What a Tuel

So do they still donate to charity for these or did they drop the charity part now? Also are every other team's little people generic non specific players? They all have double 00 as their numbers except the Bills who have Allen, Knox, and Von Miller.

There have only been 35 Super Bowl winning head coaches in 56 years. You are telling me every other head coach is inept?

It makes them a better team, but people ignore that both Rodgers and Cook (not as bad of a down year) had down years last year and attribute it at least for Rodgers to "just not trying". Rodgers had the most INT's since his rookie year last year, 3rd lowest TDs, 3rd lowest completion %, and least yards in a non injured season. We will see if a new team gives him a spark or if last year is the beginning of the end. I look at Dalvin Cook as just the placeholder for Breece Hall who apparently isn't ready. Breece Hall should be better, so does that really make them better? Yeah, but not better than the Jets with a healthy breece hall.

Scalpers dont help. They only inflate. But to each their own. Also they aren't collectible. They are children's toys remember? 🙄

No one said they are doing something illegal. And it isnt just children's toys either, it also applies to ticket sales. So off base on both counts. The toy scalping are just extra scummy because money went to charity. Fisher Price lowballed demand on the 1st run, and scalpers took advantage. Fisher price shouldve made a 2nd run of the year 1 items and gotten more money for charity rather than the scumbags buying them up and selling them for $150 a pop.

To add some more context the Cleveland drives after it was 28 to 10 were: 28-10 6:45 remaining to play: Run Chubb -1 yards Pass Incomplete Pass Complete 6 yards Pass Complete 6 yards Pass Incomplete Run Hunt 11 yards Pass Incomplete Pass Complete 14 yards Pass Complete 27 yards Pass Complete 7 yards - TD 31-16 1:56 Remaining to play: Pass Complete 12 yards Pass complete 15 yards Pass complete 12 yards QB Run 6 yards Pass incomplete Pass incomplete Pass complete 20 yards Pass incomplete Pass Incomplete Pass complete 2 yards - TD 31-23 - 19 seconds left Bills kneel.

I think that is because the supply was ramped in year 2 up after they saw the demand for the first run in year 1. It is just sickening to me to see these scalpers plotting already. I just imagine how many they are buying from Wegmans and holding hostage. I hope they eat a ton of losses and Fisher Price did a billion batch run of them.

It is really annoying to me bc doesnt this go to charity? So basically a miscalculation in demand means they don't do another run to make more money for charity but scalpers get to exploit the demand?

Pretty sure this is completely overblown and some intern put together a list of QBs drafted since 2013, and Cowherd was just popping off names and wasnt even thinking who Haskins is. Huge mistake sure, but I doubt it was intentional.

Lol. Now you don't know huh and haven't done that research yet. And yet you are over here comparing non inflation adjusted ink and oil costs and how machinery replaced in 2004 has the same efficiency as the new machinery. That cuts in headcount aren't anything and if anything are counteracted by inflated salaries (which I am sure you'll probably find out have lagged behind inflation). That computing hasn't touched the newspaper industry in any meaningful way. But YEAH, you really were only focused on convincing me that inflation exists, not at all that the costs of production have not only not decreased but INCREASED. 🙄 I'll point you towards your example and leave you to continue going round and round with this. It is more like: $1,000,000 x 2.4 inflation equals $2,400,000 in costs without the efficiency improvements. $550,000 x 2.4 inflation equals $1,320,000 in costs with the efficiency improvements. Inflation happens either way however ultimately the cost of production DECLINES.

So you agree then? The cost of production has not exceeded inflation adjusted dollars? So my initial statement we ultimately agree then (which you disagreed with). Glad we had this talk. 😂 Edit: I find it hilarious that you won't provide the actual quotes with timestamps and keep falling back to your recollection of the order of the conversation.

Man dude. People are right, you just can't accept being wrong. You are providing a bunch of links about soaring costs in 2022 compared to what?!? pre pandemic? 1990? 1950? What? As someone who holds themselves in high esteem for intelligence, you must certainly acknowledge that this does not prove that the cost of production in 2023 exceeds inflation adjusted cost in 1990. And again no. Still wrong on this. Funny how you don't provide the context. Talk about shifting goal posts. It isn't my fault that my initial post soared over your head. I literally said accounting for inflation is correct in my initial statement, but that the cost of production likely didn't skyrocket. You responded with random commodities trying to prove that it costs more in 2023 and utterly failing on multiple fronts. You are literally arguing just to argue lol. Either prove it or just stop.

You just can't admit that you are wrong and it is hilarious. The context of the argument started with this post by me: You just quoted an out of context derivation of the argument as preceding the original statement. So no, once again wrong. Again you are so big on evidence, and you made the claim that the cost of producing a newspaper went up from 1990 in 2023. So go for it. Prove to me that the cost of producing a newspaper without quoting random commodities like printer ink which im not even sure is the same ink used in newspapers. And once again take note of the bolded, underlined, italicized statement in my original argument in which I agree accounting for inflation is correct, but now prove that the total costs of production OUTPACED inflation. That alone would prove that the cost of production went up.

Nope, bud. Not even close. Edit: and yeah you were making the argument that they aren't more efficient now. You literally made arguments that the machinery installed in 2004 is the same efficiency as whatever they had prior to that. You literally made arguments that the reduction in required staff doesn't make a significant impact. Pretty sure you indirectly implied that you don't think computing advances has had any impact either. But like I said, you do you.

Im not getting into it here. You already hijacked one thread with your poor understanding of inflation.

So they replaced the printing press in 2004 with the same exact technology they already had? Come on man. "The Buffalo News took the wraps off its new color commercial printing press Thursday, part of a $1 million investment to expand the company's ability to print high-quality postcards, brochures and reports." You have a terrible understanding of this. It is more like: $1,000,000 x 2.4 inflation equals 2,400,000 in costs without the efficiency improvements. $550,000 x 2.4 inflation equals $1,320,000 in costs with the efficiency improvements. Inflation happens either way however ultimately the cost of production DECLINES.

It has everything to do with the owner's decisions because you say there is value in considering this to determine McDermott's future value. Either there is value in this statistic or there isn't. 😂 I just can't even with you man. You made the claim, and you are SO SO big on proof from what I understand, so prove to me in the other thread that a newspaper costs more to produce 2023 than 1990 without quoting random commodity prices.

Hahahaha. You think it is the same person thinking you are being absurd? The arrogance. Those machines were put in place in 2004. So suffice to say some improvement in the machinery occurred between 1990 and 2004? No? Edit: I say 1990 bc that was your inflation calculator date but it was likely faaaar older machines than 1990 were replaced in 2004. Ok lets talk computers, editing, writers, proofreading, internet research. Any number of things that make it cheaper to produce a damn newspaper man. Just give it up.

This is such a stupid statistic. You really think the owner should base his decision making not on the performance of the coaching staff but on the past record of other coaches? 😂 Don't even bother man. The guy thinks that the cost of production is higher in 2023 than 1990 and won't be told otherwise. How is he ever going to accept that he has bias towards our current HC without evidence despite his posting history knocking the HC consistently. 😂

Dude you are literally arguing the cost of production in 2023 is HIGHER than 1990. I mean give me a damn break. Like I said though. You do you.

Again a quick google search on a few factors does not prove your case. I am not going to argue man, you keep doing you.

It is not fact bc you quote ink prices and oil prices. But whatever man, you go about your business thinking it costs more money to print paper than 1990 🤣

Oh come on man. You really think it costs more to print a paper than in 1990? Give me a break. Show me all the price per barrel nonsense you want. It just isn't the case. The efficiency of technology has drastically altered the cost of production.

It doesn't account for advances in production capability, and productivity that decreases cost though. So yeah the inflated price is right but at the same time, how have their costs of production faired? They certainly didn't skyrocket, and would be amazed to find out they stayed the same.

There are ads even with the subscription?