Virtual Consulting (Continued)
I posted recently about being invited and signing up at a virtual consulting company.

Today I had my first consultation, and it went quite well. I talked to an analyst at a investment company and we ended up just chatting for an hour about the state of the overall tech market (good) and about several segments and companies in particular. I confirmed some things he has already seen as well as gave him some additional areas to look into.

After the conversation I billed the consulting company, which sent me an email confirmation that payment is in process. I should note they asked for my SS#, so I don't know if they are going to withhold (unlikely) or send me a 1099-MISC next year (more likely). For this reason, I will keep track of certain expenses (internet connection?) to write off against this income so it doesn't get taxed (i.e. I will count this income as outside business income and create a schedule of expenses to write off against it).

In addition, the analyst asked for me to be set up on his permanent "panel of advisors", so he can call me direct again in the future, in which case I will bill the company again. PLUS, the consulting company asked me to put days I can be "on call" in order to increase my call/client volume.

Overall, I would say it has been a very positive experience. I am not going to get rich doing this (my billing rate isn't very high), but it looks like a good way to pull in a few bucks on the side while also creating new business contacts and keeping my mind limber about different aspects of the market.

If you wish to join you can sign up on their web site. There is no guarantee you will be accepted, but if you have an area they are interested in and have some time, this seems like a good idea.

posted by Director_Mitch @ 2:11 PM (Permalink)
|

 
I'm Sure This Is Just a Coincidence
Manufacturing Activity Shows Fastest Growth in Two Decades





Now what I was hearing about Democrats wanting to raise taxes?

posted by Director_Mitch @ 8:58 AM (Permalink)
|

 
An Appropriate Post To Start the New Year
Are you a Blogoholic?

Apparently, not. Here are my results:

44 points is in the 21 through 50 precent
You are a casual weblogger. You only blog when you have nothing better to do, which is not very often. (Comment: Actually this is pretty often considering my current job) There's nothing wrong with that. But if you'd post a little more often, you'd make your readers very happy.

You'd have to be pretty hard-core to score in the top on this thing (Instapundit?).

Hat Tip: Outside the Beltway (link at right)

posted by Director_Mitch @ 2:16 PM (Permalink)
|

 
This Headline Looks Familiar
Iran Says U.S. Aid Won't Help Relations

I think there have been others like it??

June 6, 1944 - France Says Aid Won't Help Relations

September, 1949 - Germany Says Aid Won't Help Relations

October 31, 1956 - Egypt Says Aid Won't Help Relations

May, 1995 - Mexico Says Aid Won't Help Relations

I could Google up a bunch more if I had the time, including every single country in Africa.

posted by Director_Mitch @ 4:36 PM (Permalink)
|

 
A Good, but Distasteful Job Opportunity?
There has been a lot of discussion on the internet about job outsourcing from the U.S. to foreign countries. As I have commented before, I believe companies should be free to allocate resources as they see fit, although I think a lot of the outsourcing mania is one of those business trends that is being overdone in the short term, but will balance itself out in the long term.

However, while I believe companies should do whatever they want in terms of hiring, I personally believe that companies should try to keep jobs in the U.S., if possible. If companies look at the long-term costs, logistics, legal, and other issues, I think they will find that a lot of outsourcing really doesn't make sense.

So the bottom line is that while I personally would avoid offshoring jobs if I were running a company, I think that companies have the right to do so if they want and am not going to hold it against them (similarly, I don't own any guns and wouldn't keep any in my house, but support the platform of the NRA - it's a freedom thing).

So what do I do with THIS job opportunity? (this is one of several bullets describing responsibilities):

Support roll-out of the (foreign country) (job function) team. Provide guidance to the team, including prioritization, and compile justification to grow the (foreign country) (job function) center to meet growing demand.

So the position basically requires this person to be the U.S. advocate of this overseas center. The other aspects of the job fit me extremely well, and it looks like this company would make the position worth my while.

Do I move forward with the opportunity and use it as a way to learn this aspect of business? Do I get into the job and advocate NOT growing the overseas division, more or less acting on my personal conscious? But I would do that only if my analysis showed that outsourcing DIDN'T make sense. If I found out that growing the overseas center IS the right business decision, I would advocate growing it.

At this point I plan to move forward and talk to this company about the opportunity, with the plan - if I end up taking the job - to do an even-handed analysis of the outsourcing issues before "advocating" it, rather than follow the company's predetermined decision to grow it. I figure that someone willing to go in and do an honest analysis is better than someone going in and toeing the company line.

posted by Director_Mitch @ 9:25 AM (Permalink)
|

 
Why I Took Christmas Eve Off
Our company gets two holidays around Christmas, and since Christmas fell on a Thursday, Friday was a holiday and Christmas Eve was a work day.

Now a lot of people would simply sneak away early on Christmas eve - it's not like there is a lot of work to do, customers and vendors are all gone, the phones are silent, and a lot of people have parties and celebrations to go to. Knowing what was coming, I took a vacation day for Christmas Eve, and it was a good thing I did. Here is the ACTUAL TEXT OF THE MEMO that was sent out at my company on Christmas Eve (I have obviously added a few fictional touches).




Hey, he probably thought he was being kind hearted letting people off 2 hours early...

posted by Director_Mitch @ 3:03 PM (Permalink)
|

 
And the Bad Guy Was (and Always is) a CEO
As a continuation of the post-title below, I should note that the "bad guy" in the movie was a CEO of a Big Business. And that got me to thinking: How come bad guys in the movies are nearly always CEOs? Or neo-nazis?

The reason is that these are about the only people Hollywood can make into bad guys without pissing someone off. Even portraying the bad guys as Muslim terrorists is avoided in Hollywood. When True Lies came out, there were all sorts of protests that the movie had Muslims acting as terrorists (since, you know, that NEVER happens). So when the movie Sum of All Fears came out, the movie changed the antagonists from Muslim terrorists (that were in the book) to (white male) neo-nazi terrorists. (White South Africans were fair game during apartheid (Lethal Weapon 2 for example), but Hollywood lost them as bad guys after the fall of that regime).

Another reason is that Hollywood, which tilts decidedly left, HATES business and CEOs anyway, and why not portray the people you hate in a bad light? If you're interested, a whole 50 page dissertation by Larry E. Ribstein at the University of Illinois College of Law looks at this trend from a more scholastic and legal point of view, which is referenced at his blog.

posted by Director_Mitch @ 9:53 AM (Permalink)
|

 
At Least the Protagonist was an Engineer
In is what probably my last December movie review, I will comment briefly on Paycheck, the new Ben Affleck movie which opened at number four this weekend and looks like will sink fast in the theaters.

The movie starts interestingly enough - Affleck is a "reverse engineer" who has the ultimate Non Disclosure Agreement: his memory is wiped every time he finishes a job. Most of his jobs are a few weeks, but he is hired for a job that will last for three years. After he is done and his memory is wiped, the adventure begins.

It's an interesting plot, but some of the details require suspending reality. That in itself is not a problem - that's the point of a lot of movies - but this movie is ruined by "Hollywoodization". I was sucked in for the first 30 minutes but by the time The Big Chase Scene (TM) ensued, the movie had become formulistic. (Why do they always have to have a chase scene? Hasn't everything that CAN be done in a chase been done?)

Two out of Five Stars, or in other words: Rental.

posted by Director_Mitch @ 9:01 AM (Permalink)
|

 
I Beat Instapundit
I noticed that Instapundit linked to this story on bloggers being "self important" on December 27, while I commented on the same link on December 23. Of course, his traffic is a little bit higher than mine, so will get more attention.

Indeed.


posted by Director_Mitch @ 8:27 AM (Permalink)
|

 
Western Stars in Japanese Commercials
During my numerous trips to Japan, one of the things that always amused me (among many others) were seeing major American stars shilling for products, something they would never do in the U.S. (this is the topic of the movie Lost in Translation, which unfortunately I haven't seen yet). I remember seeing Jody Foster's mug all over subway stations, Harrison Ford in beer commercials, and other major stars. In fact, I think I saw more American actors in commercials than Japanese actors (interestingly enough, I HAVE watched Monday Night Football in Japan, and no, they don't translate it into Japanese).

These commercials are produced with the stipulation that they cannot be shown outside Japan, but thanks to the power of the internet, you get see them here.

posted by Director_Mitch @ 8:07 AM (Permalink)
|

 
Get 'em, Kerry!
I think the democrats allowed Dean's lead and mystique get too big before going on the offensive, so this is probably too little, too late: Kerry Unloads on Dean

posted by Director_Mitch @ 7:53 AM (Permalink)
|