Is Sharapova's downfall beginning?

I must begin by admitting that sadly, I find myself writing this entry on International Women's Day.

By now everyone must be aware that after calling a press conference a couple of days ago and holding most of the tennis and sports fanbase in suspense for most part of the weekend, Maria Sharapova announced she had tested positive on a drug test at the Australian Open, a result for which she took full responsibility.

Visible upset, Sharapova announced she had tested positive on a drug test

Most players who have tested positive on drug tests have been disciplined accordingly. Now the question is: what will be the case with Sharapova?

While standing up in front of the world to admit her own guilt shows bravery, heart, class and any other positive adjectives you can mention, that doesn't take away from the fact that she is in the same position Martina Hingis, Lance Armstrong, Diego Maradona, Barry Bonds and many others have been.

While many other tennis players have been banned for testing positive on drugs,
Martina Hingis was the last Grand Slam Champion to be banned from the sport (2 years) in november 2007

Sponsors have already ditched Maria, less than 24 hours after her announcement. Tag Heuer, Nike, Porsche, Evian, among others, have either suspended or halted relations with Sharapova. This sends a clear no-tolerance message to all athletes. Therefore and unfortunately, as much as I like Maria and I respect her as a tennis player, I believe the ITF should do the same thing and proceed with a ban. 

As shocked as I am by the announcement, many former pros have expressed mixed reactions. Particularly I have been quite impressed by Jennifer Capriati's:

Let's start by saying that Jen Capriati may not be the most objective opinion, as she has lived a... complicated life herself. However, despite going through all her issues and despite being in a bit of a rant, I believe she is stating the truth and talking from the bottom of her heart when she says:

"I'm extremely angry and disappointed. I had to lose my career and never opted to cheat no matter what I had to throw in the towel and suffer"

Jennifer Capriti fought many injuries and a mental breakdown as a teenager,
before becoming the Champion she was poised to become

She may be a bit over the board with the "high priced team of doctors", but she is alsto right there as well. Caroline Wozniaki makes a great point when she stated that professional players "double and triple check" everytime they take any supplement or medicine. It's as simple as that. 

Another fallen champion

Moreover, the Latvian company that manufactures meldonium says the normal course of treatment for the drug is four to six weeks - not the 10 years that Sharapova says she used the substance. That's why it is not only Sharapova, but also her team, the ones who where the blame should be placed.

This case is quite straight forward in my opinion. Sharapova let her fans down and as an elite player, who which the eyes of boys -and especially girls-are looking up to, this represents an unexcusable behavior.

Sadly, the announcement came a day before International Women's Day. To all women out there reading me, I wish you my most sincere congratulation and admiration. Keep doing what you have been doing... always following the honest way.

H

The Trump Legacy

Eight years ago I was making a connecting flight with a 24-hour stop in Miami. It was mid-july, just a few weeks before the ending of the primary elections and I decided to run a few errands in the city to kill some time. I exited the airport and took a cab driven by a Nicaraguan immigrant, probably 35 years old. We shared a nice chat during the ride and believe it or not, it turned out to be one of the most defining moments in my life.

He told me the story of how he got to the US. His dad brought him when he was only sixteen years old, escaping the misery and guerilla that reigned in Nicaragua, and being in his teen years, he never had the chance of getting educated or even dream of have a decent income. He arrived in the US without having reached sixth grade in Nicaragua, having no formal education, and knowing no English at all. At one point in the conversation he asked me: Do you know who are you voting for in november?

Do you know who are you voting for?

At that point I had pretty much decided who I was voting for, but I normally tend to avoid political discussions, especially elections, so I answered that I was making up my mind. The next lines he pronounced were simply unbelieveable. 

"This country is ready to change" he said. "McCain is going to lose, it doesn't matter who he runs again."

I nodded in order to let him follow his idea, which he did very elegantly:

"Bush has not been a very good president. He's very qualified, but he ran into too many problems and I think the job ended up being too big for him. He had good intentions though." He continued. "But the main failure of Bush, is that he failed to be the 21st Century President this country needs. He's a 20th Century President. Do you understand what I mean?" - he asked. 

That part rang interesting to me. "I think so" - I said. He then continued

"Listen. You look like a really smart person." (earlier we had talked about what I studied in college, what was I doing in Miami and where I was working. I guess my $10,000 diamond watch kind of tipped him off regarding my success in life). "To be honest with you, I never made it past sixth grade. I can be considered as what most people would refer as an ignorant person. But I do know a thing or two. And I know that right now, the world is changing. Cars are not mass-produced the way Henry Ford manufactured Ford Ts. Do you know he once said 'you can have a brand new Ford T in any color you like as long as the color is black'?"

At this point I found remarkable the fact that a Nicaraguan taxi driver would know this. Let alone, use the correct terminology "mass-produced".

"Now you have japanese cars, german cars, american cars, all big brands are competing for customer satisfaction. It is a different market era you know?" - he added. "And just like that, the political era is also changing." - he said. "In the 20th Century, America was driven by outlasting and outdoing the Soviet Communist System, and they did it, you know why? Because this is the greatest country in the world." - He said. -"But now we are in the 21st Century. The Soviets are dead, and Communism is dead. America now has a different enemy to compete against. This is not the space race, the arms race or the nuclear race. It's a different race and therefore, the strategy that has to be employed is different"

"And that is why the next president is going to make history. You see, the next president of this great country, will either be Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama. That means that for the first time in the US history, there will be, either a woman or a black man in the white house. Personally, I think it will be the latter"

Back in 2008...

"Those two represent a new era in US presidency. Either of them will be a president for the new Century. A 21st Century President. And that is why McCain will lose. He's still a 20st Century man."

And then he dropped the final beauty: "But either way, whoever wins, this country, which is entering a recession right now, will get back up again. Look at Europe!... " - he said -"They had to unite and form the EU, to try to keep up with the US. Look at China and India. They had to exploit workers paying them 2 cents a day to try to keep up with the US. And still, the US is able to be on top of them! Those guys in the Federal Reserve Bank, or at the White House, or at those World G7 summits... there is not a single mind in the world that can comprehend the superpower that the United States' economy is."

"God Bless America" - he said.

I was speechless. I had never ever in my life seen such a humble, yet powerful and sincere analysis of my country, in such a simple and down to Earth way. We arrived back at the airport after circling the city all day long, and after changing subjects to sports, entertainment and hobbies, I had yet to figure what I had just heard. I also wondered who would the guy vote for: McCain, Hillary or Obama. 

Fast forward to today's presidency campaign and I can't help but make the connection that again we have reached a defining moment in US history. But this time, we are setting up to move forward with a change, whether we vote Republican or Democrat.

If Trump wins, it means that for the first time in US history, we'll have a president with little to no poltical background. A businessman, a celebrity, a real-estate mogul. But someone who had never been senator, governor, major, or even congressman

If Hillary wins, it means that the prophecy stated by the Nicaraguan cab driver, will become true: for the first time we'll have a female president.

As today, most powerful players in the US are against Trump (or adverse at least) as it has been pretty clear with the never-ending daily bombardment of anti-Trump stories. Some justified, some not so. Some self-infringed, some infringed by others.

Some Trump followers happen to be anti-Obama, which kind of makes sense -regarding the political view- but doesn't make much sense when you go by the numbers. Like it or not, Obama:

• Brought unemployment rate to 4.9% the lowest levels since the recession
• Increased oil production to make the US the #1 oil producer in the world
• Brought oil and gas prices down, shattering oil-dependent country economies
• Captured and killed Osama Bin Laden
• Ended the 2008-09 recession
• Is a better, way better speaker than Bush

President are measured by what they achieve.
Not by what they promised

So under that logic, if I were a Trump voter (which I'm not saying I am, or I am not), I would expect Trump to achieve similar objectives, probably within the lines of:

• Bringing unemployment down to 2.5%
• Maintain the US as the #1 oil producer
• Bring oil prices to $20 or lower and gas prices under $1.50
• Capture and kill ISIL (ISIS) leaders
• Boost the US economy to favor small entrepeneurs
• Be a better, way better speaker than Obama

plus of course...

• Put a halt and an end to China's growth
• Fix the border and immigration problem
• Improve law enforcement and reduce gun violence
• Implement a better Tax system.

As it happened with my chat with the Nicaraguan Cab Driver, I won't be sharing who is my candidate of choice in this article. But I will dedicate a few lines to analyze what I have decided to call "The Trump Legacy", referring to the impact and influence that Donald has generated ever since he announced his candidacy.

Will he be fired or hired?

1. Some of Trump's ideas are actually spot on. 

The problem doesn't lay in his ideas. It lays in the execution of these ideas -or the way he's planning to do them-. It is true that the southern border has more holes than a swiss cheese, but the idea of a wall across the US-Mexico border is just ridiculous. There are dozens of other ways to reinforce, tackle and solve the immigration reform.

Enforcing the laws on the books is another true course that we have to take. But empower gun owners to take matters in their own hands, is like travelling back 150 years to the time of the wild west (or 50 years in Clint Eastwood movies). That is why we have law enforcement entities.

2. A Republican Debate (or any debate for that matter) shouldn't have as focus or even mentioned, the size of a candidate's penis 

Marco Rubio's call on Trump's hands and "something else" was perhaps the lowest shot I have ever seen... in ANY debate ever (and that includes WWF and pre-school debates). However Trump fell for it (in my opinion) and replied accordingly (or not). 

This is the primary election to select the candidate of the Republican party to run for the most important job in the world. Whether a candidate has large or small hands, or has "something else" large or small, definitely doesn't add or disqualify merit to anyone running for President.

3. The reality of Trump becoming President is a scary fact

The funniest tweet I have read regarding the campaign has been:

2016: Trump won't win

2017: President Trump can't do that, can he?

2018: You watching The Hunger Games tonight? I hope my District wins

It sums up the combination of how Trump's fantasy scenario of becoming US President -perhaps imagined ten or fifteen years ago- has grown up and developed in the the possibility that he may actually end up facing Jennifer Lawrence in Capitol City... I mean Washington DC.

4. Trump preaches a slogan that is a fallacy

Here is where I take a strong stance. "Making America Great Again" is a fallacy. Like it or not, Obama gave an astounding truth in his last state of the union speech. "The United States of America is the most powerful nation on Earth. Period."

Apparently Trump hasn't been to China, India, Mexico, Southamerica, Africa, Spain, Russia, Italy, and etc. There are no utopias in the world. Every nation has stengths and weaknesses. But all in all, the American Dream still exists and it's still there. America is a great nation. It is the greatest nation in the world. I would like it if  Trump's slogan was "Making America Even Greater Than It IS!"

5. Trump is a successful man

Whether you like it or not, Donald Trump is one of the richest and most succesful men on Earth. Yes, Trump University, Trump Airlines and many other Trump ventures have failed, but we can't use that as leverage to judge him. How many of Steve Jobs' projects failed? It's not about how many times a man has failed. It's more about how many times he has gotten up.

I am quite sure that the list of successful businessman who haven't failed in their life is less than 5%. And don't get me started on the list of successful politicians.

6. Trump talks the talk but doesn't walk the walk

I cannot get over how this doesn't make sense and no one so far has capitalized on it in any of the debates.

Why does Donald talk about smart negotiatiors that serve the interests of American workers, yet has his clothing line serving the interest of Chinese workers?

7. Trump has a valid and good point when he says he's "telling it like it is"

Unfortunately, the Brian Williams issue has been misinterpreted as to whether it matters if Brian lied or not, or whether if it should be a big deal the fact that he changed his story. That's not the point. People lie everyday and that is an intrinsic behavior of human life.

What matters is that Brian changed his story for personal gain, recognition or satisfaction. He was at a talk-show host and at a hockey game with a US Veteran. Hence breaking ethical journalism codes. As NBC ended Trump's contract, it should have also ended any relation with the most respected prime-time news anchor of its network.

8. Trump has brought the campaign into his confort zone

Trump likes attention. He likes showmanship. He likes exposure. He likes being the man in charge. He likes being in the spotlight. With all this, Trump as turned the campaign into a circus, which is the environment where he is comfortable with.

Also, there is no need to use curse words and insult everyone on sight. That's why they are called "politicians". If we didn't need them, we would just have the WWF champion in the White House and the Russian equivalent in the Kremlin, and just have them fight each other when the topic of trade agreements and foreign policy on Syria is brought on the table.

Even if Trump does not win the US Presidency, he may end as the most celebrity-like candidate in US history. The US election will end up having a president that was chosen, either because people didn't want Trump to be President, or because people wanted Trump to be President.

This should be a huge warning sign for US politicians who should take it as a signal that candidates should be preparing for a US election and have us US citizens actually choose which candidate we want to run our country, and not pick one guy because we didn't like the other guy, or blindly liked the our guy despite everyone hating him.

That is The Trump Legacy.

Upcoming movies of 2016

Continuing my tradition of writing about the up and coming movies for the year -as the Oscars gave the official close to the 2015 season-, it's time to move on and see what 2016 has in line for us. But first, let's make a quick pass on what I wrote last year and what ended up happening:

Man from UNCLE

I had: low hopes
It ended up: better than what I expected

Fast and Furious 7

I had: no hopes. I mean, what can be said about the same movie repeated six times?
It ended up: Yep. Same movie, repeated six times.

Jurassic World

I had: low hopes:
It ended up: Slightly better than what I expected

Fantastic Four "reboot"

I had: zero hope
It ended up: turning up worse than zero hope

Terminator Genisys

I had: no idea how it would turn out!
It ended up: confirming what I said. The franchise should have ended with T2.

The revenant

I had: no comment
It ended up: giving Leonardo Di Caprio his first Oscar

Mad Max Fury Road

I had: hope it'd be able to top the original
It ended up: doing it

Straight outta Compton

I had: no comment -although I hope my readers correctly interpreted this a flattering compliment to do such an interesting film about Dr Dre and NWA
It ended up: confirming my suspicions

Ant Man

I had: high hopes
It ended up: completely fulfilling them and even better than I hoped.

Hateful Eight

I had: thoughts it would be a good film, but not as legendary as Pulp Fiction
It ended up: turning exactly as I thought.

Age of Ultron

I had: high hopes
It ended up: fulfilling them. Special compliment to Elizabeth Olsen for pulling a fantastic Scarlet Witch

Regression:

I had: high hopes
It ended up: way, way below them.

Entourage

I had: no idea how it would turn out
It ended up: disappointing

Vacation

I had: complete disgust on why did someone gave the go to reboot this
It ended up: confirming I was right

Creed

I had: oh come on....
It ended up: ok, I guess.

Steve Jobs

I had: thought it'd be a good biopic
It ended up: pretty much good

Hunger games Mockingjay part 2:

I had: no major comment on it, other than being the final chapter of this dreadful drama.
It ended up: becoming reality once Donald Trump announced his candidacy for US President

Macbeth

I had: thoughts on how Shakespeare plays never transition well into movies
It ended up: confirming them

Experimenter

I had: thought it'd be interesting
It ended up: being as dull as watching grass grow

The lobster

I had: thought it was the craziest plot ever, and no idea how it would turn out
It ended up: I haven't pulled myself together to watch this yet

and finally... The Force Awakens

I had: no thoughts
It ended up: completely destroying the Star Wars universe forever



and now for 2016........the most interesting movies ...

Great addition to the MCU

Deadpool

Although it has already been released -and has turned into a huge sensation- I have to say it's a real pleasure to see Hollywood bringing a different angle to the comic-book superhero movies.

Zoolander 2

Another recently released film. Oh man, why did Ben Stiller had to destroy Zoolander's legacy.

Captain America: Civil War

I actually have VERY HIGH hopes on this one. Director Anthony Russo has a high profile credit resume on TV sitcoms, and bringing him as the entire responsible to connect phase two with phase three in the MCU is a huge weight to hold on his shoulders. With a cast that has already demonstrated great chemistry, it is possible that this film will serve as the perfect prelude for The infinity war.

Ghostbusters

Was supposed to be released in 2015, but got pushed to 2016. I still have low hopes on this one.

Allegiant

This movie will be worse than its predecesor, Divergent

Please don't mess this up!!

Doctor Strange

They better make this film good. Unfortunately, I don't think they will. Nothing about it so far suggests it will be a good movie. The director is mediocre, the plot seems pretty bad, and the cast is ... well... let's move on. I hope I'm wrong on this one.

Jason Bourne

Really?

Airlift

This foreign movie is about the 1990 Iraqi invasion to Kuwait. Normally American films on biographic topics are a little bit biased, and a foreign approach is always a bit more objective and realistic. It reminds me of the german classic, Das Boot. Therefore, I believe this movie should be very good.

The Jungle Book

This film will be good. This is a classic film that deserves an update/reboot, and only Jon Favreau can be trusted with this sort of task.

Inferno

Tom Hanks and Ron Howard once again team up for another profound movie. In Inferno, a man wakes up in a hospital in Florence, Italy, with no idea of what happened to him in the last few days. This kind of smells like a hybrid of the Da Vinci code with Memento. Kind of like a bad smoothie combining pineapple and a pancake with salt syrup.

Now THAT's what I call a close encounter
with a movie that WON'T be good

Independence Day: Resurgence

This movie will not be good. Trust me.

The Legend of Tarzan

The approach to this film seems interesting, which only brings the question on how much a risk is everyone commited to it taking to make such a movie. I have no idea what to say about this one.

Kindergarten Cop 2

Believe it or not, Kindergarten Cop is getting a sequel, more than 25 years later. I know what you're thinking: Is Arnold starring? Well, sadly he isn't, which is kind of weird considering Arnold should be the only one authorized to star in his own sequels. This time it is Agent Reed, played by the most underrated actor in all Hollywood: Dolph Lundgren.

John Wick 2

Is back for more people to kill, after grieving the loss of his dog!

Warcraft

Video game movies have always proven to be a major flop and fraud. Warcraft will be no exception.

Silence

Martin Scorsese's latest addition finds himself working with Lian Neeson and Adam Driver, in a classic 'established actor + up and coming actor' setup of his. It's staged in the seventeenth century, meaning it is one of the few times Martin doesn't set up a movie in current times. More importantly, he tackles the controversial topic of religion. Since Scorsese's well-known for his violent movies, it will be interesting to see if he is bringing a softer side to filmmaking.

Angry Birds Movie

Yep, you read it here first. Angry Birds are getting a movie. Soon we'll see something like Twitter Movie.

HUH !?!?!?!? ---- HAHAHAHAH !! ---
OHHH sorry, the voices !

Suicide Squad

DC Universe's real -and perhaps only- chance to compete toe to toe with Disney's/Marvel's juggernaut money making machines + great films. The cast looks perfect, with Jared Leto bringing a new approach to the Joker character. We haven't seen Ben Affleck as Bat-Man yet, so it's hard to judge how much influence he'll have.

X-Men Apocalypse

This film WILL be good.

Rogue One: Star Wars

Another continuation of Disney destroying the Star Wars universe.

Pwned !!

That's what happens when you don't shoot first!

BEN! Take of that mask ! You don't need it!

-Why !? What do you think will happen if I take it off ?

NOTHING, because you DON'T need it! literally speaking!

-Will you help me?

NO! I'm not an idiot!

-Yes you ARE!

Venezuela SHOULD be a very rich country

But it isn't.

A couple of months ago I wrote this article on the next steps for the now opposition led National Assembly in Venezuela, recommending what in my opinion are the immediate measures they must take regarding exiting the current crisis the country is in. So far, none have been done.

Most leaders in Venezuela are making a right when faced with this sign 

Today I came across this very interesting article, that captures in one sentence, the constant affirmation what every venezuelan knows (and constantly preaches): "Run the right way, Venezuela should be a very rich country"

Thing is, it isn't a rich country. Which begs to ask the question: Why? Which brings the most simple answer: Because it's run the wrong way.

Most of the Venezuela's middle class -filled by opposition- place the blame on the government and its strict (and crazy) policies, economic controls and laws. This makes some sense, as any business school graduate knows that as the saying goes, "the fish begins to rot from the head". However, the fish also has other body parts apart from the head.

I was having lunch with a friend yesterday at an upscale mall in Caracas when after finishing our meals, we decided to take a walk, eventually ending up at the most visited place any venezuelan attends to in his daily routine: a supermarket. Once inside, we found out a recently arrived flour shipment had made its way to the market and we took the respective two packages (1 kg each) allowed per person, per week, each package costing 2 cents (yes, $0.02). It's so cheap because it's a regulated product. However, whether you're buying regulated or unregulated products, you still have to checkout, right?

Despite many warnings, they keep going past this

Despite the supermarket being relatively empty -which is a rarity-, we ended up spending over an hour in there. You may ask, why? Well, after ten minutes or so (definitely not more than 15), it took us around 45-50 minutes to do checkout and pay. Yes, you read it right: 10 to 15 minutes shopping, 45-50 to checkout. Inevitably, you will probably ask again: Why? I mean, after all, a cashier checkout at a supermarket shouldn't take you more than five minuntes (and that's an insulting time), even if the market is full -which it wasn't. In other words, one could say:

"Run the right way, a Supermarket checkout should take no longer than five minutes"

But in Venezuela, it doesn't.

Going back to your question: Why? The answer is, quite, quite, simple. Because it (the supermarket) is run the wrong way.

Some time ago, I came across this fascinating report on what is called FedEx's Super Bowl: Christmas Rush. Whether you like FedEx or not, if you watch the video or fast forward to the 4:04 mark, where they are filming at FedEx's main hub in Memphis, TN, also known as "The Matrix, you'll listen to the manager say "if you stand here for fifteen minutes, you will see the world's economy pass before your eyes"

This profound statement can be used to explain Venezuela's critical condition, without any comprehension of GDP, CPI, official exchange rate, Black Market, or whatever economic or financial term you wish to use. Instead, just recite this: "if you stand in a supermarket line for fifty minutes, you'll see the explanation of Venezuela's crisis pass before your eyes."

In other words, you will understand why Venezuela should be a very rich country, but it isn't. More importantly, you'll see why Venezuela is run the wrong way:

1. We have a supermarket in an upscale mall, run the wrong way.
2. We have a shipping process in an upscale mall, run the wrong way.
3. We have a distribution process in an upscale mall, run the wrong way.
4. We have a pricing process in an upscale mall, run the wrong way.
5. We have a checkout process in an upscale mall, run the wrong way.
6. We have a payment process in an upscale mall, run the wrong way.

Now keep in mind this is just one supermarket. Add the other 20 stores located all across the city, you now have twenty (or so) supermarkets. Now multiply that by the five most popular supermarket chains, you have a total of 100 supermarkets. Each one of them with is run the wrong way. Finally, multiply that by the six process we listed, all run the wrong way. That's a total of 600 processes, just in the market-retail business industry.

Time passes....

In the end, what other result can it be?

I find it hard to believe that nobody has thought to himself something within the lines of "We have a process that is run the wrong way. Maybe we should fix it, so we can run our business the right way." I simply cannot understand how does a supermarket manager cannot visualize that the less time customers spend checking out (meaning, the fastest they go through the cashiers), the greater revenue the market brings.

This isn't astrophysics, or some sort of complex math problem. It's simply common sense.

Many alternatives can be proposed and I am quite sure some of them can be implemented as well. Below I will list a few:

The BEST Solution is: Drop all fixed prices and distribution controls on regulated products: the easiest and most swift solution. Prices of regulated products will go up, but in the end you let the free market flow and economy will find an equilibrium point, with the supply and demand curves. Resellers of regulated products are posting prices that 10x times the fixed price anyway. Economy 101.

An informal street vendor sells regulated products for 10x time its fixed-price

That of course, is a decision that must come from the government and the manufacturing businesses.

BUT... If you can't (or won't) drop fixed prices and distribution controls on regulated products, then we still have many variants of what can be done:

1. Have one (or more) cashier for non-regulated products: if a costumer is buying an $8 pasta sauce and a set of knives, he shouldn't suffer the same fate than those buying regulated products.

2. Have one (or more) cashier for senior citizens: it's inhuman to have a senior standing up for fifty minutes, when all he wants to do is buy food.

3. Have one (or more) cashier with fast dial-up/high speed connectivity with bank lines: paying with credit/debit cards is supposed to be quicker than paying with cash, not slower.

4. Have one (or more) cashier for express or fast checkout/less than five products.

5. Ban cashiers from using their cellphones while at work if they have customers waiting in line (or ban them altogether).

6. Have one (or more) pre-checkout cashier, so a customer can already have its order taken care of and then only has to pay when he arrives at the cashier.

I hardly believe any of the major supermarket chains will lose a substantial amount of money, if they would decide to incorporate one or all of these suggestions.

This is definitely not what I learned from that famous Toyota's Lean manufacturing case I studied in Business School,
and apparently, neither have the supermarket owners and managers

I will wrap up this entry for now, as I have more material to cover for another post, but I will add a few lines before moving on: most real estate in Venezuela has lost its value, probably around 30 or 40%, yet most of the population argue against the fact that similar to the 2008-09 housing bubble, Venezuela is currently sitting on a buyers market, and instead believe this is a selling market.

Once again, another vital and primary core of the economy, that is also run... the wrong way.

Memorable movie scenes

Although I have been taught to never say never in life and that there is always time to do whatever you want, every day that passes by my life, I always wonder what would have happened if I had decided to become a filmmaker, following the steps of Kubrick, Spieldberg, Nolan, Scott and so many others.

As many of my followers know, I am a huge movie fan who also happens to be a great appreciator of the art of filming. I never get tired of watching great films and also never get tired of watching memorable movie scenes. Thanks to the magic of youtube, today I want to share some of my most favorite with you:

Confrontation in the dark: Jodie Foster and Ted Levine. Director: Jonathan Demme. The Silence of the Lambs 

While the clip cuts a few seconds prior from where I would have recorded it, it still manages to capture the essence of what's happening.

Novice FBI agent Clarence Starling is assigned to her first case and boy what a case it is. After tracking down the whereabouts of serial killer Buffalo Bill, she finally lands at his home's basement where he has been keeping his victims. The music is loud, the basement is huge and she nervously keeps searching door by door for Bill -who had ran away from her upstairs-, only to land at a room with a bathtub and a heavily decomposed body. Lights go off and she loses all sight of where she is, while Bill -using night-vision goggles-, has trapped Clarice and has her at his own mercy. Clarice isn't nervous anymore: now she's freaking scared to death.

Jodie Foster's acting here is as good as it gets, portraying the 249 emotions, things and thoughts that must be going through her head, being trapped in a basement with no lights, a serial killer on the lose, no backup to call or anybody available to help. Other than her heavy breathing, the soundless take lasts the longest 60 seconds of her life. After ten more seconds or so, the orchestral violin soundtrack softly fades in, with Bill's left hand trying to reach Clarice's hair, as in to say "I want to have you", while she's still panicking as you can see in her eyes, giving a completely lost sight, and her left arm trying to reach out for something she doesn't even know. Then Bill finally raises his right arm and points his .357 at Clarice, getting ready to put her out of her misery. He makes one fatal mistake. Being an un experienced gun handler, he cocks his revolver, making Clarice aware that he's behind her, who quickly turns around facing him, which makes him scared and misfire a shot that gives away his position. Clarice, in middle of desperation, exasperation and madness, unloads her .38 revolver and puts an end to his life, while also breaking a window glass that allows outside light into the room, letting her see Bill laying on the ground.

Tech Noir: Arnold Schwarzenegger, Lind Hamilton and Michael Beir. Director: James Cameron. The Terminator

Ironically, the reason why is scene is so great, is also the reason why it has aged well, but not as well as other memorable scenes.

The movie opens with two naked guys being sent in time to L.A. Not much info on the guys is given, but they do not seek the cops' help nor do they make a big fuzz of their arrival. They are on their own on the loose. Sarah Connor, on the other hand, is a young waitress who on a regular L.A. day, finds out that two other Sarah Connors have been killed. One we see getting killed by one of the guys we saw at the beginning: some mute tall muscle man guy. The other we find out was killed, on a a broadcast while Sarah is in a bar, and this is the essence that makes the scene so great.

Back then, when I first saw the movie I assumed it was THE OTHER GUY who killed that Sarah, and that both of them were on a race to kill the third Sarah (our Sarah), especially when we see the other guy sort of follow Sarah through the dark streets of L.A., till she decides to hide on a club called Tech-Noir and call the cops for help. The cops tell her she'll be fine as long as she stays in the club, because it's a public place, but when she sees the guy that was following her across the bar, she starts to think this may be it for her.

At this time, the first tall muscle man, had made his way into the bar -not paying by the way-, and while at a distance, he makes visual contact with Sarah. What follows next is a cathedratic lesson on suspense: the music of the club, while still loud, fades away to let the movie's soundtrack take over the score. The motion of the characters slows down and now it is at this moment that we know who The Terminator really is, and what he is there to do.

After a violent shooting and a direct confrontation between the unknown other guy and the Terminator, Sarah on the floor hears the words that stuck in our minds for years to come: "Come with me if you want to live"

The Baptism - Al Pacino. The Godfather. Director: Francis Ford Coppola.

I won't take long to describe this one, because we can summarize this whole scene in just one word: Juxtaposition.

Michael Chorleone baptizes his sister's son, becoming godfather to him, while at the same time settles all family business, having his men murder the members of the five families. As Michael's voice in the baptsism utters the words swearing to God he accepts his faith, believes in him, renouncing satan and asks for forgiveness for all his sins, his actions prove exactly the contrary.

Michael's baptism serves for himself being baptized as Godfather to the family.

The Duel - Clint Eastwood, Lee van Cleef, Eli Wallach. The Good, The Bad and The Ugly. Director: Sergio Leone.

Same as above, not much to say about this one. It is an eight minute scene that simply flows around the fact that three almost equally skilled shooters have been racing each other to find a gold fortune burried in a cemetery.

What I like about the scene is the building of a five minute tension between the three of them and what goes on the mind of each:

The Ugly, doesn't know what to do. He knows he's good. Good enough to kill both, The Good and The Bad. But the question is, who should he shoot first?

The Bad KNOWS what to do. He knows he has to shoot The Good first because he knows that he is the better shooter. But he also knows that if he does this, then the Ugly will shoot him.

The Good also KNOWS what to do, and here is where you see the beauty of the scene and overall, the beauty of the entire movie. Throughout the film he keeps being labeled as "The Good", despite the fact that we haven't really seen ANY good deeds coming from him. It is now, only in the end when we do. He knows Tuco's gun is unloaded, so he doesn't have to worry about him, so theoritically, his only preocupation is Angel Eyes. So if this is true, he could have shot him right away and get it over with, but he doesn't. In fact, he doesn't make a move at all, until the very last second, when he sees Angel Eyes grabbed his gun and is going to shoot him. To me, this serves as an act of good.

Blondie gave Angel Eyes a "last chance". The last chance was, what was fair for all three men who arrived by their own means to the cemetery. Angel Eyes didn't want that chance and took a chance to shoot, which resulted in Blondie shooting him dead in self defense.

The end of the scene contains a memorable line: "In this world there are two kinds of people. Those with guns and those who dig. You dig."

Dallas Dies - Nostromo crew (minus two), Xenomorph. Alien. Director: Ridley Scott.

While the chest-bursting scene has become the classic and I do acknowledge its greatness, I could watch Dallas' death scene over and over for days without getting bored of it. As in the Clarice Starling clip, here the uploaded posted the clip also cutting a few seconds from earlier that help up build the tension up.

After seeing his fellow crew member get attacked by an alien egg on an unkwown planet they landed, then see this creature attached to his fellow crew member magically remove itself, then seeing a tiny alien creature burst out of the crew member -killing him- and finally, seeing another crew member being abducted by the creature, Captain Dallas of the Nostromo asks himself whether or not he screwed up by braking quarantine protocol and bringing up a living creature that is as deadly as it gets to a cargo ship in space, where - as the tagline says- no one can hear you scream.

After coming up with a plan to chase the creature out of the ship through the ventilation shafts, Dallas walks into the "mother computer" and asks "what are his chances?" against the deadly alien creature. From that moment when he is already doubting his own plan, he knows and we know, he's done for, and he will be next to die.

Cut now to where the clip starts and the faces, reaction, dialogues of the other crew members say the rest:

A panicking Lambert feels Dallas' fate as soon as he walks through the shaft
A nervous Parker feels Dallas is hopeless against an unknown enemy
A cold-blooded (later to be found cyborg) Ash is emotionless realizing the Alien's superiority
A passionate Ripley, feels for Dallas, nothing but sadness.

and finally Dallas himself. This scene, similar to Clarice's deals with the sense of isolation. Being alone against an unknown killer, who you know -not hint, know- has the upper hand, and will likely end up killing you.

The ending. Samuel L. Jackson, Tim Roth, Amanda Plummer, John Travolta. Pulp Fiction. Director: Quentin Tarantino

I remember when I first saw Pulp Fiction at my local cinema, throughout the movie as each minute passed by, I knew I was witnessing a classic, but still had a few doubts on how big a classic it was. The ending scene however, cleared and erased all doubts. This movie was THE classic.

There isn't much to be said about the scene, as there aren't enough words to describe how perfect it is, so I'll just say it is perfectly acted, perfectly written and perfectly directed. Even the freaking soundtrack to finish the movie is so casual, as casual is the walk Jules and Vincent walk, leaving the cafeteria with their guns in their dork shorts.

Unfortunately, there is no youtube clip of it as I would have like to appreciate it, but there are two clips that sort of do it justice.

The ending (cuts the final seconds)

The ending (true ending)

Gene Kelly. Singing in the rain. Singing in the rain. Directors: Stanley Donen and Gene Kelly

This scene talks for itself

Assault scene. Malcolm McDowell. A Clockwork Orange. Director: Stanley Kubrick

What makes the previous selection even best, is Malcolm McDowell's version of it in Kubrick's A Clockwork Orange

Cheers,

H

ESPN's NBA's top 10 of all time: LeBron is 3rd!

ESPN has done it again. Create controversy in a theme that is supposed to be their every day bread and butter: Ranking all time greats.

Do you agree with LeBron at #3 in the all time NBA Greats?

After weeks of suspense and thrills, the sports network finally released their top 10 NBA players of all time, and just a few hours were needed to bring even their own analysts Stephen A. Smith, Skip Bayless, to contradict it. What follows is my breakdown of their top 10 list.

#10: Hakeem Olajuwon.

Hakeem The Dream

With Shaquille O'Neal himself, one of the biggest centers of all time himself, and also, one of the biggest EGOS of all time in the NBA, even bowing down to Hakeem's greatness and how he wasn't able to figure him out, I don't think anyone disagrees that Hakeem deserves to be mentioned in a top 15 list, with a lot of chance to be included on a top 10 list. Hakeem "The Dream" won two NBA championships, two NBA MVPs, two NBA Finals MVP,12-time all star games. Hakeem is the only player to average 20 points, 10 rebounds and two blocks per game, in his first 12 seasons. Plus, he was the leader of his team the Houston Rockets. Enough said, let's move on.

#9: Shaquille O'Neal.

Simply unstoppable

This is where I believe, ESPN analysts begin taking some sort of mind "performance-anti-enhancing" brain-pills. Apart from Kareem and Wilt, there hasn't been such a dominant force in the center position as Shaq in all of NBA's history, and Shaq's career was more prolific than Wilt's, championship-wise speaking. Therefore, a case can be made of him being second after Kareem. I'll quote ESPN's website:

"Most dominant ever? Not quite"

Excuse me, but if Shaq was not dominant, I think one of the two of us has problems with the definition of the word 'dominant'.

Shaq won four rings, is seventh in the all-time scoring list, and is the only player in NBA history to score 30 points on every finals game, on multiple finals.

Shaq is way, way up on my list, up to #5.

#8: Tim Duncan.

Respect 

If you had doubts, whether the ESPN analysts had been taking some "performance-anti-enchancing" pills, seeing Tim Duncan placed at #8 erase any doubts. I like how their website refers to their "Expert panel". I wonder what are these guys expert on? Because, they are certainly no experts in NBA.

First of all, Tim Duncan is a leader. He has been the driving force behind the Spurs, for almost twenty years. He's the Jordan of the Spurs, he's the Magic Johnson of the Spurs, he's the Diego Maradona of the Spurs (to put it in other context).

Second -and perhaps the greatest blasphemy from ESPN-, Tim Duncan is 5-1 in NBA finals, and... he could have been 6-0, had he beaten LeBron the second time they met in 2013. Tim Duncan beat in order:

The 99 Knicks of Pat Ewing and Larry Johnson

The 03 Spurs of Jason Kidd and Richard Jefferson

The 05 Pistons of the Wallace brothers, who were also, defending champions

He swept the 07 Cavs of LeBron. Repeat after me: SWEPT

The 14 Heat of LeBron and Wade.

That's it, he defeated LeBron TWICE. So how is Tim Duncan placed in a lower spot than LeBron? I'm telling you: performance-anti-enhancing pills, is the only answer.

Third. You want to discuss stats? We can, but you don't need to with Tim. Because he is a force. He is a clutch player, a defensive player, an offensive player, a franchise player, a leader. He is everything, he's the whole package. 

Tim Duncan, you are #4 on my list.

#7: Bill Russell.

I'm ok with Bill Russell at #7. Let's move on.

"I just want to see which of you
guys is gonna come in second place,
'cause I'm winning this"
 - Gotta love this guy!

#6: Larry Bird.

I'm ok with Larry Bird at #6. But read below, I'll move him up a spot.

#5: Wilt Chamberlain.

This is where things start to get tricky. What I'm going to do, is spread-out the rest of the list to make it easier to explain

#4. Magic Johnson

#3. LeBron James

#2. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

#1. Michael Jordan

I rate Shaq over Wilt, because I will.... well... I'll quote Skip Bayless: "Wilt Chamberlain is the best one-man act of all time." That however, doesn't make him the best player ever. After all, we are talking about a team sport. I'll also rate him below Larry Bird, because well, it's Larry Bird. So that's why Wilt goes down two spots. Larry Bird was a better shooter period, and arguably the best clutch player ever.

Nice!

If you disagree with MJ at the top spot, you definitely are using the same pills the ESPN so called "Expert Panel" use, or probably something stronger. 

I know Mike, you can't help being the greatest!

The two greats together

Next Kareem at second. Some people rate Kareem second and Magic third, other people place Magic second after Jordan, but on top of Kareem. I really don't mind switching them, as long as they occupy spots #2 to #3. I can even relax if you want to play spots #2 to #5, as long as it's Kareem, Magic, Tim and Shaq we're talking about. But definitely not LeBron James.

LeBron at #3... is a big NO-NO. I like LeBron, I really do. I admire and respect how much of a complete player he is, and how fortunate we are to watch him play in this era. He has impressive, godlike stats. But... --and here it comes-... he fails in the key moments, and no one can argue with that reasoning.

Great players, legends, godlike sportsmen, are judged, ranked, rated and their legacy is built upon delivering the goods when it takes. LeBron is 2-4 in NBA finals, and as I said a few lines ago, should be 1-5. LeBron HAD to move to Miami and team up with an already NBA champion Dwayne Wade, to win his first championship. Nobody, I repeat, NOBODY in the top 10 list did such a lame move, and we can take a look:

Hakeem: leader of the rockets. Point made.

Shaq: signed with the up and coming new Lakers franchise. Point made.

Tim: really? Point made.

Bill, Larry, Wilt, Magic, Kareem, MJ: Point made.

To leave the Cavs and sign up with an already powerful team, who already had been champion was such a coward move, I lost all respect for LeBron as the leader he should have been. Plus, even after singing with the Heat he still lost in his first NBA appearance with them (second overall). How pathetic is that? He finally bounced back and won back-to-back titles, only to lose again back-to-back with the Heat against Duncan's Spurs and the following year against Golden State.

Come on man...

Stephen A. Smith said it best: Give me LeBron for the first 40 minutes of the game. Give me Larry Bird for the last 20 seconds.

As it is then, my list (as you should know I don't believe in "Top 10 lists" and just do "lists") ends up as follows:

1. MJ

2. Magic

3. Kareem

4. Tim Duncan

5. Larry Bird
6. Shaq

7. Wilt

8. Bill Russell

9. Hakeem Olajuwon

10. Kobe Bryant

11. LeBron James

The summarized explanation:

1. MJ (6-0 in NBA Finals. 6 NBA Finals MVP. 5 NBA MVP. Best player ever period)
2. Magic (5 NBA Rings. 3 NBA Finals MVP. 3 MVP Orchestrated showtime. Epitome of a PG)
3. Kareem (6 NBA Rings. Skyhook move. All time scoring leader. Best Center ever)
4. Tim Duncan (5-1 in NBA Finals -should be 6-0. 3 NBA Finals MVP. 2 MVP. Best PF ever)
5. Larry Bird (3 NBA Rings. 3 NBA Finals MVP, 3 MVP. Best clutch player and Best SF ever)
6. Shaq (4 NBA Rings. 3 NBA Finals MVP, 1 MVP. Unstoppable at Center)
7. Wilt (2 NBA Rings. Avg 30 pts 20 rbnds. Arguably, best solo act player in NBA history)
8. Bill Russell (11 NBA Rings)
9. Hakeem Olajuwon (2 NBA Rings. 2 NBA Finals MVP. 1 MVP. Redefined the Center post)
10. Kobe Bryant (5 NBA Rings. 2 NBA Finals MVP)
11. LeBron James (2 NBA Rings with 4 losses in NBA finals. 2 NBA Finals MVP. 4 MVP)

Other blasphemies in ESPN's list include Isiah Thomas at 26th: apparently the Expert Panel also suffers from brain damage. Maybe it's the pills?

Ok, I know Zeke is not top 10 material, but come on, he's definitely top 15.
And, over Pippen, Stockton, Malone, Barkley, Durant, Curry and Nowitzki

I don't have a problem with a great player ranked 26th, like for instance, in Baseball, they ranked Johnny Bench 26th, but had Steve Carlton at 25, Tris Speaker at 24th, Frank Robinson at 20th and Mike Schmidt at 16th, meaning, the closer the ranking gets to the top spot, the better the player is. 

But come on man, Thomas at 26th and John Stockton at 16th ! It doesn't end there. Steph Curry, Dirk Nowitzki, Charles Barkley, Kevin Durant, Karl Malone and... SCOTTIE PIPPEN are also ranked higher than Thomas. To quote John McEnroe, "you gotta be kidding!"

If you have any doubts or are unaware of Isiah's talents, I recommend you to watch this vid:

Nice try ESPN, better start advertising that you are hiring new Expert Panel.

H

Stairway to heaven Lawsuit

Today's post will be concise, as it tackles an issue I already talked about over a year ago: plagiarism in music.

Led Zepellin surving members, Jimmy Page, Robert Plant and John Paul Jones were deposed last week regarding the suit filed by lawyer Francis Malofiy, who represents 'Spirit', an American rock band from the late 60s who wrote a song called 'Taurus'. Taurus is an instrumental piece to which Stairway to Heaven bares a remarkable similarity, hence Malofiy claims Zepellin stole the main theme of Taurus and used it in Stairway without giving proper writting credits to Spirit. Malofiy is seeking at least 50% of all of Stairway's royalties, which amounts to half a billion Dollars (ouch!)

Before getting into the specifics of the case, let's take a look of the core problem.

This is Spirit's 'Taurus' which was written in 1968, and while listening to the first minute or so may be enough for you to judge whether it sounds similar or not, I recommend to listen to all of it:

...and well, if somehow you have been living in a cave in Afghanistan since 1962, or in an asteroid, and haven't listened to Stairway to heaven in your life, well, this is, Stairway to heaven.

Next, let's address this "giving proper credit" issue.

As I wrote in my post last year, theoritical music is both easy and incredible hard at the same time. There is only a finite amount of notes and the odds of two pieces sharing a few notes in their structure, is quite fair, meaning, it can happen every now and then.

The issue Spirit's lawyer is bringing here is not that Stairway to heaven sounds similar to Taurus. It's the fact that Taurus may have served as inspiration to write Stairway, and there was no acknowledgement of this by Zepellin. Let's take the following example:

Seven years ago, Madonna asked ABBA for permission to use the main theme of one of their songs. The song was 'Gimme, gimme, gimme'

... and the song Madonna wrote and eventually launched as a single, became Hung up

They both sound alike right? Well, of course they do! The main theme for both songs is the same!

Thing is, Madonna gave credits to ABBA as writers, as you can see here. So nothing's wrong in that case, because ABBA receives royalties and cultural acknowledgement that they were co-writers of Hung up.

Now, the case with Spirit and Zepellin is that well, a point can be made by Plant, Page and Jones, who declared earlier this past week that "their memories on the 60s and 70s were vague" (which kind of makes sense considering the amount of heroin and alcohol they did back then), and therefore, a case can be made by the fact that Stairway and Taurus sound the same simply because it is coincidence.

In the late 90s, American rock band Nerf Heder were also accused of stealing the main riff of a German pop song called 'Codo' written by German band D.O.F. Nerf Heder not only pleaded ignorance, but claimed that the fact that their song sounded like Codo, was simply, merely and entirely coincidental, and also, they had no idea the German band D.O.F. even existed! You probably haven't heard of Nerf Heder, but just click on the video and you'll get the picture. Check it out:

...and this is D.O.F.'s Codo, written sometime in the early 80s

Perhaps the most famous case of plagiarism in music is the one that involved The Rolling Stones suing The Verve, for "taking just four bars" of an early unknown hit-song written by the Stones called 'Last time'.

... which The Verve stole in the mid 90s and turn it into, well... if you do not know what song I'm talking about, you may have to reconsider your life. In that case, The Verve pleaded ignorance and got punished badly by it. Court sentenced and granted 50% sharing writing credits to the Stones and 100% royalties to the Stones. Keith Richards summed it all up better than anyone: "If the Verve can write a better song, they can keep the money." 15 years later, they haven't been able to write anything better than Bittersweet symphony.

So where does all of this take us regarding the Zepellin-Spirit issue?

In my opinion, there is no question that Stairway's intro sounds VERY similar to Taurus. It doesn't sound 100% exactly the same, but I would say there is about an 80% similarity between them. Being completely technical, both songs begin with an A minor bassline picking, that progresses descending a semitone for each beat all the way to D. Thing is, the baseline in both, acts as the main theme for the song.

Now, does this mean Zepellin actually stole Spirit's Taurus to write Stairway?

Well here's the thing: Zepellin members can plead ignorance and swear it is just a plain coincidence, like Nerf Heder did with D.O.F. An undeniable truth that every respectable musician (including myself) knows, is that an A minor descending bassline as a main theme for a song, is a very common musical structure in rock and even in pop. But that's not the only aspect where Stairway and Taurus are similar.

The phrasing -meaning, the way the guitar strings are played throught the descending progression- is 95% similar. Make no mistake on that.

The beating -meaning, the tempo in which the phrasing is played- is... 100% similar. Make no mistake on that.

And then, there's the KO punch.

Nerf Heder can claim ignorance on D.O.F. and can kind of get away with it. I mean, what are the chances of a teen pop punk band from Santa Barbara, California, knowing about a German pop band from the the 80s? I'm not going to say really low, but they're definitely not very high either. It's a 50-50 shot in my opinion.

But, can Zepellin claim they had no idea of the existence of Spirit? I mean, after all, why would a British rock band care about an American rock band, especially at the peak of British Invasion phenomena!?

Well, thing is... Led Zepellin not only KNEW about the existence of Spirit, they actually TOURED with them in their early unknown years, in which Spirit were more famous than Zepellin !!! And yes, Spirit played Taurus several times during these tours with Zepellin. So there goes your chance of pleading ignorance. Also, let's not forget Zepellin has already been found guilty of plagiarizing 'Dazed and confused' from Jake Holmes...

...and turn it into Dazed and Confused

In my opinion, Zepellin is guilty of at least, subconsciously plagiarizing Spirit.

But, considering Zepellin has already a previous case on plagiarizing, and the fact that they toured with Spirit in their early years, they are guilty of plagiarizing Taurus and turning it into Stairway to heaven.

Cheers!

H

(Here's my previous blog on the same matter)