> You would have bet the farm on the undervalued bet on the prediction markets.
This is what's frustrating about sites like 538. They have Biden as an 87% chance to win. A betting site I frequent has Biden's winning odds as -180 (1.556 for Europeans). If they really believe the accuracy of their models, they should literally be betting the farm on a Biden win.
Real estate prices are unlikely to drop too much since they're one of the few ways locals can maintain a store of value (if a relatively non-liquid one).
In horse racing where the bets are done via parimutuel[1], the challenge is that there's an upper bound on how much you can "invest" in a given wager without changing the odds. This makes it less likely that an expert will seek outside investment unless their model has them betting "wide" (lots of small bets vs. a few large ones).
Do you have a site/mailing list where we can sign up for alerts regarding launch of the Android app? I'd like to try this, but do not have an iPhone.
Without having tried the app, my biggest complaint with apps such as these is that they recommend recipes/meals (great!) but cannot take into account certain things that I won't eat (tomatoes, most cheeses, low preference for fish). Does Lyle take these things into account when making meal recommendations?
I was merely disproving the fact that a motivated population with rifles can't fight and (in the case of Vietnam) defeat the world's largest military. The jury is still out on Iraq/Afghanistan.
I wasn't making the argument that more people carrying == safety. I was countering the argument that more people carrying inherently means less safety.
And more cars = more car accidents and more multi-story homes = more people falling down the stairs. As a society, we're concerned with overall safety and reducing overall violence and crime metrics.
Remember the triad: time, cost, quality - pick two.
Selecting the right service/agency for translation is primarily related to what content (and what degree of accuracy) you need. Translating content for a website advertising a medical device is very different than translating social media content.
For content that HAS to be correct, I've used www.languagescientific.com
It was the standard "forget profitability, achieve growth and market share." When the crash happened in March/April 2000, the money started running out.
There was some general missteps that were glaring errors both from the outside and inside.
From the outside: no minimum order until a few months before the end. So you could order a pack of gum and a delivery person would bring it out to you. In bike messenger cities, it wasn't awful, but in car cities (Boston), it's brutal.
They also didn't focus on a particular series of products, they wanted to be "amazon in under an hour". Amazon's the only company I know of that's been able to pull off a "we sell everything" model and they didn't start that way (I think Amazon was still mostly books even as late as 2000/2001). That meant massive inventories sitting in warehouses in downtown locations (as opposed to Amazon's distribution centers in the middle of nowhere).
From the inside, setting staffing levels correctly early, expanding too quickly to second tier cities (as opposed to reaching profitability in the larger ones first), and inventory was awful. A couple of inventory stories:
"Why did we just get another 5 boxes of tootsie rolls in? I don't think I've ever seen us sell one." - Me
"We can't ever be out of stock on anything." - Boss
"Well, yeah but could we at least sell ONE box first?"
I was also there when someone fat fingered an inventory order. We were supposed to get 40 copies of The Green Mile for rent and wound up with 400.
I definitely learned a lot there and it was interesting. The model "could" work, but requires such a massive capital outlay and a lot of things to go right that I don't know if someone would be able to pull it off any time soon.
This is what's frustrating about sites like 538. They have Biden as an 87% chance to win. A betting site I frequent has Biden's winning odds as -180 (1.556 for Europeans). If they really believe the accuracy of their models, they should literally be betting the farm on a Biden win.