being a college town with two schools within a few miles of each other, I'm surprised at how few people seem to go out on Friday and Saturday nights. I'll try Smithers and the Lobby House next.
I'm not sure what the next act to go through the Schwartz Center is, but according to the gentleman who sat next to me, he said that he and his wife go to shows there all the time, so I'm going to have to look into this more. Overall, I can cross "going to the Schwartz Center for a show" off my list of things to do while I'm in Dover. If anyone else ever gets a chance to go there, it's well worth the ticket price.
And for reference, the title of this entry refers to one of the Second City player's skits. I'm not going to presume to review the show, but there were definitely some funny parts (and some others that were only so-so funny), and overall, exactly what I expected. When interacting with the audience, they asked for some recent event and someone yelled out "mersa." It wasn't until I got back to my apartment that I realized that they were talking about "MRSA." It's no wonder that a general level of confusing arose, but they handled it pretty well.
Tags:
Thursday, November 8, 2007
State news actually prints anonymous comments
One of my guilty pleasures is reading some of the ridiculous comments that get posted on the News Journal's website. Most are fairly, shall we say, uninformed. Anyway, in reading my new morning paper the other day, I've noticed that the Delaware State News actually prints some of these comments. Sometimes they are signed, and sometimes they are not. In this case, one anonymous comment in Monday's paper deserves a response.
I will print it in its completion: "I have driven from Dover to southeastern Montana recently and paid exactly a toll of 50 cents in tolls to do it, each way. That was the toll to cross the Mississippi River along the way. It is unconscionable that one (resident or not) should have to pay $4 to get from North St. George's to the Dover Air Force Base - one way. That's about 10 cents per mile. Same thing from Delaware Memorial Bridge to the toll both on I-95 in Newark - 15 miles costs $1.50 - unless that has also increased."
Well, I'm not sure if "unconscionable" is the right word. In fact, I believe if you take Rt. 13 all the way up, the cost is $0.00. That's about zero cents per mile. Putting that aside, the "sound off" forgets that the price is only $4 one way on weekends. As I have stated previously, the choice to take Rt. 1 is more out of convenience, and since you have to pay for convenience for everything else, why shouldn't the state try and make a buck off of this particular luxury? After all, it's the non-residents that travel the roadways more than residents in the summer, so (theoretically), DelDot and the general fund should get a boost from this toll jump.
The only other comment I will make about this particular sound off is that the person doesn't say how much was saved in tolls at the expense of wear and tear on the automobile that was driven. Sure, it may have only cost a dollar to go halfway across the country, but how far out of the way did you have to go to get there? I recognize this is sort of a silly argument, but so is calling the weekend toll bump "unconscionable."
I will print it in its completion: "I have driven from Dover to southeastern Montana recently and paid exactly a toll of 50 cents in tolls to do it, each way. That was the toll to cross the Mississippi River along the way. It is unconscionable that one (resident or not) should have to pay $4 to get from North St. George's to the Dover Air Force Base - one way. That's about 10 cents per mile. Same thing from Delaware Memorial Bridge to the toll both on I-95 in Newark - 15 miles costs $1.50 - unless that has also increased."
Well, I'm not sure if "unconscionable" is the right word. In fact, I believe if you take Rt. 13 all the way up, the cost is $0.00. That's about zero cents per mile. Putting that aside, the "sound off" forgets that the price is only $4 one way on weekends. As I have stated previously, the choice to take Rt. 1 is more out of convenience, and since you have to pay for convenience for everything else, why shouldn't the state try and make a buck off of this particular luxury? After all, it's the non-residents that travel the roadways more than residents in the summer, so (theoretically), DelDot and the general fund should get a boost from this toll jump.
The only other comment I will make about this particular sound off is that the person doesn't say how much was saved in tolls at the expense of wear and tear on the automobile that was driven. Sure, it may have only cost a dollar to go halfway across the country, but how far out of the way did you have to go to get there? I recognize this is sort of a silly argument, but so is calling the weekend toll bump "unconscionable."
Tags:
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
When in Rome, do the 'punkin chunkin'
I decided to go to the World (Famous) Championship Punkin Chunkin Competition on Sunday. Surprisingly, this was a great time. Who would have thought that hurling pumpkins via a air cannon or trebuchet would be so fun to watch. And, since the official site doesn't make it entirely clear, this event lends itself to alcohol, and you can bring your own. Plenty of cops are around to enforce unruliness, and they even have a DOC crew to clean up after you (and presumably haul you away if you get out of hand).
Not too much else to say about this one, but I highly recommend going to it once. I sort of doubt I would ever do this again, but I wouldn't rule it out. Well worth the drive through miles of farmland to get to the place. Even if you're coming from Wilmington, I would say it's worth the trip. Bring some folding chairs to sit on, a grill, and a cooler (and about 10 friends) for maximum fun.
Not too much else to say about this one, but I highly recommend going to it once. I sort of doubt I would ever do this again, but I wouldn't rule it out. Well worth the drive through miles of farmland to get to the place. Even if you're coming from Wilmington, I would say it's worth the trip. Bring some folding chairs to sit on, a grill, and a cooler (and about 10 friends) for maximum fun.
Tags:
Sunday, November 4, 2007
Special elections and another reason why it may be time for a constitutional convention
I wrote about this briefly before, but once again, due to the death of Senator Vaughn, the city of Dover has had another special election to fill an interim opening in an elected legislative position opening. Rep. Ennis (D) defeats Joanne Christian (R) by a nearly 2:1 margin, in what is reported as an impressive turnout of 19.6 percent. So now, there is an opening in the House, and I'm sure there will be another special election to fill that also.
To me, this whole "special election" process is nonsensical. Not to mention costly, given the timing of when this reelection process will be repeated. I think the time has come to amend the Delaware constitution to allow for the governor, by a heads up vote of the chamber that has the opening, to appoint the interim position, and that way, it remains open and any cries of lameduckedness become muted. The exact details can be worked out among the two chambers and let the people decide whether they want one election every two/four years or these "mini-elections" every few months.
Obviously if the Governor is a Republican, he would appoint a Republican to the spot, and vice versa. Nevertheless, the amendment could provide for the spot to go to the party of whose spot the open position was. Let the next general election decide whether that specially appointed person did a good job or not. The result of having these special elections, to me, simply inundate the public with misconceptions about the whole democratic process. And, if the 19.6% turnout is any indication, the current process really isn't that democratic anyway.
To me, this whole "special election" process is nonsensical. Not to mention costly, given the timing of when this reelection process will be repeated. I think the time has come to amend the Delaware constitution to allow for the governor, by a heads up vote of the chamber that has the opening, to appoint the interim position, and that way, it remains open and any cries of lameduckedness become muted. The exact details can be worked out among the two chambers and let the people decide whether they want one election every two/four years or these "mini-elections" every few months.
Obviously if the Governor is a Republican, he would appoint a Republican to the spot, and vice versa. Nevertheless, the amendment could provide for the spot to go to the party of whose spot the open position was. Let the next general election decide whether that specially appointed person did a good job or not. The result of having these special elections, to me, simply inundate the public with misconceptions about the whole democratic process. And, if the 19.6% turnout is any indication, the current process really isn't that democratic anyway.
Tags:
Monday, October 15, 2007
The allure of the black tag
Delaware is quirky in many ways, and one of the things that many don't notice until they have been here for a while is the "black tag" license plate. Whether they are a sign of elitism or just because they look cool, owners of cars in Delaware have the option of getting a "black" tag (as opposed to a "regular" tag) if their license plate number is low enough. And while I thought this number had to be somewhere less than 87000 or so, I saw a car on the way to the beach this weekend that makes me question whether the DMV has decided to elevate a few more thousand tags to "elite" status.
For those of you not aware, Delaware is the only state in the union that has a totally flat tag. The standard tag is blue with gold lettering. If you have a low number though, you are eligible to get the replica tag from the 1940s with your number. Certain restrictions apply. Low, three digit tags have been sold at auction for thousands of dollars. Apparently even people in the UK have been apprised of the "black tag" phenomenon. Regardless, it's a collector's thing like anyone else. People will buy anything if you tell them it's cool enough. Look at some of the junk that is available on ebay or Craigslist.
Nevertheless, I think the black tags are pretty cool, even if there is a hint of elitism with them. At the same time, it bothered me that I saw a six digit black tag on a dark blue or black Mustang (#148558). Not only did the tag look junky, it demeans the whole prestige of having a "low" number. Or at least, that's what I would think if I had a low number and liked the fact that the number of black tags available is fixed.
Maybe the tag was fake, but it had an '09 sticker on it, so who knows. In either case, it was unusual enough to warrant this entry and further research as to whether the whole black tag concept is about to take a lemming run off the DMV cliff.
Apparently the DMV page has changed in the times Google has searched it (current page and cached page), but I haven't been overly successful in finding out whether this is a legislative change or not. Maybe someone else who is more familiar with all of this knows and can chime in.
For those of you not aware, Delaware is the only state in the union that has a totally flat tag. The standard tag is blue with gold lettering. If you have a low number though, you are eligible to get the replica tag from the 1940s with your number. Certain restrictions apply. Low, three digit tags have been sold at auction for thousands of dollars. Apparently even people in the UK have been apprised of the "black tag" phenomenon. Regardless, it's a collector's thing like anyone else. People will buy anything if you tell them it's cool enough. Look at some of the junk that is available on ebay or Craigslist.
Nevertheless, I think the black tags are pretty cool, even if there is a hint of elitism with them. At the same time, it bothered me that I saw a six digit black tag on a dark blue or black Mustang (#148558). Not only did the tag look junky, it demeans the whole prestige of having a "low" number. Or at least, that's what I would think if I had a low number and liked the fact that the number of black tags available is fixed.
Maybe the tag was fake, but it had an '09 sticker on it, so who knows. In either case, it was unusual enough to warrant this entry and further research as to whether the whole black tag concept is about to take a lemming run off the DMV cliff.
Apparently the DMV page has changed in the times Google has searched it (current page and cached page), but I haven't been overly successful in finding out whether this is a legislative change or not. Maybe someone else who is more familiar with all of this knows and can chime in.
Tags:
Monday, October 1, 2007
Bus stop sign laws and the divided highways
I certainly don't intend this to turn into some sort of Delaware traffic blog, but this event is so random and amusing that it deserves a brief writeup.
A long time ago now, in my high school drivers ed class, my teacher told us that you always have to stop when a school bus is loading. And that law appears to be followed in our state without any problems save the occasional crash. What stuck out in my mind, and what drives this story, so to speak, was the teacher's explanation of the driving rules of other states and how they need to be obeyed regardless if you know them or not (basically, ignorance of the law is not an excuse). In Delaware, cars are required to stop when meeting or approaching a bus while it is loading or unloading. Cars on the other side of a divided highway are not required to stop. According to my drivers' ed teacher and a quick Google search, some states, including New York, do not have this divided highway exception. Which brings me to my story.
As I was driving to work today, I came upon a stopped bus and like everyone else, came to a stop to wait. On the other side of the highway though, I saw that the lead car had also stopped. Ironically, this person was in the left lane, which undoubtedly drove the growing line of cars behind him or her insane. The two truckers in the right lane, likely confused, had stopped as well, at least for a minute before finally moving on. And after the bus started moving, so did all lanes of traffic. In high school, my drivers' ed teacher speculated that this sort of event on the other side of the highway could happen and could cause an accident if the drivers behind the out-of-state resident weren't paying attention. Here anyway, that was not the case.
It actually was an interesting display of the enforceability of other states' traffic laws. While in Delaware, the driver who stopped here would merely get a honk or two, a Delaware driver in New York in that same situation could face a steep fine if caught. In all likelihood, this would not be the case, but I found the whole incident mildly amusing, if only because it made me think back to some random day in a high school drivers ed class.
And to recenter this to be Delaware-related and not an expose on the bus stopping laws, I think the current Delaware bus safety and stop laws are good and work well.
A long time ago now, in my high school drivers ed class, my teacher told us that you always have to stop when a school bus is loading. And that law appears to be followed in our state without any problems save the occasional crash. What stuck out in my mind, and what drives this story, so to speak, was the teacher's explanation of the driving rules of other states and how they need to be obeyed regardless if you know them or not (basically, ignorance of the law is not an excuse). In Delaware, cars are required to stop when meeting or approaching a bus while it is loading or unloading. Cars on the other side of a divided highway are not required to stop. According to my drivers' ed teacher and a quick Google search, some states, including New York, do not have this divided highway exception. Which brings me to my story.
As I was driving to work today, I came upon a stopped bus and like everyone else, came to a stop to wait. On the other side of the highway though, I saw that the lead car had also stopped. Ironically, this person was in the left lane, which undoubtedly drove the growing line of cars behind him or her insane. The two truckers in the right lane, likely confused, had stopped as well, at least for a minute before finally moving on. And after the bus started moving, so did all lanes of traffic. In high school, my drivers' ed teacher speculated that this sort of event on the other side of the highway could happen and could cause an accident if the drivers behind the out-of-state resident weren't paying attention. Here anyway, that was not the case.
It actually was an interesting display of the enforceability of other states' traffic laws. While in Delaware, the driver who stopped here would merely get a honk or two, a Delaware driver in New York in that same situation could face a steep fine if caught. In all likelihood, this would not be the case, but I found the whole incident mildly amusing, if only because it made me think back to some random day in a high school drivers ed class.
And to recenter this to be Delaware-related and not an expose on the bus stopping laws, I think the current Delaware bus safety and stop laws are good and work well.
Tags:
Sunday, September 30, 2007
First registration, now Route 1 - tolls are going up
As anyone who has been to the DMV lately to register their car, the registration rates have doubled now for the 1 or 2 year re-registration. It now costs $40/year to register your car once it passes inspection. Compared to Pennsylvania and other neighboring states, this is still a bargain.
For anyone who has driven up or down Route 1 lately, you probably have noticed the new electronic toll signs, which currently reflect the rate of $1/car. That, too, is going up effective Monday, Oct. 1, from $1 to $2 (but only on weekends) (for now). While this is great for our side of the tourist industry and should generate big money for the general fund, I think it's going to have the added bonus of increasing local traffic on 13. After all, it's just about as quick to take 13 as it is Route 1 anyway, despite the lights.
With the increase in tolls and car registration to generate money for the state, why not go ahead and create a toll of say, $10/car and $20/truck on the St. George's bridge. You can go over the main bridge anyway without having to pay the toll, so is the St. George's even necessary anymore? That will effectively pay to keep that old thing up - and realistically, the money the State saves if they tore it down could help prevent any future increases on the toll roads. Just a thought.
For anyone who has driven up or down Route 1 lately, you probably have noticed the new electronic toll signs, which currently reflect the rate of $1/car. That, too, is going up effective Monday, Oct. 1, from $1 to $2 (but only on weekends) (for now). While this is great for our side of the tourist industry and should generate big money for the general fund, I think it's going to have the added bonus of increasing local traffic on 13. After all, it's just about as quick to take 13 as it is Route 1 anyway, despite the lights.
With the increase in tolls and car registration to generate money for the state, why not go ahead and create a toll of say, $10/car and $20/truck on the St. George's bridge. You can go over the main bridge anyway without having to pay the toll, so is the St. George's even necessary anymore? That will effectively pay to keep that old thing up - and realistically, the money the State saves if they tore it down could help prevent any future increases on the toll roads. Just a thought.
Tags:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
