SociableSport

It seems the naming rights saga has caught fire among the English FA Premier League . On the back of Newcastle United's announcement that St. James' Park is to be known as the "sportsdirect.com @ St. James' Park", Chelsea's Chief Executive Ron Gourlay has now revealed that Chelsea are preparing to follow the lead by selling the naming rights for Stamford Bridge. Like Ashley and Co. at Newcastle, Gourlay is insisting that the associated brand will only be able to add to the name, rather than actually change the name of the stadium altogether. 'Stamford Bridge' would therefore be retained in the name along with the assocation with "a suitable blue-chip company."

"Retaining the heritage of the stadium is paramount to considering such a move but we think that is achievable and on that basis we would enter into discussions over naming rights with the right partner for Chelsea", Gourlay told Chelsea TV.

"We understand that this is a sensitive issue for our fans and that is why we would keep the name Stamford Bridge in any deal".

Could it be that scenes like the below are soon to be a thing of the past within the giants of the game? Surely Abramovich doesn't need the money as much as Chelsea need the identity of their stadium?

A sensitive issue indeed, but Gouray feels that the financial advantage of selling the rights is essential.

"What we are not prepared to happen, and I am sure our fans will appreciate this, is allow our rival clubs in England and Europe to gain a competitive advantage over us in terms of the revenue they can generate through either expanding the capacity of their existing stadia or moving to a new stadium and then invest that upside in their team or the club. Those possibilities are not open to Chelsea for the foreseeable future because of the restrictions in expanding our stadium and the issues around finding a new site, so that means we have to be creative and look at our sponsorship architecture and see if we can create new value and new opportunities that keeps us competitive".

In 2004, Emirates paid Arsenal £50million to acquire naming rights on their new Ashburton Grove stadium for 15 years, and Allianz is charged £4m every twelve months for Bayern Munich's ground to bear its name. In the USA, Citigroup pay £10m so for the new New York Mets baseball arena, now called Citi Field.

Check out http://chelseafc.com for more information.

"With the renaming it was always going to be whatever brand it was, at St James' Park. For the remainder of this season, we already have sportsdirect.com on the Gallowgate so we'd like to take that branding through the rest of the stadium."
Derek Llambias, Manging Director

Tampering with brand equity is risky business, particularly when the equity is built by generations of sports fanatics.

How do you think it's going to be received by the Newcastle United faithful? In changing the Official Name of Newcastle United's home ground, are they changing the very essence of the club itself?

Post your comments below and read more on the debate on BBC Sport's 606 debate

"We are able to show that bringing the game to Australia and having the Asian continent with us at the same time-zone will benefit not only Australia, not only Asia, but the whole football world"
Frank Lowy, Chief of Australia's FIFA World Cup Bid and Australia's Richest Man

Asia comprises the world's fastest growing economies, the fastest growing television and media audiences and the fastest growing consumer markets. Intuitively, Lowy's claim seems to be sensible. But how valid is this regional bias? The three points below try to open this up a bit.

1. The combined audiences for West and East are broadly similar

By looking at FIFA's published TV and Out Of Home (which includes pubs and other public viewing areas) cumulative viewing figures by region we can compare the 2002 World Cup held in Asia with the 2006 World Cup held in Europe.

In terms of the number of viewers, comparing Europe with Asia is hard to swing in Europe's favour. In 2002 there were 2.7 Asian viewers to every European viewer. In 2006 this figure was cut to 1.6 but still, this is a huge difference. However, this only takes into account numbers for Asia and Europe. 'East' and 'West' is much broader.

By grouping together figures for Europe with North America, South America and Central America (EurAm) we get a better idea of what Western audiences actually add up to. We can then compare this with an Eastern group comprised of the Asia and Oceana (APAC). When we look at East vs. West in this hollistic way we get a slightly more even result. In the 2002 World Cup, held in Asia, there were only 1.3 Eastern (APAC) viewers to Western (EurAm) viewers but in the 2006 World Cup there were 1.2 Western viewers to Eastern viewers - despite the fact that the Germany World Cup was broadcast in 11 fewer EurAm territories than the 2002 World Cup.

So there wasn't that big a difference after all.

The audiences are pretty much similar from East to West. The drop off in audience attributable to changes in time-zones is nearly identical with both regions losing roughly 7% of their audience when the games were shown at more unsociable hours. Let's not forget, though, that with China's population alone being double that of the whole of Europe, Asia's 7% certainly represents more people. This brings us on to our next point - although the audiences are roughly the same, and the drop off is the same, advertisers will look for efficiency over reach and this may present the West with another argument against the Lowry.

2.  Rights fees are based on efficiency, not just reach 

Lowry also spoke about the revenue that an Australasian World Cup would bring in. He didn't go into specifics in the article I read but someone told me he'd quoted a difference of +$1bn. That's a lot of money and I'm not sure where he gets it from. Despite offering huge reach, there's going to be an awful lot of wastage in a market where the audiences are almost inconceivably large. In EurAm, penetration is much higher with a greater proportion of the total populations watching or experiencing the tournament. I don't want to waste any money speaking to people who aren't in the mood to listen, especially if there's millions of them.

Also, because there aren't many national broadcasters in the regions, the scope for competition among those looking to secure broadcast rights is smaller. Coupled with the lack of efficiency, this makes for risky - and tricky - business for those formulating broadcast revenue prediction models. Although, broadcast revenue isn't the only source of income from the tournament.

3.  A successful event needs the stadia to be full

Although we hate to admit it, everyone secretly loves the English. English football fans, like many of our counterparts, bring with them a fantastic enthusiasm for the game that heralds from decades of disappointment and ecstasy from following the nation's team. World Cup tournaments need these fans. They need them to fill up the stadiums and prevent what happened at some of Beijing's Olympic events where organisers had to give tickets away to locals for free (retail price was very high - around £90 per ticket) in order to fill the seats. In Sydney's Olympic games, kids were actually transported to the venues by buses to fill the venues with the right kind of audience.

What's the lesson here? Big TV audiences don't necessarily equate to a success on a national level.

We have a little time to go before the decisions for 2018 and 2022 will be made (December 2010) but at the moment, it seems as though the argument isn't as black and white as we may have originally thought. Let's see what FIFA say.

You can read more about Lowry's argument here
Picture found here

   

Click here to download:

Two_Hours_In_Texas.zip (1294 KB)

It wasn't until a few days beforehand that my business trip to Monterrey, Mexico, was finalised. I remember sitting at my desk looking at the flight time and wincing slightly at how long the journey was compared to the time I was spending there. But it wasn't all bad.

London to Mexico is a long way and apparently not a journey that can be conducted in a single flight. Most flights on this path stop over somewhere in Texas and it can be either Houston or Dallas depending on the airline. It so happened that I was to find myself spending a little over two hours at George Bush Intercontinental in Houston.

Texas is one of those places that everybody has an opinion on and I have to say I was no different. I love the concept of America and Americans but it seemed to be - sitting from the other side of the pond - that Texas was somewhat backwards. When I thought of Texas I'd think of guns, George (W.) Bush and religion. However, I was keen to experience it myself and although I only spent two hours in Texas (plus another two on the way back), this is what I remember.

The lady on the airport monorail
I sat down at the back of the carriage awaiting transit to my gate and a lady came on board wheeling a small travel suitcase. She stood just to the left of me and began speaking with another lady. She was evangelizing about a book she'd been reading called, 'How Starbucks Saved My Life'.

My ears pricked and I listened intently.

"You see, he'd gone from wearing $1,000 shoes to just being on the bus sitting next to people like you and me. I don't know if I'd even recognise $1,000 shoes! And he realised that it didn't matter at all - he was 50 and working in Starbucks just making coffee but that was his life and he enjoyed it. So he went from being around all that money and all that wealth to just earning $5/hour at Starbucks... and he loved it!"

She looked over at me and I joined the conversation as she talked about the differences between New York and Arkansas, where she was from. About how she could leave her front door unlocked and how things in New York are too busy and too dangerous. Although I've never been to New York, I was inclined to agree with her that it is strange how the quality of one's life diminishes the more one relies on material goods, like $1,000 shoes, for happiness and how difficult it is to really relax in a city like London when you're surrounded by people who are stressed and unhappy. She agreed and we walked a little together after the rail reached its destination.  I think I heard her talking to another couple just as she disappeared from sight down the long corridor.

Texas steak
The queue for passport control was fairly minimal when I arrived, which gave me the chance to quiz the passport control officer about where I could get a good lunch. I was eager to sample Texas' famous cuisine and my stomach was empty from the flight. He said, "Ahh you gona get yourself a big juicy steak or sumthing?" I said I'd love to and he smiled and informed me that a decent lunch will cost around $10, which given that we were in an airport I found very reasonable.

I spent a little while looking for a steak house but was disappointed not to find one straight away. I approached a BBQ stall and asked for a big Texan lunch. He asked where I was from and we talked a little about the food that was available and what it may all taste like. Unfortunately, I didn't have enough money for the full on 4-meat feast so I had to settle for beef stew in barbecue sauce and a bap. When he poured the meat over the bread, it soaked up the juice like a sponge.

Just behind me in the queue was a US Marine dressed in his combat gear. The BBQ man asked him where he was from and they talked as well. He was from Missouri. The BBQ man thanked him for serving for his country, passed him his food and said,

"God bless you, son. God bless you for serving." 

I was genuinely moved by how friendly this man was and found myself compelled to tell him so. He quite naturally found it strange that anyone should find his mannerisms particularly unusual. It seems that in Texas, people like to look out for one another.

I sat and ate my bap next to the Marine and wondered where he had been and what he had seen. The bun was saturated and was beginning to crumble in my hands so I found some cutlery. As I stood up, a man asked me whether the food was any good. He had been watching me eat for a couple of moments and I felt a little intruded upon. However, the marine and I both agreed that the food was really quite good and we recommended the beef stew in barbecue sauce. The man asked me where I was from and I told him, also adding that I was keen to have a Texan meal during my short two hour stay. He smiled and joined the queue. Afterwards I felt guilty for presuming that any interruption should be unwelcome and felt myself opening up a little.

Doughnuts
After my lunch I noticed a doughnut store and went over to take a look. They had more types of doughnut than I think I had ever seen and I made the error of asking the lady at the counter which was the best. She asked me where I was from and I told her, saying also that I had not eaten a doughnut for a very long time and that I wanted the best Texan doughnut money could buy. She handed me a jam-filled sugar-coated variety and I handed her 0.69c. I later returned to buy a very large chocolate chip cookie, not content with only one Texan treat. This was $2.50 worth of cookie but to be honest rather unsatisfying.

As I walked from the doughnut store down a long corridor to the gate, I noticed a sign saying 'defibrillator here' and a picture of a heart. Looking further down the corridor, towards the end I noticed another such sign. Half way between the two, a very overweight man was sitting on a bench talking on his phone. I saw him eyeing me from a distance and thought nothing of it until I passed him and noticed he wasn't staring at me, so much as he was staying at the cookie I was eating. I continued walking, past the second defibrillator sign and took a seat at a bar.

I waited for the barman to come over and I ordered a diet coke. He said it was cheaper to give me a pint from the tap instead of a bottle and I thanked him for telling me, asking for the pint.

Rain
I watched the planed on the runway through the large windows by the gate and wondered what the weather is like in this part of the world. From nowhere, my question was answered as the heavens seemed to open in an almighty downpour of rain that shocked me somewhat.

Outside, though, it was business as usual as workers quickly put on the correct attire and continued flagging and waving at taxiing aircraft. I looked away from the window at a TV screen that was showing a football game.

Football
It was Sunday, September 13th. Houston Texans were getting beaten quite heavily by the New York Jets and tempers were beginning to flare around the bar. Now wouldn't have been a good time to ask someone to explain the rules.

I tried to get into the game with the little time I had left but my viewing was constantly interrupted by advertisements, almost exclusively for SUVs. I chuckled to myself - this was the Texas I had pictured before I arrived. I gave the game a few more minutes but gave up when I realised that I was watching more advertisements than I was football.

I took one last look around the bar, at the football fans watching their side lose and being told to buy SUVs, to the barman making conversation with everyone that approached him, to the overweight guys struggling for breath, to the wide open sky and the clouds that had now disappeared, to the turkey and ham sandwich I had just bought, to the neon around the bar, to the potato chip bags, to the wet tarmack outside, to the smell and the feel of Texan air, to the gate and to the transit flight to Mexico.

This is what I remember of my two hours in Texas.

Calgon 2-in-1
"Half Protection Is Like No Protection!"

It's been a late night - I'm recovering from the dreaded 'Swine Flu' (also known as the H1N1 virus) and so I feel I can be forgiven for watching some pretty average television. Pretty average television hosts some pretty average advertising, few more so than the Calgon 2-in-1 commercials.

Unfortunately I can't actually show you the clip itself because it isn't on youtube, but please bear with me while I outline the plot.

The ad opens with a woman struggling with her washing machine. A man appears - wearing overalls - and offers to help. She explains the situation and, conveniently for the viewer, he is able to diagnose the problem instantaneously. It is a build-up of limescale caused by, frankly, some downright heinous washing machine protector that's only offering 'half protection'.

Half protection! Can you believe that? I nearly vomited I found it so disgusting.

The woman looks quizical. She's obviously mortally embarrassed about not protecting her washing machine properly and her wild eyes tell us that she will stop at nothing to find a solution but the man is intent, to the point of sadism, on hammering the point home. Just in front of the woman he notices a small child putting on a bike helmet.

"You wouldn't let him go out with half a helmet on would you?"
"No!" she replies. To be honest, the jury is out on whether she even recognises the child given she hasn't acknowledged his presence in the room so far, nor has she comforted him on the fact there is a very strange man in the kitchen. If the child were to spontaneously combust, there is no indication that she will be wise to his plight. Her entire focus is on this plumber-come-salesman.
"Well, half protection is like no protection! That's why you need Calgon 2-in-1!"
"Oh!"

She is sold. The pieces of the jigsaw have fallen nicely into place. Her looking after her washing machine with 'full protection' (what does that even mean? Does Calgon come with a small army of soldiers to protect her washing machine from gunfire? What about a fire brigade to protect it from flames? Or a moat to protect it from Tudors? Now that's full protection!) is the emotional equivalent to ensuring her son wears a helmet when he rides his bike. Because millions of washing machines die every year from limescale damage and... and damn it the unnecessary pain just has to stop!

So there we have it - advertising doing what it does best:

Stereotyping
Well, it wouldn't be a man in the kitchen would it? A man would never listen to another man anyway... he'd just ask 'is it cheaper?' then depending on the answer either opt for 'ok cool - you can leave now' or 'seriously, get the hell out of my kitchen'. Haha, men are so predictable aren't they? And women! Always looking after the house like good women should! 1950s Chevrolet anyone?

Blackmail
We owe it to ourselves and to our children to buy products because the people selling them to us say we need them and who am I to disagree? It's not like my opinion on what I need counts for anything

Insulting Intelligence - "Half protection is like no protection!"
Hold on a minute...  is half protection not the same as 50% protection? Is that not a great deal more than no protection at all?
Now, half a helmet is a different matter. Wearing half a helmet would probably be just as useless as wearing no helmet at all. That's because half a helmet isn't a helmet, it's just a bit of useless fiberglass cushion. In the context of protecting a washing machine, just as in the context of cleaning socks, half is better than nothing and realistically these machines should count themselves lucky that they get even that

Like many of us, I felt compelled to blog after watching Sacha Baron Cohen's new film, Brüno, but found myself with something of a writer's block - either from shock or some form of mental anguish; I'm not entirely sure. Bruno was, undoubtedly, shocking but also funny insomuch as it made me chuckle among all the winces, groans and tooth-clenching. Why is this? Why is Bruno funny? It reminded me of a definition I read a few months ago on www.urbandictionary.com, for the acronym "lol".

As internet folk(sters), you will more than likely be familiar with "lol", which translates instantly either as 'laughing out loud' or 'lots of love' (usually the former). It's a pretty popular thing to add into sentences, especially among those under the age of 22 (who grew up from the age of 13 with mobile phones and by the age of 15 had good access - in the UK at least - to the internet... MSN Instant Messenger, AOL Messenger, chat rooms etc. simply because it's a short-fire way of adding some personality to otherwise pretty mundane conversation. "lol" isn't something you can say at a water-cooler at work, nor is it something you can really use when chatting up a hot girl (or guy) at a party. In fact, it is used so much in so many different (impersonal) situations that some argue it has lost and relevance, credibility or impact. Perhaps this was always on the cards, that instead of writing 'man, you've made me laugh so much I actually laughed out loud just then' we just say 'lol' instead, sometimes without actually finding something funny at all. And this is where it gets interesting.

Urbandictionary is, in my humble opinion, the richest source of amusing content anywhere on the internet and this instance was no exception. Many thanks go to urbandictionary user no_one_2000 for inspiring this post. Here are some of the definitions - uses of the acronym 'lol' in context - they submitted to the dictionary:

Statement: Sorry if I'm not too cheery, my best friend just died yesterday.
Worthless Reply: lol

Statement: The golden ratio is truly an interesting aspect of not only mathematics, but art as well.
Worthless Reply: lol

A worthless reply to a comment is one thing, but 'lol' is such a prolific statement of comedic value that it can completely change our perception of a sentence, and this is where the 'lol' Test is born. Take a look at the sentences below and ask yourself 'why do I think he finds that funny?' the answer will tell you more about yourself than it does about me, because I don't actually find any of the below funny and I can assure you I'm not laughing out loud while writing them. Even so, here they are:

1. Barack Obama has been elected the first black President of the United States of America lol
2. Swine Flu is expected to claim 65,000 people this winter lol
3. I got fired from my job today and now I have to live on the street lol
4. My son just told me he's homosexual lol

Sometimes it's important to ask ourselves why we find something funny. Lots of people claim Brüno made them laugh but I don't think many people could tell you why. I struggle to put it into words myself. But by simply adding 'lol' to the otherwise completely unfunny sentences above asks us to think creatively about what possible comic value there is, and you may even find some, depending on your sense of humour. Perhaps that's why we call it a 'sense' of humour; that how funny we find something depends how our own perception - how hard we're willing to look, or what we're naturally quite adroit at noticing - and experience either of culture, society (another over-used word) or upbringing generally. Bruno isn't for everyone, but perhaps that's what's funny about it, just like it's quite funny that adding 'lol' to the above sentences completely changes how they are read... it's ridiculous really. Then again, ridiculous things are often funny, no?

What's this got to do with sport, media and the future of communications? I could try to fit it in, but alas I have run out of time lol.

If a social network doesn't carry ad space, will this stop it from making money?

Sorrell sees mixed prospects for social nets LONDON: Social networks like Facebook and Twitter have less potential to generate ad revenues than sites such as YouTube and MySpace, which will benefit from their focus on online video, says Sir Martin Sorrell, ceo of WPP Group. According to Sorrell, one of WPP's main short-to-medium term objectives is to boost the share of its revenues derived from digital media to 33%, compared with the current level of 25%. He also argued that the various forms of web-based video currently being established are "probably the most revolutionary and most significant of the new media developments." Indeed, he predicted that the influence of this form of content could come to "dwarf what we saw from the personal computer and what we saw from mobile in terms of its impact on the media." Given this, it appears that "video-driven sites" like YouTube and MySpace will have a "greater opportunity for developing advertising revenues" than many of their online counterparts. By contrast, "sites like Facebook and Twitter are more social networking sites, where the advertising revenue potential is more limited and more restricted" due to their differing models. Indeed, Sorrell added, "we've seen cases, even in the case of Facebook, where Mark Zuckerberg – who must be the person on the planet who knows most about social networking – has made one or two mistakes by trying to commercialise too much." When discussing Twitter, the rapidly-growing microblogging service, the chief executive of WPP credited the site with producing "a lot of noise", but also wondered "where is the cashflow?" Overall, the websites at the heart of Web 2.0 are "all very sexy stuff, but there is a lot of sorting out to be done and a lot of volatility and a lot will not be here in the future," he added. With regard to newspapers, Sorrell said the "online media model will only be successful if it's a mixture of advertising revenues and subscription revenues." As such, "looking for content that consumers are willing to pay for" will be essential if news titles are ultimately going to succeed on the web. Sorrell also said that WPP will be looking to target the "third sector" of "Asia, Latin America, Africa and the Middle East and central and eastern European regions" as it seeks to bolster its revenues. He added that the rise of nations like Brazil, Russia, India and China should be seen as "an unstoppable, irreversible trend in political, economic and social power." Moreover, Sorrell predicted that "the initial signs of recovery will not come from the West, they will come from the East; they will come from China." The Chinese ad market "did flip up quite considerably in April", meaning WPP saw a 25% increase in its "media business" in the country in the fourth month of this year, its ceo added. Data sourced from The Australian; additional content by WARC staff, 23 June 2009

'Champions do not fall from the sky. They are born among us, live among us and are worshipped by us'

On the eve of October 30th 1974, in the Mai 20 Stadium in Kindshasa, Zaire, world Heavyweight Champion George Foreman against former Champion Muhammed Ali. After his refusal to obey his drafting for the US Army in a storm of political and racial significance, Ali had been spent over seven years forging his path to regaining a title he saw as rightfully his. Ali eventually met Foreman that wild night in 1974 and beat the man who had defeated him in the Fight of The Century three years earlier. The events before and during this famous bout are immortalised in the Academy Award winning documentary, When We Were Kings. Norman Mailer's book, The Fight, describes the events within the context of his views of black American culture. It was more than a boxing match, it was an event that defined an era.

On the afternoon of Sunday, June 7th 2009, Roger Federer will enter the Philippe Chatrier court at Roland Garros in Paris for the fourth consecutive year as a finalist in the hallmark claycourt event of the year - the French Open. It is the only one of the four tour majors Federer has never won, having lost on his four previous attempts to the same man - Rafeal Nadal. Victory will give Federer a career Grand Slam and tie him with Pete Sampras on 14 major wins. But with the coveted Coupe de Mousquetaires trophy that elluded the great American, he will surpass Sampras as, according to Andre Agassi, the Greatest tennis player to have graced the sport.

The significance of this victory, should it come, is not weighted in the political or social history of that October night in Zaire, but rather in an affirmation of a man - like Ali - who is widely considered to be a God of his sport. Greatness comes in many forms, but in individual sports like tennis, boxing or golf, the pressures - personal and professional - are so great that they can break even the most gifted. Now, after six years being at the top of the game, Federer is on the cusp of sporting immortality.

Illness at the start of the 2008 season, along with his recent loses to Rafael Nadal not only at Roland Garros but then at Wimbledon and Melbourne Park have revealed a certain frailty within Federer that had otherwise gone unnoticed. It is this frailty - this mortality - that reminds us that Roger Federer, although a global superstar, is human. Like every one of us, he has to overcome emotions like anxiety, fear and self-doubt in order to succeed. In Federer we see a man who has dedicated his life, his soul and his very being to his sport. In the process he has had to bear great suffering: breaking down in tears at the Australian Open final and having to stand and watch as Rafael Nadal lifted a Wimbledon trophy that would have seen him become the first man in history to win six consecutive titles at the All England Club.

This year's French Open has been an up-and-down tournament for Federer and his route to the final is arguably his hardest yet (incidentally, this will be his 19th - tying Ivan Lendl's record). Two of his last three matches have seen him pushed to the very edge of defeat, taken to five sets first by Tommy Haas in the fourth round and then in the semi-final by Juan Martin del Potro. In both matches there were times when Federer looked down and out, staring down the barrell of the gun with no response and no means of stopping what was coming; yet he prevailed. His path to the final demonstrated all the qualities of a Champion - a belief greater than the sum of his doubts and a determination more powerful than the strength of his body - qualities that he will need with him if he is to succeed tomorrow.

Standing in Federer's way is Robin Soderling, an apparent anomaly of the game. Thrust from obscurity, Soderling  has smashed all odds to shreds with victories over David Ferrer, four-time defending Champion Rafael Nadal and having come from 1-4 down in the fifth set to beat Fernando Gonzalez in the semi-final. Should Soderling continue this remarkable run and halt Federer on his quest for greatness there are many who feel he will be defying the very natural order of things - not just of sporting achievement but of human accomplishment, of reward for the deserved and of justice itself.

However, should Federer succeed in defeating his foe (as he has done in their nine previous meetings), he will prove once and for all that the greatest Champions are those who are humble in defeat and gracious in victory; like Ali before him he will prove that true Champions are those who pursue universal greatness when the world seems to be against them; he will prove that the Champion Elite are those who harvest, year after year and season after season, a burning hunger and passion in their hearts so deep and so bright that no man no matter how strong and no matter how fierce can ever extinguish their unfaltering goal: to be the best there has ever been.

Roger Federer, I wish you the very, very best of luck.

Click here to download:

Twitter Background Template.ppt (1567 KB)

I've attached a simple twitter background template I just used to create a background to my own page.

All you have to do is open the PowerPoint slide and work around the template.

If you're working from a Mac, you can save your workings as a single image and then upload that. If you're working from Windows then you'll have to change the resolution of the image in MS Paint to 1920×1200.

One thing - make sure you keep the size of the final image to under 800kb.

So, what are you waiting for? No excuses for having a default background now!

All the best,
Lyndon

@lyndonmorant

Recession.
It's a big, dark, gloomy word.
'Current economic climate' is a much happier phrase, and one everyone seems to prefer. Here's why -

'Current' invokes a sense of immediacy. It also implies that the future is yet unknown - that it is likely to change. Imagine 'economic climate' without the word current. The duration of the description would seem much longer.

'Economic' (instead of, say, recessionary) is a very vague word. When we talk about 'economic forces' or 'economic factors' we invariably talk about things beyond our control. When they are under our control they become policy - monetary policy, fiscal stimulus etc. This sense of vagueness is coupled with disownership. The word 'economic' is itself an adjective relating to the word 'economy' (a noun). And what it is here we're describing as economic?

'Climate' - also likely to change, also beyond our control (unless you're in a really nice car). To be exposed to a certain climate is to be subject to certain external circumstances - such as heat or cold, or rain and snow. But these are all things you can make the most of - some people don't like too heat but some do and vice versa - it's a matter of opinion. As humans, we can adapt to different climates to suit our own preferences. In this sense, then, an economic climate is whatever you want it to be. If you're the type that won't go outside unless it's precisely 24degrees with zero chance of precipitation, then perhaps you'll be agitated when the temperature rises or falls, or if clouds start to form in the sky. Even so, in this case 'climate' is only a 'current' situation, by definition it is not consistent. The current temperature may be 22degrees - or even 12degrees - but it's not going to stay like that forever. So, even if you're a die-hard cynic refusing to leave the comfort of your climate-controlled home unless there's a clear, blue sky and a warm 24degrees showing on the baraometer, you can sit by the window and wait for things to get better because - eventually - they will.

'Recession', on the other hand, is like a hurricane. Hurricanes can be very dangerous and very unpredictable. Everyone is adviced to stay indoors and even the emergency services struggle to cope in the stormy conditions. No one feels safe and no one really knows how bad it's going to be, how long it will last or where it's going to cause the most damage. What we do know is that it won't last forever, but when one comes along our main concern should be protecting ourselves from the associated dangers. This is no time for sitting by the window wondering when the sun is going to have his hat on - you may get a face full of glass!

Can you see the difference? By describing a recession using the phrase 'current economic climate' we avoid the need to 'weather the storm'. Instead, we describe something that's out of reach (economic), as being short-lived (current) and something perfectly natural (climate).

It's a climate of expectancy (let's look forward to when it gets better!) rather than a climate of fear (how bad is it going to get?).

I don't know about you, but it's back to work for me!

Lyndon