(wow) Words Of Wonders Level 1591 Answers – This continues. When I first thought about switching to Substack, I asked my readers what they thought. They were thinking of different things, but one of them was that they hated the record. At some point I turned this into a formal study and:
A few months ago, I wrote a post titled Why I'm Shit, which discussed some people's complaints about the new blog. In the comments, many people said that their main complaint was that the Substack design was worse than the SSC design. FOR INSTANCE:
(wow) Words Of Wonders Level 1591 Answers
I think all of this together is pretty strong evidence that most people prefer the old version of the Slate Star Codec over the new Substack-managed ACKS.
We'll Never Be Apart By Emiko Jean
This is weird, because the old version was Slate Star Codec – usually something I put together in a day or two. I've been known to have no taste and the only website I've ever developed before was the Geocities site which was even worse. Some of my web designer friends helped me with some rough edges (literally Apple-style in one case), but the basic design remained my hasty amateurish job.
Meanwhile, Substack is run by tech industry veterans who tend to hire a team of highly experienced designers who seriously challenge every aspect of their product. It doesn't make any sense that I'm doing a better job than them. So what's going on?
Is it selection bias? My previous readers are, by definition, people who liked my old blog, so obviously they like my old blog more than the new one? I'm including this because I know someone will bring it up in the comments if I don't, but that's unlikely; most people definitely chose the content themselves, with the design coming second.
Is it something mobile? I didn't bother optimizing my old design for mobile, so it probably adds another layer of complexity. But I think at some point a web designer friend made a version that worked for mobile, so it can't be too hard.
Orbit 3 Tb Pdf
Isn't the dichotomy me versus Substack, but WordPress (also a big tech company) versus Substack? I think that partly explains. But some of the people in the comments were specifically talking about the colors and the shape.
Substack may be reminiscent of the story of MySpace versus Facebook. MySpace allowed people to customize their page however they wanted, and most turned into some kind of monster attached to the tag. Facebook gave everyone a consistent minimalist design that allowed people to focus on content and conquer the world. I don't (obviously) question Substack's decision not to make the blog layout very customizable. But how is their non-standard (apparently) custom format worse than my old format? If they provided everyone with the non-standard SSC vision for 2015, would that be a direct benefit?
Maybe it's a little too cute, but I can't help thinking about Where Tartary? In all art forms, complex colorful designs eventually evolve into “modern” minimalist designs. When someone asks, people say they hate modern minimalist design and want to go back to complex and colorful design. But for some reason no one ever does. Is it just the internet version of the same general thing? The end of 2019 ushered in the year of the flag. Reviews and contracts with top performers (Penn National & BarStool, Caesars & Eldorado) included. Then the world changed overnight. There was panic in the public markets and valuations fell (Penn National fell from $49 in March to $4). Gambling compensation committees were challenged to pay bonuses for 2019 just as COVID wreaked havoc on their businesses. A place to say the least. The markets have since recovered and casinos are slowly reopening to the new reality. How gaming companies will manage CEO pay at the end of 2020 will be very interesting reading.
In the meantime, we'll be reviewing proxy statements to estimate gaming CEO pay in our 14th annual survey this summer. The goal is to determine whether the CEO has provided value to the shareholders to pay them. AETHOS pay-for-performance model compares key financial metrics such as company size (market capitalization), share value (share price growth from 2016-19), EBITDA growth (2016 -19) and the total direct salary (combination of salary, bonus). , LTIP and others). Our findings are detailed below.
Xu Fu's Pet Battle Strategies
Market cap tends to dictate the complexity of the company, so the CEO pays. In general, the bigger the company, the bigger the check. Sheldon Adelson of Las Vegas Sands was the highest paid executive in the industry with total compensation of $24.7 million. LVS is also outperforming its competitors in market cap. All ten of the highest-paid gaming CEOs earned more than $10 million in total compensation, and 24 of the 31 CEOs earned more than $1 million annually. Average CEO compensation decreased $1 million to $6.1 million year-over-year.
When it comes to our pay-per-performance valuation, Avery Holding's Mike Rumbolz leads the pack with a value index of 168 AVI (AETHOS). In other words, Rumbolz provided the best value to Avery's shareholders relative to his salary. According to our calculations, Rumbolz could have paid $3 million more and still been adequately compensated. Other major players included Todd Cravens, Blake Sartini, Tom Rigg and Ken Alexander. The wealthiest CEOs are still Che Wu Lui and Sheldon Adelson who own billions of shares in the company, while Carlino, Farahi and Sartini round out the list. Interestingly, all five CEOs had an AVI above 100, half of the group. Lawrence Ho was not on this year's list because Melk's films didn't come out on time, but he is still suspected to be a billionaire this year.
Fourteen gaming industry CEOs received base salaries in excess of $1 million. Sheldon Adelson had the highest salary at $5 million, followed by Jim Maren and Matt Maddox at $2 million. The group's average salary was just over $1.1 million. A slight decrease from last year. In the bonus category, Sheldon Adelson led the pack with a $12.5 million bonus, followed by Peter Carlino with $3.5 million. The group CEO's average bonus was $1.5 million, with five CEOs receiving no bonuses. Long-Term Incentives (LTIPs) are the most important component of CEO compensation. The maximum value of the LTIP share was 3 million dollars. Barry Cottle tops this list with his $18.5 million scholarship. Rod Baker and Matt Maddock followed with nearly $8 million worth of stock donations. Seventeen CEOs received an equity grant worth more than $1 million, while five received nothing.
Pay mix has become a hot topic as ISS and institutional investors demand more CEO compensation in the form of “at risk” compensation (short and long term incentives). Experts also want more performance-based metrics as part of stock grants. In the Fortune 500, risk compensation averages 58% and has risen steadily over the past decade. In games, that number is 51%. Greater scrutiny in this area can be expected as “payroll opinion” and other SEC requirements are implemented. As stated earlier, 2020 has been a tumultuous year and it will be interesting to see how COVID and government watchdogs affect CEO pay.
Pokémon Go Friend Codes
October is the “Halloween season”, a fun cultural holiday for many people around the world. It represents a socially sanctioned time of year when both children and adults can escape into a world of fantasy and mystery that involves the simultaneous expression of “lighter” and “darker” aspects of human nature. Besides pumpkin carving, costume dressing, and the nightly ritual of trick-or-treating, many people's favorite thing this month is the psychosocial phenomenon known as “paranormal tourism.” Indeed, these tours are very popular all over the world. during the year. Over the last decade, social scientists have increasingly studied this place to find out why it is so attractive and widespread. A recent market study has revealed new insights that have broad potential for understanding consumer motivation for immersive experiences.
Paranormal tourism is broadly defined as “visiting any setting or area with the specific purpose of encountering the paranormal, whether for vacation, research, services, products, or conventions.” Therefore, this action also includes a “journey into legends”, i.e. deliberate visits to ghostly places, as well as virtual tours such as live streaming video or “ghost hunting” TV shows. Folklorists might consider them examples of ‘ostensia' recreations. , ‘showing or expressing the narration of the legend in real life. From a tourism perspective, paranormal tourism is likely a combination of “heritage tourism” (focusing on local culture and history) and “dark tourism” (focusing on places associated with human tragedy, suffering, or death). This suggests that paranormal tourists are looking for escape or entertainment. But new research shows that paranormal tourists are compatible with active and passive seekers and that these users are even willing to travel to inconvenient places to get their paranormal “fix.”
What exactly is a “fix”? Well, it seems it is
