I want my SSA

Nyal Williams wrote:

It isn't about geography; there
are crooks everywhere.

Of course. See my later post. But, geography does play a part in
determining the right location for SSA HQ, for several reasons having
nothing to do with morality.

I have spent years living and later visiting in that region of the US
and I know that the people there are among the finest souls to be found
anywhere.


Jack

Nyal Williams wrote:
Faulty logic, Jack. It isn't about geography; there
are crooks everywhere.

At 13:36 19 September 2006, Jack wrote:
Eric Greenwell wrote:

Mike Schumann wrote:
If you were looking for a new CFO, how many candidates
are there in
Hobbs, or would be interested in relocating there?
That's the real
downfall of being in such an obscure location.


Really, there are a couple of issues underlying this:

- Availability of a deep enough talent pool to allow for multiple,
qualified candidates to be sourced locally.
- Barring a local talent pool, the desirability of the environment as
a place to relocate a family. This is a way to broaden the talent
pool.
- Accessiblity for both planned and unplanned visits.

A thought on this last point. Over the last 7 years, I've been part of
a team which started up a global company. Despite extensive use of
phone, video, Web meetings, etc. there's still no substitute for
face-to-face interaction. I've noticed that the ability to get an
executive to visit any location is almost directly proportional to the
quality of the airline service. I'm sure it's the same for our
board members, who are, for the most part, extremely busy individuals .
Even if we do move toward more of a "virtual organization" (which I
fully support), we still ought to be in a position to drop in (planned
or unplanned) on HQ (even if HQ is just 5,000 square feet in some
office complex). As a straw model, I'd say that any location we
choose must be within a 1 hour drive of a major airport (defined as
one having direct service from any of the 20 or so major hubs in the
US). There's obviously a lot more to site selection than that, but
it's certainly one of the knockout criteria in my book.

P3

I think it would be even better if it was a cab ride from a Southwest
Arlines airport. This would make it fast and cheap for people to
conduct business at HQ. The two nearest cities with soaring bases that
fit this are Albuquerque and Denver.

A thought on this last point. Over the last 7 years, I've been part of
a team which started up a global company. Despite extensive use of
phone, video, Web meetings, etc. there's still no substitute for
face-to-face interaction. I've noticed that the ability to get an
executive to visit any location is almost directly proportional to the
quality of the airline service. I'm sure it's the same for our
board members, who are, for the most part, extremely busy individuals .
Even if we do move toward more of a "virtual organization" (which I
fully support), we still ought to be in a position to drop in (planned
or unplanned) on HQ (even if HQ is just 5,000 square feet in some
office complex). As a straw model, I'd say that any location we
choose must be within a 1 hour drive of a major airport (defined as
one having direct service from any of the 20 or so major hubs in the
US). There's obviously a lot more to site selection than that, but
it's certainly one of the knockout criteria in my book.

P3

Nyal,



You might want to check the definition of "libel".



Larry Goddard

-- zero one -





"Nyal Williams" wrote in
message :

Faulty logic, Jack. It isn't about geography; there
are crooks everywhere.

At 13:36 19 September 2006, Jack wrote:
Eric Greenwell wrote:

Mike Schumann wrote:
If you were looking for a new CFO, how many candidates
are there in
Hobbs, or would be interested in relocating there?
That's the real
downfall of being in such an obscure location.

I don't know, but I'll bet you haven't researched
the job market in
Hobbs, either. Have you done the research for any
of the other places
mentioned, like Elmira, Colorado Springs, or Chicago,
and determined
what a CFO would cost? It might be easy to find a
CFO on Hobbs if we
paid a Chicago salary. Besides, we only need one CFO,
so it's not like
we're trying to staff a major corporation, and have
to line up 500
applicants to have enough bodies to hire.

Yeah, look how much we saved so far by having a Hobbs
CFO.


Jack

01-- Zero One wrote:
Nyal,



You might want to check the definition of "libel".



Larry Goddard

Nyal wrote " there are crooks everywhere", which is a true statement
(truth is one of the valid defenses against libel lawsuits).

Tom Seim
2G
Richland, WA

I have labeled no one. My comment was only concerned
with the comment about Hobbs.

At 17:54 19 September 2006, 01-- Zero One wrote:
Nyal,



You might want to check the definition of 'libel'.



Larry Goddard

-- zero one -





'Nyal Williams' wrote in
message :

Faulty logic, Jack. It isn't about geography; there
are crooks everywhere.

At 13:36 19 September 2006, Jack wrote:
Eric Greenwell wrote:

Mike Schumann wrote:
If you were looking for a new CFO, how many candidates
are there in
Hobbs, or would be interested in relocating there?
That's the real
downfall of being in such an obscure location.

I don't know, but I'll bet you haven't researched
the job market in
Hobbs, either. Have you done the research for any
of the other places
mentioned, like Elmira, Colorado Springs, or Chicago,
and determined
what a CFO would cost? It might be easy to find a
CFO on Hobbs if we
paid a Chicago salary. Besides, we only need one
CFO,
so it's not like
we're trying to staff a major corporation, and have
to line up 500
applicants to have enough bodies to hire.

Yeah, look how much we saved so far by having a Hobbs
CFO.


Jack

How about Hobbs, Indiana; it isn't that far from Indianapolis
International. Our club considered buying a farm there
as a place to operate. grin

As long as we're playing this game, and it really is
just a game, howzabout Dayton? One of the largest
club operations in the country is located there. If
Dayton airport doesn't qualify as a place to fly in
commercially, then Cincinnati isn't far away. More
centrally located among the directors, governors, etc.



At 16:18 19 September 2006, Papa3 wrote:
snip
Really, there are a couple of issues underlying this:

- Availability of a deep enough talent pool to allow
for multiple,
qualified candidates to be sourced locally.
- Barring a local talent pool, the desirability of
the environment as
a place to relocate a family. This is a way to broaden
the talent
pool.
- Accessiblity for both planned and unplanned visits.

A thought on this last point. Over the last 7 years,
I've been part of
a team which started up a global company. Despite
extensive use of
phone, video, Web meetings, etc. there's still no substitute
for
face-to-face interaction. I've noticed that the ability
to get an
executive to visit any location is almost directly
proportional to the
quality of the airline service. I'm sure it's the
same for our
board members, who are, for the most part, extremely
busy individuals .
Even if we do move toward more of a 'virtual organization'
(which I
fully support), we still ought to be in a position
to drop in (planned
or unplanned) on HQ (even if HQ is just 5,000 square
feet in some
office complex). As a straw model, I'd say that any
location we
choose must be within a 1 hour drive of a major airport
(defined as
one having direct service from any of the 20 or so
major hubs in the
US). There's obviously a lot more to site selection
than that, but
it's certainly one of the knockout criteria in my book.

P3