text:
There's a website called Cheapism.com that does consumer reviews geared toward getting the best value for money. They claim that they are the only review site that focuses exclusively on low-price products, a part of the market they say is often overlooked by experts. So, this week they published a report on their comparison between Sam's Club and Costco. In the end, they decided that Sam's Club was somewhat better than Costco. But of course, as you can all guess, I don't agree with that. And I don't even necessarily agree with that based on their own data.
One of my biggest gripes with their comparison starts with what is definitely the easiest direct comparison: prices. They compared the prices from the two stores when purchasing a variety of items for a family of four. Overall, they came out spending less at Sam's Club by $12.00 ($215.65 at Sam's vs. $227.08 at Costco). So, you'd think that was pretty cut and dried and apparently they did too because they gave the pricing win to Sam's Club. However, it turns out that Costco is actually cheaper by 3.6% on the actual cost when compared on a per unit basis. So, what that says to me is that Costco is actually less. Does it not say that to you too? If Costco is cheaper on the per unit cost, but costs more overall, that just means that when you are buying at Costco you are getting slightly larger quantities than at Sam's Club. Therefore, their pricing win to Sam's Club is a false victory. You'll have to buy those items (or at least some of them) more often if you shop at Sam's Club, thus spending more over the course of a year. That doesn't seem like a good thing to me.
Using their own comparison table, they show that Costco is the less expensive option by 3.6%, but then in the actual text of the article and the verdict table they contradict this finding by saying that Sam's Club is cheaper. Huh? No, the price is not cheaper overall at Sam's Club, you just weren't buying as much stuff. For instance, in a hypothetical situation, if you buy a 10 ounce jar of peanut butter at Sam's Club for $2.00 and the 16 ounce jar of peanut butter at Costco for $2.50, then Sam's Club is not cheaper for peanut butter because you are paying more for that smaller quantity. You are paying $0.20 per ounce at Sam's instead of $0.16 per ounce at Costco. And you're going to run out of peanut butter faster if you buy it from Sam's. But that isn't what Cheapism.com would say, they would say Sam's is cheaper because you only had to pay $2.00 to get some peanut butter. They also have this statement about buying more manageable sizes at Sam's Club, which seems to me like they are just trying to add credence to their odd price comparison verdict.
I would encourage anyone really interested in a price comparison between these two stores to really look at the Cheapism.com comparison table. You need to really study it item by item for the differences in prices and quantities, as well as brands. I think this tells a different picture than what you will find in the text and verdict table for the Cheapism.com comparison.
I was really interested to read this comparison since I've never done a whole lot of shopping at Sam's Club, but when I did, I didn't find the quality of products to be anywhere near the same. I was hoping that they would do a considered comparison, including a bit of an evaluation of quality differences between the two store brands in particular. Unfortunately, they didn't mention quality at all. And really, in my mind you can't compare two items of varying qualities and act like that is a direct comparison. There are ways to be less subjective about quality too (though usually you can just 'see' the difference) by using label information or nutritional information on food items. But they just compared the store brands without a mention of quality. And that makes me sad. Mostly it makes me sad because part of getting good value (which is what they claim they are about) is quality. They could have at least mentioned it because I know that there are definitely some areas where there are enormous differences in quality of products. I've heard people mention that over and over about things at Sam's Club: lack of quality. It's the same as at Wal-mart, there is a lesser quality sold for their prices. Really, they should have at least covered a little something about that because that is the number one reason I hear people give for why they shop at Costco rather than Sam's Club.
I don't shop at Sam's Club on a regular basis, and haven't even shopped there at all in a few years, but the general feeling on the Internet and from everyone I know that shops at both stores, says that Sam's Club is about cheapness, and Costco is about quality. A lot of reviews and personal opinions I have gotten actually say Costco has the better value for a consumer because they offer quality goods for exceptional prices. This would have been an excellent opportunity for Cheapism.com to disprove that theory. However, maybe they didn't discuss quality because they, like Sam's Club, really are all about cheap and have no consideration for quality. I think they missed an opportunity here to really do a meaningful comparison on the value that both stores offer, that means an emphasis on both price and quality.
Their comparison of services was hit or miss too. For instance, they claim that Costco doesn't sell contact lenses. Strange because I've bought mine there for years and can easily find them, with big giant prices, in the glass wall cabinet right by the eyeglasses. How did they miss them? Maybe it's because they had gotten their glasses at Sam's Club. Don't know, but they say they never even saw them.
Then there's the electronics, where the prices don't differ all that much but they say Sam's is better because they have an extra year of warranty and offer technical assistance which they claim Costco does not offer. However, all over any Costco store's electronics area you will find the signs and brochures talking about their technical concierge services, as well as their second year of warranty for free. If they missed the big obvious things like that, what other things are they missing or leaving out of their review? One of the big things they're missing is that the Sam's Club extra year of warranty is apparently only available to Advantage Plus or Business Plus ($100 membership) members. Whereas at Costco, everyone who purchases a computer, television or projector gets the extra year of warranty, no matter your membership level.
Also, I don't think they were giving any credit to Costco for their added value deals that they often have with electronics and kitchen electrics. For instance, I know that when you buy a camera at Costco a lot of times you get extra things like memory cards, cases, extra batteries or cables, in any case, not just the camera. Does Sam's do that same thing? They mention a camera that Sam's has for $10.00 less, but mention nothing about getting an SD card in the deal at Costco. From looking online, I can see that the camera they compared, Canon Powershot SD4500, comes with a 4GB Class 6 SD card at Costco, but does not come with one at Sam's Club. And at Sam's Club it is going to cost you another $15.00 – $20.00 to get a similarly sized class 6 SD card . So, in the end, you're paying more at Sam's Club for the same camera and a comparable memory card. Well, that pretty much wipes out the Sam's Club advantage, doesn't it?
Then they talk about the pharmacy services but leave stuff out too. They mention that there are some $4/$10 generic prescriptions at Sam's Club and how they have a member prescription plan. But from what I read online you have to have the Advantage Plus membership to get the discounts on prescriptions or the $4/$10 generic prescriptions. They also don't mention that Costco also has a prescription plan for members. Or, how the two plans might differ. Nor do they do a direct price comparison for any actual prescription medications. It does look like if you get one of the generic versions that is on their $4/$10 prescription list, then you would come out ahead at Sam's Club though I didn't do an exhaustive comparison of the lists. I've never done a pharmacy comparison with Sam's Club, but I have done a direct comparison with Wal-mart. Costco was the winner in a big way for my particular set of prescription drugs, so I say that Costco's pharmacy is better and I have actual numbers to prove it. But seriously, this is really going to depend on your prescriptions and to some extent your insurance situation too.
The other thing I didn't like was that they included snippets of reviews from various online sites about the two stores. But that seems a bit contrived and gives too much room for things to be taken out of context. If they had used the broad ratings generalizations that these types of review sites usually give (four stars out of five, or an 87% favorable rating), then that would have been better and more useful. But finding one positive or negative thing that someone wrote in a review isn't all that helpful to me. We all know that there are people that have had bad experiences just about anywhere and we all know that there are people that just absolutely love someplace. However, if the majority of people love or hate someplace that is more telling and useful.
They also do a little comparison, or their version of one anyway, of the membership prices. Again they say Sam's is better because their price is lower and they have more in-store benefits. Of course, they never do list all in-store benefits for each store, but then they seem to not know half of the ones for Costco, so I guess the list wouldn't necessarily be that helpful anyway. But they also don't point out that Costco has a lot of external partner service benefits. Does Sam's Club? I don't know. Nor do they mention anything about the 2% cash back at the Costco $100 membership level. Does the Sam's Club $100 membership level have the same benefit? From what I've read online, it doesn't seem like Sam's Club has the same kind of cash back deal for their upper level memberships.
So, all in all, I'm a little disappointed by this comparison of Costco and Sam's Club. I think they could have been more thorough and certainly could have done a far better job on research before they published this comparison. I found a lot of information online, from here in the UK, so why couldn't they have done that? I didn't even have to spend that long looking things up and I could see that there were discrepancies and issues with the information that included in their article.
Cheapism.com says that they are about value but in reality it appears that they are more concerned with cheapness: how little can I pay to bring something home once. They don't appear to be concerned with how long that product will last or how many times will I have to go buy more. And I guess that is why they don't mention quality in their comparison, and also why they don't place more emphasis on the fact that Costco was cheaper on unit price. They are just looking at how cheaply they could buy their set of items, not how long those items will last, whether that is because the items break or because they have fewer servings. Either way, they were not really looking at the value of these stores or memberships to me, just about how much they would spend right now to get some stuff but not the same amount of stuff.
What do you think? Fair comparison or are there issues? Am I being too in love with Costco? Are there other issues with their comparison that I didn't even consider? Where do you stand on the Sam's vs. Costco thing? And yes, you fans of BJ's, why didn't they include them in their comparison too?
Read the whole comparison:


text:
Deliver a concept/design for a next-generation medical transportation device that enables a rescuer to quickly and safely transport an injured person away from an active combat site.
This Challenge requires only a written proposal.
This Challenge is seeking innovative designs for a transportation device that can be carried into a combat site by a single rescuer, quickly unpacked to load an injured or deceased person, and used to safely evacuate the injured or deceased person away from the combat zone and into a helicopter.
The current design is a collapsible medical stretcher that uses straps to secure the patient, but straps are too slow to deploy in the field. Any design is acceptable as long as it meets all requirements; detailed Technical Requirements are available in the full description. Key improvements over existing systems are: quick/simple loading of an injured person, ease for a single rescuer (on foot) to safely transport the injured person across difficult terrain, ability to support/stabilize the body's vital functions, and overall elegance/simplicity of the design. The Seeker expects to prototype winning designs; successful Solvers may be invited to engage in the design/prototyping process.
This is a Theoretical Challenge that requires only a written proposal to be submitted. The Challenge award will be contingent upon theoretical evaluation of the proposal by the Seeker. To receive an award, Solvers will not have to transfer their exclusive IP rights to the Seeker. Instead, they will grant to the Seeker non-exclusive license to practice their solutions.
What is a Theoretical-Licensing Challenge?
An InnoCentive Theoretical Challenge builds upon an idea but is not yet a proof of concept. A solution to a Theoretical Challenge will solidify the Solver's concept with detailed descriptions, specifications and requirements necessary to bringing a good idea closer to becoming an actual product or service.
This Challenge is a Theoretical-Licensing Challenge, meaning that the Seeker is requesting non-exclusive rights to use the winning solution. By contrast, Theoretical-IP Transfer means that Solvers must relinquish all rights to the Intellectual Property (IP) for which they are awarded. For these forms of a Theoretical Challenge, Solvers that do not win retain the rights to their solution after the evaluation period is complete. The Seeker retains no rights to any IP not awarded.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
I frequently hear that I am a very productive — even prolific — author.
By mainstream standards, that's true. In mainstream, two novels a year — four if you're ultra ambitious — is pretty much the norm. At the end of this year, I'll have published some 46 individual works as Josh Lanyon. It took me four years.* A couple of weeks ago one of my Facebook author friends mentioned in passing that she was aiming to publish 50 works this year.
When I recovered from my faint, I began to snoop around, checking out the production schedules of various colleagues in order to get a feel for the "normal" output of authors in our particular genre. I even posed a couple of questions to writers both aspiring and published on my Facebook and Goodreads walls this past week. While the actual numbers varied, there was a common theme. Everyone valued quality over quantity, everyone was working to their maximum ability, and nearly everyone believed they were not productive enough.
I find the last response the most intriguing. It seems to imply that there's an unknown yardstick by which to judge our productivity. Or that we're in competition with other writers.
And, of course, that's the truth. We do compete with each other for everything from reviews to premium shelf space (even if these days the shelf is a cyber-shelf). We also help each other and support each other, but the fact remains that there are only so many readers with so much money and time. Whether we wish to or not, we are in competition with other writers in our genre.
Few people make a living writing fiction. Most of the writers who support themselves through their craft do so through non-fiction. Even today, with the boom in both ebooks and erotica — and despite the encouraging success of the Amanda Hockings and Joe Konraths — most writers of fiction are not earning a living. But there's no question that earning a living spinning yarns looks a lot more possible than it used to.
Mainstream wisdom dictates that an author begins to earn real money — a self-supporting income — when she's finally got sufficient and still active backlist. How big that backlist needs to be varies according to who you talk to. I've heard everything quoted from seven to forty still active titles. The fact is, it's not the number of titles on your backlist, it's how active those titles are. A backlist of thirty OP titles does one little good.
Ebooks, of course, are the game changer. Ebooks, with their eternal and everlasting backlist, change the publishing world as we know it. Our titles need never go out of print. While the average mainstream mass market paperback has something like a six month shelf life, our electronic books (potentially) last forever.
On the surface that's a wonderful thing. Wonderful for all of us. In four years I've been able to create an active, thriving 46-book backlist. I'm earning a living now — and that earning is no longer supplemented by credit cards as it was for the first couple of years I went fulltime. In fact, my credit cards are clear and I'm saving for my retirement. And, as we've seen, I'm not nearly as prolific as others in this genre.
Ebooks have made it possible for us to do what few in mainstream publishing ever manage.
So is there any possible way this eternal backlist could be a bad thing? I've been thinking about that, and I'm starting to wonder.
We had a home team advantage in that we got here first. We had the vision and the daring to try electronic publishing before most. But the game is changing again. Mainstream writers who originally insisted ebooks would never catch on, are now taking their out-of-print backlists and dumping them onto Amazon and Barnes and Noble and every other possible digital venue. Other entrepreneurs are taking public domain classics and funneling those into the digital channels. All around us digital mini-presses are popping up like mushrooms, and hundreds of new m/m titles are released each month.
What we're essentially talking about is a flood of books hitting an already fiercely competitive market. No wonder there's a pervading sense of we're not producing fast enough. It's a reader's market, no question. If you're a reader, you've got more to choose from than ever before. For authors, however, it's heading fast for the old status quo. With all those books to choose from — ultimately millions more than before — how will readers find your book?
I suppose, whether we like it or not, there will be still greater reliance on promotion and marketing, voices raised ever higher and prices dropped ever lower in a desperate bid to stand out from an exponentially expanding crowd.
The old business model was pretty simple: sell a lot of copies of a few books. But a new business model seems to be taking hold here in ebooks: sell a few copies of a lot of books. It's the democratization of publishing. If you're prolific enough, aggressive enough, it might not even matter whether you're a competent writer. You could still, in theory, sell as much or more as any feted mainstream bestseller.
Thus we have the gal who hoped to write 50 books this year. The odds are she's only selling a few hundred copies of each title. But so long as she keeps having a new title every few weeks, she's got a steady source of revenue. Each new release gives her backlist a little bump and provided her imagination and wrists hold out, she could earn a comfortable living.
Or maybe not.
The problem with an eternal backlist in a genre where it takes dedication to avoid being published, is our first and weakest efforts linger forever side by side with our latest and best releases, and with so much to choose from, readers increasingly exhibit a take-no-prisoners attitude. If your first book fails to satisfy, odds are strong that you won't get another shot, .99 cent price break or not.
Already we're hearing from reviewers and regular readers alike that there is too much to read and it's harder and harder to sift through the dreck. On the other side of the coin, writers are trying frantically to up their output before the market becomes so flooded only the established names will have any chance of earning reader attention. That fear leads to taking shortcuts, and the shortcuts lead to more inferior books, which merely reinforces the complaints of reviewers and readers about the proliferation of crap flooding the m/m market.
Is there a solution to all this? Probably not. The publishing industry is changing so fast right now that I suspect none of us will recognize it in five years. My advice to aspiring writers is that they take their time and make sure their first published work is the absolute best it can be, that they promote it adequately before rushing off to sell the next five manuscripts, and that they pace themselves so that they build a reputation for quality over quantity. Simple stuff, but surprisingly difficult to do when all around you people seem to be pumping out five books a month.
Here's the thing to remember. No one can continue to pump out 50 books a year indefinitely. You don't want to be left at the end of that run of awesome productivity with a largely inactive backlist. But if you've taken time to craft a strong body of work over a period, it will continue to payoff for years and years to come. Take the long view of your writing career and don't worry about what the Joneses are up to.
*The breakdown of those four years went as follows:
7 works in 2007 (3 novels were previously published)
6 works in 2008
15 works in 2009
11 works in 2010
6 works in 2011


text: This study contains comprehensive and analytically rich information to help manufacturers understand product quality issues. Consumers are surveyed regarding problems they experienced at 2 to 6 months of ownership. Analysis focuses on problem areas affecting quality across vehicle systems. Overall performance is summarized with "Problems Per 100 vehicles" (PP100) designations.


text:
"With prices, competition and water situations the way they are all over California, it can be hard for a farmer or rancher to make a living on small acreage," said Jose Fernandez De Soto, UC Cooperative Extension academic coordinator and member of the project team in Ventura County. "Events, U-Pick orchards, educational tours, farm stays, and other visitor-serving operations can add something to their income and help spread the risk of a hard production year. Our workshops will give farmers and ranchers the contacts and tools to more successfully grow and market their agritourism enterprises."
Participants will learn about the variety of potential businesses, including farm stands, U-Pick operations, event hosting, tours, festivals and outdoor recreation. Each participant will receive a free copy of "Agritourism and Nature Tourism in California." The handbook, published by UC Agriculture and Natural Resources, will be used as the text for the class. Attendees will hear from experienced agritourism operators and experts in business planning, risk management, regulatory compliance and marketing. Class instructors will provide individual guidance and help participants form a supportive network as they plan and develop their own agritourism or nature tourism businesses.
Ventura County Agritourism Intensive:
Dates: Tuesdays, Dec 3, 2013, Jan 14 & Feb 11, 2014
Times: 9:00 a.m. - 3:00 p.m. each session (lunch provided)
Location: Center for Non-Profit Leadership, 4001 Mission Oaks Blvd., Camarillo
Cost: $50 for 3-session course – Registration: http://ucanr.edu/agtourventura13
Monterey County Agritourism Intensive:
Dates: Friday, Dec 6, 2013, Wednesdays, Jan 8 and Feb 5, 2014
Times: 9:00 a.m. - 3:00 p.m. each session (lunch provided)
Location: UC Cooperative Extension Monterey County, 1432 Abbott St, Salinas
Cost: $50 for 3-session course – Registration: http://ucanr.edu/agtourmonterey13
Riverside County Agritourism Intensive:
Dates: Mondays, Dec 9, 2013, Jan 13 and Feb 10, 2014
Times: 9:00 a.m. - 3:00 p.m. each session (lunch provided)
Location: Western Municipal Water District, 14205 Meridian Parkway, Riverside
Cost: $40 for 3-session course – Registration: http://ucanr.edu/agtourriverside13
For more Information: Penny Leff, UCCE Agritourism Coordinator, email@example.com, 530-752-7779
Funding for this project was provided by the Washington State University Western Center for Risk Management Education, the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA).


text:
Three glamorous looks for plus-size figures
Beauty standards are no longer represented by thin women, and you can see more and more plus-size women looking gorgeous and loving who they are. It does not matter what other people think about your body as long as you are happy with who you are and how you look. You can adopt a glamorous look even if you are not a size 0. Here are three ideas that you can try:
- Palazzo pants. Skinny jeans look good, but they are not exactly glamorous and they can be very uncomfortable sometimes if you are heavy. Palazzo pants are wide, comfortable, and light for the summer and they look amazing on a plus-size figure. You can wear them with anything, from a basic t-shirt to a delicate silk top. Add a pair of heels and you are ready to attend a glamorous dinner!
- Empire dress. Do you need something more elegant, maybe something for a wedding or a very special occasion? Then the empire dress is what you need. It will emphasize your waist and it will make you look taller and curvier. If you want to show your beauty, you can choose a strapless design that will look amazing with a statement necklace. Should I also mention how incredibly comfortable empire dresses are?
- High-waisted pants. For a comfortable fit, go for high-waisted pants and a wide, colorful top. This will make your legs look longer and it will emphasize a small waist. Besides, you can do anything without thinking about how you sit or how you move. High-waisted pants will give you that relaxed, confident look that we all want, and they are suitable for the day or for evenings. For a bold look, wear high-waisted pants in a bright color.


text:
Video Based Object Detection and Analytics Platform
KritiKal Solutions specializes in real-time video processing solutions for on-line applications apart from off-line video and image analysis solutions. We work on intelligent software critical for security and traffic and transport applications, biometric software, and machine vision systems. We work right from selection of the imaging sensors or cameras and image digitization circuitry, lighting, placement and mounting to processing platform for the software deployment and integration with other electronic or electro-mechanical systems like sensors and motorized arms.
Some of the application areas include intrusion detection, object detection and recognition, vehicle detection, counting and classification and face detection. In all the above applications, our software also supports multiple camera coordination for scenarios which require more than one camera for monitoring or inspection purposes. All our intelligent software suites work on both Windows and Linux platforms and are capable of working with all major categories of cameras from simple analog cameras over TWAIN compatible framegrabbers, DCAM cameras and also cameras on the CameraLink. We also undertake custom software development and turnkey projects based on client needs.


text:
Researching Employers & Programs
You are here
Researching employers is a key step in applying for jobs. You need to have a thorough understanding of different industries, positions, and organizations to land the right position.
LinkedIn is a very under-utilized resource. You should be using LinkedIn to do advanced searches on other Cornell alumni, but also to get a feel for the industry or organizations you're interested in. Is there a company that you'd like to work for, or a job you'd like to get? Look at people who have held similar positions on LinkedIn to identify patterns and see what steps you can take to get to your end goal. Do all students in PhD programs at a particular university have another degree to prepare for the PhD program they're currently in? Do all analysts at a particular company have a similar position earlier in their career, or a certain kind of summer internship? Once you find patterns in people's backgrounds, you can identify steps can you be taking in the next month, six months, and year to get closer to your end goal. Keep networking and chatting with alumni and connections to understand industries and positions.
Also take a close look at job descriptions that you could be interested in. Do they all have similar qualifications, and are you missing any? Are there any areas that you could improve in the next month, six months, or year to eventually reach fulfill this qualification?
Use LinkedIn to identify connections at places in which you're interested. Have a conversation with people you know at organizations of interest to discuss their work, the company and the industry at large. Get a feel for what they do and how you would fit in there.
You should also research the company or industry in which you're interested. Spend time digging through their website! Look at the organization and its mission, and see how you and your values align with it. Find connections between yourself and the missions and values.
Read the news about these industries or organizations to make sure you have relevant information at hand if you're speaking with anyone in the industry. You can set up Google Alerts to receive notifications about certain topics to keep you well-informed.
There are also some resources to keep in mind to learn more about the inside of a company. Vault, Bloomberg and Hoovers are all great places to start.
We have a variety of resources specific to Cornell as well as general job-searching databases to help you check out what's out there in the world. Handshake, our Cornell-specific database, is a great place to get started. You can also review this in-depth spreadsheet of other job- and internship-searching databases like ZipRecruiter. You can sort by a variety of factors, including industry, what kind of job, geographic locations, and more.
In addition to these databases, it's a great idea to check out some specific information on where A&S alumni have gone in the past. We encourage you to review this list of places that have hired recent A&S grads (an aggregate from the last five years), places that have hired international Cornelians in the last two years, and law firms that have hired Cornelians. We also have lists of general rotational programs, financial services programs, diversity programs, and retail programs - please set up an appointment to go over these resources.


text:
- Description
The Gibson USA 2018 Explorer Electric Guitar in Antique Natural is everything you could want in a guitar - visually arresting, tonally powerful, and an unadulterated joy to perform with. If playing guitar was a guilty pleasure, then the Explorer would make the ultimate indulgence. Fortunately, we don't need to excuse ourselves for wanting a piece of this beauty. Each model is supplied with a hardshell case and accessory kit from Gibson, so you can transport yours in safety and keep it in top condition as you go. Don't hang about, do yourself a favour and grab yours now!
Striking body style
Ever since its introduction, the Explorer has forged its own path. The angular shape is a far cry from the rounder-bodied guitars in the Gibson family, and though it was initially released several decades ago, it is still light years ahead of the rest. The body is crafted using mahogany, a solid tonewood that is highly regarded due to its impressive midrange clout and enduring sustain. The weight across the body and neck is finely balanced to create a comfortable feel in the hands, making it an effortless guitar to perform with.
The sublime antique natural finish is protected by a coating of gloss nitrocellulose lacquer, preserving the tonewood for as long as possible so that it can age gracefully.
Solid and fast-playing neck
The set-in mahogany neck is firmly joined to the body of the Explorer, equipping it with a reassuringly unyielding feel in the hand. The neck is shaped to the slimtaper profile to add speed and dexterity to its arsenal. Married to the neck is a torrefied granadillo fingerboard, which is home to 22 frets that are decorated with acrylic dot position inlays for guidance. The neck also features a Tektoid nut which lubricates itself, consequently improving sustain and ensuring accuracy when returning to pitch.
The body shape and neck profile partnership comes together beautifully to ensure that your fretting hand has access to each fret, affording total mastery the fingerboard. The result is a playing experience unlike any other.
Mighty BurstBuckers
To give the 2018 Explorer the tonal palette it deserves, Gibson USA have fitted a pair of their BurstBucker pickups, with a 2 in the neck position, and a 3 in the bridge position. Both pickups are modelled on the hallowed PAF pickups. However, the BurstBucker 3 has been overwound, which is essence gives it a much beefier and hotter output. Control over the pickups comes in the form of independent volume controls, a master tone that controls both, and a three-way pickup selector switch. The range of tones available to allows the Explorer to tackle any musical genre with ease. Dial it back for a smoother, less in-your-face response. Alternatively, ramp up the level, push your amp, and let loose some punishing riffs.
Gig-ready hardware
The headstock is fitted with the highly-reliable Mini Grover Kidney tuners that boast a 14:01 gear ratio, you can rest assured that your strings will stay in tune no matter what. The body is home to an aluminium Tune-O-Matic bridge, which is partnered with an aluminium stopbar tailpiece to provide the perfect anchor point for the strings to optimise intonation and sustain throughout every performance.
- Specification
Manufacturer Gibson Model 2018 Explorer Electric Guitar Body Material Mahogany Neck Material Mahogany Fingerboard Material Torrefied Granadillo Pickup Configuration HH Neck Profile Slim Taper No. of Frets 22 Position Inlays Acrylic Dots Bridge/Tailpiece Aluminium Tune-O-Matic/Aluminium Stop Bar Active/Passive Passive Tuners Mini Grover Pickups Neck: BurstBucker 2 Bridge: BurstBucker 3 Controls 2 x Volume Master Tone Pickup Switching 3-Position Blade: Position 1. Bridge Pickup, Position 2. Bridge and Neck Pickups, Position 3. Neck Pickup Included Accessories Gibson Hardshell Case
Gibson Accessory Kit
- Reviews
Write Your Own Review


text:
Man on work task cr Tom Eyes
Location: Silent Valley, nr Ebbw Vale, Gwent
Opportunity type: Work Party
Available: Tuesdays
Frequency: Weekly
The Eastern Valleys volunteer group works on practical conservation tasks on a variety of our Eastern Valleys reserves.
The Eastern Valleys work tasks take place every tuesday from 10 until 3pm, sometimes the tasks carry on unti later and if you wish to stay on the help is always appreciated.
The work is varied throughout the year but there is always something for people of all abilities. We will provide all tools and protective equipment but please wear sensible clothing for the time of year and sturdy work boots (steel toe caps if you have them) and bring a packed lunch.
If you would like to know more about what the group is doing each week, please see our Eastern Valleys Volunteering Group page.
We look forward to seeing you.
Contact details:
If you are interested in taking part please contact Tom Eyles on either 01495307525 or 07788565459 or email firstname.lastname@example.com.
There are currently no comments, why not be the first.


text:
The USAA Career Starter Loan offers newly commissioned officers an opportunity to borrow up to $25,000 to start their career.
Non-military Books For Personal And Professional Development
Technology and vast sources of entertainment surround us. As a society we watch and play more while reading, learning, and doing less. Holding the title of "U.S. Marine" doesn't make us superior to, or more educated than, our civilian counterparts. It does, however, dictate we are warriors with the responsibility of leading others and performing


text:
By Rich Mosca, Special to Everyday Health
When I tell people I battled mesothelioma and lived to tell about it, they often ask, "Oh, is that the disease they have commercials for on TV?" Yes, my name is Rich and I have that cancer you see on TV.
For those unfamiliar with it, mesothelioma is a form of cancer directly related to asbestos exposure, and it's as deadly as they come. There is no cure. The one FDA-approved drug has very limited effectiveness, and the prognosis for long-term survival is not good. A diagnosis like mesothelioma will stop you in your tracks. And, for many of us, it almost always seems to hit when we least expect it.
Different Journey, Different Plans
In the fall of 2006, I was 54 years old and living a storybook life. My wife, Lora, and I had recently become grandparents, our youngest child was getting married the following year, and we were just about to embark on our dream vacation: a two-week Mediterranean cruise.
I had been feeling a little bloated around that time, and more often than not I would wake up in the middle of the night in a severe sweat best described as feeling like getting out of the shower and jumping directly into bed. I self-diagnosed it as another diverticulitis attack and was going through it unencumbered as usual.
During my annual physical, I didn't even think to mention it to my doctor until he asked the routine question, "Is there anything else you want to discuss?" His eyebrow shot up when I described my symptoms, and he immediately sent me for what I now know would be the first of countless CT scans.
My first scan was scheduled for the following Monday at 8 a.m. That same Monday evening, Lora and I were supposed to fly to Spain to start our cruise. I chugged that disgusting contrast, laid motionless in a CT scanner for an hour, and thought about what I still needed to pack. Did I remember the sunscreen? Were my walking shoes packed? Are we bringing enough Euros? Needless to say, the question "Do I have mesothelioma?" never crossed my mind.
I was barely home when the phone rang. It was my doctor; they found fluid in my abdomen. Little did I know that day was indeed the start of a journey, but it wasn't the one Lora and I had planned.
Three Anxious Months of Waiting
At this point, neither my doctor nor I suspected mesothelioma. Fluid was not a good symptom, but my hopes were it was nothing. It could be a simple fix — a few pills or a quick surgical procedure and it would be over within a couple of weeks. I never imagined it would take more than three months, a half a dozen doctors, and several painful biopsies to get a final diagnosis.
If you've ever waited for important news, you can understand the anxiety I was experiencing during that three-month time frame. What was wrong with me? Why couldn't they figure it out? The mental anguish of waiting and wondering was nearly as painful as those biopsies. Not knowing, feeling powerless, wanting so badly to make myself whole again turned out to be worse than getting that final diagnosis. Having no idea what was wrong, we had no idea what to do. All we could do was wait, see more doctors, get more tests, and hope for something new to happen.
Then, in true mesothelioma fashion, when I least expected it, a new symptom suddenly appeared. When you're waiting for a diagnosis, you'll be amazed at how in tune you become with your body, no matter how loudly or subtly a signal occurs. So when I felt a golf ball-sized lump at the base of my neck, I knew my body just sent me a loud signal.
As I sat through yet another CT scan, I was almost excited about it. Finally, this will give us the answer we've been looking for. This was the one clue to the crossword puzzle we needed. This was the one turn needed to get out of the labyrinth.
What they found was a blood clot in my neck and inflammation in my abdomen. I was sent to the emergency room and admitted to the hospital almost immediately.
Having so much time to think is dangerous, as my excitement now had transformed into fear: Fear that I wouldn't see my grandchildren grow up; fear that my job of being a father would be cut short; fear that Lora and I would not be able to fulfill the many dreams and plans we made together. I would have given anything to leave that hospital room and run with the bulls in Spain or tandem jump off a skyscraper — something just dangerous enough to take my mind off the unknown and the uncertainty of a daunting diagnosis.
More biopsies, more doctors, more questions. In just three months, I had visited more hospitals than I had in my entire 54-plus years. But just when the repetitive cycle of seeing a doctor and getting a test started to feel like a way of life, something miraculous happened: I found a surgeon without an ego (which surgeons themselves will tell you is a rarity). Even though the biopsies were initially inconclusive, he knew what he was looking at. His words of wisdom still reverberate in my head: You need to see a mesothelioma specialist!
Eight Years Later, I Still Have That TV Cancer
The mesothelioma specialist finally delivered a definitive diagnosis, and in a strange way, a sense of control I hadn't felt over the past three months. Having that diagnosis made me feel active, almost triumphant. It also let me know I had a new journey ahead of me — one that I never expected. One that has lasted almost eight years.
When people refer to my disease as "that one on TV," I laugh and nod. Yes, "that one from TV commercials." It's a rare form of cancer that currently has no cure and few viable treatment options. It's a rare form of cancer that, for now, my doctors and treatments have kept on the back burner.
Rich Mosca has been an active member of the mesothelioma patient community for more than seven years and has attended the last seven International Symposia on Malignant Mesothelioma, including advocacy days on Capitol Hill. Through a nomination by the Mesothelioma Applied Research Foundation, he has participated in six Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs' grant panels, giving him a unique perspective on the scientific community's focus and dedication that most patients do not experience. Prior to retiring, Rich spent 35 years working in the IT industry.


text:
A PB4Y-1 on anti-submarine sweep from
At three quarters of a mile and
Machine gun flashes were observed coming from a position near the Conning Tower, no men were observed on deck, and the U-boat gave no indication of attempting to crash-dive. The plane regained altitude to
By Cap. Jerry Mason USN Ret. www.uboatarchive.net