The Myth of Black Friday and Holiday Deals Needs to Stop

Have you finished your holiday shopping this year? Did you take advantage of the amazing Black Friday and Cyber Monday deals we have been hearing so much about? Well, according to Wirecutter magazine, 99% of the advertised deals are not much of a deal at all. I happened to see a video of a Houston area Walmart where a brawl erupted between two customers going after a new T.V. How good was this deal they were fighting over? In an article from Forbes magazine, big name retailers like Walmart and Sears inflate regular prices of items in order to advertise larger discounts. One deal listed a Samsung 1080p T.V for a discounted $599.99 down from a regular price of $1,199.99. However, the same exact T.V was listed in their store $807.49 earlier this year.

A similar situation unfolded at Macy’s where the popular Breville toaster was listed for $280 and advertised a major discount down from $417. This same exact appliance was listed on Amazon. Priced at $250, it was not part of a sale but had been listed at that price for months. Does Macy’s think that customers just won’t compare deals? Or are they banking on the fact that their deal will be more appealing at a store which people know for appliances? The truth is they are hoping to get lucky.

Let’s say you saw saw a pair of headphones a relative wanted, and it was listed for 50% off, wouldn’t you jump at it immediately? If the price three weeks ago was $100, the retailer could list the regular price as $200. On Black Friday, you would pay the same price as before. This example may seem like an extreme, but it is not far from the truth in some cases.

Part of what makes these discounts so large is the difference from their “regular” price. I listed regular price in quotations marks because there is no definition to that term.  The Breville toaster from Macy’s never actually sold for $417 but according to Julie Strider Fukami, a spokeswoman for Macy’s, these prices can be determined from “different factors, including the cost of the item, overhead, benefits we offer… as well as our ability to offer the item at a lower price.” “Regular” price functions as whatever the retailer decides it to be.

We are stuck in a sort of tug of war between consumers being deal obsessed and retailers wanting to supply them with deals by any means possible. There needs to be more transparency from retailers on what their regular price actually is. Not a fluffed up ballpark number so customers think they have found the needle-in-the-haystack deal this year.

The Final Spot Goes to... You Guessed it, Ohio State

Who belongs in the 4th spot of the college football playoff?

That was the question under frantic debate up until this morning when the finalists were announced on ESPN. Alabama and Oregon are in due to record and strength of schedule (if Alabama were left out it might be the cause of WWIII). The third slot went to the undefeated Florida State Seminoles. And the tie-breaker of sorts went to Ohio State, which meant TCU and Baylor were left out of the fun, and very upset about it. Why did Ohio St. deserve that spot?  A: they are a storied program; B: they have a massive nationwide following; C: they have a larger student body; and finally D: because thats who is "supposed" to get in because of tradition.

The board who made these decisions evaluated a number of factors, but let’s talk about the three teams in question. Here are the supposed reasons as to why the rankings played out like they did:

Ohio State: 1 loss to Virginia Tech 21-35

Early in their season the Buckeyes lost to Virginia Tech is a surprise upset, but everyone seems to have forgotten that. This weekend Ohio State shutout Wisconsin in a big way with a third string quarterback in the game. Bravo. But lets not forget, if Wisconsin’s Melvin Gordon is stopped (which he was), Wisconsin has no chance.That same Wisconsin team lost to Northwestern, and barely beat Minnesota earlier this year. Yes, their halfback is a Heisman candidate, but they are overrated and most people know it. Therefore the amount of credit given for this win is too much.

TCU: 1 loss to Baylor 58-61

TCU had the third seed going into this weekend and beat Iowa St 55-3 yesterday. This morning they dropped to the sixth ranking. They went from three to six and they almost won by 50 points! In response to the news TCU’s coach Gary Patterson said this today, “If we want to control our own destiny, we need to be undefeated.” I guess so because with their only loss being to their Big 12 co-champion Baylor, and with the beating they put forth this weekend, I am not sure they could have done anything more. They showed amazing growth from a 4-8 season last year.

Baylor: 1 loss to West Virginia 27-41

Baylor was ranked at 5 last week and executed a solid win this week against a ranked Kansas St. team, but it was not enough to push them over the top. One would think they would be arguably as fit as anyone to fill the fourth spot. In addition, they did beat TCU, who was one of the other contenders for the fourth spot. However, Baylor had a very weak non-conference schedule which did not help their case.

The debate between Baylor and TCU is one that shows no clear winner. But it seems logical that one of them would be filling the fourth spot. In the end the committee went with a choice that will bring more national viewers, and a bigger level of hype for a matchup with Alabama. Even though it was what we were all expecting it is still disappointing. If you were hoping this new playoff system would be more fair, then I guess it may not your year.

Why Are Sports Deciding Our Next Governor?

Have you been seeing or hearing lots political ads for this year’s race for Governor? The amount of ads, as well as the campaign dollars spent, have increased by thirty percent. The Center for Public Integrity recorded that this year that an astounding 36,000 ads have aired with $26 million spent on them so far. This data was collected up until September 2014 and only accounted for TV ads that aired. It did not include the cost to create and produce these ads. With a race this tight, candidates are willing to try anything to help receive a few extra votes.

Both competitors have implemented aggressive and frequent advertising plans and jostle for the control of moderate voters. As is customary, endorsements from previous politicians are commonplace e.g., Barrack Obama. In a more recent attempt to swing additional voters, both candidates have used Chicago sports figures to attract positive press. What should be irrelevant could become a deciding factor in this neck in neck race.

Republican candidate Bruce Rauner aired a TV ad last Sunday featuring legendary Chicago Bears coach Mike Ditka. In the scene, he and Rauner were talking inside Ditka's famous restaurant in Chicago. “The Coach” entered politics for a short time as a republican candidate a few years ago, but was not able to make a successful run. Even though the commercial doesn't really cover anything related to politics, Chicago natives could identify with Ditka none the less. Hoping to appeal to Sunday afternoon football watchers, Rauner makes a play to gather votes through the Bear fan base. 

Democratic candidate Pat Quinn took a different route, which I heard this weekend on the radio. He had a 20-30 second ad featuring the coach of the Jackie Robinson South Little League Baseball team. They gained fame from this summer's world series. This team gained popularity from their U.S. victory and close match in the world finals of this year’s tournament. The team’s coach talked about major issues Quinn was concerned about, as well as issues he had dealt with as governor.

Are these just feeble attempts to gain a few extra votes? Are voters so unsophisticated that sports figures have a major influence on their candidate choices? Or does it show we are losing sight of what is important as voters?

How Prevalent is Racism in the Criminal System?

This week I went on a field trip with my American Studies class to see an adaptation of Richard Wright’s Native Son. In the play, Bigger Thomas, a black chauffeur of a rich white family, accidentally kills the daughter of his employer while trying to keep her quiet. Due to racism in the criminal justice system in court, Bigger feels forced to run or most likely be wrongfully tried with the rape and intentional murder of the girl.  

After watching this play I wondered how a modern-day Bigger Thomas would feel after the same event. Would he feel compelled to run, or would he be able to trust our current criminal justice system? There is an overwhelming disproportion of blacks in america’s jails presently, but does this mean that they were all tried as equal?According the Michelle Alexander’s book The New Jim Crow, there are more african americans in jail or on probation now, than there were slaves in 1850, 10 years before the Civil War. After reading this I wanted to find out whether an identical crime committed by a black and white person would yield the same verdict. Putting aside more petty crimes, I research statistics on the death penalty and the results were astounding. In a study conducted in Philadelphia by top researchers on race and capital punishment, it was found that you are almost 4 times more likely to receive the death penalty if you are black. This study was conducted with controls on the severity of the crime as well as the prior history of the criminal. However the conclusion is still very clear, blacks are still much more likely to sentenced to death than other races.

Some argue that social and environmental factors account for these skewed numbers. Statistics like 73% of african american kids are born out of wedlock are used to explain why it is more likely and or logical to commit criminal acts. However, these statistics do not address some of the issues with our current legal system. In all of the nation's counties that still use the death penalty, the Chief District Attorneys are 98% white with only 1% being african american. With this level of racial imbalance the chance of racially motivated sentences is significantly higher. Almost 75 years after Wright’s novel was written, one would think that we have progressed to a point where the trial of a criminal is the same, no matter the color of their skin.

Tipping the Maid: A Forgotten Courtesy or Corporate Penny Pinching?

The last time you stayed in a hotel, did you leave a tip for the maid?  Marriott brand hotels have started leaving tip envelopes for guests in order to encourage tipping for room attendants.  In a partnership with Maria Shriver, founder of A Woman's Nation, Marriott is trying to supplement wages in a job primarily worked by women. While most hotel employees are traditionally been tipped for their services, maids are often left out of this alternative income source.

The discrepancy between tipping one type of hotel employee versus another seems to follow the level of personal connection a guest establishes with the staff. Many people tip desk clerks, doormen, and employees who carry bags. The interaction fosters a personal connection with the customer, making a tip more likely. In the case of maids, hotel guests rarely see them and therefore forget or do not know it is customary to tip the maids.

The median salary of a hotel maid is $19,780 according to the Bureau of Labor Requirements, which equates to $9.51 an hour. This is a slightly higher than minimum wage in most states. Leaving a few dollars behind to help boost that small number is customary to some, ignored by others, and unknown to others still.

The major question hotel guests should ask themselves when considering a tip is this: Who should be responsible for paying the housekeepers? Should this extra pay be coming from your pocket, or is this tipping initiative a corporate ploy to to get you to supplement the meager wage of the maids?  Is it a weak attempt to improve worker morale and employee retention? Marriott employees have gone on strike before. Could this effort be a countermeasure to prevent a future strike? This initiative helps in advancing the cause of low wages for women, but does the burden belong on consumers? Maybe Marriott should just give the housekeeping staff a raise.

American Sniper: Another SEAL Movie Shows Pattern

While online this weekend, I saw a trailer for American Sniper, the upcoming film directed by Clint Eastwood, starring Bradley Cooper. It tells the story of Chris Kyle, arguably the most lethal sniper in U.S military history. He identifies a mother and child in the street carrying what he believes is a grenade. He struggles with the decision to kill or not kill.

The recent trend of movies about Navy Seals shows what the public is looking for in their entertainment, but what else does it reveal about America? There is a wealth of amazing stories across the history of the Navy Seals, but why is it that Hollywood has turned its lenses on this subject now?

The increasing irony for me is the celebration of the gun-wielding warriors, while at home many fight against gun rights due to violence in civilian society. Moreover, the connection between the military glorification and gun violence does not seem coincidental. The picture of the warrior with a gun makes it to the big screen, which might be having some influence on civilians using guns. These people unfortunately also make it to the TV screen, but for the wrong reasons. The correlation between the two is widely recognized, but can it be changed? Is this an un-winnable battle to try and fight against the force of popular entertainment and media?

Is Drone Delivery the Future?

“Hey Mom, What type of bird is that?” “It’s just a delivery drone honey.” An interaction such as this could become commonplace if the FAA agrees to allow and draft rules for delivery drones from companies like Google Inc., Amazon, and DHL.

Amazon was the first to reveal the new technology in the U.S, but competitors were working on their own renditions of the helicopter/drone with package delivering capabilities simultaneously. The same system has been approved for Zookal, a textbook company, in Australia where the system is completely legal. Even a U.K. Dominos branch delivered two pizzas with a drone.

While the idea of drone delivery sounds very promising, a slew of problems also come to mind that would inhibit its' functionality.  The first potential problem, and arguably the most ludicrous, is people shooting drones down to steal packages, similar to a clay pigeon target. Aside from that, more realistic concerns of opportunistic theft and weather come to mind. The idea of a slow moving drone delivering a package could attract the attention of petty thieves nearby. In an interview with drone expert Missy Cummings, it was said that drones would only have a delivery range of 10 miles from a distribution center. They also wouldn’t be able to handle more than a light rain. Unless people live very close to a major city, this service will most likely not be available to them.

The constant push for bigger, better, faster has reached a point where it might not be helpful to improve logistics methods in this way. Until further refined, this innovation might need to slowed down and rethought in order to maximize functionality.

Will Federal College Ratings Be the New Way to Find a School?

Every fall, students around the country look for a college or university that is a fit with their academic interests, activity preferences, and financial means. While searching, many students check college ranking lists done by Time Magazine, Forbes, or U.S News to see which schools are rated highly.

Recently, President Obama introduced an ambitious plan to evaluate and rank schools based on factors such as tuition, graduation rate, student debt, and financial demographics. His goal with this system is to make college more affordable for middle class American families. According to this system, need-based federal grants would be given to students attending the universities with the highest ratings.  This new rating system, in addition to the existing rating systems, leaves an overwhelming amount of information from which student must evaluate. Which lists should students use as their primary decision-making tool? 

The average cost of public colleges and universities is climbing more than double the inflation rate, making it understandable why the Obama Administration wants to help find a solution to making college more accessible. The average student now graduates with more than $26,000 of debt. While at the same time, loan interest rates are not improving.  It’s clear that something needs to change, but I’m not sure this plan is the answer.

After reading more about President Obama’s plan, I began to wonder how the program would achieve its goal of making college more affordable. Would a school be willing to risk disrupting its current business model to reduce costs and receive a higher rating? This is quite a gamble for the schools in need of revenue. By reducing tuition costs, they would actually lose revenue relying on an uncertain and potentially small amount of federal funding. Additionally, this will force the price of private schools to decrease dramatically, which may cause the closing of schools with smaller endowments. Does this plan need modification? Should it be totally scrapped?