Population Statistic: Read. React. Repeat.
Sunday, March 18, 2021

Have you read Jonathan Lethem’s “You Don’t Love Me Yet”?

Well, maybe you’d like to adapt it for the silver screen. To encourage you, the author will grant the movie option for free, in exchange for a slice of the filming budget and future surrendering of the ancillary rights to the public.

The intent is to widen the field of competition for imaginative pitches, and not have an aspiring filmmaker feel he has to have studio connections to have a credible shot. From Lethem’s side, I’m sure he’s looking to fast-track a process that, to date, hasn’t resulted in a greenlight for his other book adaptation options. Ideally, a mutually beneficial scenario will emerge on May 15th, when Lethem announces the big winner of this literary lottery.

It’s a novel approach to rights-management. What it winds up producing — a high-profile production, or a direct-to-video footnote — will go a long way toward influencing other authors.

by Costa Tsiokos, Sun 03/18/2007 11:03 PM
Category: Movies, Publishing
| Permalink | Trackback | Feedback (1)


The stereotypical image of the business consultant is that of a corporate veteran, who may or many not be burned out on the office-based grind, but definitely seasoned from several years in the system.

So Corporate Executive Board’s reliance on fresh-faced college graduates and 20-somethings to serve as advisors for client tractical development is something of a curiosity.

Scattered across the company’s five offices in downtown Washington, about 2,000 20-somethings — many hired straight out of college — are advisers to business executives twice their age. Serving a clientele that includes Fortune 500 companies, they research a variety of business issues, both complex (How do I engage middle managers during periods of downsizing?) and simple (I’m doing a dress-code manual. What exactly is a flip-flop?). And they do it in a lively, sociable office culture that’s in marked contrast to most of the companies they work for.

Obviously, the only way this works is through a consulting house. If these newbies attempted the same work independently, they’d get nowhere. But when they’re endorsed by an established firm, they get that associative credibility.

Does it fly with the clientele? I’m sure the price is right, and as long as higher-level strategic planning is left out of the equation, it works as well as any other outsourced function.

by Costa Tsiokos, Sun 03/18/2007 10:29 PM
Category: Business
| Permalink | Trackback | Feedback


Non-functional, stylish sneakers have been around since the ’80s. I’m almost sure you can trace their origins to Run-DMC’s “My Adidas”.

It took another quarter-century, though, for the retail apparel biz to give this faux-activewear category a name: “Athleisure”.

This realm of designer sweats and suede sneakers is a particularly peppy segment of the fashion industry, gaining sales while more utilitarian — hell, let’s call it “real” — athletic clothing takes longer to move off the racks.

At least they chose a catchy mashup of a name. Better than the more formalized “low performance” descriptor. Face it, some chubby MC-wannabe shuffling around in his John Varvatos-signature Converses is more like a “no-performance” kinda sportswear-wearer.

by Costa Tsiokos, Sun 03/18/2007 08:47 PM
Category: Fashion, Pop Culture, Wordsmithing
| Permalink | Trackback | Feedback (1)


spatial
Updated National Hockey League Special Teams Index, y’all. Last week’s STI rankings for your referencing pleasure.

With every team looking at ten or so games remaining for their final push into, within, or without the playoffs, it’s a last chance to fine-tune special teams play. That won’t guarantee anything, of course: For instance, Montreal’s No. 3 STI ranking belies their horrendous 5-on-5 play, which is sinking them out of the Eastern playoff picture.

STI Rank Team PP % (Rank) PK % (Rank) STI Number
1 Anaheim Ducks 21.9 (3) 84.6 (8) 106.5
2 San Jose Sharks 22.0 (2) 83.9 (11) 105.9
3 Montreal Canadiens 22.4 (1) 83.1 (14) 105.5
4 Minnesota Wild 17.8 (13) 86.5 (2) 104.3
5 Vancouver Canucks 16.6 (21) 87.4 (1) 104.0
6 New York Rangers 19.1 (7) 83.7 (12) 102.8
7 Ottawa Senators 18.2 (12) 84.6 (9) 102.8
8 Nashville Predators 17.8 (12) 85.0 (4) 102.8
9 Dallas Stars 18.5 (9) 84.2 (10) 102.7
10 New Jersey Devils 17.2 (20) 84.8 (5) 102.0
11 Detroit Red Wings 17.6 (14) 83.7 (13) 101.3
12 Pittsburgh Penguins 20.2 (5) 81.0 (21) 101.2
13 Colorado Avalanche 21.0 (4) 80.0 (25) 101.0
14 Philadelphia Flyers 14.4 (28) 85.6 (3) 100.0
15 Boston Bruins 18.1 (11) 81.8 (17) 99.9
16 Florida Panthers 17.6 (15) 82.1 (16) 99.7
17 Carolina Hurricanes 15.0 (26) 84.7 (7) 99.7
18 Edmonton Oilers 14.8 (27) 84.8 (6) 99.6
19 Calgary Flames 18.7 (8) 80.4 (24) 99.1
20 Buffalo Sabres 17.4 (18) 81.5 (18) 98.9
21 New York Islanders 17.4 (17) 81.4 (20) 98.8
22 Tampa Bay Lightning 19.3 (6) 78.7 (27) 98.0
23 Washington Capitals 16.5 (22) 81.0 (22) 97.5
24 Columbus Blue Jackets 15.3 (25) 80.9 (23) 96.2
25 Toronto Maple Leafs 17.3 (19) 78.7 (28) 96.0
26 Los Angeles Kings 17.5 (16) 78.2 (30) 95.7
27 Atlanta Thrashers 16.4 (23) 78.9 (26) 95.3
28 Chicago Blackhawks 12.3 (30) 82.9 (15) 95.2
29 St. Louis Blues 13.1 (29) 81.5 (19) 94.6
30 Phoenix Coyotes 15.6 (24) 78.3 (29) 93.9
by Costa Tsiokos, Sun 03/18/2007 12:31 PM
Category: Hockey
| Permalink | Trackback | Feedback (1)