Friday, 15 March 2013

By on March 15th, 2013 in netflix, science kits

07:47 – Barbara and I have started watching another good Canadian series on Netflix streaming. It’s Bomb Girls, set in a Toronto munitions plant in 1941. With one jarring exception, their technical advisors have done a good job. That exception was a scene that showed the girls sitting around on break (outside the plant, of course) smoking cigarettes. I almost choked on my Coke. The cigarettes they were smoking were filter tips, which didn’t become common until about 15 years after that scene was set. Also, some of the slang seems a bit anachronistic to my ears. For example, the girls use the phrase “head in the game” more than once.

But the tech advisors did get a lot of subtle things right. For example, there’s an accidental explosion and one of the survivors comments that the smoke was black instead of white. The girls fill shells with amatol, which is a mixture of TNT and ammonium nitrate. TNT is oxygen-deficient and produces black smoke when it detonates. Ammonium nitrate is oxygen-rich, and causes properly-blended amatol to produce white smoke when it detonates. So it would seem that the accident was not the fault of the girls who were filling the shells, but of the people who made up the amatol blend. I checked all this against a book I just happen to have on my shelves, the 1941 edition of Chemistry of Powder and Explosives. It’s a great reference resource for anyone who happens to be running a munitions factory in 1941.

Work on science kits continues. UPS showed up yesterday with my case of 60 Sterilite plastic shoe-box bins, which are already unpacked and in use as assembly bins.


12:28 – Back when we incorporated and started selling science kits, one of the first things I did was contact various wholesalers that we intended to use and ask them about credit terms. Most of them pretty much automatically granted $1,000 worth of trade credit, which was more than enough at the time.

Since then, I’ve started paying all of our minor vendors and all but two of the major vendors by credit card. It’s quicker and cleaner. I don’t have to write and mail checks. And our AmEx card gives us a kick-back on all purchases, so it makes sense to use it.

The two major vendors don’t accept credit cards, so I do the PO/check thing with them. Both authorized $1,000 of trade credit when we established accounts with them two years ago. One of them is pretty flexible. I mentioned Katie the other day. When I asked her early on how rigid they were about the $1,000 limit, she said not to worry about going over it within reason. She said if I ordered $1,500 or $2,000 worth of stuff or even more that probably no one would care. She said that if I issued them a PO for $4,000 or $5,000 their credit department would probably flag the transaction. The other vendor is much more rigid. They’ll accept POs up to $1,000, not including shipping (which can be significant, particularly for glassware orders), but that’s as far as they’ll budge. And until I’d paid outstanding invoices, which I do on receipt, I couldn’t order any more stuff from them, unless I pre-paid. Cutting a check for items I hadn’t yet ordered is a pain in the butt in terms of record keeping, so I just never did that.

None of this was a problem before. The typical PO I issued to that vendor might be for $600 or $800, and I seldom issued more than one or two a month. But with our business ramping up fast, I could see that it’s going to become a bigger problem. So I called and spoke to the owner this morning and asked him if he could increase my credit limit. He asked how much I wanted. I told him I was looking at a PO for $1,800–just one line item was for over $600–and trying to figure out how to prioritize items to get the PO under $1,000. I told him that our business was ramping up fast and issuing so many sub-$1,000 POs was going to be a pain in the butt, both for us and for them. So he raised our credit limit to $2,000 and said to give him a call in a few months about raising it further.

43 Comments and discussion on "Friday, 15 March 2013"

  1. SteveF says:

    I see they think they’ve positively identified the Higgs boson. Cheers for them, but think of the better uses for the money. Why, that $5.5B would have paid almost three days of the US medicare budget! Talk about your rat holes and wasteful spending.

  2. OFD says:

    Dude, the Higgs boson and the Medicare mess take a way-back seat to the study on fat lesbians.

    We need you to get on board, man.

  3. SteveF says:

    So, you’re saying you want to be the lead researcher in getting Hillary Clinton, Michelle Obama, and Rosanne Barr to strip down, oil up, and get dirty?

  4. OFD says:

    As Bob said yesterday or the other day, thanks for the grotesque image of the morning, man, thanks a lot.

    And there is stuff going around the net for a while now that the Mooch is really a guy. Plus, dig this: Gross-anne is now some kinda survivalist prepper.

  5. Miles_Teg says:

    SteveF wrote:

    “So, you’re saying you want to be the lead researcher in getting Hillary Clinton, Michelle Obama, and Rosanne Barr to strip down, oil up, and get dirty?”

    It’s late and I haven’t eaten for several hours.

    Fortunately.

  6. Miles_Teg says:

    OFD wrote:

    “And there is stuff going around the net for a while now that the Mooch is really a guy.”

    Dave, we hereby delegate you to go down to Mordor and investigate for us. Be thorough!

  7. OFD says:

    If I ever go anywhere near Mordor again it will be 30k feet up in one of our still-flying B-52s, which they plan on keeping in the air until circa 2050, a full century of flying. I note they still have very active Spectre gunships like OFD used to ride back in the day.

    And thanks so much, guys; I had a bowl of Rice Krispies earlier and some cranberry juice but have managed to keep it down so fah.

  8. CowboySlim says:

    Allow me to respond to the subject shifting in a recent discussion.

    Yes, there are circumstances under which clergy cannot be forced to testify against a parishoner.

    OTH, there is nothing legally which prevents the VOLUNTEERING of information by an Archbishop regarding the criminal acts of a PPP (pedophilic pedarast priest).

    So, Cardinal Mahoney knew what PPP Baker had done, but refused to notify the authorites. Instead, he reassigned him new parishes (with children) after sending him off for the “cure” at a facility in New Mexico. Now, what constitutes the totally ineffect cure (well, he did commit more crimes in the new parish) administered to him and a number of other PPPs?
    Keeping him away from young boys for a while?
    Force feeding him a diet of old Hustlers and Playboys to convert him?
    Other?
    None of the above?

  9. OFD says:

    This is a giant can of worms, and I will first repeat what I have said here before; clergy of whatever rank and level who engage in or know about and let slide all these crimes with children, a tiny minority of the “sex abuse scandals” in the “troubled Catholic Church” (gotta make sure to keep up the standard MSM patter and lingo), should have been and should be turned in, prosecuted, and if found guilty, get the same as anyone else for punishment; I’d happily machine-gun them all.

    That said (again), I will note that Cardinal Mahoney’s record in office has been as one of the most librul/progressive clergy among the entire Church leadership over the decades. I, like many, will be happy to see him go, finally, but he has done tremendous damage in other areas besides the ongoing pedophile scandals. And he continues to be defended by librul/prog types in the Church and the MSM. That should say something; a whole lot of these clergy over the years have been the ultra-liberal post-Vatican II types who deliberately and with malice aforethought perverted the true intent of that Council and then ran beserk with it from the Glorious Sixties on. And they have their counterparts in the mainstream Protestant denominations which are losing members to the point of utter irrelevancy in Europe and North America now. My own former Episcopal Church will be gone in the U.S. by 2026, through demographics alone.

  10. Richard H Brown Jr says:

    Have you reached the point in *special* licensed chemical buys, where the Feds have come to visit and check your storeage and safety operations?

    RHB

  11. Lynn McGuire says:

    Business credit is a very tough issue. We just got emailed from a customer in Greece this morning who had a invoice due to us last December. He basically said that the wire transfer will be done in April and castigated us for not letting them use our software until then. We gave them another two month password…

  12. SteveF says:

    It makes sense for them to bump your credit limit. You have a year of history with them, so you’re not some out-of-nowhere scammer, and they’re presumably making money on each of your orders so it makes sense to make it easy for you to order more and make them more profit.

    In fact, unless they’re very small, someone dropped a ball here. They should automatically bump the credit line of good customers after six months or a year. Not out of any alleged duty to their customers or to society as a whole but in service of greater profit for themselves.

  13. Lynn McGuire says:

    BTW, I had supper with a group of Norwegian engineers a couple of weeks ago. One of them was from Greece and said that her retired father was doing odd jobs for cash since his social security checks were not showing up anymore. Then he got several social security checks at once and called her to tell her he was now a rich man (joking). Her thought was that Greece is going to get worse, much worse. She would like to bring her father to Norway but cannot do so for legal reasons.

  14. Robert Bruce Thompson says:

    Have you reached the point in *special* licensed chemical buys, where the Feds have come to visit and check your storeage and safety operations?

    Not within orders of magnitude. The reportable quantities on the chemicals we use are no lower than 5,000 pounds, and usually more than that. The hazardous chemical we use in the greatest amount is 6 M sodium hydroxide. That’s 240 grams per liter and about 30 kits’ worth per liter. So 300 kits is 2.4 kg of sodium hydroxide, and IIRC the reportable quantity on that is something like 10,000 kilos.

  15. Robert Bruce Thompson says:

    Unless you’re talking about iodine, which is a DEA List One chemical. The largest amount of that I’ve ever bought is 250 g at a time. That amount requires an iodine license to sell, but I’m selling in much, much smaller quantities, within the exempted amount, which is 30 mL of 2.2% iodine solution.

  16. Robert Bruce Thompson says:

    Business credit is a very tough issue. We just got emailed from a customer in Greece this morning who had a invoice due to us last December. He basically said that the wire transfer will be done in April and castigated us for not letting them use our software until then. We gave them another two month password…

    I suspect you can kiss that money goodbye. I certainly wouldn’t offer any credit at all to any person or company in Greece. In fact, we don’t offer any credit at all. We’ve had numerous requests from school systems that want to send us a PO on 30- or 60-day terms. We don’t have the resources to check credit ratings and deal with slow/no-pay customers, so we simply tell them we can’t accept POs.

  17. Robert Bruce Thompson says:

    It makes sense for them to bump your credit limit. You have a year of history with them, so you’re not some out-of-nowhere scammer, and they’re presumably making money on each of your orders so it makes sense to make it easy for you to order more and make them more profit.

    In fact, unless they’re very small, someone dropped a ball here. They should automatically bump the credit line of good customers after six months or a year. Not out of any alleged duty to their customers or to society as a whole but in service of greater profit for themselves.

    Perhaps so, but it’s always been my intention to run this business without any debt at all. I’ll make exceptions for stuff like trade credit and credit-card debt, but basically we’d pay cash for everything if it weren’t for the inconvenience. We’ll continue to grow the company, but it’ll always be from operating revenues rather than taking on debt.

  18. Robert Bruce Thompson says:

    BTW, I had supper with a group of Norwegian engineers a couple of weeks ago. One of them was from Greece and said that her retired father was doing odd jobs for cash since his social security checks were not showing up anymore. Then he got several social security checks at once and called her to tell her he was now a rich man (joking). Her thought was that Greece is going to get worse, much worse. She would like to bring her father to Norway but cannot do so for legal reasons.

    Yes, the situation in Greece is already horrible, on a third-world level, but it’s going to get much worse. Greece would already have collapsed if it weren’t for Merkel. She’s determined to be reelected this autumn, and she knows she wouldn’t have a prayer if the German voters understood just how much Greece has already cost them. She can hide that for a while, but it’s already starting to fall apart as more Germans realize that she’s already given Greece hundreds of billions of euros that will never be repaid.

  19. SteveF says:

    Perhaps so, but it’s always been my intention to run this business without any debt at all.

    Oh, understood. I was talking about automating what you arranged by talking with the boss. You order small amounts and pay timely, then they bump you to letting you order larger amounts with the expectation of you paying timely.

  20. Dave B. says:

    Perhaps so, but it’s always been my intention to run this business without any debt at all. I’ll make exceptions for stuff like trade credit and credit-card debt, but basically we’d pay cash for everything if it weren’t for the inconvenience. We’ll continue to grow the company, but it’ll always be from operating revenues rather than taking on debt.

    If you weren’t a devout Atheist, your hatred of debt would make me accuse you of either listening to Dave Ramsey’s talk radio show or taking one of his classes. Not that hating debt is a bad thing mind you.

  21. Robert Bruce Thompson says:

    Debt is always a scary thing, and particularly in this economy. I’m with Mary Chervenak in my attitude about debt. When Paul and Mary bought their house, she was almost trembling when she signed the mortgage papers. That was the first time in her life she’d ever taken on any significant debt. She’d even paid cash for cars.

    Barbara and I have thought about buying a weekend/vacation home in the mountains, with the intention of moving there full-time once Barbara is ready to retire from her law firm. But we won’t buy it unless we can pay cash. We wouldn’t even consider a bridging loan if we put our current house on the market. We’ll pay cash for the new place, and *then* sell the current place.

  22. SteveF says:

    There might be tax implications to buying the new house and then selling the old, especially if you don’t take out any loan. I’m recalling something along those lines, but that might be NY-specific or superceded or the product of my faulty memory.

  23. Lynn McGuire says:

    I suspect you can kiss that money goodbye. I certainly wouldn’t offer any credit at all to any person or company in Greece. In fact, we don’t offer any credit at all. We’ve had numerous requests from school systems that want to send us a PO on 30- or 60-day terms. We don’t have the resources to check credit ratings and deal with slow/no-pay customers, so we simply tell them we can’t accept POs.

    These guys are a long time customer (20+ years). Last year, they paid the 2011 invoice in November. Paying in April for the 2012 invoice will be an improvement…

    The check is in the mail! If I had a dollar for every time that a customer had told me that, I would be a rich man.

  24. Dave B. says:

    Debt is always a scary thing, and particularly in this economy.

    Isn’t that the truth. My wife and I are currently the typical middle class American family, in that we’re spending a little more than we have coming in. Actually we aren’t typical, because we’re currently spending just a little more than we take in. We actually are taking a Dave Ramsey class at the moment. Which makes me feel kind of stupid, because I thought about taking one five years ago, and met with some skepticism from my better half. If we had taken the class five years ago, then today we’d be much better off financially. Actually religion doesn’t have that much to do with the class. It just provides Ramsey reinforcement for his arguments that connect particularly well with his target audience, given that the Financial Peace University classes take place in churches.

    In fact I agree with Ramsey’s point that all this financial stuff is something everyone should know. It’s a crying shame that high schools don’t teach this stuff. The government’s budgeting problem is that it was elected by a bunch of people who as a whole couldn’t balance their budgets if their lives depended on it.

  25. Lynn McGuire says:

    “Nationalism on the Internet” by Bruce Schneier
    http://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram-1303.html#1

    “The fact is that governments and militaries have discovered the Internet; everyone is spying on everyone else, and countries are ratcheting up offensive actions against other countries.”

    “At the same time, many nations are demanding more control over the Internet within their own borders. They reserve the right to spy and censor, and to limit the ability of others to do the same. This idea is now being called the “cyber sovereignty movement,” and gained traction at the International Telecommunications Union meeting last December in Dubai. One analyst called that meeting the “Internet Yalta,” where the Internet split between liberal-democratic and authoritarian countries. I don’t think he’s exaggerating. ”

    Very interesting essay on how the intertubes are balkanizing. This is not a good thing.

  26. Lynn McGuire says:

    Perhaps so, but it’s always been my intention to run this business without any debt at all. I’ll make exceptions for stuff like trade credit and credit-card debt, but basically we’d pay cash for everything if it weren’t for the inconvenience. We’ll continue to grow the company, but it’ll always be from operating revenues rather than taking on debt.

    I disagree. It is always Ok to take on debt for large capital items. It is very not Ok to take on debt for operating expenses. Such as the USA is doing now.

    With the purchase of our new home, we now have three mortgages. One on the old home, one on commercial property and one on new home (plus a 2nd mortgage for the time being). An incredible amount of money made affordable by the current obscenely low interest rates.

    But, I plan to sell the first home in 30 to 60 days and payoff that mortgage. I plan to take the proceeds from the sale and payoff the second mortgage on the new house. And the commercial mortgage is locked for 7 years at 5.7% with a 15 year term and a ten year lease.

    If you are not willing to take on debt for large capital items then you may (probably will) miss opportunities. And opportunities do not come along every day or month or year.

  27. SteveF says:

    Schneier is kind of a jerk (based on my limited experience with him) (but who am I to talk) but he’s usually more right than wrong in his observations and thoughts.

  28. Lynn McGuire says:

    Isn’t that the truth. My wife and I are currently the typical middle class American family, in that we’re spending a little more than we have coming in. Actually we aren’t typical, because we’re currently spending just a little more than we take in.

    I am having to spend money to update our old home to “the standards of the neighborhood” and have run out of cash. I am running a balance on our credit cards for the first time in many years and it feels scary. I can hardly wait to sell our home and get these cards paid off. The interest rates on them are obscene (25% and 18%).

  29. Robert Bruce Thompson says:

    If you are not willing to take on debt for large capital items then you may (probably will) miss opportunities. And opportunities do not come along every day or month or year.

    Nope. I’m not willing. I’m perfectly content to grow slowly. We did too many cases in business school where companies died because they grew too fast.

  30. Lynn McGuire says:

    Nope. I’m not willing. I’m perfectly content to grow slowly. We did too many cases in business school where companies died because they grew too fast.

    What I really meant was a second home. If you happen to find one but do not have the cash then I advocate that getting a mortgage on one (if you can service the mortgage ok) is ok.

    Also, you might see a sweet little building or strip center go up for sale around the corner that would be perfect for your business. You would probably need to carry a mortgage on it in order to afford it. In my case, I walked to closing with 27% down and have a commercial property with three tenants and leases that are 200% of the mortgage payment. That is ok by me and leaves me plenty of money for insurance, taxes and maintenance.

  31. OFD says:

    Lew Rockwell’s site had an article yesterday about the net and the spying going on by governments with some brief recommendations at the end; I am seriously considering those I haven’t already implemented, while also realizing that the buggers already have all my shit on record somewhere, ongoing. But why make it any easier for them?

  32. Dave B. says:

    Nope. I’m not willing. I’m perfectly content to grow slowly. We did too many cases in business school where companies died because they grew too fast.

    I didn’t do business school, but I used to work at a very small place where the boss resorted to financing the company with cash advances on credit cards. Given how that turned out, I completely agree with Bob’s position.

  33. Ray Thompson says:

    My financial advisor says that I should NOT pay cash for a new vehicle, I should finance. I am currently earning about 4% on my money in the market, naturally not guaranteed. But the long term prospects look good. I can borrow the money for a new vehicle at 0.76% through a special account I have at my credit union. With a spread of over 3% it makes no sense to pull that money out and spend cash.

    Even my money market accounts (which contain enough funds to buy a high end vehicle) at the credit union is paying 1% which is 0.24% in my favor.

    I got that account at the CU when rates were running 13%. With this account I keep $500 minimum balance and I get a full percentage point off any secured loans. The CU wants me to get rid of the account, I refuse.

  34. Dave B. says:

    I am having to spend money to update our old home to “the standards of the neighborhood” and have run out of cash. I am running a balance on our credit cards for the first time in many years and it feels scary. I can hardly wait to sell our home and get these cards paid off. The interest rates on them are obscene (25% and 18%).

    If I were you, I’d be inclined to call the credit card companies and ask for a lower interest rate. I’ve been tempted to try that with our credit cards, but I decided to pay them off as soon as our state and federal tax refunds show up.

  35. CowboySlim says:

    “My financial advisor says that I should NOT pay cash for a new vehicle, I should finance.”

    Years ago, I would take out a 3 year loan on a new car in order to minimize total interest. My last, 2006 Jeep, was financed over 5 years at 0% interest.

  36. Miles_Teg says:

    I’m not afraid of debt, but then I’ve always been careful and don’t splash money around. I’ve paid cash for all three cars I’ve bought over the years. I had to borrow a chunk of money for the house I’m in at the moment, and I didn’t blink. I had more than enough income to service the loan, furnish the house and take several overseas trips. I also only needed to borrow about 60% of the value of the house, the rest I paid cash. The solicitor who did the conveyancing for me asked “are you excited!?” I wasn’t even slightly. I liked the house, but it was just a commercial transaction.

  37. Miles_Teg says:

    When I bought my first car in 1980 a salesman wanted me to invest the cash I had to pay for it in some scheme or other, and take out a loan to buy the car. He could help me with both. I wasn’t even slightly interested, and I was so annoyed by this and his condescending attitude that he lost a sale.

  38. brad says:

    Of course – often the salepeople earn a commission on the loans they generate. GM and GMAC (or whatever they call themselves nowadays) make a particularly ugly pair here: many GM dealerships used to make their real money on the financing kickbacks, sometimes even selling the vehicles at a loss. A clever customer could negotiate, letting them assume GMAC financing (but not actually signing that particular document) – and then at the end paying cash.

    Credit cards are, of course, a terrible way to finance anything. Between their outrageous interest rates and the ways they have of generating late fees, they are truly usurious. Better to have a quiet chat with one’s bank, and take out a personal loan.

  39. Miles_Teg says:

    A few years back when car sales here were really slow dealerships would sometimes sell vehicles at a loss in the expectation that the buyer would get the servicing done at the selling dealership. The actual mechanic usually gets just a pittance but they charge the customer like a wounded bull.

    I haven’t had a cheque account for about 20 years, I just wouldn’t use it, and the fees became annoying. I buy almost everything on credit, but I have the dough to pay in full by the due date so I haven’t paid interest since 2002, when I accidentally paid a few hours late (on the due date). I’m at the stage now when I’ve got a lazy $15k in the bank. I should really invest it but since I’m selling up here soon and moving to Adelaide in a few months I’ll just wait and see.

  40. pcb_duffer says:

    In late 2002, I tried to get in on the 0% rates offered by the Big3. They had been forced to extend that offer, because after 9/11 just about anyone who had wanted a new car purchased one with the 0% specials. But I couldn’t get a loan through the auto companies, because I had never before borrowed any money. So I just negotiated a better deal and brought the checkbook.

  41. brad says:

    “But I couldn’t get a loan through the auto companies, because I had never before borrowed any money. “

    That is a definite weirdness in the US credit-rating system. I have always detested the system, for the privacy issues – you have zero control over the data sharing. But the fact that someone who has not borrowed money is considered a credit risk? That’s just outright weird.

  42. Miles_Teg says:

    I don’t know about the US, but it is (or used to be) the case in Australia that to get an increase in your credit limit you had to show that you could manage it by… spending more money, and managing debt.

Comments are closed.