For no real reason, I'm taking today off. When I told Jenny that I was doing this, she looked at me kind of funny and asked me, "What did you do with Terrence?" Jenny has known me for a long time and knows it isn't too often that I actually take time off. It is especially rare when I decide to take a day off for no reason.
But there really is no reason. It was true for a long time that I never took days off work, but that has lessened as I have gotten older and my time has become more valuable to me. When I was young and single, work was everything. While work is certainly still very important, I'm putting more emphasis on a work-life balance. Not a lot more emphasis, but some :)
Even when I was at Microsoft, I took some days off. I even went so far as to take three consecutive days off once to take a much needed trip with the girlfriend. And now, when I probably need vacation even more than when I was at Microsoft, I am going to take some time off to go hang out at the beach. This has me thinking about how much my life has changed over the years. Back in the days I worked with Jenny at our previous employer, I didn't even know what work life balance was. It was all work. I would work 70 or 80 hour weeks, go home, and then work some more. I didn't really have a life, so work kind of filled a void there. That wasn't to say I wasn't happy, I was, but it's amazing to me how much my priorities have shifted. I probably work 50 hour weeks on average, and rarely go over that. Only occasionally will I work more than an hour when I get home.
So I'm off to somewhere in the direction of a beach. Don't have a lot of plans, that would almost be too crazy for me, and knowing me I'll still be checking work e-mail via my blackberry, but at least I won't be in the office.
Friday, July 18, 2008
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Ignoring Your Paycheck
I get paid twice a month, on the 15th and on the last day of the month. That would make today payday. As I was sitting at my computer today, I said out loud, "Oh, today is payday. I almost forgot".
My coworker looked at me and said, "There is clearly a man that doesn't live paycheck to paycheck." Of course, he is right.
I certainly understand this is a luxury that many might not have. It's hard enough in this day and age to save any money let alone enough where you can almost completely forget that it is payday. However, I tend to think most people have a lot more fat in their budget than they realize. So I tend to think that if more people tried, they could eventually not end up living paycheck to paycheck. The key is to break it up.
To not live paycheck to paycheck, you probably have to have six months of living expenses. This is the standard amount that almost any financial advisor would give you to say that you are financially sound. It is a hard goal to manage, but it is very doable. The key part of that is not the money you save, but it is the money you spend.
Six months of living expenses is much easier to manage if you cut down your living expenses. If you can cut your living expenses from say $1500 a month to $1000 a month, that equates to $3000 less you have to save every month. Now that's a big difference. I have helped others do this by simply making them list out what they spend in a month, and then asking them a simple question, "Would you rather continue to struggle and worry about your finances day in and day out and have that latte, or would you rather sleep better at night?" (both from being financially secure and having less caffeine) The answer should be obvious.
For me, saving six months of living expenses has never been hard, and it isn't because I made a lot of money or lived in a cheap area. It's becasue I controlled my cost. At no time in my life have I spent more than 70% of my paycheck on my living expenses. This means I'm saving 30% at a minimum. Now that number runs closer to 50% as I make more money, and I keep my standard of living relatively flat. Think its impossible? It isn't. When I first graduated college, I made less than $50,000 a year. While that may seem like a lot to some people, try living on that in New York City. Now try saving money. Not so easy. My paycheck came out to roughly $1600. I got this twice a month. Keep in mind this is a NET number after taxes as well as whatever I put away in my 401K (which should never be considered as part of your pay. You should just do it and forget it. Learn to budget without this money) My goal was then, and is now, to only have to spend one of these paychecks on my living expenses.
Out of college, I shared a two bedroom apartment with two other people. Our apartment was $3400 a month. My share of it came out to a little more than $1100. So how the heck do you live on $500 a month in NYC? Well to be fair, I did cheat a little. I was a consultant so I travelled a lot which means I also got a small living stipend for each day I was gone. This would more than cover any meal I had (I ate cheap) as well as any incidentals. In fact, I got to save most of the money. But even without this, I could have made it. I had no car so no insurace or gas cost. I limited my going out and my cab rides. I didn't go to a lot of shows or movies or buy things I didn't need.
Before I left NYC, I had a nice little cushion. More than enough to cover my move back to L.A, which I had to pay for myself, as well as all the other setup cost I had to incur like security deposits, setup fees, etc. Not once did I have to go into debt despite the sudden large expenditures I had to make. Why, because I told myself I would never have to be one of those people staring at the calendar wondering when the next Paycheck was going to come.
In this case ignorance really is bliss.
My coworker looked at me and said, "There is clearly a man that doesn't live paycheck to paycheck." Of course, he is right.
I certainly understand this is a luxury that many might not have. It's hard enough in this day and age to save any money let alone enough where you can almost completely forget that it is payday. However, I tend to think most people have a lot more fat in their budget than they realize. So I tend to think that if more people tried, they could eventually not end up living paycheck to paycheck. The key is to break it up.
To not live paycheck to paycheck, you probably have to have six months of living expenses. This is the standard amount that almost any financial advisor would give you to say that you are financially sound. It is a hard goal to manage, but it is very doable. The key part of that is not the money you save, but it is the money you spend.
Six months of living expenses is much easier to manage if you cut down your living expenses. If you can cut your living expenses from say $1500 a month to $1000 a month, that equates to $3000 less you have to save every month. Now that's a big difference. I have helped others do this by simply making them list out what they spend in a month, and then asking them a simple question, "Would you rather continue to struggle and worry about your finances day in and day out and have that latte, or would you rather sleep better at night?" (both from being financially secure and having less caffeine) The answer should be obvious.
For me, saving six months of living expenses has never been hard, and it isn't because I made a lot of money or lived in a cheap area. It's becasue I controlled my cost. At no time in my life have I spent more than 70% of my paycheck on my living expenses. This means I'm saving 30% at a minimum. Now that number runs closer to 50% as I make more money, and I keep my standard of living relatively flat. Think its impossible? It isn't. When I first graduated college, I made less than $50,000 a year. While that may seem like a lot to some people, try living on that in New York City. Now try saving money. Not so easy. My paycheck came out to roughly $1600. I got this twice a month. Keep in mind this is a NET number after taxes as well as whatever I put away in my 401K (which should never be considered as part of your pay. You should just do it and forget it. Learn to budget without this money) My goal was then, and is now, to only have to spend one of these paychecks on my living expenses.
Out of college, I shared a two bedroom apartment with two other people. Our apartment was $3400 a month. My share of it came out to a little more than $1100. So how the heck do you live on $500 a month in NYC? Well to be fair, I did cheat a little. I was a consultant so I travelled a lot which means I also got a small living stipend for each day I was gone. This would more than cover any meal I had (I ate cheap) as well as any incidentals. In fact, I got to save most of the money. But even without this, I could have made it. I had no car so no insurace or gas cost. I limited my going out and my cab rides. I didn't go to a lot of shows or movies or buy things I didn't need.
Before I left NYC, I had a nice little cushion. More than enough to cover my move back to L.A, which I had to pay for myself, as well as all the other setup cost I had to incur like security deposits, setup fees, etc. Not once did I have to go into debt despite the sudden large expenditures I had to make. Why, because I told myself I would never have to be one of those people staring at the calendar wondering when the next Paycheck was going to come.
In this case ignorance really is bliss.
Monday, July 14, 2008
What I'm Doing in the Awful Market
The market is down almost 20% over the last few months, signaling that we are indeed in a bear market. So what to do from here?For me, I'm well positioned. I've actually taken my lumps like a lot of people, some of them far far worse than the market, but I'm in relatively good position because I've maintained a large position in cash. In fact, I'm about 70% cash right now and have been for a long time. As the market crashes around me, I'm going to update my shopping list (which I haven't done in a while) and start to look for things to buy. So what are my thoughts right now?
- Financials are cheap, but going cheaper - I really want to buy some banks right now, and probably will soon. Nobody wants to own them right now, and that's the best time to own them. People are running away from the financials because of problems faced at Indy Mac, and Frannie and Freddie. I'm not one to try and pick a bottom, so i'll start looking at which ones I want to own soon. Two of the banks I have my eye on are US Bancorp and Wells Fargo. I might also get into some of the brokers like Goldman Sachs. But like I said, the financials are going cheaper from here so if you can't take the pain short term, avoid.
- Oil is up, and going higher - People keep waiting for the bottom to drop out of oil. I'm not one of them. I for one think that the high price of oil is here to stay for the foreseeable future. I believe that worldwide demand is going to remain high and if the oil producing countries could bring down the price of oil right now, they would. I still think some of the better oil names have a ways to go like Schlumberger or Conoco Phillips (which I own)
- Short the market, just get ready for the bounce - I think the market could easily go down another 20% from here. That being said, it won't go down forever, so be ready for a quick bounce back up. I would just hedge my bets. If I start buying a tech company or two, I would probably short the Nasdaq (QID). This way, you hedge against the market doing anything crazy.
- Buy high quality names - I still like a lot of the bigger names. I am still loving Johnson and Johnson. They announce earnings tomorrow and I think they will do well there. Even if they don't, I still like their long term prospects. This is the best time to pick up some of the best names because they are so cheap.
I've sat on the sidelines for a while, and avoided much of the pain that a lot of traders have faced. But things are starting to look interesting, so I may decided to jump back in soon.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Managing with No Authority
One of the most difficult things about my job is the fact that I have to manage people when I have no authority over them. As a Program Manager, I have all the responsibility yet none of the authority. If something goes wrong, I have to find a way to get it done despite the fact that I can't in reality order anybody to do anything. So how do I get this done?
Well it isn't easy. It's something that I've learned to do over time but still don't have quite right. This can be the most frustrating thing about my job and without the right strategy and mindset, it probably will drive a person crazy. But here is my approach to things.
Well it isn't easy. It's something that I've learned to do over time but still don't have quite right. This can be the most frustrating thing about my job and without the right strategy and mindset, it probably will drive a person crazy. But here is my approach to things.
- Be Confident - You would be surprised how far this will get you. If you seem to know what you are talking about, a lot of other people will believe you and do what you say. If you are unsure about what to do next, others will be to and they will find a reason
- Have your facts - It's hard to argue facts. So you have to know what you are talking about and you have to know it before the other guy does. If you are trying to convince someone to do something, and you don't have any facts to back up what you want them to do, good luck making a convincing argument
- Know what battles to fight - You only can fight so many battles. Most of the time, you will discover that 80% of the time, it doesn't really matter what decision gets made. It only matters that one does get made. Therefore, leave you big guns to the fights that need to be fought and don't waste your ammo on things that just don't matter
- Know when to ask for help - There are times that you just can't get the right thing done. That's when you call in the cavalry. You and the person you need to convince probably have someone above you who is in charge of both of you. If you know the battle is worth fighting (and you should after #3) and you know you are right (and you should be after #2) then you need to escalate. There is no shame in fighting the good fight and then calling for help when you need it. Just don't make it a habit.
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
Who is "The Man"?
I was having a conversation with a coworker today about "The Man". No not any man, "THE" man. You know, the one we all work for and who is holding us all down. We were discussing it, and both complaining about how hard we had to work today because of the man. But then it got me thinking, would I be considered, "The Man".
I'm not sure. I certainly don't feel like The Man. I don't feel like I'm opressing anybody or keeping anybody down. So I searched wikipedia for an answer and this was their definition of The Man.
"The Man" refers to the someone or some group that has higher authority, such as, but not limited to, the government, leaders of large corporations, and other authority figures in general, such as the police. The Man is colloquially defined as the figurative person who controls our world. The Man is also often used as a symbol of racial oppression, as well as the boss of a blue-collar worker, and the enemy of any counterculture.
Given this definition, I think I'm running dangerously close to the line. I definitely don't feel in control of the world, but at work I'm definitely an authority figure. And while my company isn't a large corporation yet, it certainly isn't small. So I think for now, I'm probably safely out of The Man status. While it is certainly hard to quantify, my whole life is trying to make sense out of the nonsensical so let me give it a try. I am definitely not the man. My company is a little small, slightly over 200 people, and I'm not quite important enough yet to be considered in this category. I probably make enough to be close to Man status, and I wield influence over quite a few people, but I'm not quite there yet.
In my book, The Man is
Where do you think the line is? Do you have to work for a certain size company and be in charge of a certain number of people? Do you have to make a certain amount of money? Will you all still be my friend even if I do become The Man?
I'm not sure. I certainly don't feel like The Man. I don't feel like I'm opressing anybody or keeping anybody down. So I searched wikipedia for an answer and this was their definition of The Man.
"The Man" refers to the someone or some group that has higher authority, such as, but not limited to, the government, leaders of large corporations, and other authority figures in general, such as the police. The Man is colloquially defined as the figurative person who controls our world. The Man is also often used as a symbol of racial oppression, as well as the boss of a blue-collar worker, and the enemy of any counterculture.
Given this definition, I think I'm running dangerously close to the line. I definitely don't feel in control of the world, but at work I'm definitely an authority figure. And while my company isn't a large corporation yet, it certainly isn't small. So I think for now, I'm probably safely out of The Man status. While it is certainly hard to quantify, my whole life is trying to make sense out of the nonsensical so let me give it a try. I am definitely not the man. My company is a little small, slightly over 200 people, and I'm not quite important enough yet to be considered in this category. I probably make enough to be close to Man status, and I wield influence over quite a few people, but I'm not quite there yet.
In my book, The Man is
- VP level or higher of a Fortune 1000 company
- Elected government official at the state or higher level
- Anybody with a net worth greater than $5 million
Where do you think the line is? Do you have to work for a certain size company and be in charge of a certain number of people? Do you have to make a certain amount of money? Will you all still be my friend even if I do become The Man?
Sunday, July 6, 2008
Panasonic 50PZ800u Review - The Good
So I've had my Panasonic 50PZ800u
for a little bit over a month. I am going to write up my review in two parts. The first part will be all the things I love about my new TV. The second part will be all the things that annoy me about the TV.Let me start off by saying that I love this TV. I am extremely happy with my purchase and I don't think I could have bought a better TV for myself. I had a big party last night for the Fourth of July, and had a lot of people over watching lots of different source material and everyone really enjoyed it. We watched a few different things. We watched Ratatouille, National Treasure, and Planet Earth all in HD, and the picture looked fantastic. I think it even convinced one of my friends that it was time to buy a new TV.
My setup is not extraordinary. I don't yet have a stereo system hooked up to it, so I'm using the TV's onboard speakers. They actually sound pretty good and I can't really complain about them. I have a Wii and a Standard DVD player hooked up over component cables, a MediaCenter PC and the DirecTV box hooked up over HDMI, and an old Xbox hooked up over the Composite connections. On to my review.
Picture Quality - Admittedly, this is my first HDTV. The step up from regular TV is gigantic so if you haven't had a HDTV yet, you won't be disappointed with this as your first one. That being said, I've seen a lot of my friends' TVs and I think mine stack up well against all of them. It's hard to really compare TVs without a side to side comparison, so I won't even try it, but all I can say is that I'm very happy with the set. The movies I have seen are all fantastic. You watch Planet Earth on this thing and it is unbelievable the detail that you can see and how great the picture looks. If you are like me, and watch a lot of sports, you won't be disappointed. I watched the NBA finals on this TV and was just watching the Wimbledon Finals right now. The experience was fantastic.
All of the sources I have on the TV look good. The connection to the computer the, DirectTV feed, and the OTA antenna, being the only true HD sources I have, look fantastic. The Wii and the non upconverting DVD player look good but obviously not as sharp as the HD sources.
People like to break down this category into things like black levels, color accuracy, etc. I say that's rubbish. Judge with your own eyes and taste. All I can say is that for me, and pretty much everyone else who has watched the TV, this TV will suit you no matter what your taste may actually be.
Price and Shopping Experience - I bought my TV from Amazon. Like most would be, I was a little nervous about buying such a high price item online. However, when I was only paying about $2280 for this TV with delivery included, it was too good of a deal to pass up. Considering that the step down version of this TV, the 50PZ85U retails for $2300, and this is a significantly better TV than that, then it was a no brainer for me to go to Amazon. The delivery was when it said it would be, albeit slower than I would have liked. But it was delivered safe and sound and with no problems whatsoever. If I had to do it all over again, i wouldn't hesitate to buy my next TV through Amazon.
THX Setting - This is the big feature that accounts for the price difference between the 85u and the 800u. Is it worth it? Hell Yeah! This is the setting I watch most of my programming in. The colors look realistic. Some could say that it looks a little duller, and it wouldn't be totally inaccurate. The colors are not over-saturated, and a lot of people like the over-saturated look. My girlfriend for one. But I love the look of THX. It makes colors look like Colors are supposed to.
Design - I know not a lot of people care about this aspect of their TV since they just want something that will produce a good looking picture, and not necessarily look good in a picture. However, I have a girlfriend who has dreams of being a designer. And so it is important that the TV looks as good as the pictures it can produce. I thing this TV looks great on or off. The "one sheet of glass" design is nothing to get too hyped up about, especially since they put on a plastic bezel around the edge. But it still looks fantastic and one never even notices the bezel. The girlfriend couldn't stand the fat lip under the 85U, so she almost made me get the 800 on this fact alone.
So overall, on a scale of one to ten, I give it a 9. No TV is perfect, and I have a few problems with some things, but I'll get to those in my next post. Overall a great TV, and if you are willing to spend the cash, it seriously is the best bang for your buck.
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
When Interviewing, Interview the Interviewer!
As a manager in my company, I have to do a lot of interviews. It surprises me how often I interview people who don't have much idea about how to get through even the simplest of interviews. Now in defense of some of these candidates, I often see people for junior positions. Many of these people are either freshly out of college or on their second job. But even then, it still is surprising how some people perform.
Probably most common mistake I see in people consistently make is to not engage with the interviewer. People naturally like people they can have a good conversation with. If you are answering questions too succinctly it can be a problem. I was on an interview the other day where I was basically trying to guide the candidate down a certain path. This candidate was answering my questions, but they were not doing much more than that. I was hoping to have a dialog with the person to delve deeper into their background and skill set, but it was almost impossible without me doing all the talking. I even went so far as to asking a purposefully vague question in hopes this person would ask me to clarify. It is a technique I like to use to see how people deal with ambiguity and how good they are at asking meaningful questions. No such luck. The person just answered the question.
So my advice is simple. It just involves
So don't be shy. You would be surprised how often interviewers wouldn't mind a helping hand for themselves when trying to get through an interview.
Probably most common mistake I see in people consistently make is to not engage with the interviewer. People naturally like people they can have a good conversation with. If you are answering questions too succinctly it can be a problem. I was on an interview the other day where I was basically trying to guide the candidate down a certain path. This candidate was answering my questions, but they were not doing much more than that. I was hoping to have a dialog with the person to delve deeper into their background and skill set, but it was almost impossible without me doing all the talking. I even went so far as to asking a purposefully vague question in hopes this person would ask me to clarify. It is a technique I like to use to see how people deal with ambiguity and how good they are at asking meaningful questions. No such luck. The person just answered the question.
So my advice is simple. It just involves
- Asking lots of questions - If you are asked a question, ask a question right back. There are no perfect interview questions. Almost everything in life can be clarified. I like it when people are confused about my question. It shows they are paying attention and that they are being thoughtful about their response.
- Talk and be verbose - Don't go overboard with this one but remember that this is a conversation. You should probably be talking as much as the interviewer. There are times I have gotten the interviewer talking more than myself by asking the right question. More often than not, I do well in those interviews.
So don't be shy. You would be surprised how often interviewers wouldn't mind a helping hand for themselves when trying to get through an interview.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)