byAlma Abell

Those who are in the market for a remanufactured transmission might want to consider a few key points before making a final decision. You would not want to end up with a transmission that does not work or breaks down very quickly, so it is vital that you take the time to research the location at which you are making this purchase and ask the right questions. In the end, you do not want to become a victim, so be proactive about this purchase.

Consider the Source

Many people now buy transmissions online, as they see great deals and jump on them very quickly. While this has the potential to save you money, it is also very risky. For starters, it can be difficult to find accurate information on the mechanic who worked on the transmission if you buy it online. You can research the company online and look at the experiences that past customers have had, as this provides you with some additional insight. It is highly recommended, however, that you only buy a remanufactured transmission from a garage that you can physically visit, since this can help you avoid potential scams.

Ask Questions

It is a good idea to ask as many questions as possible about the transmission and listen carefully to all of the answers that you receive. For starters, you should ask if the transmission has been tested. You might be shocked to hear that some mechanics do not even test their transmissions before selling them, so they have no idea if the units even work before taking your money. You should also ask about the parts that have been used and the experience level of the mechanic who handled the job before agreeing to buy anything.

Evaluate the Customer Service

Since you are making such a major purchase, you have every right to ask questions and receive answers very quickly. If a shop makes you feel unwelcome before you buy a remanufactured transmission, you can imagine how poorly you will be treated after the transactions has been completed. In short, the company should make you feel like it values your business and if it does not, it might be time to consider a different shop.

Serving the area between Green Bay and years of transmission experience. Visit their website at Trannyman.net to request a free estimate.You can find more info on what we offer by taking a look at our Youtube video. Visit BBB businesses reviews to check the reliability of company.

trannyman.net

Saturday, September 12, 2009

This past week, British Commandos saved a British journalist, Stephen Farrell from what could have been a very dangerous situation as he had been abducted by Taliban insurgents in Kunduz Province, Afghanistan last weekend. During the raid, one of the rescuers and the journalist’s translator were killed in addition to about three others according to conflicting reports.

Farrell, a journalist from The New York Times and dual British-Irish citizen, and his Afghan interpreter, Sultan Munadi, were taken captive by the Taliban while covering a September 4th bombing by coalition aircraft not far from Konduz City, Afghanistan. A local Afghan reported that while Farrell was interviewing individuals that witnessed the bombing, he received a warning from another Afghan that he should leave the area. Soon after, gun-shots were heard and the Taliban was said to be approaching. Reportedly, police warned journalists covering the strike that insurgents controlled the area surrounding the tanker and that they should take precautions for their personal safety.

“We feared that media attention would raise the temperature and increase the risk to the captives.”

When Farrell was taken, few major news outlets reported his capture for security reasons. NY Times Executive Editor Bill Keller earlier said “We feared that media attention would raise the temperature and increase the risk to the captives.”

According to Farrell, while he was treated well — given food, water, and other provisions — his captors taunted Munadi. During their captivity, Farrell commented that his captors would drive within 1500 feet of NATO and Afghan outposts with weapons displayed to prove their daring. Six to eight guards took turns monitoring the captives.

Farrell is the second NY Times journalist to be taken captive in Afghanistan in less than a year. In November 2008, reporter David S. Rohde and his colleague Tahir Ludin were taken captive south of Kabul and moved to Pakistan before they managed to escape in June of this year. Farrell was also kidnapped in April 2004 while on-assignment in Fallujah, Iraq.

Kidnappings are done for ideological reasons by some Taliban members but are also conducted by local insurgents for ransom. At least 16 journalists have been kidnapped since the beginning of the Afghan war.

“The tragedy that took place this morning in northern Afghanistan raises many questions.”

According to Keller, the possibility had arisen that Farrell and Munadi would be moved, possibly to Pakistan, which may have caused the military to act much sooner. On the morning of September 9th, Mohammad Sami Yowar, a spokesman for the Konduz Governor’s Office, briefed that British Commandos conducted a helicopter assault on the house in which the captives were held and subsequently a gun-battle erupted. A Taliban commander inside the house where Farrell and Munadi were being held was reportedly killed during the raid. Munadi was killed during the firefight and British officials said that they could not rule out the possibility he was killed by one of the Commandos. The Konduz Governor, Abdel Wahid Omar Khil, indicated that a woman and child probably caught in the crossfire were also killed during the raid. Farrell indicated that he was not harmed.

Reporters Without Borders has called for an investigation of the Munadi killing stating that “The tragedy that took place this morning in northern Afghanistan raises many questions.” U.S. military officials confirmed the raid was carried out by NATO and Afghan soldiers; no further details were provided.

Thursday, September 13, 2007

Having worked as an aide, advisor, and Executive Assistant to municipal and provincial politicians, Sheila White is running for the Ontario New Democratic Party in the Ontario provincial election, in the Scarborough-Rouge River riding. Wikinews’ Nick Moreau interviewed her regarding her values, her experience, and her campaign.

Stay tuned for further interviews; every candidate from every party is eligible, and will be contacted. Expect interviews from Liberals, Progressive Conservatives, New Democratic Party members, Ontario Greens, as well as members from the Family Coalition, Freedom, Communist, Libertarian, and Confederation of Regions parties, as well as independents.

Shape Minds, Build Brands, and Deliver Results with Game-Changing Public Relations”.

“You think I’m not aware that I’m living the first line of my obituary right now?” – C. J. Cregg White House Press Secretary on the West Wing

Who would have thought only a few years ago that the first line of Martha Stewart’s obituary wouldn’t have included her status as a convicted felon? While her obituary hasn’t yet been written, it’s simply amazing that J.C. Penney is buying a minority stake in Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia Inc. for $38.5 today, as well as the fact that very few stories even mention the fact that Stewart is a convicted felon. What a Public Relations coup and victory for Stewart, who was convicted of lying to investigators about a stock sale, and served five months in a federal prison.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iL0m5XRkdtg[/youtube]

Having represented many high-profile figures convicted of (and accused of) crimes, I wasn’t surprised a few years ago when the media speculated that her jail situation would result in the end of her media empire. Wow does America love compelling comeback stories – her high-profile, well orchestrated comeback campaign had her returning to profitability the following year.

Stewart has told a great story the last few years, and has done an amazing job in communicating to her consumer. Stewart realized and continues to realize that there are two courts in any crisis – first, the court of law, and second, the court of public opinion. While she was found guilty in the court of law, her public (her core consumer) wasn’t upset with her, and her crime wasn’t seen as harming anyone (something in today’s 99%/1% environment which would be much harder to achieve).

Stewart was very public in her comeback; be it from her direct re-engagement with Martha Stewart Living to creation of furnishings. She even created her own Apprentice-type show with Mark Burnett. Stewart, the quintessential American successful woman launched a home handbook, and kept contributing to The Today Show. She’s appeared in commercials for Macy’s, has her own Sirius satellite radio show and has just continued to go and go and go without stopping, despite her temporary setback.

Martha Stewart today deserves congratulations for the sale and a place in the Crisis PR hall-of-fame for her victory in overcoming in the publics’ eye her felony conviction.

Article Source: sooperarticles.com/business-articles/press-release-articles/martha-stewart-prison-power-public-relations-ronn-torossian-738117.html

About Author:

Ronn Torossian is a public relations executive and entrepreneur. Ronn Torossian is CEO of 5WPR, 1 of the 25 largest PR agencies in the US, and author of “For Immediate Release: Shape Minds, Build Brands, and Deliver Results with Game-Changing Public Relations” an Amazon best selling Public Relations bookAuthor: Ronn T

Thursday, December 31, 2009

A suicide bomber attacked an American base in the Khowst region on the Pakistani border of Afghanistan, leaving seven American CIA officers dead and six injured. No American or NATO military personnel were killed or injured in the attack on Forward Operating Base Chapman.

It appears that the suicide bomber, reportedly wearing an Afghan National Army uniform, blew himself up in either the gym or the dining facility of Base Chapman.

In a statement on the Voice of Jihad web page, the Taliban claimed responsiblity for the attack, alleging 20 “CIA employees” were killed in the incident.

The Chapman Base is a converted military base which is now being used for civilian reconstruction operations, although military personnel are still located on the base. Camp Salerno, the main base in the Khowst province, has been the target of many attacks in recent weeks.

Recent attacks have been focused on foreign civilians, such as an incident in October in which 7 foreign and 3 Afghan civilians were killed in an attack at a UN guest house. The CIA has not lost this many operatives in nearly 25 years and the last time CIA agents were killed was in 2003.

Friday, July 9, 2010

A California jury in a Humboldt County courthouse ordered nursing home operator Skilled Healthcare (SH) to pay $671 million (about €531 million) in a class action lawsuit from patients of SH’s 22 California facilities and their families. The jury found that SH failed to properly staff its facilities to comply with California state law.

The jury has not heard the case for punitive damages; however, it awarded the plaintiffs $613 million (about €484 million) in statutory damages. The remaining $58 million (about €46 million) was in restitution.

After the verdict was issued, Skilled Healthcare stocks plunged over 75% to a record low.

An official statement from SH says it “strongly disagrees” with the jury’s verdict. SH plans on filing an appeal to the decision. The company could possibly face bankruptcy because of this verdict.

One of the lawyers for the nearly 32,000 plaintiffs, Timothy Needham, claimed that inadequate staffing levels put SH’s patients at risk. He said, “The company knows that this lack of staffing causes a higher risk of problems for patients. Call lights don’t get answered, persons don’t get proper hygiene, persons don’t get their medications on time or the care they need.”

This lawsuit does not apply to SH’s facilities in Arizona, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, and Texas.

By Gabriel Adams

Affiliate programs allow other people to sell or promote your products and services for commission. If you have multiple websites and distributors promoting your product, you have a much greater potential for sales than otherwise. Affiliate programs are very cost-effective because you only pay when a sales is made. An additional benefit to setting up your own affiliate program is that with a lot more websites linking to yours, your link popularity will increase in search engines, leading to increased website traffic and more sales.

However, there are so many affiliate programs competing for the interest of affiliates that you need to offer a very attractive commission for selling your product. This is particularly true if you are selling a digital product such as an e-book which is mostly all profit. For example, if your digital product is sold for $99 and you are offering your affiliates a 50% commission, your program will be very attractive to affiliates as long as you provide a high quality sales page and offer a good quality product.

Before you even begin to set up your own affiliate program, you need to make sure you have a quality product, a website that is set up to maximize search engine marketing and is easy to navigate and a professional sales page. Before you involve others in selling your product, sell it for yourself for a little while so you can iron out any problems that might crop up while the customer base is still small. Once you are confident that there are no problems with the product, you need to decide how you want to set up your affiliate program.

Before you begin, it is a good idea to ask yourself these questions:

What do you want to pay affiliates for leads, clicks or actual sales?

Do you want to give your affiliates their own website that is a replica of yours?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmxVqo92jaA[/youtube]

Or do you just want to give your affiliates their own unique ID to track sales?

Will you commission be a flat rate or a percentage of sales?

Do you want to sell all your products and services through affiliates, or just certain ones?

Do you want to create a single tier program that pays for sales only, or do you wish to set up a two tier program to pay the affiliate for referrals as well?

Do you wish to limit your affiliates to your own country or are you happy to go global?

Once you have made these fundamental decisions, you need to consider whether you want to run your own CGI scripts and administer your affiliate program yourself. However, this is a lot of work and you will be responsible for the security, testing, promotion and commission payments etc.

If you have a downloadable product such as e-books or software,

Clickbank.com

might be a good option. Clickbank charges an initial fee of $49.95 and allows you to process credit cards and online checks for $1.00 per transaction and 7.5% of sales. You also get a built in affiliate program. Clickbank lists your product and program on their website and visitors can either buy your products or join your affiliate program. You choose the commission rate and all commission payments are handled by them. The only real downside is that it doesnt allow for a two-tiered system.

ClixGalore.com on the other hand does allow for two tiers, however they are much more expensive both to join and in ongoing costs. ClixGalore is an affiliate network and as such could provide you with beneficial exposure to potential affiliates.

As you can see, there are many options available to you if you want to set up your own affiliate program. There is only time to mention a few in this article, but do an internet search and take some time to explore the choices available to you in terms of computer software, third party providers and affiliate networks.

Once you have set up your affiliate program, the promotion is up to you. A good starting point for promoting your own affiliate program is to list your site at

revenews.com

,

associateprograms.com

and

affiliatebroadcast.com

. Blogs, forum posts and article marketing can also be used to attract interest in both your products and your affiliate program.

About the Author: Opinions in this article do not necessarily reflect the view of

SEO Consultant

which the author would like for you to visit.

Source:

isnare.com

Permanent Link:

isnare.com/?aid=135779&ca=Business

Thursday, January 14, 2010

Digital radio listeners in the UK may have noticed a new station on their list over the last few months with the beta launch of Amazing Radio, founded by Paul Campbell as a follow up and companion to Amazing Tunes. However, unlike the majority of the other stations on both digital and FM, Amazing Radio doesn’t play normal, mainstream music. Instead, its playlist consists solely of music from unsigned bands and artists who have signed up and uploaded their music to AmazingTunes.com. Their music can then be downloaded from the site, for which they get paid. The more downloads and interest an artist receives, the more likely they are to get played on the national radio station. Amazing markets itself as an “ethical” download website, on which artists get 70% of the download revenues. They now have more than 22,000 songs uploaded, with about 100 uploaded every day.

Blimey, I sound like some corporate twat.

Paul Campbell himself has extensive experience in both radio and television production, having worked for BBC Radio 4 and Channel 4. After success with his own production company in the nineties and with support from investors, Campbell launched Amazing Tunes in 2005.

As Amazing Radio introduces a new schedule for the New Year, with presenters rather than solely pre-recorded links, Wikinews reporter Tristan Thomas interviewed Campbell to find out more.

((Wikinews)) Hi Paul, thanks for doing this interview.

((Paul Campbell)) My pleasure – thanks very much for asking me. We’re really grateful that Wikinews is interested in us.

((WN)) At the end of 2009, you complained to the BBC Trust about BBC Introducing. Can you explain what this was about and the reasons for it. Has anything come of it?

((PC)) Sure: in a nutshell, the complaint was about unfair competition – about the BBC not following its own rules. It’s still ongoing. It will take, ahem, a while to resolve.

The details are a bit complex, but here goes. (If you commit suicide out of the boredom at what follows, I apologise).

As British readers will know, the BBC has a guaranteed and very comfortable income derived from the Licence Fee – effectively a tax you have to pay if you want a TV. According to Wikipedia (so it must be true), this generates an income to the BBC of about stg4.5bn per annum. Nice.

BBC people live in an insulated, publicly-funded world

Not really. In recent years the beeb has increasingly used this gargantuan income – and its incredible audience reach online, on radio & TV – to launch new services that make life impossible for everyone who is not the BBC. These have ranged from e-learning content (that completely wrecked the market for private publishers), to a new digital radio station (that caused a private speech station to go bust), to an attempt to launch online regional news services (which caused howls of outrage from local newspapers). The BBC does it for the best of reasons – to provide a public service – but BBC people live in an insulated, publicly-funded world, one where you know with complete certainty you’ll get paid on the 15th of every month. It’s a million miles away from the real world, where entrepreneurial people take risks, and lose their jobs and their houses if it goes wrong. Here, the BBC’s actions have grave implications. And not just for private companies: the UK as a whole is very good at creative industries, which are the fastest-growing part of the economy. But it’s kinda hard to grow a global business if your domestic market has been wrecked by a rampaging, publicly-funded, bull in a china shop. So by accidentally knackering private companies, the BBC is also damaging the British economy.

Wise people noticed this. A few years ago the Governance of the BBC was changed. A new regulator, the BBC Trust, was created. It tried to address the problem. It insists the Corporation does a ‘public value test’ when it wants to launch a new service, or to expand an existing one.

Here, it hasn’t. Although the BBC has a longstanding commitment to play new music on its local radio stations, and one of its most famous DJs John Peel had an outstanding show on BBC Radio 1 for many years which played new music (and was, incidentally, produced by one of our new presenters), it’s suddenly changed the game. It’s launched a huge expansion and automation of this formerly piecemeal and limited activity, targeted exclusively at unsigned bands. BBC Introducing is a pan-BBC brand, combining local and network radio, television, online, even a special stage at Glastonbury. There’s a very expensive online upload service which I just know would have cost ten times what we had to spend on our similar service. There’s a Head of Department, doubtless with dozens of staff. I’ll bet they have BBC Introducing pens. It’s everywhere.

This is, by any reckoning, a ‘new service’. But it’s not been subjected to a public value test. Worse, I have it on very good authority from someone inside the BBC that BBC Worldwide – its commercial arm – is planning to launch a BBC Introducing record label – i.e., an overtly commercial expansion of BBC Introducing. This would be like the BBC trying to create a new version of the music industry, all by itself.

Whether or not you think it’s a good thing for the beeb to champion new music, you may agree it should follow its own rules. It hasn’t. There was no Public Value Test; no request to the Trust to be allowed to do this.

So we complained. It was a bit hilarious. The Trust said they weren’t allowed to investigate until we’d complained to the beeb itself and the BBC had rejected our complaint. There was a long pause as I tried to understand the logic. I said ‘I’m guessing the BBC didn’t do a PVT because it didn’t think it needed to do a PVT. We think they should have done. We’re asking you to investigate, to see if you agree’. They said ‘you have to complain to them first. It’s protocol’. It’s all very British – i.e., charmingly polite … ludicrously bureaucratic … and totally useless.

So we have another hoop to jump through. We’re now preparing our formal complaint to the BBC itself – whose Director General is someone I used to work with, when we were both fresh-faced BBC trainees in 1981. It takes time: I’ll have to write it myself, and I have a business to run. The beeb will have a small army of staff whose only job is to read it … and reject it. (They always reject criticism; it’s the BBC’s default position. They usually do it with a slightly pained expression, hurt that anyone could fail to understand their brilliance and omniscience. Either that, or they try to demolish your intellect and cast doubt on your probity. Either way, they’ll reject it).

When they do, we’ll then be able to go back to the BBC Trust to say ‘guess what? The BBC rejected our complaint. Now will you investigate?’. Yawn.

All this might make me seem a BBC-hater. Actually nothing could be further from the truth. The BBC trained me.

All this might make me seem a BBC-hater. Actually nothing could be further from the truth. The BBC trained me. I was once, so I was told by the Head of Appointments, its youngest-ever Producer. Despite appearances, I firmly believe it’s one of the best things about the UK. I wrote to The Times of London recently in defence of it. But unfortunately it’s really, really bad at understanding the damage it does to private companies, the ones like ours that create jobs and try to create wealth, without the benefit of a guaranteed income. (Or even, any income at all).

The stakes are high. The conventional music industry is falling to bits around us. There’s an historic opportunity to re-invent music in a way that’s fair to musicians and music-lovers, and also creates jobs and wealth in the real economy. It’s vitally important the BBC, with its publicly-funded hobnailed boots, doesn’t ruin that opportunity.

So we’ll do our complaint, wait for it to be rejected, complain to the Trust, and keep battering away. Fun fun fun. (This would never happen in the States).

((WN)) You don’t accept any PRS registered artists at all. Why not?

HAVE YOUR SAY
Do you agree with Paul? Are PRS getting it completely wrong?
Add or view comments

((PC)) We’d love to – after all, we have the same aim as PRS, which is to make it easier for musicians to earn a living from their talent. But we can’t. There’s two reasons.

1. PRS has a barmy standard contract for using their members’ music online. It requires us to pay them a fixed percentage of ALL revenue from that website – whether or not the revenue is derived from their members’ work. So if we had 100,000 songs from non-PRS artists on amazingtunes.com, and one song from a PRS artist, we’d have to pay them a percentage of the revenue from ALL 100,000 songs. I.e., we’d have to take money out of the pockets out of non-PRS artists to pay to PRS. That would be immoral.
2. If we played PRS artists on the radio, we’d have to pay PRS for our use of their members’ music. Sound fair enough? But PRS doesn’t know what to do with the money. They’d put it into a big bucket, then share it out among ALL their artists – not the members whose songs we played, all their artists, including rich and famous signed ones. The vast majority of PRS payments go to a tiny minority of artists (and big record labels). So it would be another case of stealing from Peter to pay Paul. Paul McCartney, that is.

I wrote to the CEO of PRS when we first launched Amazing Radio pointing out these absurdities and asking if we could do a more intelligent deal. I said that I thought we had identical aims – to make life fair for musicians. I suggested we could/should be a feeder to them, introducing new members to PRS as they grew in the music industry. But so far, the PRS head is still firmly in the sand.

((WN)) And how would you suggest PRS could improve? If they did, would you consider allowing artists registered with them?

((PC)) PRS could improve by;

a. buying some computers (so they could handle our comprehensive data about the tracks we play, and then pay the right people);
b. accepting that we want to mix PRS and non-PRS artists, and only asking for a share of the artists they actually represent.

If they did that, we’d sign up. This would not necessarily be popular with our audience. A lot of people – especially charities and small businesses – like the fact that they can listen to Amazing Radio without a PRS licence. But we’d do it anyway, as it would be a better service for musicians.

PRS should also stop threatening to murder law-abiding people who want to listen to music at work

My personal view is that the PRS should also stop threatening to murder law-abiding people who want to listen to music at work. There was a recent case where they threatened someone for singing at work. They actually did that. They later apologized, but it revealed the corporate mentality. I think it’s incredibly counter-productive; it means their members make less money, not more; it’s ruining perceptions of what motivates musicians; it’s causing thousands of people to stop listening to music. When really, PRS should be encouraging that, shouldn’t it?

((WN)) With regard to Amazing Tunes, how many downloads could your most popular artist expect to receive per month and monetary wise, how would this compare to them receiving that number from iTunes?

((PC)) Sorry, but we don’t currently release detailed figures – our competitors would love it, but we’d rather be nice to our artists and our investors instead. We do say that we expect amazingtunes.com artists to make ‘anything from a few quid, to a good living, to a small fortune’. At the moment, because it’s still very early days, people are clustered towards the first two of those options. As things grow – and there’s been incredible growth even in the past few months – we hope/expect more and more artists will start to make tens of thousands of pounds each month. We’ll soon register for the official chart, and our guess is that someone will have a major hit before long. Then everything will go really crazy.

So far as the iTunes comparisons go, the facts are already public domain. An artist on iTunes can expect to make 8p from a 79p download. The same artist on amazingtunes.com will make about 52p. We only deduct the VAT and the cost of the transaction: 70% of what’s left goes to the artist. What’s more, their income will improve over time – the more downloads we sell, the less the transactions cost us, so the more cash there is to give to the artists. That’s one reason we ask people to buy eight or more songs in one transaction – it’s much more cost-effective, less of their cash goes to VISA, more to the artist. (See my Blog post on this here – [1]).

((WN)) Amazing Radio launched in mid-2009. How has it grown since then and what are your current listening figures?

((PC)) It’s gone mad since then. I’ve worked in broadcasting and the media since 1978 (I was very very young then, mind you). I’ve never known anything like it. The reaction has been absolutely incredible – and it’s growing faster than ever right now. The most humbling thing has been the audience feedback – masses of long emails from people we’ve never met, saying they found it by accident, and they love it.

the best guess I’ve heard in the industry is that we have something like 600,000 listeners in the UK on DAB.

We’ve not yet paid for RAJAR audience figures because – well, because we’re a bit mean really, and I’m not convinced they would accurately measure our audience. I think RAJAR is very good at coming out with figures for radio stations that have been going for 40 years, but not very accurate when it comes to new and innovative stations which are also listened to a lot online and especially popular with young people. But the best guess I’ve heard in the industry is that we have something like 600,000 listeners in the UK on DAB. That’s an estimate, but it came from a very wise source. We have slightly more than that number on top as regular users online, and a weekly reach for amazingtunes.com of about two million users. But it’s all growing so fast, those numbers will be out of date by the time you read this.

((WN)) DAB transmission costs are well over half a million pounds a year. How is this being funded currently and how are you planning to fund it in the future?

((PC)) We’re not contractually allowed to tell you what we pay, so we can’t confirm or deny the cost. Whatever the true figure, it is undeniably expensive; but it gives our musicians a chance to be on national radio. We figure it’s worth it. I’m reminded of that wonderful teachers’ union bumper sticker: ‘if you think education’s expensive, try ignorance’. If you think creating the world’s first radio station playing 100% new music is expensive …. try being inaudible.

So far, we’ve been funded by a very small number of private investors, people of enormous wisdom and insight, natch. They understand that we have a very serious, long-term and audacious ambition to change the music industry for the better, to make radio interesting again, and to turn the word ‘amazing’ into a global challenger brand.

This year, we expect to do one final fund-raising in the UK, then to raise a lot of money on the West Coast of the USA to make this absolutely massive and global, fast. They understand this scale of ambition there.

HAVE YOUR SAY
Have you tuned into Amazing Radio? What did you think?
Add or view comments

((WN)) What are your plans for Amazing Radio in 2010? Any exciting announcements to come?

((PC)) ‘Fraid so.

In 2010, we hope to make Amazing Radio the default station for everyone who has ever had that incredible experience of hearing a song for the first time, and having to stop what you’re doing to listen to it: a station for everyone who has broad musical tastes, a respect for musical talent and an open mind. We want it to be constantly surprising, fresh, original, sometimes hilarious, always unexpected.

Blimey, I sound like some corporate twat.

Now (obviously) it wouldn’t be massively unexpected if we suddenly started revealing all the unexpected things in advance – but basically, we’d like the message to spread that we’re doing something different, fresh, original and ethical – so we’ll launch more new programmes and more new services – on Amazing Radio and amazingtunes.com. Things like our virtual radio station Amazing Ambient. [2]. There’ll be some video and some TV along soon too. And other cool stuff.

It may not be ‘insanely cool’; just cool will do just fine.

We also want to do it in other places. E.g. America. We’ve already started there. We’ll be unexpected there too.

((WN)) Finally, your favourite artist on Amazing Tunes/Radio at the moment?

((PC)) Now this will sound like a real cop-out, but I never ever say who my favourite artist is. It’s for a serious reason. I’m not some musical Einstein – I’m merely the bloke who started amazing. And I’m merely a drummer. My taste doesn’t matter. EVERYBODY’s musical taste does. One of the many problems of conventional record companies is that they think geezers in suits in big glass buildings have the right to decide what’s good music. We think the world does. I’ve found hundreds of incredible songs that I love, across loads of styles of music. You’ll find hundreds of your own. Enjoy.

((WN)) Thank you very much for your time Paul. Good luck for 2010.

((PC)) Thanks very much, we really appreciate it. 2010 is going to be amazing.

Tuesday, January 16, 2018

A car accident involving the car occupants and a dentist’s office happened on Sunday night in Santa Ana, California. A white Nissan sedan which was apparently driving too fast hit the raised concrete median on the road, after which it was launched into the air, slamming straight into the wall of the second floor of a two-story dental practice building, where the car got wedged.

According to the police, the car approached from a side street. The room of the dental office penetrated by the sedan was used as a storage space. A fire department crane was used to extract the vehicle from the building, which took several hours.

There were two people in the sedan. One of them managed to escape from the hanging vehicle on his own, while the other one remained trapped inside it for over an hour. They were both hospitalized with minor injuries, according to the Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA). According to the police, the driver of the car admitted narcotics use, and after toxicology tests the case is to be submitted to the Orange County District Attorney’s Office.

The moment of the accident was captured by surveillance video from a bus which the car narrowly missed when becoming airborne.

According to OCFA spokesperson Captain Stephen Horner, there was a small fire after the crash, which was extinguished quickly.

Monday, February 12, 2007

Cars drove home the big prize last night, from the 34th Annual Annie Awards. The animation industry’s highest honor, ASIFA-Hollywood’s Annies recognise contributions to animation, writing, directing, storyboarding, voice acting, composing, and much more.

As mentioned, Pixar took home the big prize last night, after facing stiff competition from four other Happy Feet, Monster House, Open Season, and Over the Hedge.

But the biggest winner of the night didn’t get a “Best Animated Feature” nod at all. Flushed Away won five feature animation categories including Animated Effects (Scott Cegielski), Character Animation (Gabe Hordos), Production Design (Pierre-Olivier Vincent), Voice Acting (Sir Ian McKellan as Toad), Writing (Dick Clement, Ian La Frenais, Chris Lloyd, Joe Keenan, and Will Davies).

Over The Hedge won awards for Directing (Tim Johnson and Karey Kirkpatrick), Storyboarding (Gary Graham), and Character Design (Nicolas Marlet).

Of little surprise, Randy Newman won an Annie for Cars in the “Music in an Animated Feature Production” category. Newman has won many Oscars for his movie music, and has a nomination this year for the song “Our Town”. Newman didn’t attend the Annies, instead picking up a Grammy for “Best Song Written For Motion Picture, Television Or Other Visual Media”.

DisneyToon Studios’ Bambi II won “Best Home Entertainment Production”, while “Best Animated Short Subject” went to Blue Sky Studios’ No Time For Nuts, which is based on Ice Age.

“Best Animated Video Game” went to Flushed Away The Game, while a United Airlines ad named “Dragon” won a “Best Animated Television Commercial” Annie for DUCK Studios.

Contents

  • 1 Foster an Annie fav on TV
  • 2 Wikinews was there
  • 3 Related news
  • 4 Sources