[UCGal]

[quote=flu]Not everything in ikea is that bad. But there comes a point when I think folks outgrow the ikea look….[/quote]
The one thing Ikea has going for it is they have furniture for smaller scale homes. I have issues with the bigger is better trend in furniture. My house is a comfortable size – but not a McMansion… and the furniture at most furniture stores is oversized… Coffee tables that are 5’x5’… Dining room chairs that are 36″ wide, etc..

We have a lot of ikea shelving – it’s not the most attractive, but it does the job in our office and garage… We bought it in PA and moved it twice since then… reconfiguring each time. Ikea does serve a purpose… but it’s true that some of the stuff is shoddy.

[UCGal]

[quote=flu]Not everything in ikea is that bad. But there comes a point when I think folks outgrow the ikea look….[/quote]
The one thing Ikea has going for it is they have furniture for smaller scale homes. I have issues with the bigger is better trend in furniture. My house is a comfortable size – but not a McMansion… and the furniture at most furniture stores is oversized… Coffee tables that are 5’x5’… Dining room chairs that are 36″ wide, etc..

We have a lot of ikea shelving – it’s not the most attractive, but it does the job in our office and garage… We bought it in PA and moved it twice since then… reconfiguring each time. Ikea does serve a purpose… but it’s true that some of the stuff is shoddy.

[UCGal]

[quote=flu]Not everything in ikea is that bad. But there comes a point when I think folks outgrow the ikea look….[/quote]
The one thing Ikea has going for it is they have furniture for smaller scale homes. I have issues with the bigger is better trend in furniture. My house is a comfortable size – but not a McMansion… and the furniture at most furniture stores is oversized… Coffee tables that are 5’x5’… Dining room chairs that are 36″ wide, etc..

We have a lot of ikea shelving – it’s not the most attractive, but it does the job in our office and garage… We bought it in PA and moved it twice since then… reconfiguring each time. Ikea does serve a purpose… but it’s true that some of the stuff is shoddy.

[UCGal]

[quote=AN]
All CxO / directors were managers, but not all managers become CxO / directors. I hope you can tell the difference.[/quote]
Semi-hijack…

What’s with the CxO phenomena… I remember when you had a CEO and a Pres (often the same person)… and then you had VEEPS of finance, HR, tech, etc…

I remember when the head of R&D was called that. When the head of IT was a director or maybe a vp – but not a “chief”.

Now it’s CTO, CFO, CIO, CQO and the latest I heard – CPO: chief people officer. (HR).

Talk about title inflation.

[UCGal]

[quote=AN]
All CxO / directors were managers, but not all managers become CxO / directors. I hope you can tell the difference.[/quote]
Semi-hijack…

What’s with the CxO phenomena… I remember when you had a CEO and a Pres (often the same person)… and then you had VEEPS of finance, HR, tech, etc…

I remember when the head of R&D was called that. When the head of IT was a director or maybe a vp – but not a “chief”.

Now it’s CTO, CFO, CIO, CQO and the latest I heard – CPO: chief people officer. (HR).

Talk about title inflation.

[UCGal]

[quote=AN]
All CxO / directors were managers, but not all managers become CxO / directors. I hope you can tell the difference.[/quote]
Semi-hijack…

What’s with the CxO phenomena… I remember when you had a CEO and a Pres (often the same person)… and then you had VEEPS of finance, HR, tech, etc…

I remember when the head of R&D was called that. When the head of IT was a director or maybe a vp – but not a “chief”.

Now it’s CTO, CFO, CIO, CQO and the latest I heard – CPO: chief people officer. (HR).

Talk about title inflation.

[UCGal]

[quote=AN]
All CxO / directors were managers, but not all managers become CxO / directors. I hope you can tell the difference.[/quote]
Semi-hijack…

What’s with the CxO phenomena… I remember when you had a CEO and a Pres (often the same person)… and then you had VEEPS of finance, HR, tech, etc…

I remember when the head of R&D was called that. When the head of IT was a director or maybe a vp – but not a “chief”.

Now it’s CTO, CFO, CIO, CQO and the latest I heard – CPO: chief people officer. (HR).

Talk about title inflation.

[UCGal]

[quote=AN]
All CxO / directors were managers, but not all managers become CxO / directors. I hope you can tell the difference.[/quote]
Semi-hijack…

What’s with the CxO phenomena… I remember when you had a CEO and a Pres (often the same person)… and then you had VEEPS of finance, HR, tech, etc…

I remember when the head of R&D was called that. When the head of IT was a director or maybe a vp – but not a “chief”.

Now it’s CTO, CFO, CIO, CQO and the latest I heard – CPO: chief people officer. (HR).

Talk about title inflation.

[UCGal]

[quote=dbapig]Aha, it’s that much more insulting that the managers are managers than. Why are they paid more to do same or less work when they are the 1st to be let go? And how do you become CEO or director? Become a manager first.[/quote]

My observation of working at tech companies for 25 years… CEOs are either brought in from other companies – or are promoted from sales, marketing, finance, or operations. Even if they had a tech degree (about 20% of S&P 500 ceo’s) they switch to other fields pretty early in their career. Only 10% of the S&P CEOs came out of engineering.

As far as Ivy league – Harvard is it. But it looks like you could save some $ by sending your future CEO child to the University of Wisconsin… Degrees from Harvard and UofW are the most common among the S&P500 CEOS.

http://content.spencerstuart.com/sswebsite/pdf/lib/Statistical_Snapshot_of_Leading_CEOs_relB3.pdf

http://www.lifescienceleader.com/index.php?option=com_jambozine&layout=article&view=page&aid=3923

http://www.forbes.com/2002/04/25/0425ceoschools.html

[UCGal]

[quote=dbapig]Aha, it’s that much more insulting that the managers are managers than. Why are they paid more to do same or less work when they are the 1st to be let go? And how do you become CEO or director? Become a manager first.[/quote]

My observation of working at tech companies for 25 years… CEOs are either brought in from other companies – or are promoted from sales, marketing, finance, or operations. Even if they had a tech degree (about 20% of S&P 500 ceo’s) they switch to other fields pretty early in their career. Only 10% of the S&P CEOs came out of engineering.

As far as Ivy league – Harvard is it. But it looks like you could save some $ by sending your future CEO child to the University of Wisconsin… Degrees from Harvard and UofW are the most common among the S&P500 CEOS.

http://content.spencerstuart.com/sswebsite/pdf/lib/Statistical_Snapshot_of_Leading_CEOs_relB3.pdf

http://www.lifescienceleader.com/index.php?option=com_jambozine&layout=article&view=page&aid=3923

http://www.forbes.com/2002/04/25/0425ceoschools.html

[UCGal]

[quote=dbapig]Aha, it’s that much more insulting that the managers are managers than. Why are they paid more to do same or less work when they are the 1st to be let go? And how do you become CEO or director? Become a manager first.[/quote]

My observation of working at tech companies for 25 years… CEOs are either brought in from other companies – or are promoted from sales, marketing, finance, or operations. Even if they had a tech degree (about 20% of S&P 500 ceo’s) they switch to other fields pretty early in their career. Only 10% of the S&P CEOs came out of engineering.

As far as Ivy league – Harvard is it. But it looks like you could save some $ by sending your future CEO child to the University of Wisconsin… Degrees from Harvard and UofW are the most common among the S&P500 CEOS.

http://content.spencerstuart.com/sswebsite/pdf/lib/Statistical_Snapshot_of_Leading_CEOs_relB3.pdf

http://www.lifescienceleader.com/index.php?option=com_jambozine&layout=article&view=page&aid=3923

http://www.forbes.com/2002/04/25/0425ceoschools.html

[UCGal]

[quote=dbapig]Aha, it’s that much more insulting that the managers are managers than. Why are they paid more to do same or less work when they are the 1st to be let go? And how do you become CEO or director? Become a manager first.[/quote]

My observation of working at tech companies for 25 years… CEOs are either brought in from other companies – or are promoted from sales, marketing, finance, or operations. Even if they had a tech degree (about 20% of S&P 500 ceo’s) they switch to other fields pretty early in their career. Only 10% of the S&P CEOs came out of engineering.

As far as Ivy league – Harvard is it. But it looks like you could save some $ by sending your future CEO child to the University of Wisconsin… Degrees from Harvard and UofW are the most common among the S&P500 CEOS.

http://content.spencerstuart.com/sswebsite/pdf/lib/Statistical_Snapshot_of_Leading_CEOs_relB3.pdf

http://www.lifescienceleader.com/index.php?option=com_jambozine&layout=article&view=page&aid=3923

http://www.forbes.com/2002/04/25/0425ceoschools.html

[UCGal]

[quote=dbapig]Aha, it’s that much more insulting that the managers are managers than. Why are they paid more to do same or less work when they are the 1st to be let go? And how do you become CEO or director? Become a manager first.[/quote]

My observation of working at tech companies for 25 years… CEOs are either brought in from other companies – or are promoted from sales, marketing, finance, or operations. Even if they had a tech degree (about 20% of S&P 500 ceo’s) they switch to other fields pretty early in their career. Only 10% of the S&P CEOs came out of engineering.

As far as Ivy league – Harvard is it. But it looks like you could save some $ by sending your future CEO child to the University of Wisconsin… Degrees from Harvard and UofW are the most common among the S&P500 CEOS.

http://content.spencerstuart.com/sswebsite/pdf/lib/Statistical_Snapshot_of_Leading_CEOs_relB3.pdf

http://www.lifescienceleader.com/index.php?option=com_jambozine&layout=article&view=page&aid=3923

http://www.forbes.com/2002/04/25/0425ceoschools.html

[UCGal]

[quote=temeculaguy]

How is it that nobody told me that a thread fell so far that porn was discussed? On that topic, I googled her as well, sorry, not in my wheelhouse, not even close, she looks 11. If we are going to have a rational, adult and realistic discussion about porn stars, regardless of ethnicity, we have to set some ground rules. D-cup minimum is the first rule, since I have seen asian porn stars meet this minimum, go back to the drawing board and bring me some better names. Rule #2, the word “cute” is not permitted during the discussion.

Now if you brought up Ava Devine, different story, but then again, she’s U.S. born and after cheeseburgers and silicon get the better of them, now they are in the wheelhouse. I’ll even entertain a discussion of true asian borns Hitomi Tanaka, Anna Ohura, Mariko Morikawa or Miki Sawaguchi, well then we can have a conversation. But keep that middle schooler looking skinny stuff of my computer.[/quote]

LMAO – TG’s in the house.

[UCGal]

[quote=temeculaguy]

How is it that nobody told me that a thread fell so far that porn was discussed? On that topic, I googled her as well, sorry, not in my wheelhouse, not even close, she looks 11. If we are going to have a rational, adult and realistic discussion about porn stars, regardless of ethnicity, we have to set some ground rules. D-cup minimum is the first rule, since I have seen asian porn stars meet this minimum, go back to the drawing board and bring me some better names. Rule #2, the word “cute” is not permitted during the discussion.

Now if you brought up Ava Devine, different story, but then again, she’s U.S. born and after cheeseburgers and silicon get the better of them, now they are in the wheelhouse. I’ll even entertain a discussion of true asian borns Hitomi Tanaka, Anna Ohura, Mariko Morikawa or Miki Sawaguchi, well then we can have a conversation. But keep that middle schooler looking skinny stuff of my computer.[/quote]

LMAO – TG’s in the house.

[Author]

Posts