Housekeeping

It's amazing how much stuff a person is able to amass, even within a short amount of time. I'm constantly faced with the task of trying to keep my apartment in check, and questioning whether I need to keep something or not. The struggle seems to be something of a never ending streak of losses: you just can't win! I've been playing around with an idea of revising my apartment a bit in a desperate effort to clear some more room for coats and jackets and streamline everything by putting books behind some type of glass doors to keep the dust out. But in a small apartment it seems to be incredibly difficult to find the type of furniture that you actually want and that would fit the needs that you've specified.

On other frontiers I guess a bit of housekeeping is also required. In the digital world it seems that you also have to be fairly rigorous to ensure that you throw out the old as you introduce the new. I took some first steps by removing obviously dead and/or outdated links from my blog (it seems that quite many people lack the persistence to keep up a blog, so I got rid of all links to blogs that haven't been updated in a while).

An additional challenge has also appeared with the emergence of social networking sites: how do you prune your network? It isn't as trivial as throwing away an old shirt, since removing links may be a politically sensitive issue. "It's nothing personal, but I don't want you in my social network anymore" just seems sort of blunt and only works for the persona non grata -types, who you don't necessarily want to deal with in the future. But otherwise I guess it's just a matter of more carefully grouping and segmenting the network. Or something to that extent.

Patience, perseverence, and persistence

For some odd reason patience seems to be one of the rarer virtues around. This manifested itself in e.g. the overt greed of Wall Street and the City, and how sustainability and persistence were forgotten. It's especially sad to see, amongst others, longstanding and very traditional institutions be the victims of very short-term greed.

On a slightly separate note, I recently signed up for the Stockholm Half Marathon. It is held on Saturday, September 12th and I thought that it would be a great way to rectify the injustice of me not getting to participate in HCR'09 this earlier in the spring due to health issues. Also, I recently noticed that due to some slipping in lifestyle-related things I had started to amass some weight. Instead of going on a diet as such, I just decided that I would kick up my training a notch and then adjust my eating habits to contain a larger proportion of vegetables, fruits, and the like. Another policy decision concerned fast food and soft drinks: they're gone and replaced with more frequent home cooking and mineral water.

Related to this, I never really understood the point of any type of strict, project-oriented dieting, which seems to be all the craze with women. It's not only one or two women who I know who seem to be doing this; deciding to drop weight over a certain period of time and then they go back to their old routines. But if the old routines were the ones that brought the extra weight in the first place, how does this work? I think that it's the longer term policy decisions with which you hopefully more permanently alter you lifestyle that get the job done.

I also broke out my heart rate monitor from the closet again to complement my running. It seems that I may have finally matured enough to actually be able to do slower runs at lower heart rate levels, which are quite possibly the things that were missing from my previous training. It again requires a healthy bit of patience and restraint to keep yourself from just blasting away on your jogs in the same way that you've been used to before. But again, hopefully this type of strategy will pay off in Stockholm and if things go well, then maybe even on a marathon next summer. All in all I feel that this recent change of trying to integrate sports and exercising as a more integral part of my life may be for the best. We'll see...

On generosity

In brief, my position on generosity is increasingly that you should not be generous. It isn't as simple as that, I'm afraid, but if nothing else, there's no point in it. If you are generous, people will forget it very quickly. If you are not generous, then you're pretty much like everyone else and/or you just merely upset some people. Machiavelli had an interesting chapter on whether or not princes should be generous, and he concluded something similar. He did, however, also note that if you are generous, you should be generous out of someone else's fortune, as that does not deplete your fortune or the fortunes of your citizens.

That said, you actually should be generous, but not to everyone. I have increasingly gotten the feeling that there are two criteria to judge when deciding on whether or not to be generous to someone: 1) are they in a position to offer you something and 2) if they are, are they willing to give you something? Why be generous to a person who does not reciprocate at all, either because they cannot afford to or because they just do not want to?

Customer retention

I've recently had to buy quite a few pairs of trousers in an attempt to revitalize my wardrobe in that area. For some strange reason it's a lot easier to casually pick up jackets, coats, and shirts rather than trousers and jeans. I've even bought shoes online in a vim. But trousers need consideration. Anyway, without getting into the whole debacle, I would like to highlight an issue related to marketing and customer retention...

As everyone who has passed Marketing 101 knows, traditional view holds that it's a lot cheaper (and more profitable) in the long run to retain customers rather than continuously attract new ones. That's why most companies in most businesses would do better to shed the transactional mode of business and focus on building relationships. Relationships are based on trust. And trust in business is created via successful deals. Now, in consumer business, at least, it's very easy to create long-term customer relationships by rectifying mistakes that you've made and compensating the customer very generously. If the customer's bad experience can be salvaged into a good one, you'll also be able to tap the viral marketing mechanism: the customer will undoubtedly tell his friends about the good service he got.

So, back to trousers. I bought a new pair of... uhmm... Swedish designer jeans from Beamhill and a pair of Pal Zileri trousers from Fere. Both had problems. The cloth of the jeans wore down and got a hole after two weeks of use and the trousers, after being initially adjusted, started to unravel from the back seem. Now, at this point the two different companies went two very different routes. That's why I will continue to be a customer of one company, but stear clear of the other.

First, the Pal Zileris... I took them back to the store and I was met by a shocked salesperson, who seemed genuinely apologetic after I told him about the somewhat awkward situation. Then we laughed and agreed that it's a good thing that men wear jackets to cover their rear. The salesperson then proceeded to ensure me that although the tailor had gone home for the day (to be fair, I was at the store at around 5.30 PM, and they were closing pretty soon), they would fix the trousers first thing in the morning and I would be able to pick them up pretty much as soon as the store opened. All of this on top of the fact that they kindly enough gave me a discount and threw in free alterations to the trousers in the first place, and even then they delivered within 24 hours since I was in somewhat of a hurry that week. Brilliant service.

Then on to the jeans. Amazingly enough the cloth itself wore out with the jeans. And in two weeks! That can't be possible! I take them back to the store and the salesperson takes them and my contact information and promises to be in touch the following morning as she is unable to make a decision on how to proceed by herself and has to consult her boss. Ok, fair enough... Then, the following day... No call. I get interested about the situation as those were the only pair of jeans that I had at the moment and swing by the store just before closing time. The same salesperson is there, this time telling me that yes, I'll get a new pair and that I can pick them up the following day (Day 3). Not any mention of apologies for not following up on the promised call, which then resulted in me making a pointless trip to the store. Well, come Day 3 I go to the store just before closing time and this time there is another salesperson, who I explain the situation to, and just as I'm finished the first salesperson comes along and it turns out that this new person is in fact the boss of the initial salesperson. And now it turns out that the jeans are still not at the store, but I can go fetch them from some obscure location elsewhere. Or I can wait and have them possibly fetch the jeans to this store tomorrow.

At this point I'm quite annoyed at the fact that I've made two pointless trips and still don't have my jeans. My annoyance might've become obvious after I told them that let's just schedule my pickup for next week, so that they would have seven whole days to be able to handle the simple transportation to the store. They insist that the jeans will be available the following day (Day 4). Ok, I'm somewhat skeptical, thank, and leave. Then after 30 minutes I get a phone call from the store saying that the jeans are there. Excellent! I didn't typo the phone number that I gave them. Up until now I was fairly convinced that there was a possibility that I wrote the wrong phone number. Anyway, what am I supposed to do about the situation now? The information is useless as I've already gone home and don't feel like making a fourth trip to the store.

Ultimately I ended up getting the new jeans, and I've been wearing them now for slightly over a week. Right now I'm fairly jumpy and I have this strange feeling that the jeans are slowly coming apart again. Let's hope that they won't, since I do not want to deal with this company again. Actually, if the jeans do come apart, I'm just going to take them back and leave them there. I don't really even care about the money as it was just slightly more than a day's pay, but let's just say that if they don't offer any tangible apology, I'm going to be slightly sad for them.

Let's just hope that the jeans will now last. And I'll never buy anything Swedish ever again, just to be safe...

Asymmetricity of information

The internet is truly a game changing disruption. I've noticed this again recently as I've shifted even more of my shopping online. It's actually quite logical: if you're buying more or less standardized products, the main differentiator between sellers is price. Right now I'm looking for sunglasses. I've narrowed my search down to one pair that I'm fairly interested in, and there is only one place in Finland selling that specific brand of sunglasses. I haven't been there yet, but I'm imagining that they are most likely charging a premium. Fortunately, however, I've been doing my homework and calculated the price that I would have to pay if I ordered them from abroad (including shipping and handling, taxes, and customs fees). Another dimension to this is the currency market, which gives me an additional discount to offset the fees with. So now, thanks to the available information related to the product's price as well as an efficient method of transporting goods globally, I'm going to be in a lot better position to negotiate with the local merchant about the price of the pair of sunglasses that he is selling.

The interesting thing about this is, however, that it's precisely in the asymmetric distribution of information where the merchants make their profits from. Used car merchants used to be in the brilliant position to basically lie and cheat the customer, since the customer was seldom able to value the car as well as the merchant could. Now with the rise of the internet and an access to global used car markets, the buyer can calculate some different scenarios about what it would cost to obtain the car from some other dealer. So in a sense the customer is now able to value the car being sold in a lot more precise and better way. This has sent the used car dealers scrambling for the hills. One Finnish dealer was actually saying in a newspaper that the internet should be destroyed, because it's killing business. That may be, but I for one see the positive aspects in this: business shouldn't necessarily be based on lying and cheating the customer but on creating tangible value add for the customer. If you're not creating value, the globalization of markets will soon drive you out of business. And that's how it should be...