So, I was in Cambridge, MA last week and parked in a public lot while attending the TechStars Boston Mentor Dinner (really great group, BTW).  I searched the 10,000 little signs around the lot to find out if I needed to fill a meter somewhere and felt fairly secure that I didn’t when I found an obscured sign that stated that sacrifices to the parking lot gods were not required after 6pm – it was 5:58.

Imagine my dismay then, when I came back to my car later that evening to find this parking ticket on the car.  Not because I neglected to fill a meter, but because I backed into a parking space (see arrows).  I suppose I can dream of reasons why this is a rule, most of them having to do with bad drivers, but I can’t think of any logical reason why this should be a problem (Massachusetts requires front license plates, so that’s not it).

I had to hunt around the parking lot to find the small sign that told parkers that they had to park “head on” only.  It was there, but it wasn’t obvious.  It was posted and I was, therefore, wrong.  I just think it’s absurd – both the rule and the poor posting of it.

Anyone know why this type of parking restriction is mandated?

I’m a car guy.  I’ve owned many cars and have driven dozens that I haven’t had the opportunity to own (yet).  Hands down, my all time favorite car was my new, at the time, 1984 Camaro Z28 HO (High Output).  An 80s example of the classic American muscle car.  It had a clutch pedal that took Schwarzeneggerian strength to depress and a shifter with a softball-size shift knob and a throw worthy of a shot-putter or, as it was aptly often nicknamed, a rock-crusher.  It could leave rubber in third gear and could get going from a dead stop in fifth.  It didn’t actually require a steering wheel – there was so much oversteer that one’s right foot did the job in most cases.  Man, I loved that car.

If you’re a car-as-transportation kinda person or believe that automobiles are all about getting from point A to point B, you may not understand this, but the sheer enjoyment of driving any vehicle is greatly about time and place.  Much of what I cherished about that car had to do with the fact that I was in my early twenties, unattached (other than to work) and relatively reckless – on the road, anyway.  Did I mention how much I loved that car?

At the time, the Z28 HO carried a Chevy small block – a classic, smallish 305 cubic inch one, although referred to as a 5.0 liter motor so Chevy could seem more European – that generated an anemic 190 horsepower with torque in the low 200 ft-lb range I’d expect, although I don’t recall precisely.  It drank fuel faster than the Exxon Valdez leaked oil.  I recall getting about 13 mpg.  Of course, it’s not like I drove with conservation in mind.  Oh, BTW, I paid about $19K for the car when new.

Unless you’ve had your head in the sand, you know that a new generation of muscle cars has arrived from the Big 3 Detroit-based auto companies [note: if you’re reading this long after it was written, there may be a smaller number].  Ford has its Mustang, Dodge has its Challenger and Chevrolet once again has its Camaro.  Of course, each of these vehicles comes in a V-8 version that, to quote Car and Driver Magazine, “reduce tires to a gray haze that hangs on the horizon like a thousand dirty sweatpants.”  They are, after all, American muscle cars.  Unlike the original muscle car days, though, these cars are also all available outfitted with V-6s.  Lest you scoff at the idea of dropping only six cylinders into the engine bay of a muscle car, read on.  There is interesting news here.  At least from The General.

The Camaro LS/LT sports a 3.6L (I guess the metric system won out after all) V-6 that generates 304 hp and 273 ft-lb of torque.  It goes from 0-60 in 5.9 seconds, pulls 0.87 g on the skidpad and is rated by the EPA to frugally travel 29 highway and 23 combined city/highway miles on a single gallon of refined dinosaur remains.  This not only kicks the ass of my favorite vehicle of all time using two fewer cylinders, it beats the original 1960s era Camaro SS with its huge 396 cu in engine to 60 mph by 0.7 seconds while riding in more comfort and safety.  The icing on this automotive cake is that the car starts at less than $23K.  In 25 years, that not much of a bump.

While the bashing of American car companies is certainly in vogue and pissing on GM, in particular, is the stuff of headlines, it’s great to see cars like this fighting back in showrooms and on the streets.  There are many who will say that the Prius is now rated at 50 mpg and that any car that gets lower mileage than that should be banned from the streets.  Those people are welcome to buy all the Priuses that Toyota can produce.  I look at the advent of cars like this – cars that address our emotional desires as well as our economical ones – as a huge advance for the auto industry and a monster opportunity for the auto buying public.  Who knows, maybe my new favorite car is coming soon.

Here in New England, the mercury in thermometers is reaching renewed heights and the great winter cleanup is taking place.  Seeing people poking at the ground with various forms of pointy sticks made me think of this haiku.

Winter turns to Spring.

Trading snow shovels for rakes,

man urges life back.

Special thanks to my editor, teacher and thesaurus, Dave.

My son and I once again visited the Big Apple to see what the remaining industrial might of the automotive world has to offer.  Since between the two of us, we read almost every English language car magazine published and cruise virtually all the automotive blogs that Google can dig up, there are hardly any surprises at the the show.  Seeing real sheet metal, though, is an experience hard to match in two dimensions.  The touch of seat fabric or dashboard material can tell you more about a car than 2,000 words of text any day.

The first thing that hit us as we entered the show was its size – in terms of manufacturers, vehicles and show visitors.  Maybe slightly smaller than previous years, but pretty close – at least the day we were there.  Almost all manufacturers that sell cars in the US were represented, with the notable exception of Ferrari, Maserati and Tesla (I only mention Tesla because Fisker was there – more on that later).

Themes are easy to spot at any of these shows.  Obviously, these are derived from the perception that the auto manufacturers have of what will sell.  This year, unsurprisingly, green was big, but so were muscle cars, some strange looks and performance cars.

In the green space, almost everyone was touting the higher mileage of their cars.  The usual suspects were involved, of course, and the big hybrid smackdown between the Honda Insight and Toyota’s updated Prius were on full display.

I think they’re both hideous, but it’s great to see Honda seriously entering the fray and keeping Toyota in line when it comes to prices and style – well, just forget I mentioned style.

Fisker Automotive was at the show as well showing off its fabulous Karma in sedan and convertible versions.  Both are plug-in hybrids that cruise for their first 50 miles or so on electricity only.  I don’t know if they’re gonna work, but they are gorgeous.

As usual, the American manufacturers seem virtually ignored in this space, even though they have loads of hybrids and high mileage cars.  The Ford Fusion, for example, is much bigger than the Honda and Toyota and gets 41mpg.

GM’s Chevrolet Volt was not getting as much attention as it has in the past.  Perhaps because GM has been announcing it since the end of WWII.  It’s still a terrific car, though, and will be a tremendous breakthrough when it is finally delivered next year. 

Even more interesting to me is the Volt’s cousin, the Cadillac Converj.  While still a concept car, it certainly is a looker.  I think it could be a real attention-getter for GM if they can afford to build it.

Another trend that is emerging quickly is boxy cars.  As far as I can tell, Honda was way out in front of everyone when it started selling the Element a few years ago.  Now, there are loads of these boxes cruising the streets and many more to come.  Here are a few new ones.  All relatively low price, highly customizable and surprisingly large inside.

As always, there are a few cars on the show floor that make us scratch our heads.  To this [these] vehicles, my son and I award the Pontiac Aztek medal of honor.  My son and I both agree that the GMC Terrain was a top vote-getter for the prize this year.  I can’t imagine what GM was thinking when they applied the fender flares and bumpers to this thing.

My son disagrees with me, but I believe that the BMW X6 is a close runner up.  Chris Bangle is gone.  Can we blame him for this any more?

The full gallery of pictures can be found here, if you’re interested.

I’ve been toying with the idea of buying a netbook to use as a cross between my iPhone and my desktop.  My trusty Lenovo X60s has filled that role for years, but the combination of my crack-addiction-like need for new technology combined with the allure of a netbook’s lighter weight has been my siren song for the new platform. Not that at 3.4lbs (with six-cell battery) the X60s is a heavyweight or anything, but, as everyone knows, you can never be too thin.  Even if you’re a computer.

Since I was planning on putting the beta of Windows 7 on the netbook anyway, last night I took a deep breath, burned down the X60s, reformatted the drive and installed Windows 7 on it just to see what it would be like.  Not only did the conversion go way better than planned, but Windows 7 breathed new life into my trusty steed.  Windows 7 is amazingly stable for a beta and a good deal faster on the machine than Vista Business and XP were.  The new OS consumes fewer resources in general and memory in particular.  Yes, even when taking into account a fresh installation.  Additionally, I like the user interface changes (a lot!) which let you do much more with less real estate – critical on a small laptop.

I was a bit worried about drivers and overall compatibility issues.  I had none.  Windows update downloaded all the Lenovo and X60s-specific drivers I needed.  I only had two issues when all was said and done.

1. A couple of tools I have for poking around the file system didn’t work.  This included a couple of desktop gadgets and a file browser.  I found new gadgets changed for Windows 7 and got around the file browser problem by changing some settings in the respective programs.
2. I had a load of trouble connecting Outlook 2007 to my Exchange Server (2007).  According to my Exchange provider, there are some differences (I can’t imagine why an OS change would mandate these).  Again, after poking around a lot, I was able to get Exchange to work.  If you’re having similar problems, search for how to connect Windows Mobile with Exchange.  Use the same user and password you would use with Windows Mobile.

I’m back to loving my X60s and plan on keeping it until it drops dead.  I have it loaded with applications and data and it still has plenty-o-room to breath.  Sure, I would like it to be about 30% lighter, but I don’t have to be Schwartzenegger to carry it as is.  I think Windows 7 will just get better with it’s release later this year, too.  There’s probably a zillion lines of debugging code in this version that will be removed for the final release.  That alone should make it even faster.

Since some Apple fanboi is going to flame in the comments about how all the good UI stuff in Windows 7 was stolen from OSX, let me say up front, you’re probably, mostly right.  Although, not completely.  Personally, I’ll take openess and thus, broad application availability over locked-down any day, even at the expense of some quirks and a less-than-optimal UI – it’s the American way.  ‘Nuff said.

Power Play by Joseph Finder – I came across Power Play while cruising through some thrillers at a book store.  Having read Finder’s Paranoia a few years ago and remembering how much I enjoyed it, I picked it up and consumed it quickly.  A very fun and fast read.  I guess it would be called a corporate thriller, sorta like how Grisham’s books are legal thrillers.  I really like how Finder uses an otherwise unassuming and humble (yet cool) hero to figure things out and save the day.  The ending is a little anticlimactic, but overall, very enjoyable.

The Yankee Years by Joe Torre and Tom Verducci – If you’re a fan of baseball, you’ll love this book.  It’s more like an expose than anything else.  If you were involved with the Yankees and you’re name doesn’t rhyme with Jereck Deter (or isn’t Jorge Pasada, Andy Pettite, Mariano Rivera or Bernie Williams), Joe’s got something . . . interesting . . . to say about you.  Very thoughtful stuff about steroids and even more interesting material on changing attitudes in the game.  His commentary on how the rest of the league caught up with the Yankees’ ability to outspend other teams by being smarter is also illuminating (in a Money Ball-ish kinda way).

If, as Bill Parcels says, “you’re only as good as your record,” Torre is among the best ever.  1249 wins over 12 seasons, including 4 World Series Championships.  His teams went to the playoffs every year he was in New York.  Impressive.

The only problem with the book was the amount of time Torre spend describing the 7th game, 12th inning Yankee defeat of the Red Sox in the 2003 ALCS.  Very, very painful.

Why Shi*t Happens: The Science of a Really Bad Day by Peter J. Bentley – Bentley uses the story of someone’s amazingly bad day to walk the reader through a basic how things work of anatomy, physics, medicine, electronics and so forth.  I almost punted on the book because of how basic it initially seemed, but I realized that I was learning at least one thing with each little story the author presented.  In fact, a few were completely enlightening.  You certainly have to be in the right mood to read this and some insatiable curiosity about the world around you is required.  It’s a fun way pf presenting the material, though.

Answering questions posed by the press today, Johan Bruyneel, the team manager of the Astana cycling team of which Lance Armstrong is a member, commented on the impact of Armstrong’s fractured clavicle that happened as a result of a cycling crash this week.

“Whether Armstrong can recover in time to start July’s Tour is not a major concern for Astana team manager Johan Bruyneel, but he’s not so sure about the Giro with the start in Venice just six weeks away.”

I’m feeling very wimpy.

Rain: What a Paperboy Learned About Business by Jeffrey Fox – I had high hopes for this book, a parable about what a young paperboy learns about business and life through his paper delivery travails.  It doesn’t work IMO, at least not for a reasonably knowledgeable adult who say, can balance his own checkbook.  Might be great for an early teen who could use a lesson on why hard work and ingenuity pay off.

The Life and Times of the Thunderbolt Kid: A Memoir by Bill Bryson – Warning: if you read this book in public, you will routinely laugh out loud and draw attention to yourself.  Further, if you have food or liquid in your mouth when reading this book, it will not remain there.  This book is hilarious (Thanks, Ron!).  I imagine it is a crack up for anyone, but if you happened to grow up during the 50s and 60s, memories will stream back into your head and you’ll be laughing about your own experiences as much as with Bryson’s.  If you didn’t grow up during that era, the book will reveal how we got to where we are today comically, but with incredible insight into what underlies who Americans are.  A total blast to read.  Highly recommended.

Coyote Blue by Christopher Moore – I’ve read many Christopher Moore books and have totally enjoyed them all.  This one, an earlier book of his, has the same strange Moore humor found in his other works, but isn’t as captivating.  It took me a long time – about half the book – to warm up to the story.  If you’re an avid Moore reader, it’s certainly worth the time.  If you’re new to his books, though, I’d recommend one of his later works.  My favorites being “You Suck” and “Lamb: The Gospel According to Bill, Christ’s Childhood Pal.”

I’ve been getting involved with more raw startups lately and I’m being reminded daily about the difficulty many teams have in establishing any form of decision-making hierarchy.  “We’re equal partners in this enterprise.”  “We started it together, we’re going to run it together.”  “We both [all] provide equal value so should have equal input.”  Yeah, I think I’ve heard it all and, at times, said and believed it all myself.  Let me try to put it as succinctly as possible . . . it doesn’t work.

Sure, when things are going well and life is good, almost any organizational structure will be somewhat effective.  It’s when the road gets bumpy, which it inevitably does, that the wheels of the multi-headed vehicle come off.  Decision-making is tough when things are tight and as much as you would like to believe that two or more people can reasonably make an informed final decision, a hundred thousand years of human nature stands against you.  This is why, by the way, when you’re out looking for VC funding, investors will simply laugh you out of the room when you say that the partners are co-CEOs.

Just because one person should be chosen as the final arbiter of decisions doesn’t mean that the entire founding team doesn’t remain active in strategy, tactics and corporate philosophy, it simply means that a single person is responsible for ending the conversation and making the decision on which path to take.  There is also no reason for differences in compensation or company ownership, if that’s what you’d like (although I’ve met VCs that get heartburn when this happens).  In the end, it’s simply about a single person being in charge; a go-to person (as viewed from inside the company and outside of it).  In all other ways, the founding team can remain equal.

Far be it from me to plug my own blog posts, but I wrote about this a couple of years ago and I urge you to read about it before throwing yourself into the abyss.

Hope it helps.

This month’s Tennis magazine has an article discussing the fact that tennis players feel their sport should “share” more of its profits (the article uses revenues and profits haphazardly) with its players.  Apparently, tennis players feel like the low man on the totem pole, only taking home 26% of the revenue (not profits, which would result in a substantially higher percentage, one would think) generated by the sport.  The article has a graphic that compares the 26% earned (or won) by tennis players to other team sports (a fair comparison?):

• Baseball players take home 52% of MLB revenue
• Hockey players take home 56% of NHL revenue
• Basketball players take home 57% of NBA revenue
• Football players take home 62% of NFL revenue

[Note: golf is not mentioned, my guess is that it's similar to tennis or even lower]

The article tries to  make a case for greater distribution of revenue, but points out that the primary reason that sports like tennis are on the low end of the revenue-sharing spectrum is that the players aren’t unionized and, therefore, have no collective power.  Of course, being an international sport, it would be difficult to create a worldwide union.  Even in the US, only employees of a company can create a union.  The players are clearly not employees.

The article further points out that to be successful, the top players would have to be a member of such a collective bargaining group.  The top players, who make gobs-o-money have little incentive to give up some of their earnings to make sure the group of players makes more.  Therefore, aside from the legal/structural difficulties, it’d be difficult to imagine how the players themselves would work together to establish a strong bargaining coalition.

Personally, I believe that tennis, like all professional sports are about entertainment and, I think it all works pretty well.  If I thought that competition would get better with more money at stake, I’d be in favor of major changes.  Since it’s pretty damned good right now, I don’t think I’ll be supporting changes any time soon. 

Sorry guys.