Question:

I have a buyer who is paying me by Western Union. The payment has been pending for 9 days! The buyer has even sent me a picture of his credit card statement showing Western Union took payment within a few hours of him requesting the money order. Obviously Im not shipping the goods until I get payment but why is this payment taking so long to approve? Also why has Western Union failed to respond to ANY of the 5 seperate e mails I have sent them about this? Is there a specific problem or are they just useless?? Larry

Response:

I have a buyer who is paying me by Western Union. The payment has been pending for 9 days! The buyer has even sent me a picture of his credit card statement showing Western Union took payment within a few hours of him requesting the money order.

I’m guessing this is AuctionPayments.com, formerly known as BidPay? While nobody seems to have discovered what’s going on, there have been similar reports on this service for the past couple of weeks; it may not be coincidence that they’re changing names right now (meaning they may be changing more than names). Is there a specific problem or are they just useless??

They used to be useful, and one hopes they will be again.  It’s a monumentally stupid way to usher in a newly titled service, that’s for sure. — Deborah Stevenson [eliminate OBSTACLES to email me]

Response:

I have a buyer who is paying me by Western Union. Larry

No he is not. Western Union payment is a sure sign you have been scammed. — Many thanks, Don Lancaster Synergetics   3860 West First Street  Box 809  Thatcher, AZ 85552 Please visit my GURU’s LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com

Response:

I have a buyer who is paying me by Western Union. The payment has been pending for 9 days! <snip Also why has Western Union failed to respond to ANY of the 5 seperate e mails I have sent them about this?

My experience is telephoning is much faster than email for resolving these types of problems, and often there are toll free numbers you can use. There is a list of numbers for various types of help on the right hand side of the webpage at: https://wumt.westernunion.com/asp/orderStatus.asp // Ralph

Response:

I have a buyer who is paying me by Western Union. Larry No he is not. Western Union payment is a sure sign you have been scammed. — Many thanks, Don Lancaster

And getting an answer by Don Lancaster is a sure sign you’ll likely get a wildly bizarre theory not based on fact or even reality.

Response:

I have a buyer who is paying me by Western Union. Larry No he is not. Western Union payment is a sure sign you have been scammed.

Not if you’re getting paid by them. Paying someone with them is another matter.

Response:

I have a buyer who is paying me by Western Union. Larry No he is not. Western Union payment is a sure sign you have been scammed. Not if you’re getting paid by them. Paying someone with them is another matter.

No, there is actually a big Western Union component in some of the scams of electronics sellers.  I’m just not clear if we’re talking Western Union proper or The Service Formerly Known as Bidpay. — Deborah Stevenson [eliminate OBSTACLES to email me]

Response:

Please explain how someone paying you via Western Union is a scam.  If you have the money then you ship the item.  How can they scam you?  I am not trying to disagree with you or imply that you don’t know what you are talking about it’s just that I don’t see where the scam is. I can see how a buyer can get scammed using WU but that same thing can happen if the buyer pays via check or money order as well. Thanks.  I am a new seller and I want to make sure I understand how people can get over on me.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I have a buyer who is paying me by Western Union. Larry No he is not. Western Union payment is a sure sign you have been scammed. — Many thanks, Don Lancaster Synergetics   3860 West First Street  Box 809  Thatcher, AZ 85552 Please visit my GURU’s LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com

Response:

I have a buyer who is paying me by Western Union. The payment has been pending for 9 days! The buyer has even sent me a picture of his credit card statement showing Western Union took payment within a few hours of him requesting the money order. Obviously Im not shipping the goods until I get payment but why is this payment taking so long to approve? Also why has Western Union failed to respond to ANY of the 5 seperate e mails I have sent them about this? Is there a specific problem or are they just useless?? Larry

Larry,      There is a toll free number available, another kindly user gave it to me last week.  I had the same problem, fixed very quickly. Email me for the number if you like.  Danny.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Please explain how someone paying you via Western Union is a scam.  If you have the money then you ship the item.  How can they scam you?  I am not trying to disagree with you or imply that you don’t know what you are talking about it’s just that I don’t see where the scam is. I can see how a buyer can get scammed using WU but that same thing can happen if the buyer pays via check or money order as well. Thanks.  I am a new seller and I want to make sure I understand how people can get over on me. I have a buyer who is paying me by Western Union. Larry No he is not. Western Union payment is a sure sign you have been scammed. — Many thanks, Don Lancaster Synergetics   3860 West First Street  Box 809  Thatcher, AZ 85552 Please visit my GURU’s LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com

There are several red flag words that IMMEDIATELY tell you to RUN away from an eBay transaction. Such as "rumania", "laptop", "plasma", or "western union". — Many thanks, Don Lancaster Synergetics   3860 West First Street  Box 809  Thatcher, AZ 85552 Please visit my GURU’s LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com

Response:

I created a BidPay MO for a seller on Dec 1.  The new Western Union Auction Payments still hasn’t processed.  I’ll bet they’re waiting for new check stock with the new letterhead.  Or they discovered an Enron accounting problem.  AFAIK nothing has been processed for December. As I said before everyone is waiting for their unemployment Christmas present.  I wished they would put something on their website if nothing more "Please be patient". Jim – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I have a buyer who is paying me by Western Union. The payment has been pending for 9 days! The buyer has even sent me a picture of his credit card statement showing Western Union took payment within a few hours of him requesting the money order. Obviously Im not shipping the goods until I get payment but why is this payment taking so long to approve? Also why has Western Union failed to respond to ANY of the 5 seperate e mails I have sent them about this? Is there a specific problem or are they just useless?? Larry

Response:

Thanks.  I am a new seller and I want to make sure I understand how people can get over on me.

I prefer WU, especially on any large-ticket item.  I walk into the supermarket with a number and my ID, I walk out with pictures of Dead Presidents, I pay no discounts or percentages, can’t be charged back, don’t need to worry about a stolen card, can’t have my account frozen by PP, and in general take no more risk than if someone walked in and handed me cash.

Response:

There are several red flag words that IMMEDIATELY tell you to RUN away from an eBay transaction. Such as "rumania", "laptop", "plasma", or "western union".

That’s half right and all wrong. Granted, if a seller in the US claims he can give you a great deal on a plasma TV or laptoy if you wire him money by WU to Romania, then you probably should make a quick stop for some KY jelly, because you’ll be needing it. I’ve taken money from Greece, France, Italy, Latvia, Germany and Russia, all by WU, and cash from Singapore, and never had a bit of trouble with the transactions. The problem is not the WU or the wire, but the way the deal is being structured.  You MUST trust the person the money is being wired to, as my customers trusted me. — Divide by Cucumber Error. Reinstall Universe and reboot  - Hex – Hogfather – Terry Pratchett

Response:

Okay for the record it took 20 days to process the MO.  I guess that was the time it took to move computers to new offices and fire people. Jim – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I created a BidPay MO for a seller on Dec 1.  The new Western Union Auction Payments still hasn’t processed.  I’ll bet they’re waiting for new check stock with the new letterhead.  Or they discovered an Enron accounting problem.  AFAIK nothing has been processed for December. As I said before everyone is waiting for their unemployment Christmas present.  I wished they would put something on their website if nothing more "Please be patient". Jim

Response:

Question:

You can get a lot of free accounting programs at www.medlin.com. You can use them free, but there will be a message printed at the bottom of the page "printed on a trial version." If you want to get rid of that message, then there is a small cost. However, the message does no harm and will not make the program any less effective.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – there is a reason why you can’t find what you’re looking for  - simple double entry accounting can get complicated,  even with excel spreadsheets – ask any accountant! What do you plan to do with it? Well, I have an ridiculously small (and mostly inactive) small business. It’s to keep track of things and make it easier (and therefore cheaper) for my accountant to do the more involved things he does every year.  I think Ill have to do with Excel though, from the looks of it. Mike maybe so but chances are the accountant will take your information and re-do it in quickbooks or peachtree (even if you have just a few transactions and few expenses).  A tax return usually requires it,  –  you should ask your accountant about summarizing revenue or expenses before investing a lot of time in designing an Excel program.

Response:

There’s a pretty nice accounting program called GnuCash, that is mostly based on double-entry accounting, and is free. However, it runs on Mac OS/X or Linux, but not Windows (as far as I know).  They may be working on a Windows version, though. You can find out more at www.gnucash.org if you want. says… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – You can get a lot of free accounting programs at www.medlin.com. You can use them free, but there will be a message printed at the bottom of the page "printed on a trial version." If you want to get rid of that message, then there is a small cost. However, the message does no harm and will not make the program any less effective. there is a reason why you can’t find what you’re looking for  - simple double entry accounting can get complicated,  even with excel spreadsheets – ask any accountant! What do you plan to do with it? Well, I have an ridiculously small (and mostly inactive) small business. It’s to keep track of things and make it easier (and therefore cheaper) for my accountant to do the more involved things he does every year.  I think Ill have to do with Excel though, from the looks of it. Mike maybe so but chances are the accountant will take your information and re-do it in quickbooks or peachtree (even if you have just a few transactions and few expenses).  A tax return usually requires it,  –  you should ask your accountant about summarizing revenue or expenses before investing a lot of time in designing an Excel program.

– Bob Langford,                   Silicon Masters Consulting, Inc. phone:  804-674-1253                          fax:  804-745-7803

Response:

Simply Accounting.. single user.. $49.  Has all you would want.  Use it before QuickBooks Thomas Hill, CHAE, CHTP Controller Balcones Country Club – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Mike, For $25, you can have A-Systems Visual Bookkeeper.  It has the General Ledger, Payroll, Accounts Receivable, and Accounts Payable.  The CD has over 50 sessions of multimedia training (minimovies) a sample company and a Company Setup Wizard.  The tax tables are user definable, so you don’t have to purchase updates every time withholding changes.  The Help files are filled with "pictures" of the screens, not just text explanations.  The Help files are auguably the best in the industry. You can order it for $25 at (800) 365-6790.  By the way, A-Systems has been providing accounting software since 1978.  The software is quick to learn and easy to run.  The $25 package allows unlimited transactions, unlimited employees, employees in all 50 states plus others, and it will not "expire".  It is a basics-only accounting program, but has no limitations. A-Systems will be rolling it out in a national marketing campaign soon.   You can get it now for $25. Good luck, Arnold Hi, I am looking for the cheapest software available that will let me do double-entry accounting, Balance sheets and Income statements.  I’ve been looking on the web, but all I can find are feature-packed mega-accounting sofwtare.  I’d be happy with an Excel spreadsheet that has already been built, but I can’t even find that.   If I can’t find anything, I guess Ill just put my numbers in Excel and be done with it, but there must be some freeware floating around, no? Mike

Response:

Mike, For $25, you can have A-Systems Visual Bookkeeper.  It has the General Ledger, Payroll, Accounts Receivable, and Accounts Payable.  The CD has over 50 sessions of multimedia training (minimovies) a sample company and a Company Setup Wizard.  The tax tables are user definable, so you don’t have to purchase updates every time withholding changes.  The Help files are filled with "pictures" of the screens, not just text explanations.  The Help files are auguably the best in the industry. You can order it for $25 at (800) 365-6790.  By the way, A-Systems has been providing accounting software since 1978.  The software is quick to learn and easy to run.  The $25 package allows unlimited transactions, unlimited employees, employees in all 50 states plus others, and it will not "expire".  It is a basics-only accounting program, but has no limitations. A-Systems will be rolling it out in a national marketing campaign soon.   You can get it now for $25. Good luck, Arnold – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi, I am looking for the cheapest software available that will let me do double-entry accounting, Balance sheets and Income statements.  I’ve been looking on the web, but all I can find are feature-packed mega-accounting sofwtare.  I’d be happy with an Excel spreadsheet that has already been built, but I can’t even find that.   If I can’t find anything, I guess Ill just put my numbers in Excel and be done with it, but there must be some freeware floating around, no? Mike

Response:

there is a reason why you can’t find what you’re looking for  - simple double entry accounting can get complicated,  even with excel spreadsheets – ask any accountant! What do you plan to do with it? Well, I have an ridiculously small (and mostly inactive) small business. It’s to keep track of things and make it easier (and therefore cheaper) for my accountant to do the more involved things he does every year.  I think Ill have to do with Excel though, from the looks of it. Mike

maybe so but chances are the accountant will take your information and re-do it in quickbooks or peachtree (even if you have just a few transactions and few expenses).  A tax return usually requires it,  –  you should ask your accountant about summarizing revenue or expenses before investing a lot of time in designing an Excel program.

Response:

If you don’t need to do payroll (or are willing to set up manual payroll), maybe you could just buy someone’s no-longer-needed copy of QuickBooks 99. It’s fairly simple to set up and use and it does a lot.  Many people who were using QB99 (and used it for payroll) had to switch to a newer version of QuickBooks because Intuit no longer provides payroll tables for QB99. So, maybe it’s for sale for cheap on Ebay or elsewhere.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – there is a reason why you can’t find what you’re looking for  - simple double entry accounting can get complicated,  even with excel spreadsheets – ask any accountant! What do you plan to do with it? Well, I have an ridiculously small (and mostly inactive) small business. It’s to keep track of things and make it easier (and therefore cheaper) for my accountant to do the more involved things he does every year.  I think Ill have to do with Excel though, from the looks of it. Mike

Response:

there is a reason why you can’t find what you’re looking for  - simple double entry accounting can get complicated,  even with excel spreadsheets – ask any accountant! What do you plan to do with it?

Well, I have an ridiculously small (and mostly inactive) small business.   It’s to keep track of things and make it easier (and therefore cheaper) for my accountant to do the more involved things he does every year.  I think Ill have to do with Excel though, from the looks of it. Mike

Response:

Hi, I am looking for the cheapest software available that will let me do double-entry accounting, Balance sheets and Income statements.  I’ve been looking on the web, but all I can find are feature-packed mega-accounting sofwtare.  I’d be happy with an Excel spreadsheet that has already been built, but I can’t even find that.   If I can’t find anything, I guess Ill just put my numbers in Excel and be done with it, but there must be some freeware floating around, no? Mike

Response:

If you can use Linux there are some floating around but even there there are charges involved. Quickbooks  Basic is the cheapest or Simply Accounting. Hi, I am looking for the cheapest software available that will let me do double-entry accounting, Balance sheets and Income statements.  I’ve been looking on the web, but all I can find are feature-packed mega-accounting sofwtare.  I’d be happy with an Excel spreadsheet that has already been built, but I can’t even find that.   If I can’t find anything, I guess Ill just put my numbers in Excel and be done with it, but there must be some freeware floating around, no? Mike

– Affordable Support Services .. No waiting for help. 660-949-2416 Northeastern Missouri

Response:

Hi, I am looking for the cheapest software available that will let me do double-entry accounting, Balance sheets and Income statements.  I’ve been looking on the web, but all I can find are feature-packed mega-accounting sofwtare.  I’d be happy with an Excel spreadsheet that has already been built, but I can’t even find that. If I can’t find anything, I guess Ill just put my numbers in Excel and be done with it, but there must be some freeware floating around, no? Mike

there is a reason why you can’t find what you’re looking for  - simple double entry accounting can get complicated,  even with excel spreadsheets – ask any accountant! What do you plan to do with it?

Response:

Question:

In October’s Woodwork Magazine there is an article on how Abijah Reed uses the metric system in his woodwork.  I had never really considered the idea of using metric in the shop since everything I buy seems to come in imperial units.  However, he noted some facts about metric that I hadn’t thought about.  In particular, if you use metric you can work in mm, which is a little over half the size of 1/16", the smallest unit my existing tape measure has.  Also, in measurement and design, there is less tendancy to "round" numbers to 1/8", 1/4", or whatever. So I went to McMaster-Carr and ordered a 3m tape measure.  I must say, just after two days, I’m totally hooked.  The math is easier, reading the tape measure is easier, and Reed was exactly right about rounding. In terms of being metric in an imperial world, I didn’t have any problems.  I haven’t drilled any holes yet, but really the only conversion I had to do was that a sheet of plywood is 1219mm x 2438mm. I’d give it a try! Mark

Response:

I’d bet that more do than is reckoned. I often switch between decimal and imperial when measuring so that I don’t have to interpolate … since I normally just need a consistent reference to transfer a particular dimension, I could care less whether the reference mark is called a mm, some fraction of an inch, or just a mark on a story stick. When looked at it that way, the mystery disappears.  … but you’re dead on about the mathematical operations. — http://www.wood-workers.com/users/swingman/ – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – In October’s Woodwork Magazine there is an article on how Abijah Reed uses the metric system in his woodwork.

Response:

I’d bet that more do than is reckoned. I often switch between decimal and imperial when measuring so that I don’t have to interpolate … since I normally just need a consistent reference to transfer a particular dimension, I could care less whether the reference mark is called a mm, some fraction of an inch, or just a mark on a story stick. When looked at it that way, the mystery disappears.  … but you’re dead on about the mathematical operations.

That’s how I do it…I’ve been a toomaker for 25 years and I don’t think in terms of 1/4" or 1/2"…it’s .250 or .500. But I haven’t quite figured out why the scale that I keep in my pocket all the time and use ALOT has only fractions on it…and I translate on the fly. Mike

Response:

Yeah… Divide 3′ 5 13/16" inches into 4 and/or 5 equal parts quick. Why would anyone want to go metric?

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – In October’s Woodwork Magazine there is an article on how Abijah Reed uses the metric system in his woodwork.  I had never really considered the idea of using metric in the shop since everything I buy seems to come in imperial units.  However, he noted some facts about metric that I hadn’t thought about.  In particular, if you use metric you can work in mm, which is a little over half the size of 1/16", the smallest unit my existing tape measure has.  Also, in measurement and design, there is less tendancy to "round" numbers to 1/8", 1/4", or whatever. So I went to McMaster-Carr and ordered a 3m tape measure.  I must say, just after two days, I’m totally hooked.  The math is easier, reading the tape measure is easier, and Reed was exactly right about rounding. In terms of being metric in an imperial world, I didn’t have any problems.  I haven’t drilled any holes yet, but really the only conversion I had to do was that a sheet of plywood is 1219mm x 2438mm. I’d give it a try! Mark

Response:

I used to do that when I was a mechanical engineer.  However, I switched over to IT and lost the skill to atrophy of the brain.  The ‘ole addage "used it or loose it" played out rather finitely in my case. Dave – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -That’s how I do it…I’ve been a toomaker for 25 years and I don’t think in terms of 1/4" or 1/2"…it’s .250 or .500. But I haven’t quite figured out why the scale that I keep in my pocket all the time and use ALOT has only fractions on it…and I translate on the fly. Mike

Response:

Why would anyone want to go metric?

For the same reason you have 100 cents to the dollar rather than the 240 pence we used to have to the pound – besides being logical, it’s just easier. 12 pence to a shilling 240 pence to a pound 960 farthings to a pound 20 shillings to a pound That will be 12 and 9 pence please sir. Does this make sense to you? Chris

Response:

12 pence to a shilling 240 pence to a pound 960 farthings to a pound 20 shillings to a pound That will be 12 and 9 pence please sir. Does this make sense to you?

I have a hard enough time figuring change in the US and my accounting skills are only a little better. Question: how does an electronic calculator work in the UK?! Layne

Response:

12 pence to a shilling 240 pence to a pound 960 farthings to a pound 20 shillings to a pound

Also, now that I think about it the only strange and out of place thing about US currency is the Quarter. 5 pennies = 1 nickel 2 nickles = 1 dime 10 dimes = 1 dollar 25 pennies or 2 dimes & 1 nickel = 1 quarter? 4 quarters = 1 dollar? 1 Susan B. Anthony  dollar coin = well, a dollar but is mistakenly used as a quarter because of it’s close sizing to a quarter But there’s no such thing equal to that with our paper currency. There’s no such thing as a $25 bill Layne

Response:

Also, now that I think about it the only strange and out of place thing about US currency is the Quarter.

I don’t see anything inherently non-metric about the quarter-dollar coin.  The essential units of US currency are the dollar and the penny (centi-dollar, if you prefer).  That fact that there are convenient coins in circulation which are worth 5, or 10, or 25 centi-dollars doesn’t really change much.  If I buy something that costs $1.53, the clerk says "That’ll be a dollar fifty three, please".  They don’t say, "That’s be one, two, and three", implying one dollar, two quarters, and three pennys. Wine is commonly sold in 750 ml bottles (although I sometimes see the bottles stamped "7.5 dl").  That’s kind of the same thing; the units are inherently metric, but the size of the item is not a round power of 10.   Or is that just an American thing?  What’s the most common size for a bottle of wine in the rest of the world?  Is it usually sold in liter bottles?

Response:

Wine is commonly sold in 750 ml bottles (although I sometimes see the bottles stamped "7.5 dl").  That’s kind of the same thing; the units are inherently metric, but the size of the item is not a round power of 10. Or is that just an American thing?  What’s the most common size for a bottle of wine in the rest of the world?  Is it usually sold in liter bottles?

Same here in Germany: wine comes mostly in 750 ml, cheap wine in one liter bottles. Also found are bottles and cans with 0.5 or 0.33 l (beer/coke). Wolfgang — "Holzbearbeitung mit Handwerkzeugen": http://www.holzwerken.de "Kleines Werkzeugmuseum": http://www.holzwerken.de/museum

Response:

Hi Roy On this one wine bottle in my hand it says 750 ml. It’s Pepsi/Coke and other ordinary beverages tend to be in litre (or even liter) bottles. The spelling is confusing! no? Cheers Arde UK

Response:

Wine is commonly sold in 750 ml bottles (although I sometimes see the bottles stamped "7.5 dl").  That’s kind of the same thing; the units are inherently metric, but the size of the item is not a round power of 10. Or is that just an American thing?

I think I know the answer to this one! We used to sell wines and liquors "fifths", quarts and half-gallons A "fifth" referred equaled one-fifths of a gallon or four-fifths of a quart. Back in the ’70’s, when we were attempting a transition to the metric system, the package sized were changed to 750 ml and one liter (1000 mL). I don’t recall what became of the half-gallon ….. 1.5L, perhaps? In any case, the old "fifth" contained 25.6 fluid ounces US and the "new" 750 ml equals not quite 25.4 ounces. The US quart contains 32.0 ounces, a liter about 33.8 ounces. Marketing-wise this made for a smooth, almost unnoticed transition in the packaging and sales of alcoholic beverages.

Response:

Question: how does an electronic calculator work in the UK?!

By pressing the little numbers and signs on the keypad! Chris

Response:

That’s exactly the point the original poster was trying to convey. If you try to divide your inch dimension into several equal parts it takes a little cypherin’ to get the answer. However, in metric your dimension is equivalent to 1062mm (1062.0375mm to be more precise, but we’re not doing brain surgery here). Therefore, 4 equal parts would be 265.5mm and 5 equal parts would be 212.4mm. Millimeter measurements really are a lot easier to work with than inch measurements.  That’s why someone would want to go metric. R.C. spoketh: – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Yeah… Divide 3′ 5 13/16" inches into 4 and/or 5 equal parts quick. Why would anyone want to go metric?

Response:

But there’s no such thing equal to that with our paper currency. There’s no such thing as a $25 bill Layne

    I have seen a $3  bill with Bill Clintons pix on it.      …lew…

Response:

The biggest problem I have with metric measuring is that the increments all sound the same.  Millimeter, centimeter, decimeter, hectometer, kilometer, dekameter, micrometer, nanometer,  oh and meter.  The confusion could be disastrous. BTY what do you call 1/2 a millimeter?  To accurately measure it you would not say .5 millimeter.  What is that increment half way between millimeters on a ruler?  Would it be 500 micrometers?  Could you even see micrometers?

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – In October’s Woodwork Magazine there is an article on how Abijah Reed uses the metric system in his woodwork.  I had never really considered the idea of using metric in the shop since everything I buy seems to come in imperial units.  However, he noted some facts about metric that I hadn’t thought about.  In particular, if you use metric you can work in mm, which is a little over half the size of 1/16", the smallest unit my existing tape measure has.  Also, in measurement and design, there is less tendancy to "round" numbers to 1/8", 1/4", or whatever. So I went to McMaster-Carr and ordered a 3m tape measure.  I must say, just after two days, I’m totally hooked.  The math is easier, reading the tape measure is easier, and Reed was exactly right about rounding. In terms of being metric in an imperial world, I didn’t have any problems.  I haven’t drilled any holes yet, but really the only conversion I had to do was that a sheet of plywood is 1219mm x 2438mm. I’d give it a try! Mark

Response:

The other side benefit for the companies is that although the amount that the 0.6 oz. difference is almost inperceptable to the consumer, in the long run the company enjoys a considerable savings. Glen "Peter Shull"   wrote   – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – In any case, the old "fifth" contained 25.6 fluid ounces US and the "new" 750 ml equals not quite 25.4 ounces. The US quart contains 32.0 ounces, a liter about 33.8 ounces. Marketing-wise this made for a smooth, almost unnoticed transition in the packaging and sales of alcoholic beverages.

Response:

stating: 12 pence to a shilling 240 pence to a pound 960 farthings to a pound 20 shillings to a pound

That works out to… 4 farthings to a pence 48 farthings to a shilling So tuppence is 1/120 of a pound?  Cool. Also, now that I think about it the only strange and out of place thing about US currency is the Quarter. 5 pennies = 1 nickel 2 nickles = 1 dime

"nickles"? 10 dimes = 1 dollar 25 pennies or 2 dimes & 1 nickel = 1 quarter? 4 quarters = 1 dollar? 1 Susan B. Anthony  dollar coin = well, a dollar but is mistakenly used as a quarter because of it’s close sizing to a quarter

I carried around a couple Suebies for a couple months and found that there is very little gold in them. They up and _tarnished_ on me! But there’s no such thing equal to that with our paper currency. There’s no such thing as a $25 bill

I have Clinton & Clintonette $3 bills, Clinton $6 bills, Lewinsky $8 bills. I s’pose those are even less metricated. Layne-only note: I found a video at the library yesterday afternoon that covered Japanese metalworking. Unfortunately, it was on Japanese blademakers (interesting enough), not tansu chest hardware. –  Don’t be a possum on the Information Superhighway of life.                           —-   http://diversify.com  Dynamic Database-Driven Websites

Response:

I carried around a couple Suebies for a couple months and found that there is very little gold in them. They up and _tarnished_ on me!

Subies or Susan B’s are silver not gold color.

Response:

Yes, .5 millimeter.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The biggest problem I have with metric measuring is that the increments all sound the same.  Millimeter, centimeter, decimeter, hectometer, kilometer, dekameter, micrometer, nanometer,  oh and meter.  The confusion could be disastrous. BTY what do you call 1/2 a millimeter?  To accurately measure it you would not say .5 millimeter.  What is that increment half way between millimeters on a ruler?  Would it be 500 micrometers?  Could you even see micrometers? In October’s Woodwork Magazine there is an article on how Abijah Reed uses the metric system in his woodwork.  I had never really considered the idea of using metric in the shop since everything I buy seems to come in imperial units.  However, he noted some facts about metric that I hadn’t thought about.  In particular, if you use metric you can work in mm, which is a little over half the size of 1/16", the smallest unit my existing tape measure has.  Also, in measurement and design, there is less tendancy to "round" numbers to 1/8", 1/4", or whatever. So I went to McMaster-Carr and ordered a 3m tape measure.  I must say, just after two days, I’m totally hooked.  The math is easier, reading the tape measure is easier, and Reed was exactly right about rounding. In terms of being metric in an imperial world, I didn’t have any problems.  I haven’t drilled any holes yet, but really the only conversion I had to do was that a sheet of plywood is 1219mm x 2438mm. I’d give it a try! Mark

Response:

Guess I should have read your post to the end. It is common practice to express units smaller than a millimeter in fractions of a millimeter but micrometers would be quite correct.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The biggest problem I have with metric measuring is that the increments all sound the same.  Millimeter, centimeter, decimeter, hectometer, kilometer, dekameter, micrometer, nanometer,  oh and meter.  The confusion could be disastrous. BTY what do you call 1/2 a millimeter?  To accurately measure it you would not say .5 millimeter.  What is that increment half way between millimeters on a ruler?  Would it be 500 micrometers?  Could you even see micrometers? In October’s Woodwork Magazine there is an article on how Abijah Reed uses the metric system in his woodwork.  I had never really considered the idea of using metric in the shop since everything I buy seems to come in imperial units.  However, he noted some facts about metric that I hadn’t thought about.  In particular, if you use metric you can work in mm, which is a little over half the size of 1/16", the smallest unit my existing tape measure has.  Also, in measurement and design, there is less tendancy to "round" numbers to 1/8", 1/4", or whatever. So I went to McMaster-Carr and ordered a 3m tape measure.  I must say, just after two days, I’m totally hooked.  The math is easier, reading the tape measure is easier, and Reed was exactly right about rounding. In terms of being metric in an imperial world, I didn’t have any problems.  I haven’t drilled any holes yet, but really the only conversion I had to do was that a sheet of plywood is 1219mm x 2438mm. I’d give it a try! Mark

Response:

It didn’t used to be 750 ml’s. It used to be  a ‘fifth’. I’ll bet if you went to a liquor store and bought one of the flask-shaped bottles of your favorite rot-gut, you could ask for a fifth and the guy behind the counter would know exactly what you were talking about 1/5 gallon. Where would they come up with that strange measurement? The bottle fits in your back pocket. I think it comes from that dry period of this country’s history in the early 1900’s when a bunch of people thought you could outlaw booze and people would obey the law. —Rob – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Wine is commonly sold in 750 ml bottles (although I sometimes see the bottles stamped "7.5 dl").  That’s kind of the same thing; the units are inherently metric, but the size of the item is not a round power of 10.   Or is that just an American thing?  What’s the most common size for a bottle of wine in the rest of the world?  Is it usually sold in liter bottles?

Response:

OK, now where did the phrase "2 bits" come from when referring to a quarter? Also, we used to call the Susie B’s Carter quarters, they were a flop when they were originally issued because many people couldn’t tell or didn’t take the time to inspect the coin that was very close to the same size as the quarter. —Rob – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Also, now that I think about it the only strange and out of place thing about US currency is the Quarter. 5 pennies = 1 nickel 2 nickles = 1 dime 10 dimes = 1 dollar 25 pennies or 2 dimes & 1 nickel = 1 quarter? 4 quarters = 1 dollar? 1 Susan B. Anthony  dollar coin = well, a dollar but is mistakenly used as a quarter because of it’s close sizing to a quarter But there’s no such thing equal to that with our paper currency. There’s no such thing as a $25 bill Layne

Response:

IIRC, 0.5 mm would also be 500 microns or 500 uM… —Rob – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Guess I should have read your post to the end. It is common practice to express units smaller than a millimeter in fractions of a millimeter but micrometers would be quite correct. The biggest problem I have with metric measuring is that the increments all sound the same.  Millimeter, centimeter, decimeter, hectometer, kilometer, dekameter, micrometer, nanometer,  oh and meter.  The confusion could be disastrous. BTY what do you call 1/2 a millimeter?  To accurately measure it you would not say .5 millimeter.  What is that increment half way between millimeters on a ruler?  Would it be 500 micrometers?  Could you even see micrometers? In October’s Woodwork Magazine there is an article on how Abijah Reed uses the metric system in his woodwork.  I had never really considered the idea of using metric in the shop since everything I buy seems to come in imperial units.  However, he noted some facts about metric that I hadn’t thought about.  In particular, if you use metric you can work in mm, which is a little over half the size of 1/16", the smallest unit my existing tape measure has.  Also, in measurement and design, there is less tendancy to "round" numbers to 1/8", 1/4", or whatever. So I went to McMaster-Carr and ordered a 3m tape measure.  I must say, just after two days, I’m totally hooked.  The math is easier, reading the tape measure is easier, and Reed was exactly right about rounding. In terms of being metric in an imperial world, I didn’t have any problems.  I haven’t drilled any holes yet, but really the only conversion I had to do was that a sheet of plywood is 1219mm x 2438mm. I’d give it a try! Mark

Response:

OK, now where did the phrase "2 bits" come from when referring to a quarter?

The original coin was the only coin.  I assume it had intrisic value as a metal back then, because to make change, you’d take a cold chisel and cut the coin into halves, quarters, or as a last resort, eighths. The small bits you were left with (the eighths) were just called "bits".  Two bits was a quarter, two quarters a half, etc. http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/jargon/html/entry/quarter.html

Response:

Question:

How many mpg are people getting on AWD CRV with manual transmission. Is fuel economy worse with automatic. Specs are 22 mpg city 25 highway. Hope this is appropriate for these newsgroups.

I’m getting 25-26 MPG with my 2000 EX automatic, with A/C running almost all the time.

Response:

it is my understanding that honda tricks you on the term AWD. the CRV is not a true AWD like the new subaru’s. but like the civic AWD of a few years ago. or the old (pre 90’s) subaru’s, really FWD till you need the rear to engage then you have to engage it right? same as with the RAV4. honda’s view of AWD, is you have the ability to engage all the wheels to get you stuck. REMEMBER! TANLINES ARE UNKEWL

Response:

it is my understanding that honda tricks you on the term AWD. the CRV is not a true AWD like the new subaru’s. but like the civic AWD of a few years ago. or the old (pre 90’s) subaru’s, really FWD till you need the rear to engage then you have to engage it right? same as with the RAV4. honda’s view of AWD, is you have the ability to engage all the wheels to get you stuck.

You have things mixed up a bit….the CRV is indeed frontwheel drive normally, but the rear engages automatically (no manual action required) when, after, and as long as there is slip between front and right (which also implies that it can not be true 4wd for longer than a fraction of a second….there will always be rpm differences between front and rear, otherwise it can’t detect slip in the first place when engaged, to stay engaged). In Markerink’s nomenclatura, this is called ‘reactive parttime 4wd’; whereas my definition for ‘fulltime 4wd’ is: ‘drives all wheels all the time’, unlike the old definition of ‘can be left engaged all the time’….at that time there were no reactive systems available on the market, it was either a 3rd/center diff (fulltime) or parttime. Note that the RAV4 is a true fulltime system, like Subaru manuals of recent years, but unlike early Subaru’s (parttime), or Subaru auto’s of recent years (these come with an initial torque bias of 90/10 front rear, pretty close to the Jeep Quadratrac’s 05/95….this 5-10% to the ‘idling’ axle is only meant to take up slack in the drive train, to avoid clunks when engaging….in a dynamical driving context, it does diddly squat. REMEMBER! TANLINES ARE UNKEWL

I still doubt you fully support the true unisex version of this concept, naturism….at least not in this newsgroup….;-)) — Bye, Willem-Jan Markerink       The desire to understand is sometimes far less intelligent than      the inability to understand [note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!]

Response:

CRV is AWD or aka Real Time 4 wheel  drive. Any  differences in speed between the front and rear axles will engage drive to the rear axle. So it is engaged as it is needed nothing more. No buttons , no shifting, no turning 4wd on all the time,…. its a passive system that comes on when needed!! The CRV ’s performance in Snow,Mud and Rainy Roads has been lauded. However, this is not a great or even good off road performer. Take it off road for transportation needs, but if you want to have serious fun with it…serious off-roader , it will be damaged!!!

it is my understanding that honda tricks you on the term AWD. the CRV is not a true AWD like the new subaru’s. but like the civic AWD of a few years ago. or the old (pre 90’s) subaru’s, really FWD till you need the rear to engage then you have to engage it right? same as with the RAV4. honda’s view of AWD, is you have the ability to engage all the wheels to get you stuck. REMEMBER! TANLINES ARE UNKEWL

Response:

I get 22mpg all the time mostly city driving. get 25mpg tops when its mostly highway, havent computed off a long all highway run yet. But 25 or 26 would be tops. A 2.0 liter engine should do better, but the CR-V has quite a bit of wind resistance, accounting for the small latitude in MPG between city and highway driving. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – How many mpg are people getting on AWD CRV with manual transmission. Is fuel economy worse with automatic. Specs are 22 mpg city 25 highway. Hope this is appropriate for these newsgroups. I’m getting 25-26 MPG with my 2000 EX automatic, with A/C running almost all the time.

Response:

How many mpg are people getting on AWD CRV with manual transmission. Is fuel economy worse with automatic. Specs are 22 mpg city 25 highway. Hope this is appropriate for these newsgroups. — Click here for Free Video!! http://www.gohip.com/freevideo/

Response:

Question:

Since I updated the program with Y2K disks sent by peachtree, I am having all kinds of error messages. Is there some forum, which would help me understand the error codes etc. for Peachtree, so that I can straighten out my accounts. I will appreciate any help as Peachtree is hard to reach. Best regards, Gulab Gidwani

Response:

Try "alt.comp.software.financial.peachtree". Julie – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Since I updated the program with Y2K disks sent by peachtree, I am having all kinds of error messages. Is there some forum, which would help me understand the error codes etc. for Peachtree, so that I can straighten out my accounts. I will appreciate any help as Peachtree is hard to reach. Best regards, Gulab Gidwani

Response:

Sorry, but that group is not available on my server and I don’t know of any Peachtree group at all. I have ver 3.5 batch 5 which is supposed to be Y2K compliant, but as yet, I have no idea how to get the 2000 payroll tax codes modified to work. Peachtree doesn’t even support it in their Tax Service 2000 scam. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Try "alt.comp.software.financial.peachtree". Julie Since I updated the program with Y2K disks sent by peachtree, I am having all kinds of error messages. Is there some forum, which would help me understand the error codes etc. for Peachtree, so that I can straighten out my accounts. I will appreciate any help as Peachtree is hard to reach. Best regards, Gulab Gidwani

– … what? You mean this isn’t a dress rehearsal? "So long, and thanks for all the fish." — last dolphin leaving planet.

Response:

Question:

please have contact if u  are UA user…… PLEASE I need help….

Response:

Tina; I can answer most UA questions, or point you in the right direction. What would you like to know?  - Carl Dick – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – please have contact if u  are UA user…… PLEASE I need help….

Response:

Question:

The answer to that question depends largely on your payors and billing method.  Do you have a large percent in Medicare and you are billing electronically or do you have a large percentage of workers compensation and self pay?  Medicare pays within 14-21 days when bills are submitted electronically.  They pay no better than 35 days when submitting paper claims.  Add mailing time for paper claims and payments and the difference can be substantial based on volume.  Workers compensation and private pay can be the most difficult to collect.  And thus their percent as compared to total will drag all of your numbers down. Your specialty and the amount of managed care contracts and location can also play a huge factor in timely payments.  In short to answer your question we will need more information.  I would try to contact your local specialty group association as a place to start. HTH Don   I have had little background in accounting and need to know the answer to a   question about our practice’s accounts   receivable balance.     In a family practice center with $3.7 million   dollars in billed charges, what would be the   acceptable percentage of for dollars charged  in accounts receivable?   What   percent should be in current to 30 days, 60   days, 90 days, 120 days of service/charge date?   **** Posted from RemarQ – http://www.remarq.com – Discussions Start Here ™ ****

Response:

Dear Anonymous; If you first exclude insurance and medicare billing, the general pattern is that funds which are not collected quickly, say 30 days, will not be collectible without outside assistance such as a collection agency.   The collection agencies are looking for "low hanging fruit".  That is, they collect accounts with findable assets and attachable incomes.  - Carl – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I have had little background in accounting and need to know the answer to a question about our practice’s accounts receivable balance.     In a family practice center with $3.7 million dollars in billed charges, what would be the acceptable percentage of for dollars charged  in accounts receivable?   What percent should be in current to 30 days, 60 days, 90 days, 120 days of service/charge date? **** Posted from RemarQ – http://www.remarq.com – Discussions Start Here ™ ****

Response:

Question:

Your burn rate would be only the taxes and overhead, you could make this thing look very profitable….

I don’t advocate that you only look at tax returns as a method for determining whether to buy–but it is a very useful "first cut" method for weeding out problems.  Once they pass this first cut, you still have to actually look into the details of the operation and determine whether or not there is anything funny going on. One advantage, though, is that most people trying to cheat potential buyers of their businesses aren’t sharp enough to see how paying taxes might help make them look more solid. — Ed Zollars, CPA (AZ) http://www.getnet.com/~hmtzcpas

Response:

-looking at the tax returns is especially useful in determining if the seller changes his/her tune about financial results of the business when it benefits him/her.  That is, if the financial statements you are given show huge profits and the tax returns don’t back that up, it is reasonable to ask for a reconciliation

Interestingly, during the bubble economy in Japan 1988-91 there were a lot of companies that actually reported high incomes and paid taxes as a mechanism to make people believe they were correct…. There are probably formulas for calculating how big a fake company you can make with any given investment, say $100,000. What if you paid bills of $100,000 to an assortment of fake suppliers, which you controlled in remote locations. What if you took all the cash received by the suppliers, and ran back to the shop, and plunged it all into the cash register, say, 2 times a month.  Similarly, your profit on each inventory turnover, you would also plunge into the cash register. Your burn rate would be only the taxes and overhead, you could make this thing look very profitable….

Response:

After you get the idea from Todd Boyles "Creative Accounting Class" <g maybe you should try to get advanced credit into a degree on alt.education.distance. These are our secrets Todd, and we should not share them. However, there is a good lesson there for those who wish to reverse learn, but when the IRS catch up with you, you can’t say that you got the idea from this NG. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – There are probably formulas for calculating how big a fake company you can make with any given investment, say $100,000. What if you paid bills of $100,000 to an assortment of fake suppliers, which you controlled in remote locations. What if you took all the cash received by the suppliers, and ran back to the shop, and plunged it all into the cash register, say, 2 times a month.  Similarly, your profit on each inventory turnover, you would also plunge into the cash register. Your burn rate would be only the taxes and overhead, you could make this thing look very profitable….

Response:

Reminds me of the story one of my acctg professors told us about his efforts to buy a small business.  Upon being told that there was one set of books for the gov’t, and one set of books that ‘really showed what happened’, he asked, "How do I know you don’t have a third set of books for potential buyers?"

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – My husband recently purchased a small business.  It was a sole proprietorship. The owner refused to show us his tax returns, but did tell us his AGI on his returns.  It was about $25,000 a year.  But he kept stating "The books don’t tell the whole story" over and over.  So I went in and looked at all his bank deposits, and checks.  He wouldn’t let us look at any invoices or bills or anything like that.  This guy was stupid enough to deposit all the money he made.  He almost had to though because most of the money received comes in checks without much cash.  After figuring out the intermingling of personal and business money, which can be very confusing in a small business like this….this guy was clearing over $100,000/year.  He was in ill health forcing him to sell the business.  We got it for $15,000.  Why so cheap?  Because we had the cash to buy it and nobody else interested in it did, because of his refusal to show any financials to anyone, no bank would loan anyone money to buy it.  It is also a business that just not everyone can do.  It is a TV/VCR repair shop.  Been in the same location for over 40 years.  Although we are not making as much money as he did….the guy was a major crook charging for parts never put in and such….we are definitely getting our $15,000 worth.  Moral of the story…..when looking at these mom and pop operations you definitely cannot go by what is on their tax returns. Now, my dilemma.  Should I report this crook to the IRS.  He is old, in ill health, but bragging about how he is worth more than a million dollars. Makes me mad when we pay every dime of tax that we should and he got away with this for so long.  I am not a CPA, so as far as my obligation under that, I have none.  Or should I just let it go?

I wouldn’t touch this post with a ten-foot pole…

Response:

Moral of the story…..when looking at these mom and pop operations you definitely cannot go by what is on their tax returns.

Maybe not, but since I’ve been through quite a few of these deals with clients over the years, I can tell you there’s a high correlation between businesses with bad looking tax returns and businesses that are simply a bad buy.  If a person is willing to lie to the government (an entity that happens to own a few prisons) when it is to their financial benefit, there’s a high likelihood they would lie to a potential buyer of the business. I suspect the reason you got the good buy is because this gentleman had been asking for a fortune and refusing to show books–by the time you came along, he was out of luck.  But I still wouldn’t say that anyone that passed on it beforehand made a bad decision–the odds of making a bad buy were simply too great. Now, my dilemma.  Should I report this crook to the IRS.  He is old, in ill health, but bragging about how he is worth more than a million dollars.  Makes me mad when we pay every dime of tax that we should and he got away with this for so long.  

That’s your call entirely.  However, you may need to worry about whether or not you agreed to anything about keeping the information you obtained from this gentleman confidential.  You are under no obligation to turn him in and there may be liability issues if you do–I certainly wouldn’t do so without some legal advice. I am not a CPA, so as far as my obligation under that, I have none.  Or should I just let it go?

For a CPA this is simple–a CPA could not turn him in without permission from the client.  So if I had looked at this business for you, I could not turn him in without your permission.  If the other person was my client, I could (and likely should) fire the client, but I still couldn’t turn him in without his permission (not likely to be granted). Otherwise, I’d have to be ordered by a court to turn over the information. — Ed Zollars, CPA (AZ) http://www.getnet.com/~hmtzcpas

Response:

My husband recently purchased a small business.  It was a sole proprietorship. The owner refused to show us his tax returns, but did tell us his AGI on his returns.  It was about $25,000 a year.  But he kept stating "The books don’t tell the whole story" over and over.  So I went in and looked at all his bank deposits, and checks.  He wouldn’t let us look at any invoices or bills or anything like that.  This guy was stupid enough to deposit all the money he made.  He almost had to though because most of the money received comes in checks without much cash.  After figuring out the intermingling of personal and business money, which can be very confusing in a small business like this….this guy was clearing over $100,000/year.  He was in ill health forcing him to sell the business.  We got it for $15,000.  Why so cheap?  Because we had the cash to buy it and nobody else interested in it did, because of his refusal to show any financials to anyone, no bank would loan anyone money to buy it.  It is also a business that just not everyone can do.  It is a TV/VCR repair shop.  Been in the same location for over 40 years.  Although we are not making as much money as he did….the guy was a major crook charging for parts never put in and such….we are definitely getting our $15,000 worth.  Moral of the story…..when looking at these mom and pop operations you definitely cannot go by what is on their tax returns. Now, my dilemma.  Should I report this crook to the IRS.  He is old, in ill health, but bragging about how he is worth more than a million dollars.  Makes me mad when we pay every dime of tax that we should and he got away with this for so long.  I am not a CPA, so as far as my obligation under that, I have none.  Or should I just let it go? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Well, a lot of times you want a CPA to have a look beforehand.  But failing that, start with the tax returns.  You’re more likely to get the "worst case scenerio" there (i.e., weakest earnings picture).  But just as important as "the books" are external factors such as what the local competition is, what changes are going on there, why’s this guy selling, etc. It’s a big subject. I agree in general–looking at the tax returns is especially useful in determining if the seller changes his/her tune about financial results of the business when it benefits him/her.  That is, if the financial statements you are given show huge profits and the tax returns don’t back that up, it is reasonable to ask for a reconciliation that ties the two together.  A knowledgable CPA is going to be able to spot a song and dance routine faster than you will, but your gut instincts will likely tell you a lot. Second, it’s important to try and understand *WHY* this individual is selling.  If, in fact, the business makes tons of money and is almost no work to run, why would anyone sell it?  Again, this is more of a "gut feeling" question when you get the answer–you’ll have to see if you believe the explanation. — Ed Zollars, CPA (AZ) http://www.getnet.com/~hmtzcpas

Response:

Well, a lot of times you want a CPA to have a look beforehand.  But failing that, start with the tax returns.  You’re more likely to get the "worst case scenerio" there (i.e., weakest earnings picture).  But just as important as "the books" are external factors such as what the local competition is, what changes are going on there, why’s this guy selling, etc. It’s a big subject.

I agree in general–looking at the tax returns is especially useful in determining if the seller changes his/her tune about financial results of the business when it benefits him/her.  That is, if the financial statements you are given show huge profits and the tax returns don’t back that up, it is reasonable to ask for a reconciliation that ties the two together.  A knowledgable CPA is going to be able to spot a song and dance routine faster than you will, but your gut instincts will likely tell you a lot. Second, it’s important to try and understand *WHY* this individual is selling.  If, in fact, the business makes tons of money and is almost no work to run, why would anyone sell it?  Again, this is more of a "gut feeling" question when you get the answer–you’ll have to see if you believe the explanation. — Ed Zollars, CPA (AZ) http://www.getnet.com/~hmtzcpas

Response:

Hi I’m looking to get some information on a business that my brother in-law (lives out of state) wants to purchase.  This is just a superficial fact finding mission.  I’ve already told him if he decides to go through with it he will need to get a CPA to go over everything.  It’s a bait and tackle type store that has done very well.  They’re willing to show me the books but I have never seen any "books" before.  What do I need to scrutinize?  What questions should I ask?

Well, a lot of times you want a CPA to have a look beforehand.  But failing that, start with the tax returns.  You’re more likely to get the "worst case scenerio" there (i.e., weakest earnings picture).  But just as important as "the books" are external factors such as what the local competition is, what changes are going on there, why’s this guy selling, etc. It’s a big subject. David

Response:

Hi I’m looking to get some information on a business that my brother in-law (lives out of state) wants to purchase.  This is just a superficial fact finding mission.  I’ve already told him if he decides to go through with it he will need to get a CPA to go over everything.  It’s a bait and tackle type store that has done very well.  They’re willing to show me the books but I have never seen any "books" before.  What do I need to scrutinize?  What questions should I ask? I planned on looking at a years worth of utilities bills, prporty tax, insurance etc. Where is the best place to find, the profit margin? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Daniel A. Gelfand

Response:

Question:

A flight instructor told me that the maneuvering speed of an airplane decreases if you fly less than max gross weight.  After some thought, this seems wrong to me, and I’m interested in getting some opinions and/or hard facts!  :-) Maneuvering speed is the top speed where the wings will stall before any structural damage will occur if the wing suddenly is rotated to a high angle of attack.  Now, the maximum amount of lift the wings can generate at a given speed is the same no matter what the gross weight of the aircraft. And so, if the airplane is lighter, the wing lift can accelerate the airplane up faster (f=ma), and hence the plane "pulls more g’s". I think this is the crux of the argument that you have to fly slower if under max gross – you don’t want to "pull too many g’s". The problem I have with this is that acceleration (g’s) don’t break aircraft, force does.  Think of an airplane as two masses – a wing and a fuselage – with some kind of structure holding them together.   Then, if the you lighten the aircraft below max gross by making the fuselage lighter, then the forces in the connecting structure are LESS when wings generate maximum lift, even though you pull more g’s.  (Details available upon request). By this reasoning, maneuvering speed ought to INCREASE if you fly less than max gross.  What’s the deal? Regards, Charles Bier PP-Glider, Student- ASEL

Response:

A flight instructor told me that the maneuvering speed of an airplane decreases if you fly less than max gross weight.  After some thought, this seems wrong to me, and I’m interested in getting some opinions and/or hard facts!  :-) Maneuvering speed is the top speed where the wings will stall before any structural damage will occur if the wing suddenly is rotated to a high angle of attack.  

       [snip]   Charles,     Your question sent me back to the books, because I forgot myself why    this is (maneuvering speed reduces with gross weight).     Your analysis is correct (snipped here) in that you won’t have to worry    about the wing/fuselage separating as long as you fly at or below    maneuvering speed regardless of weight.  Evidently what is of concern    are other parts of the structure, i.e engine mounts and seat attachments,    minor things like that.  The reference I used even said that actually,    at the lower gross weight, your wing/fuselage attach point stresses are    reduced (from the max gross wt case) just as you surmised.   —Tom Turton

Response:

[deletions] I think this is the crux of the argument that you have to fly slower if under max gross – you don’t want to "pull too many g’s". The problem I have with this is that acceleration (g’s) don’t break aircraft, force does.  Think of an airplane as two masses – a wing and a fuselage – with some kind of structure holding them together.   Then, if the you lighten the aircraft below max gross by making the fuselage lighter, then the forces in the connecting structure are LESS when wings generate maximum lift, even though you pull more g’s.  (Details available upon request). By this reasoning, maneuvering speed ought to INCREASE if you fly less than max gross.  What’s the deal?

Well, let’s consider an airplane licensed at, say 2000 lb. gross, and flown at 1500 lbs.  True, when you’re pulling 4.4 g’s, the stuff that holds the wings on is supporting only 6600 lbs, 3/4 of its "full" load of 8800 lbs.   So why not allow 5.8 g’s?  That would allow the wings to carry their full load.  [actually, the wing attach fittings don't support the weight of the wings and their contents, but let's save that for another time] But your engine still weighs the same old 300 lbs.  The mount that was de- signed to carry a load of 1320 lbs is now carrying 1740 lbs.  Will it break? Probably not, but you’ve used up most of your 1.5 safety factor, and it _is_ allowed to bend in that range.  Plus, if there’s some hidden damage, it could get worse.  The same sort of thing is true of the battery box, pilot’s seat, fuel tanks, and all the other fixed equipment. So ease up at light weight.  The performance improves, but the airplane has more capacity to hurt itself. Jeff Matthews

Response:

All that Jeffrey wrote here is very correct.  The other factor here is the definition and reason for the "Manuevering Speed" limitation.  You merely multiply the clean stall speed at the current weight by the square root of the design load factor.  This will give you the speed where the airplane will stall before it goes into automatic disassembly mode.  This is the whole idea of "manuevering speed."  It will stall before it can break. Since the clean stall speed is proportional to the square root of the ratio of the current weight to the gross weight, you can see the stall speed is reduced when the weight is less.  Since the design load factor is a constant for any given airplane, as you reduce the weight, the manuevering speed is reduces also.  This automatically compensates for all of those localized unreduceable loads that could break at a higher G loading, even if the wings did not come unattached or otherwise bend. See the interesting article by Pete Garrison in the latest Flying mag. John – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – [deletions] I think this is the crux of the argument that you have to fly slower if under max gross – you don’t want to "pull too many g’s". The problem I have with this is that acceleration (g’s) don’t break aircraft, force does.  Think of an airplane as two masses – a wing and a fuselage – with some kind of structure holding them together.   Then, if the you lighten the aircraft below max gross by making the fuselage lighter, then the forces in the connecting structure are LESS when wings generate maximum lift, even though you pull more g’s.  (Details available upon request). By this reasoning, maneuvering speed ought to INCREASE if you fly less than max gross.  What’s the deal? Well, let’s consider an airplane licensed at, say 2000 lb. gross, and flown at 1500 lbs.  True, when you’re pulling 4.4 g’s, the stuff that holds the wings on is supporting only 6600 lbs, 3/4 of its "full" load of 8800 lbs.   So why not allow 5.8 g’s?  That would allow the wings to carry their full load.  [actually, the wing attach fittings don't support the weight of the wings and their contents, but let's save that for another time] But your engine still weighs the same old 300 lbs.  The mount that was de- signed to carry a load of 1320 lbs is now carrying 1740 lbs.  Will it break? Probably not, but you’ve used up most of your 1.5 safety factor, and it _is_ allowed to bend in that range.  Plus, if there’s some hidden damage, it could get worse.  The same sort of thing is true of the battery box, pilot’s seat, fuel tanks, and all the other fixed equipment. So ease up at light weight.  The performance improves, but the airplane has more capacity to hurt itself. Jeff Matthews

Response:

It’s actually easier than all this.  As all have said, the reason to remain at or below the maneuvering speed in turbulence is to get the wing to stall before the plane suffers any structural damage.  And, as we all know, as weight decreases, so does stall speed.  Expand that and you end up with the answer to the original question:  Why does maneuvering speed decrease when weight decreases?…because stall speed decreases. For a great example of how this is complicated by things that reduce the designed stall speed (vortex generators, STOL kits, etc.), and for the governing equation, see the latest Aviation Saftey article on flying twin engine aircraft–it’s well worth it.  I think the equation was,                          Va = Max Load x sqrt(Stall Speed)

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – A flight instructor told me that the maneuvering speed of an airplane decreases if you fly less than max gross weight.  After some thought, this seems wrong to me, and I’m interested in getting some opinions and/or hard facts!  :-) Maneuvering speed is the top speed where the wings will stall before any structural damage will occur if the wing suddenly is rotated to a high angle of attack.  Now, the maximum amount of lift the wings can generate at a given speed is the same no matter what the gross weight of the aircraft. And so, if the airplane is lighter, the wing lift can accelerate the airplane up faster (f=ma), and hence the plane "pulls more g’s". I think this is the crux of the argument that you have to fly slower if under max gross – you don’t want to "pull too many g’s".

This is correct.  Below maneuvering speed, a plane will stall when encountering severe turbulence, rather than subjecting the plane to higher G-forces than the plane was designed for. The problem I have with this is that acceleration (g’s) don’t break aircraft, force does.  Think of an airplane as two masses – a wing and a fuselage – with some kind of structure holding them together.   Then, if the you lighten the aircraft below max gross by making the fuselage lighter, then the forces in the connecting structure are LESS when wings generate maximum lift, even though you pull more g’s.  (Details available upon request). By this reasoning, maneuvering speed ought to INCREASE if you fly less than max gross.  What’s the deal?

I think the problem with this line of reasoning is that you’ve over simplified the plane by simply calling it a "wing" and a "fuselage". The connecting structure between the wing and fuselage is not the only place where these g’s are felt, and it also may not be the structure that limits the g-force that the plane is designed to handle.  Other structures in the plane, such as engine mounts, propellor shafts, the cockpit floor, canopies, etc., may be designed to only be stressed to a certain g-force limit, either equal to or beyond the maximum positive and negative g-force limitations listed for the entire plane in the POH. If you subject the plane to higher g-forces than it was designed for, you may find that some internal structure of the plane has been damaged no matter how lightly the plane was loaded. — +=And=the=Master=said=unto=the=silence,="In=the=path=of=our=happiness=shall =+ we find the learning for which we have chosen this lifetime." – R. Bach   /

Response:

I’m glad I qualified the above equation statement with "I think…"  I should have run some numbers first and I would have found that I got stupid results.  The correct equation is, *I think*:                        Va = Stall Speed x sqrt(Max Load) That works for a 172 that has, *I think*, a max load of 3.5g.                          112 = 60 x sqrt(3.5) If someone has the article (I threw mine out), would you mind varifying the equation for me?  Thanks.

Response:

All that Jeffrey wrote here is very correct.  The other factor here is the definition and reason for the "Manuevering Speed" limitation.  You merely multiply the clean stall speed at the current weight by the square root of the design load factor.  This will give you the speed where the airplane will stall before it goes into automatic disassembly mode.  This is the whole idea of "manuevering speed."  It will stall before it can break. Since the clean stall speed is proportional to the square root of the ratio of the current weight to the gross weight, you can see the stall speed is reduced when the weight is less.  Since the design load factor is a constant for any given airplane, as you reduce the weight, the manuevering speed is reduces also.  This automatically compensates for all of those localized unreduceable loads that could break at a higher G loading, even if the wings did not come unattached or otherwise bend. See the interesting article by Pete Garrison in the latest Flying mag. John

I agree that all of this is true, but remember that some planes are certified in multiple categories.  My Cessna 152 is certified in both the Normal and Utility categories.  Whether I qualify for Utility category maneuvers depends on the GC and current weight. Because the max G load is higher for the airplane when it falls within the Utility CG envelope, this is one case where as the aircraft gets lighter, the maneuvering speed actually increases. The opinions expressed herein are my own.  They do not necessarily represent those of my employer, my accountant, my wife, . . .

Response:

A flight instructor told me that the maneuvering speed of an airplane decreases if you fly less than max gross weight.  After some thought, this seems wrong to me, and I’m interested in getting some opinions and/or hard facts!  :-)

When an aircraft manufacturer designs an airplane, he determines the manoeuvring-diagram. In this diagram speed is on the hor. axis and loadfactor on the vert. axis. For GA airplanes in the Normal category Nmax = 3.8g. One of the airworthines requirements states that Va may not be less than Vs * sqrt(n) In the manoeuvring diagram the speed limit and loadfactor limits are straight lines, but there is also a curved line that represents the Clmax condition.This curved line starts at the origin of the daigram and curves up. This line crosses the line for n = 3.8g at a certain point. On the hor. axis this point gives you your Va. Should the load on an airplane increase (e.g. in an acceleratd stall) at a speed below Va the airplane stalls before it gets the chance to overstress. Should this happen at a speed above Va the plane will overstress. When the airplane weight decreases, the Clmax line curves up stronger, while it still starts at the origin. Hence the intersection representing Va now turns op at a lower speed. As said before Va is a function of Vs, with decreased weight Vs decreases, so Va decreases as well. Interesting detail is that the formula Va = Vs * sqrt(n) results in a speed that is often lower that the speed given by the manufacturer. The manufacturer is free to determine a manoeuvring speed and the airworthiness requirement in only a minimum speed!!! Therefore you can even overstress your airplane when flying at Va !!!!! Va usually is valid for rudder and ailerons, but you still have to be carefull on the elevator. Hope this helps (it is not easy to explain this without a drawing) BvH

Response:

A flight instructor told me that the maneuvering speed of an airplane decreases if you fly less than max gross weight.  After some thought, this seems wrong to me, and I’m interested in getting some opinions and/or hard facts!  :-) Maneuvering speed is the top speed where the wings will stall before any structural damage will occur if the wing suddenly is rotated to a high angle of attack.  

This is true and not true.   True:  Va decreases with decreased weight. Not true:  Va = safe. Maneuvering speed is the top speed where: "- the vertical stabilizer and the entire airplane must be designed to the loads resulting from a sudden maximum rudder input.  - the ailerons and wing must be designed to the loads resulting from a sudden maximum aileron input.  - the horizontal stabilizer must be designed to the loads resulting from a sudden maximum forward or aft elevator input." "…the last item…there is no specific requirement that the wing be designed for the loads resulting from a full and abrupt elevator input at Va.  True, the formula for maneuvering speed would seem to suggest that below Va the wing will stall before the limit load is reached, but this is not necessarily the case.  For one thing, the formula applies to aft elevator inputs and positive load factors – in many aircraft the negative limit load factor is lower than the positive limit load factor and could be exceeded in an agressive pushover at airspeeds below Va.  Second, the regulations allow the maneuvering speed to be based on a calculated stall speed.  The actual stall speed might end up being slower than this.  Finally, the formula gives a MINIMUM value of Va. The regulations allow designers to set Va higher than this value if they choose.  They might indeed have their own reasons for doing so." From _Basic Aerobatics_ by Szurovy and Goulian. Va = stalling speed x (limit positive maneuvering load factor)^0.5 and from F = m x a, a = F/m, so with less mass, you need less lift (F) to get the same a (load factor), and since F is proportional to speed (to the square of speed), you need less speed to get the same load factor at lighter weights.  In other words, at lighter weights and the highest Va, you could pop the baggage out the floor, rip the engine off its mount, etc., before exceeding the load factor that would stall the wing. — Eric Witherspoon, CFI/ASEL      *     "Do or do not.  There is no try!"

Response:

A flight instructor told me that the maneuvering speed of an airplane decreases if you fly less than max gross weight.  After some thought, this seems wrong to me, and I’m interested in getting some opinions and/or hard facts!  :-)

True "It seems wrong", but this is one of those cases where intuitive logic fails.  It took my instructor a long time to convince me, but convince me he did.  It should be in the POH for the plane you fly. You may not notice much difference in a 150, 172 or Cherokee when it comes to speed as their top cruise speed is maneuvering speed, but get into a retract like a Cessna 210, Beech F33 or A36, or any high performance aircraft and the first time the air gets bumpy I gurantee you will also agree.   In the F33/Debonair on a nice warm day there may be a few bumps and the plane may "squirle" around a little at maneuvering speed.  Take ‘er up to max cruise and it will quit "squirling" around.  It’ll also beat the livin’ snot out of you.  That’s at gross.  If you’re alone and light on fuel you’ll be in for a real treat.  You learn to slow down in a hurry. When the autopilot starts making some drastic pitch changes (at maneuvering speed) to hold altitude, it’s time to turn off the autopilot, try for a constant pitch attitude,  and try to enjoy the roller coaster ride.  Maneuvering speed , in the Beech (140 mph in mine) is designed to stall with a 30 ft/sec updraft at gross weight.  That’s also at 4.5 Gs.  Stalling a plane pulling 4.5 Gs in level flight is an experience I gurantee you will not soon forget! Now what would happen with a good "healthy" updraft??? <:-)  No lose cameras please. <:-( Roger Halstead http://members.mdn.net/rdhalste/index.htm N833R  Worlds oldest Debonair S# CD-2 I think this is the first thread where all those replying have been in agreement.

Response:

It’s actually easier than all this.  As all have said, the reason to remain at or below the maneuvering speed in turbulence is to get the wing to stall before the plane suffers any structural damage.  And, as we all know, as weight decreases, so does stall speed.  Expand that and you end up with the answer to the original question:  Why does maneuvering speed decrease when weight decreases?…because stall speed decreases.

Rod, An instructor told me the other day that Max. Weight limits were not because the plane wouldn’t take off at that weight but that the structural limits could be exceeded before stalling in turbulent air. I always thought this limit was so you could do a "go around" with full flaps.  Now I’m confused since he basically yold me I could exceed the Max. Weight as long as I was within the CG Envelope.  Of course, the envelope in the POH doesn’t show it’s shape outside the MAx. Weight Limits. Let’s here some discussion on this.  (I’ve never exceeded Max Weight and don’t intend to do so.) Trip

Response:

Thank you all for the informative posts.  If don’t slow down when I’m under max gross, it sounds like my wings are still safe.  But as I’d prefer not to "pop the baggage out the floor", "rip the engine off its mount", or have the "living snot" beat out of me, I think I may slow down anyway. Best regards, Charles Bier

Response:

I always thought this limit was so you could do a "go around" with full flaps.  Now I’m confused since he basically yold me I could exceed the Max. Weight as long as I was within the CG Envelope.  Of course, the envelope in the POH doesn’t show it’s shape outside the MAx. Weight Limits.

It’s all of the above. Airplanes are flown over-gross all the time.  In Alaska, there’s an applicable FAR that allows over-gross operation for certain operations.  For any flight, with FAA approval, you can fly over-gross. The problem is that, when over-gross, you *are* exposing the airplane to greater stress, or potential stress, than it was designed and tested for. The limiting factor in choosing max weight can be structural strength, or it can be worst-case-scenario go-around performance, or it can be landing gear strength, or it can be one of a number of other design characteristics of the airplane. (One example of the go-around performance: as I understand it (and I *know* someone will correct me if I don’t understand properly ), limiting the flaps to 30 degrees on the 172 increased the max weight by 100 lbs, from the 2300 lbs allowed on a 172 with flaps that extend to 40 degrees; this is because of the better performance at full-flaps, due to lower drag). Peter Duniho                                      N1404Y, Lake Renegade Redmond, WA               for they shall let in the light." — J.C.

Response:

says… I always thought this limit was so you could do a "go around" with full flaps. s because of the better performance at full-flaps, due to lower drag). Peter Duniho

"Better performance at full flaps due to lower drag"? No way. I don’t know the history of the 100 pound max gross weight change, but for any Cessna 172 drivers out there, here are approximate (based largely on one theory or another, not on flight tests) values of maximum lift coefficient CLmax and parasite drag coefficient CD0 at various flaps settings (airplane efficiency factor e is "said" not to change appreciably with flap setting): For flaps up: CLmax = 1.54, CD0 = 0.037;     flaps 10: 1.73 and 0.039;     flaps 20: 1.84 and 0.045;     flaps 30: 1.93 and 0.055; and     flaps 40: 2.00 and 0.066. As you can see, going from say flaps 30 to flaps 40 gives only a small amount of extra lift and a large amount of extra drag. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – PP-ASEL&S-IR Redmond, WA               for they shall let in the light." — J.C.

Response:

"Better performance at full flaps due to lower drag"? No way.

I didn’t write most of the text that you included; what I did write was indistinguishable from text written by Trip.  Please trim more carefully next time. And after an "interesting" email "discussion" with Trip, I’ll decline to try to defend what he wrote.  Maybe he *was* saying that extending flaps reduces drag. But for sure, *I* wasn’t saying that.  My point was that the "full-flaps" drag of one airplane was lower than the "full-flaps" drag of a *another* airplane, because the first airplane couldn’t actually extend the flaps as far. Or put another way, the "better" in "better performance" is comparing two different airplanes, not some given airplane with different flap settings. Peter Duniho                                      N1404Y, Lake Renegade Redmond, WA               for they shall let in the light." — J.C.

Response:

Question:

: No surprise there, Jason. I’ve seen the list of Harris’ contributors. : Given Mike’s policies, the PCs are clearly the best political party : money can buy… Does not say much for the value of money.

Hee hee! Not to mention it got squandered, as evidenced by the party’s crappy financial picture. Some financial gurus they are. Feh! Shawn | "To be a ruler of men, you need at least      | |             twelve inches."                   | | SHAWNVILLE! http://www.ptbo.igs.net/~shawn    |

Response:

The Ontario P.C.’s should take a page from the NDP instructional pamphlet on how to raise money. It’s a very simple process; you simply steal money from charity! It’s simple, it’s easy and after all who the hell does it hurt? Just the poor people; you know, those folks the NDP has told us for years that they represent. And after all, everybody plays bingo. Don’t they?

Response:

How so, Jason? Why, the Executive Director of the PC Party of Ontario himself said in his letter to me, dated March 5/96, that "The 1995 Chairman’s Report will be available in August 1996." In other words, the financial statement (they call it a Chairman’s Report) isn’t even out yet. So, how can you make that claim when the figures aren’t out yet?

You don’t even NEED the party to tell you that!  All that information is available from the Elections Finance Dept. — Jason Nardari

Response:

I firmly believe Bob Allisat would make a fine Premiere! He would sure make a better Premiere than Harris! VOTE FOR BOB ALLISAT,THE NEXT PREMIERE OF ONTARIO!!!

Response:

<snip: … I’ve seen the list of Harris’ contributors. : Given Mike’s policies, the PCs are clearly the best political party : money can buy… Then why did unions in Ontario buy the NDP? — (-:    Off the monitor, through the modem… nothing but net.    :-)

Response:

<snip: … I’ve seen the list of Harris’ contributors. : Given Mike’s policies, the PCs are clearly the best political party : money can buy… Then why did unions in Ontario buy the NDP?

Gawd. Where were you during the last election? And did you ever hear of the "social contract"? Your not seriously going to claim that the NDP support (over many years) for some trade union objectives is the same thing as Harris’ housing policies (so far, designed to pump **your** money into the pockets of Ontario’s biggest [greediest] landlords)? Are you? nick Nick Sidor

Response:

….Isn’t it also interesting to note that the PC party was the ONLY party in the last election who actually came out of the election with a profit rather than a loss??? No surprise there, Jason. I’ve seen the list of Harris’ contributors.

Well, that’s mighty kind of you. Now, did you see the list of Harris contributors between, oh, 1989 and 1993? — Jeff Joseph                          Madness Tour ‘96               "Toronto sport fans are inherently       irrational" – Bob McCown, The Fan 590.

Response:

….Isn’t it also interesting to note that the PC party was the ONLY party in the last election who actually came out of the election with a profit rather than a loss??? No surprise there, Jason. I’ve seen the list of Harris’ contributors. Well, that’s mighty kind of you. Now, did you see the list of Harris contributors between, oh, 1989 and 1993?

Sorry, it’s been a long day. Is there a point you want to make? nick       Nick Sidor

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The PC Party record Bank Borrowings Reduction ‘93 – ‘94  = 14.4 % nick replied: Get this, as a **defence** of the PC party. Gives **defence** a brand new meaning… Keep up the good work! nick What’s the matter Nick, a 14% reduction in debt when a party is at 20% in the polls not good enough for you brilliant financial wizards on the loonie left? I suppose there will be no "defence"  coming from your ilk on the Bob’s record during the same time period? Defense? Heh, heh… go ahead and give it a try. I’ll sit back and watch the mental contortions.

Tsk tsk tsk. Poor Tony is having trouble with numbers again. Go back and read the PC Party’s balance sheet, Tony. They have a DEFICIT. They are up to their armpits in DEBT. Although no one needs to calculate a single financial ratio, you might want to look at few more things on their balance sheet to know what kind of crappy fiscal managers the PC Party is. Look at the ratio of accounts receivable to accounts payable. Look at the ratio of assets to liabilities. Is that a sign of a healthy organization? If you let them run the company you work for, would you apologize for them and say it’s okay? By all standards of financial management, with a balance sheet that looks like that, the PC Party can file for bankruptcy. It boggles the mind how you can defend a party’s economic policy for a province, with the great promise of jobs and renewing the engine of growth, when their own damned party can’t support itself in a ‘efficient’ and ‘cost-effective’ manner. Christ, man…all you have to do is look at how much comes in and goes out for each of their income categories (the income and expenditure categories are the same) to see that they have no idea how to raise money. One of the categories (their General Meeting) had a cost of over 90%!!!! Is that cost-effective to you? Do you think that those $500 a plate dinners are raising money, knowing that it’s probably costing them $400 a plate, for example? Well, that’s the way it seems to be with the PC Party when you read their financial statement. Remember, Tony, they may have reduced their debt 14% but look at the big picture and remember: THE INTEREST CLOCK IS TICKING AT TORY HQ. They’re still in DEBT and have a DEFICIT. They have NO ASSETS. If the party is a financial shambles, then it foreshadows what they will do to Ontario’s finances with tax cuts. I wouldn’t let them run a lemonade stand with a financial statement like that. Shawn — "…accidents speak louder than words" – R. Poindexter

| "To be a ruler of men, you need at least      | |             twelve inches."                   | | SHAWNVILLE! http://www.ptbo.igs.net/~shawn    |

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – If you want to know more about how the PC Party spends it’s own money (that it apparently does not have or raise very well), then you will be shocked to learn that they have more than $2.5 million in BANK BORROWINGS and a mere $500000 or so in the bank. And who are *they* to preach about running an efficient organization and deficits when they are basically BROKE themselves? The numbers speak for themselves and you will never think of them in the same way again after you see it. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Poor Shawn has been having trouble with figures again. It’s recently found out much to its surprise that the PC Party can indeed lower debt – you know, fiscal responsibility and all that stuff. The PC Party record Bank Borrowings 1993 = $3.47 million Bank Borrowings 1994 = $2.97 million Reduction ‘93 – ‘94  = 14.4 % A 14.4 % reduction! – not bad for a party that was riding the polls in the 20% range during the same time period. Now for a comparison lets see the NDP’s record for the same time period. Ontario’s Debt 1992-1993 = $68.6 billion Ontario’s Debt 1993-1994 = $79.3 billion Increase ‘93 – ‘94 = 15.6% Not bad for the comrades – only a 15.6% increase in debt – and that after sticking it to the electorate with the biggest tax hike in Ontario history. Suck on those figures Shawn. …..Isn’t it also interesting to note that the PC party was the ONLY party in the last election who actually came out of the election with a profit rather than a loss??? — Jason Nardari

How so, Jason? Why, the Executive Director of the PC Party of Ontario himself said in his letter to me, dated March 5/96, that "The 1995 Chairman’s Report will be available in August 1996." In other words, the financial statement (they call it a Chairman’s Report) isn’t even out yet. So, how can you make that claim when the figures aren’t out yet? Shawn | "To be a ruler of men, you need at least      | |             twelve inches."                   | | SHAWNVILLE! http://www.ptbo.igs.net/~shawn    |

Response:

Draft Trudeau, or Rae, or even Allisat, but at least get somebody fit, both mentally and physically to run this place. I’ve met Allisat and I’ve met Harris. Allisat is a good, kind and warm humnan being, Harris is not. I defy anybody who knows both personally to offer a counter opinion.

   I will throw my hat (?) into the Allisat for Premier ring.I will always vote for bob because behind the on-line bluster,there is a real person. —"The Internet is a complex network of people linked together by computers"- Bob Allisat

Response:

The PC Party record Bank Borrowings 1993 = $3.47 million Bank Borrowings 1994 = $2.97 million Reduction ‘93 – ‘94  = 14.4 %

Get this, as a **defence** of the PC party. Gives **defence** a brand new meaning… Keep up the good work! nick Nick Sidor

Response:

: No surprise there, Jason. I’ve seen the list of Harris’ contributors. : Given Mike’s policies, the PCs are clearly the best political party : money can buy… Does not say much for the value of money.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – If you want to know more about how the PC Party spends it’s own money (that it apparently does not have or raise very well), then you will be shocked to learn that they have more than $2.5 million in BANK BORROWINGS and a mere $500000 or so in the bank. And who are *they* to preach about running an efficient organization and deficits when they are basically BROKE themselves? The numbers speak for themselves and you will never think of them in the same way again after you see it. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Poor Shawn has been having trouble with figures again. It’s recently found out much to its surprise that the PC Party can indeed lower debt – you know, fiscal responsibility and all that stuff. The PC Party record Bank Borrowings 1993 = $3.47 million Bank Borrowings 1994 = $2.97 million Reduction ‘93 – ‘94  = 14.4 %

You have missed the point altogether, Tony. They may have reduced their bank borrowings, but you are ignoring the point that they have a DEFICIT and a DEBT which EXCEEDS their MEAGRE RESOURCES (see Accounting 101 or, lesson on "if liabilities exceed assets…"). Their ideology says that the interest clock is ticking and things can be made better by (using their favourite buzzwords) being more ‘efficient’ and ‘cost-effective’. Well, did you even look at the rest of your party’s balance sheet? They don’t have enough money to pay the interest on a debt that large, with only just over a half-million dollars in the bank and no collateral. Neither you nor I nor anyone else could get bank loans like that with no assets, so how did the PC Party of Ontario? I’d be finding out what bank that was and tell everyone "hey! the (name of bank) gives million dollar loans to people with no collateral!". Is that responsible borrowing *or* responsible lending? I think not. So, why should anyone trust these clowns with taxpayers money when they have proven that their own party is incompetent with PC members’ money? Suck on that and reconsider your political affiliation. Shawn – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -A 14.4 % reduction! – not bad for a party that was riding the polls in the 20% range during the same time period. Now for a comparison lets see the NDP’s record for the same time period. Ontario’s Debt 1992-1993 = $68.6 billion Ontario’s Debt 1993-1994 = $79.3 billion Increase ‘93 – ‘94 = 15.6% Not bad for the comrades – only a 15.6% increase in debt – and that after sticking it to the electorate with the biggest tax hike in Ontario history. Suck on those figures Shawn. — "…accidents speak louder than words" – R. Poindexter

| "To be a ruler of men, you need at least      | |             twelve inches."                   | | SHAWNVILLE! http://www.ptbo.igs.net/~shawn    |

Response:

If you want to know more about how the PC Party spends it’s own money (that it apparently does not have or raise very well), then you will be shocked to learn that they have more than $2.5 million in BANK BORROWINGS and a mere $500000 or so in the bank. And who are *they* to preach about running an efficient organization and deficits when they are basically BROKE themselves? The numbers speak for themselves and you will never think of them in the same way again after you see it.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. Poor Shawn has been having trouble with figures again. It’s recently found out much to its surprise that the PC Party can indeed lower debt – you know, fiscal responsibility and all that stuff. The PC Party record Bank Borrowings 1993 = $3.47 million Bank Borrowings 1994 = $2.97 million Reduction ‘93 – ‘94  = 14.4 % A 14.4 % reduction! – not bad for a party that was riding the polls in the 20% range during the same time period. Now for a comparison lets see the NDP’s record for the same time period. Ontario’s Debt 1992-1993 = $68.6 billion Ontario’s Debt 1993-1994 = $79.3 billion Increase ‘93 – ‘94 = 15.6% Not bad for the comrades – only a 15.6% increase in debt – and that after sticking it to the electorate with the biggest tax hike in Ontario history. Suck on those figures Shawn. — "…accidents speak louder than words" – R. Poindexter

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – If you want to know more about how the PC Party spends it’s own money (that it apparently does not have or raise very well), then you will be shocked to learn that they have more than $2.5 million in BANK BORROWINGS and a mere $500000 or so in the bank. And who are *they* to preach about running an efficient organization and deficits when they are basically BROKE themselves? The numbers speak for themselves and you will never think of them in the same way again after you see it. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Poor Shawn has been having trouble with figures again. It’s recently found out much to its surprise that the PC Party can indeed lower debt – you know, fiscal responsibility and all that stuff. The PC Party record Bank Borrowings 1993 = $3.47 million Bank Borrowings 1994 = $2.97 million Reduction ‘93 – ‘94  = 14.4 % A 14.4 % reduction! – not bad for a party that was riding the polls in the 20% range during the same time period. Now for a comparison lets see the NDP’s record for the same time period. Ontario’s Debt 1992-1993 = $68.6 billion Ontario’s Debt 1993-1994 = $79.3 billion Increase ‘93 – ‘94 = 15.6% Not bad for the comrades – only a 15.6% increase in debt – and that after sticking it to the electorate with the biggest tax hike in Ontario history. Suck on those figures Shawn.

….Isn’t it also interesting to note that the PC party was the ONLY party in the last election who actually came out of the election with a profit rather than a loss??? — Jason Nardari

Response:

Not to mention the huge deficit in logical thinking they suffer from. Uh, duh – let’s see. Deficit bad. Cut program. Cut tax. Make deficit bigger. Deficit bad. Make more cuts. Cut taxes more. Make deficit really big now. Credit rating lower. Create crisis.  Big bad deficit grow more. Go far away…play golf.

        I a bizarre way I really enjoyed this neanderthalling of the CSR. It’s cracking me up!

Response:

The PC Party record Bank Borrowings Reduction ‘93 – ‘94  = 14.4 % nick replied: Get this, as a **defence** of the PC party. Gives **defence** a brand new meaning… Keep up the good work! nick

What’s the matter Nick, a 14% reduction in debt when a party is at 20% in the polls not good enough for you brilliant financial wizards on the loonie left? I suppose there will be no "defence"  coming from your ilk on the Bob’s record during the same time period? Defense? Heh, heh… go ahead and give it a try. I’ll sit back and watch the mental contortions. — "…accidents speak louder than words" – R. Poindexter

Response:

The PC Party record Bank Borrowings 1993 = $3.47 million Bank Borrowings 1994 = $2.97 million Reduction ‘93 – ‘94  = 14.4 % Get this, as a **defence** of the PC party. Gives **defence** a brand new meaning… Keep up the good work!

No shit. And look how much better the overall quality of life is under Harris. And look arounf you. Notice how many peole have losta bit of weight ? It aint because they’ve been going to the club baby. But then in truest Orwellian newspeak, If you can’t afford food,then Mike Harris was good for your health. Of course why you peple elected a man who can neither control his weight or his budget is beyond me. Middle class: you have been targeted for extinction. You don’t have long. Go to any large Amerikan city and ask them how the gap between poor and rich has widened. I lived in LA for 10 years. Have 5 good years there, moved back to Canadia, and am now watching the Los Angelization of Ontarion before my very eyes, and I really don’t care if you call them Bush, Thatcher or Harris, these are not good kind poeple. Draft Trudeau, or Rae, or even Allisat, but at least get somebody fit, both mentally and physically to run this place. I’ve met Allisat and I’ve met Harris. Allisat is a good, kind and warm humnan being, Harris is not. I defy anybody who knows both personally to offer a counter opinion. — Richard J. Sexton                             Windows 95. Netscape 96.

Response:

It certainly is a disadvantage for the PC’s that they don’t have big labour to ‘donate’ money to their coffers. The NDP is much better a transfer financing. Big labour gave them money and in turn, after they lost the election last June, the NDP cynically attempted to give it back with a cash grant of five million dollars. It was only diligence on the part of some beaurocrat that the money never got paid.

Response:

: If you want to know more about how the PC Party spends it’s own money : (that it apparently does not have or raise very well), then you will be : shocked to learn that they have more than $2.5 million in BANK BORROWINGS : and a mere $500000 or so in the bank. And who are *they* to preach about : running an efficient organization and deficits when they are basically BROKE : themselves? If that is the case then the PC party should declare bankrupty and get the hell out of the government business!

Did you ever consider why Bob Rae pissed off the unions as bad as he did ? He cut it to what he thought a bare working minumum but sustainable. This left very little room for the inevetible Tory backlash. Leaving Harris no real for realistic cuts, and if we extrapolate the Tory’s own bad spending onto Ontario, my prediction is, if there is anything left of Canada and especially Ontario in 3 years, we’ll probably feel like drafting him for PM, party affiliations aside. Bob Rae made some of the boldest moves in Canadian political history, moves that would make a tory proud. Rae days suck, but the alteratives were worse, as we are finding out now. Harris’s plan, and it’s execution by talking to the media not the opposition, is a mean and spitefull campaign aimed at saving the government $150MIL a day – because they’re broke. It’s a viable business plan, but one I personally would have rejected becaus the human suffering component of that equation is a little too high. Curious how modern day scholars are looking back at Hitler (see the current Barned Review). I wonder how they will see Haris in 50 years. My theory: "Harris, Mike. Inept bungling crooked Ontario politician. See Richard Nixon." — Richard J. Sexton                             Windows 95. Netscape 96.

Response:

If you want to know more about how the PC Party spends it’s own money (that it apparently does not have or raise very well), then you will be shocked to learn that they have more than $2.5 million in BANK BORROWINGS and a mere $500000 or so in the bank. And who are *they* to preach about running an efficient organization and deficits when they are basically BROKE themselves? Well, to get that and the whole story from an AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENT mailed to me DIRECTLY FROM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR of the PC PARTY OF ONTARIO (just got it on Monday), then go directly to http://www.ptbo.igs.net/(squiggly)shawn/tory.txt (squiggly)=tilde key on keyboard You will be appalled to see how they mismanage their own money…and people are putting blind faith in poor business and money managers ( a lemonade stand would do better than these guys ). The numbers speak for themselves and you will never think of them in the same way again after you see it. Shawn

Response:

If you want to know more about how the PC Party spends it’s own money (that it apparently does not have or raise very well), then you will be shocked to learn that they have more than $2.5 million in BANK BORROWINGS and a mere $500000 or so in the bank. And who are *they* to preach about running an efficient organization and deficits when they are basically BROKE themselves? Well, to get that and the whole story from an AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENT mailed to me DIRECTLY FROM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR of the PC PARTY OF ONTARIO (just got it on Monday), then go directly to

Here’s my favourite. It now seems pretty clear that they can’t even manage their own government employees. It’s the Clampetts at Queen’s Park. Next thing you know, Mike will be putting in a "ceee-ment pond". nick Nick Sidor

Response:

: If you want to know more about how the PC Party spends it’s own money : (that it apparently does not have or raise very well), then you will be : shocked to learn that they have more than $2.5 million in BANK BORROWINGS : and a mere $500000 or so in the bank. And who are *they* to preach about : running an efficient organization and deficits when they are basically BROKE : themselves? If that is the case then the PC party should declare bankrupty and get the hell out of the government business!

Response:

If you want to know more about how the PC Party spends it’s own money (that it apparently does not have or raise very well)… You will be appalled to see how they mismanage their own money…and people are putting blind faith in poor business and money managers ( a lemonade stand would do better than these guys ). The numbers speak for themselves and you will never think of them in the same way again after you see it. Shawn

Not to mention the huge deficit in logical thinking they suffer from. Uh, duh – let’s see. Deficit bad. Cut program. Cut tax. Make deficit bigger. Deficit bad. Make more cuts. Cut taxes more. Make deficit really big now. Credit rating lower. Create crisis.  Big bad deficit grow more. Go far away…play golf. — "Man’s capacity for justice makes democracy possible…man’s inclination to injustice makes democracy necessary" Reinhold Niebuhr (1944) Check out harrisment.net Top 5% of all web sites Eyesite of the Week http://www.io.org/~foxy/harrisment.net Brought to you by Ontario Taxpayers United Against Harrisment