You're being intentionally dense. No, people don't accidentally post pictures but they often do post them with the intention of showing a certain thing, e.g. profile picture, something for sale, something related to hobbies, household repairs, whatever. All of thse are posted with intent to include a certain object but may include background info that the poster did not consider.
But if you visit NASA space center, and have the means, definitely do the VIP tours.
The depth, the quality, the passion of the guides, are an order of magnitude better than the generic tours they offer.
The regular ones are often lead by young inexperienced hires, mostly reading from a script, and you go through extremely curated exhibits.
On the VIP tour, we had a 30 year veteran who was on first name basis with the last few directors. We did things that made you think “I can’t believe we’re allowed to do/touch/see that” over and over again.
It would seem that Sapporo did not do enough diligence when they bought Anchor. Anchor's facilities are far too small, their infrastructure and their team not setup to brew at that sort of scale. Stone is a much better fit for what they seem to be trying to do.
I mean they had an entirely unique process. That was their whole shtick.
They had a big multistory warehouse type brewery with fields of open air swimming pools fermenting. That's what made it steam beer. Their setup isn't like any other brewery at all. No vats for brewing!
Anchor Steam brewery is as similar as a concrete plant to other breweries.
So if Sapporo bought this for $143million thinking they could make other style of beer there and didn't even do a brewery tour omfg.
They started selling at scale 1 or 2 days after prohibition ended. This is logistically impossible if they were truly shut down during the entirety of prohibition.
If you plan on being a Walmart lifer, sure. But what about your next job if that isn’t true?
Better to be central to where the majority of companies and candidates are, where your ex-colleagues, parents of your children’s friends, and casual acquaintances (proverbial bowling league) all are part of a broader and accessible network for future job prospects.
It also keeps you culturally (professionally) more similar to your next job’s culture.
I know someone who had a non-technical corporate management role in Bentonville. The company basically decided to eliminate the group and he needed to move somewhere else to even job hunt because there sure wasn't anything else locally.
Of course MBBs and others have expertise. It's just that most of that expertise is not in the industry domain.
They have expertise in crafting and creating compelling arguments, in selling ideas. They have expertise in maintaining an industry-wide view and synthesizing general trends across the industry (or across industries). They have expertise in parachuting in as third-party and the politics that are associated with that.
These are VALUABLE skills. Imagine if everyone in your organization was an expert in crafting narratives, in putting forth concise arguments, in maintaining the larger context beyond their own area of practice.
The problem with strategy consultants is that they are not hired to be objectively valuable to an organization, an industry, society, etc. They are mercenaries who apply their skills to be valuable to specific people. And because they know how to be more compelling, even if they are not actually correct, it becomes deeply problematic over time, or at scale.
> These are VALUABLE skills. Imagine if everyone in your organization was an expert in crafting narratives, in putting forth concise arguments, in maintaining the larger context beyond their own area of practice.
That would certainly be valuable to those people; would it actually help the organization though?
For professional office workers, there are short term and long term benefits to all individuals (entry level, middle management, executives / younger, older) and to the company as a whole. There are also short term and long term detriments to all the same parties.
For individuals, the costs and benefits are easier to grasp, though the net benefit is likely higher than for companies. This makes it harder for companies to make a case as to why it's worth it, especially since the longer term costs and benefits for companies is incredibly difficult to prove in the short run, and without concrete evidence, it's very hard to convince people to give up the more tangible benefits they are seeing as individuals.
Then there's overall societal impact as well. Things like the economic impact on neighborhoods surrounding business districts, residential districts as people shift where they spend their time. Things like changes in civil engineering needs as commute and travel patterns change. But even more broadly, the impact of spouses spending more time together, parents spending more time at home with their children, home duties being more evenly taken care of across parents, etc.
In my mind, the level of complexity and decision making issues is akin to something like outsourcing manufacturing from the United States. There were short term and long term impacts on individuals, on companies, on industries, and on society as a whole that were known, that were debated. But how much import we placed on each, how much each factor was weighed in the moment, versus the broader impacts we are finally realizing and grappling with now, decades later, is just an absolute mess.
The train ride is less of an exploration, more a viewport into, a meditation on what is happening outside the window.
I've done the road trip - a slow meandering journey spanning tens of thousands of miles across the United States and Canada across many months. It's wonderful, but it's also fully engaged while being very hard on the body to drive so much. The engagement is obviously the point, but it's a particular way of travel.
I've also done the Zephyr in both directions, lakeshore limited, etc. on sleeper trains. It's very relaxing, but you also don't get to actually interact much with what is going on outside. But that's not such a bad thing at times. Sometimes it's exactly what you're looking for.
in such a niche market, you're better off creating competition among a few bidders, rather than putting off a significant % of the demand and relying on a person really liking the property to bid up the price.
Put another way, 4 people moderately interested in the property will probably yield a higher price than 2 people that are very interested in the property.
This is especially true in luxury real estate, where buyers go in looking to substantially change the property. They expect to bring in their own architects and designers. The staging is just a canvas.
