shs96

The Big 10 does not utilize tiebreakers when determining conference champions in football. Teams with the same record will be "co-champs". So if Ohio St and Michigan St / Penn State finish with 1 conference loss, the two 1 loss teams will be co-champs. Few people realize/remember when Ohio St won the National Championship in 2002, they were Co-Big 10 champs with Iowa. Standard tie-breakers apply for who goes to the Rose Bowl. So if Michigan State wins out and Ohio State wins out, you will likely be seeing Ohio St/USC part II in the Rose Bowl.

I find it pretty humiliating that at the beginning of the year we have the reigning AL Cy Young award winner and future AL Cy Young award winner on our team and they still crapped the bed.

Within a thread to exclusively discuss fuel prices being high and how that's a problem, we have low fuel prices also being a problem.

There was - we were the geeks with name tags :) I meant to say hi, but I couldn't really identify who anyone was and didn't want to risk walking up to a group of people and saying "Hi! I'm SHS96!" and having them look at me and say "who the F names their kid some random letters and numbers?" ... So I stuck to the other random group of people I didn't know :) But glad everyone had a good time! Boo! We were the group in the cabana spot to the right as you'd walk in. Or you could have asked the host where the UO group was, and he would gladly help you out. So did anyone have enough Christmas Ales where they were inspired to do some karaoke? ;) I had enough Christmas Ales where I was not intelligent enough to think of asking the host where the UO group was and karaoked "Glamorous". So yeah.

There was - we were the geeks with name tags :) I meant to say hi, but I couldn't really identify who anyone was and didn't want to risk walking up to a group of people and saying "Hi! I'm SHS96!" and having them look at me and say "who the F names their kid some random letters and numbers?" ... So I stuck to the other random group of people I didn't know :) But glad everyone had a good time!

here we go...

That's a good point. Pittsburgh is NCC's 3rd largest market (Cleveland, Detroit) and of the 3, is the only one with any overlap. I think percentage wise, comparing NCC employees in Pittsburgh compared to Cleveland, Pittsburgh will be hit harder. I still think the volume willbe greater in Cleveland though. Hopefully people will have opportunity to apply for existing job postings with PNC and priority will be given to former NCC employees.

This place is worth trying - the house special, complete with head and neck massage, is worth it. Not to metion the free beer and TV in front of you.

Brady's lack of downfield passing is also completely attributed to the coaching staff. They installed a very conservative game plan which did not ask him to do a whole lot - and he executed that. We'll see what happens as it expands. But this team is in desperate need of a leader. DA is not a leader. He had big games last year against Cincy, Miami, and St Louis - the 3 worst teams in the league. Otherwise, he played average or poorly, particularly when pressure was on him to perform. Hopefully Brady can fill a leadership role. Usually your head coach is supposed to be a leader, but Romeo leads nothing. "Anderson is our QB" (two hours later) "We're making a change to Brady Quinn" Awesome. The whole Frye/Anderson thing last year, DA/Quinn this year, Winslow staph infection mis-management, the inability to manage the clock at the end of the half or game, the play calling, defensive schemes...its horrid. The Broncos HAD NO HEALTHY RB IN THE SECOND HALF! When your opponent has no running back on their roster, do you think they might have to resort to throwing the ball? And you can't put together a defensive package to stop what you know is coming? Complete and total disaster.

So game winding down and you have 2 timeouts left. 1st and 10, you pick up 9 yards. 2nd and 1, incomplete pass. 3rd and 1, incomplete pass. 4th and 1, incomplete pass. Game over. Why it never dawned on anyone on the coaching staff to perhaps run a draw play to pick up a first down, keep the drive alive, and get a new set of downs is beyond me. Denver is running a prevent defense, rushing only 3, I am quite certain you can pick up a first down, call timeout, and continue on. This is why the coaching staff needs to go.

I intend on having a X-mas Ale as soon as I get home tonight, pre Browns taligaiting :) Christmas Ale and Palm Beer (Belgium, recently became available in the US in NYC and San Diego) are my two favorite beers.

well said

Since I can't sit with my legs in the aisle, I just stand. It is what it is. No seat on any public transportation vehicle is going to be ideal for 100% of its users. I don't disagree nor do I mind standing. But people are complaining (from what I see here) about the smaller seat sizes and I don't see any logic behind reducing the size of the seats. And to say "well people should lose some weight if they have a problem", IMO, doesn't address the point.

Ummmmm... these seat-width comments have been coming from skinny people. Fat people don't make such comments because they already know what the follow-up will be... something about gluttony, no matter what their individual situation... I agree. I haven't been on the health line, but I don't fit in the normal bus/train seats unless I utilize the aisle or sit across the seats with my back against the wall. Width is not my problem; I need the leg room. Like life expectency, the average persons size is going up - obesity aside - as we learn more abour nutrition and health.

Absolutely. I had never run over 8 miles when I first decided to run a marathon. Ditto...I had never run more than a 10k. It was only until someone told me I couldn't run a marathon at a similar pace to a 10k that I decided to try it, slowly working my way up of course. Sadly microfracture surgery has put my running days behind me. I decided to quite while I was still ahead.

I'm going to Momocho for dinner so that will probably involve margaritas instead of beer, but... Christmas Ale hit the market this weekend...I got my first case on Saturday around 2:00pm. Apparently a lot of other people had the same idea as the gift shop at Great Lakes was packed (not on the shelves in stores yet, at least not Dave's in Ohio City). They had an early sale special at midnight Friday Night / Saturday morning where, apprently, it was so packed they were handing out numbers and you could only buy two 6-packs per person!

Well, this is all my own speculation based on a few facts so take that into consideration. But... The Monday after the bailout was approved, Raskind (maybe other execs, but at least Raskind) was in Washington making a pitch to the Treasury department to have National City be the "test case" for this bail out package. He did have a good case - well capitalized, many of the troubled assets had been sold off, growing retail bank, and generally a more diversified bank than many others with high risk exposure to troubled assets. Should the economy be in a position of stability, there would be no risk at all. If there is demand for subprime mortgage backed securities on the secondary market, National City is doing just fine. But since there is no demand what so ever and since Sarbanes Oxley is in place, companies have to write down assets at market value as opposed to book value. So what is the market value when there is no demand? $0 (well, it wasn't quite 0, but $0.20 on the $1). This creates a problem. A BIG problem. Because no bank can afford to mark down all these losses at an 80% loss rate. Which is where the TARP package comes in, or is supposed to come in. The government essentially creates a market for these assets ignoring the liquidity issues and buying them back for say $0.80 on the $1 (the actual rate was TBD). Now, considering National City had the highest capital ratio among all tier I banks, they were in the best position to absorb these losses. Let's "say" NCC had $20 billion in distressed assets on its books. At market rate of $0.20 on the $1, that's losses of $16 billion. With $10 billion in capital reserve, I think you see the problem. At the TARP gov't rate of $0.80 on the $1, that's losses of $4 billion...National City can easily absorb that and still remain above the required capital ratio set by the SEC. So why didn't they get the TARP benefit? Consolidation in the financial industry was inevitable at this point, but who and where was yet to be determined. Well, Paulson and the Treasury department decided this process needed to be expidited. They came to the conclusion that the regional banks needed to be consolidated. So they went though and simply picked winners and losers of who would be the recipient of the TARP plan. National City was a loser. Now here's where I think things start to stink. Simply because National City was picked as a loser was not the end all be all. They could have survived on their own, although this was a risk. Lines of credit to the bank were starting to be closed since fewer places were lending and consumer panic (read this thread a few pages back and you can see evidence on this) was a threat to make a run on deposits (this would reduce their capital ratio). But still, all was not lost. That is until Paulson basically told NCC to find a buyer or the government will take control. Gov't control would be a total loss for shareholders and, as required by law, the Board of Trustees at National City is required to maximize shareholder value. The government forced their hand. So PNC makes the best offer, coupled with the government kicking in the TARP package above their independent allowed ratio to match the consolidated PNC/NCC allowed amount. Why that happened is anyone's guess, but if you don't think its effected by politicians lobbying in DC for one cause or another, you would be wrong. From my view, having the Treasury Comptroller being a former PNC guy sure doesn't hurt. And if you look at PNC's primary footprint, you'll see its most heavily located on the East coast - Maryland, New Jersey, Delaware, and DC. It's actually quite odd the HQ is in Pittsburgh as they have a bigger precense in Philly even than in Pittsburgh. Start throwing out some names of prominant politicians in those regions - Jon Corzine, Governor of New Jersey and the CEO of Goldman Sachs prior to Paulson himself, Stephen Friedman, chairman of the National Economic Council, also a former CEO of Goldman Sachs, and Robert Rubin, former Treasury Secretary under Clinton, also a former CEO of...you get the idea...

Well, yes and no. Yes, National City only has itself to blame for getting itself in the position it was in. Its decision to get involved in the sub-prime mortgage business is easily one they regret...and they were certainly punished for it with diminishing stock and heavy losses. On the "no" side though, they had taken action to right those mistakes with the capital raise they did in April. This capital infusion ensured they had enough reserves to cover these losses. Now the problem is there are many other banks with comparable sub-prime crisis on their hands, but none with the capital ratio that National City has. Examinig all banks with liquidity issues, National City is (was) the best positioned bank to successfully emerge from a government bailout package. Of course, National City was on the "NO" list instead of the "YES" list. And the only reason why this was the case is political as opposed to financial or performance based. And that's a problem.

I think many agree with the sentiment, but the reality is instead of "this deal must be stopped" it should have been the leaders we have elected should not have let it happen. The deal is going to go through, the only backlash being does anyone in the Treasury department pay for it and, most importantly and perhaps the only silver lining, the top executives and the 42 subordinates will not get any of their precious parachutes (thank God they at least got that part right).

This is driven by PNC having to buy out Corsair in the transaction, who had preferred shares of NCC. It's just with a majority stake, it drives the final purchase price well below market for normal shareholders. If you read any of the details about the transaction, you'll see mention of a bunch of warrants...those warrants are going to Corsair and drive the final share price down. Thornburgh abstained from voting on the buy out for this reason (conflict of interest).

I have to eat and keep a roof over my head. There is no bigger perspective. Well, unless you had planned on selling your shares to pay your mortgage this month, the bigger perspective is now you own stock in the 5th largest bank in the US with a strong and divesified portfolio and that, again, unless you sell today, might actually go up and you can make a profit over time. From a pure business perspective, ignoring the negative social ramifications, this was a great move for both companies.

That is not true. This will happen, only if they WANT TO, PNC will have no "vested" community ties to Cleveland, once the deal is final. None. PNC is a corporate citizen of Pittsburgh not Cleveland. I disagree. PNC will have a vested interest in that they will have tens of thousands of northeast ohio customers who they do not want to turn off. It will be hard enough for them to convince them to stay with a Pittsburgh based bank for them to start slashing community support. They'll love to have their name supporting the plays at playhouse square, or even supporting the Browns (ugh..I hate the thought, but think Giant Eagle). It'll be just like Nat City did about a decade ago when they brought Integra Bank in Pittsburgh and became one of Pittsburgh's best corporate citizens. Large institutions that receive support will be ok. My concern is for the smaller community organizations...hopefully they are not abandoned by PNC. I agree. They have business motives to become a strong corporate citizen, especially during a merger when attrition is usually the highest.

I'm a litte curious as to what to full impact will be. The footprint is only slightly overlapping, so I think many branch employees will reamin intact. NCC in terms of customer base and deposit balances is larger than PNC, so they will need to retain some corporate head count simply to manage the increased volume. Some people I know who have been involved in bank take overs in the past say they do it pretty quickly, but I have ahrd time, considering the volume involved, imagining anything will happen in the short term. The intergration of systems and data could take up to a year.

Probably not much in the short term, but I would expect a number of synergies after 6 months, especially in support functions like call centers and IT.

Well, there's the official announcement, but I know people who were involved.