People always ask me how I get my story and character ideas and my answer always boils down to one word: curiosity! Maybe this stems from my long career as a journalist where I was paid to ask questions and go deep, or maybe it's just my natural inclination to learn more, and more, and more. In any case, curiosity has driven all of my novels. And here's how it plays out in my day-to-day life: I'm always listening, observing, and … eavesdropping! That woman at the table next to yours who is sipping her pinot noir and staring off into space? That's me, and I'm listening to your argument with your boyfriend while pretending to totally be interested in that spec on the far wall. That woman at the grocery store who is seemingly inspecting the artichokes? Yep, me again, listening to a mother speak to her eleven-year-old son about his deadbeat dad. All of it, everywhere, is the interesting real-life stuff that make characters pop off the page and make stories feel more three-dimensional. Try it! I promise, it leads to great material.
New Video of My Signing Event in Istanbul!
Two Book Signings in Istanbul–This Weekend!
Thank you for writing tips. I hope many more will come.
Can you write about how you choose conflicts, and perhaps show us your workplace at home?


G.R. No. 203332, June 18, 2014 - FLORENCIO LIBONGCOGON, FELIPE VILLAREAL AND ALFONSO CLAUDIO, Petitioners, v. PHIMCO INDUSTRIES, INC., Respondent.
FLORENCIO LIBONGCOGON, FELIPE VILLAREAL AND ALFONSO CLAUDIO, Petitioners, v. PHIMCO INDUSTRIES, INC., Respondent.
We resolve the present petition for review on certiorari1 which seeks to nullify the amended decision2 dated August 30, 2012 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. 115295.
The Phimco Industries, Inc. (PHIMCO) is a domestic corporation engaged in the production of matches. The Phimco Labor Association (PILA) is the exclusive collective bargaining representative of the PHIMCO regular rank-and-file employees. Due to a bargaining deadlock with PHIMCO, PILA staged a strike on April 21, 1995.
The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) issued a temporary restraining order on June 23, 1995, but the strike continued, with the strikers blocking the company's points of ingress and egress. Three days later or, on June 26, 1995, PHIMCO served dismissal notices on the strikers for the alleged illegal acts they committed during the strike. Consequently, PILA filed a complaint for illegal dismissal and unfair labor practice against PHIMCO (illegal dismissal case) under NLRC NCR Case No. 00-07-04705-95. PHIMCO, for its part, filed a petition to declare the strike illegal (illegal strike case), docketed as NLRC Case No. 00-08-06031-95.
Then Acting Secretary Jose Brillantes of the Department of Labor and Employment assumed jurisdiction over the strike and issued a return-to-work order. PILA ended its strike and PHIMCO resumed its operations. Later, PHIMCO laid off 21 of its employees and implemented a retirement program covering 53 other employees. Twenty-two out of the 53 questioned the legality of their retirement. Further, PILA found out that seven other workers who were also dismissed on June 26, 1995—Florencio Libongcogon, Felipe Villareal, Mario Perea, Angelito Dejan, Mariano Rosales, Roger Caber, and Alfonso Claudio - were not included in the illegal dismissal case.
In view of these developments, PILA filed another complaint (NLRC NCR Case No. 00-07-04723-97) against PHIMCO with the following causes of action: (1) the illegal dismissal of the 7 employees; (2) the forced retirement of 53 employees; and (3) the lay-off of 21 employees.
In a decision3 dated August 5, 1998, Labor Arbiter (LA) Felipe P. Pati dismissed NLRC Case No. 00-07-04723-97. PILA filed an appeal which the NLRC dismissed through its decision4 dated July 30, 1999. PILA sought relief from the CA through a petition for certiorari (CA-G.R. SP No. 57988).
The CA Special 12th Division rendered a decision5 on February 27, 2001 partly granting the petition. It found the 7 employees to have been illegally dismissed. It ruled that as ordinary union members, the 7 must have been shown to have committed illegal acts during the strike to warrant their dismissal, but there was no such showing. Having been illegally dismissed, the 7 were entitled to reinstatement, full backwages inclusive of allowances, and other benefits, computed from June 26, 1995 up to the time of their actual reinstatement.
Thereafter, PHIMCO appealed to this Court through a petition for review on certiorari which the Court denied in its Resolution6 dated October 3, 2001. The resolution became final and executory on December 4, 2001.7 PILA then filed a motion for the computation of backwages and benefits of the 7 union members, the CA decision in CA-G.R. SP No. 57988 likewise having become final and executory.
On October 18, 2002, the NLRC NCR Arbitration Branch submitted a computation of the backwages for June 26, 1995 to October 2, 2002 in the total amount of P519,907.10 for each of the 7 employees. The amount of P174,305.84 received by Caber (for which he executed a quitclaim), was deducted from the computation of his backwages. On January 7, 2003, LA Pati ordered the issuance of a writ of execution in favor of Libongcogon, Villareal, Claudio, Peria and Dejan, excluding Caber and Rosales who passed away and whose heirs had received financial assistance from the company for which they executed the corresponding quitclaims and release.
PHIMCO appealed, but the NLRC denied the appeal, as well as PHIMCO's subsequent motion for reconsideration.
On March 6, 2004, Dejan moved for the dismissal of the case as far as he was concerned, manifesting that he voluntarily executed a quitclaim and release in the company's favor (before LA Pati) in consideration of P164,025.85. PILA moved for execution of the CA ruling.
PHIMCO, on the other hand, filed a motion for the computation of the backwages of Libongcogon, Villareal and Claudio, claiming that their former positions no longer existed as of June 26, 1995, making their reinstatement physically impossible. It argued that under Section 4(b), Rule I, Book VI of the Omnibus Rules Implementing the Labor Code, its obligation to the three employees was only to pay them separation pay up to June 26, 1995.
Accompanying PHIMCO's motion for computation was a certification issued by its Chief Accountant, Nestor Sebastian, stating that in 1993, the company shifted to the buying of splints (palito) and skillets (match boxes) instead of buying logs and making the materials in the company itself. In the middle of June 1995, PHIMCO stopped the splint and skillet processing in its Sta. Ana factory, resulting in the abolition on June 26, 1995 of the jobs of Perea, Villareal and Claudio. Later, PHIMCO closed one match automatic line due to reduced sales of matches. The closure also resulted in the abolition of the jobs of eleven (11) other employees, including Libongcogon. Through a supplement to the motion for computation, PHIMCO maintained that the separation pay of the remaining four employees should be as follows: Libongcogon, P71,289.00; Villareal, P113,556.00; Perea, P143,809.00; and Claudio, P35,385.00.
In an order8 dated March 28, 2005, LA Aliman D. Mangandog, who took over the case due to LA Pati's inhibition from further handling the dispute, upheld PHIMCO's position and declared that the reinstatement of the 7 union members had been rendered impossible because of the abolition of their positions in 1995. Further, LA Mangandog noted that three of the 7 had withdrawn their claims against the company (Caber and Rosales [who died during the pendency of the case] and Dejan). He ordered PHIMCO to pay Libongcogon, Villareal, Perea and Claudio separation pay of one month's salary for every year of service from date of their employment up to June 1995, plus financial assistance of one-half month's pay for each of them.
After receipt of copy of LA Mangandog's order, Perea moved to withdraw his claim against PHIMCO, stating that he voluntarily executed a quitclaim and release in favor of the company in consideration of P143,711.32. PILA filed a motion for reconsideration of the order which the NLRC treated as an appeal.
On June 30, 2009, the NLRC issued a resolution9 reversing LA Mangandog's ruling. It declared that PHIMCO had not shown any clear basis to modify the CA decision of February 27, 200110 ordering the reinstatement of the 7 dismissed union members, which had long become final and executory. It considered LA Mangandog's order which modified the CA decision a nullity. It then remanded the records of the case to its Regional Arbitration Branch for the issuance of a writ of execution to strictly enforce the CA decision of February 27, 2001.
PHIMCO moved for reconsideration. On July 21, 2010, the NLRC issued another resolution11 modifying its resolution of June 30, 2009. It dismissed the case with prejudice with respect to Rosales, Caber, Dejan and Perea as they or their heirs executed quitclaims in favor of PHIMCO. It again remanded the records to its arbitration branch for the issuance of a writ of execution in the following amounts: (1) P827,842.23 for Libongcogon; (2) P1,061,512.70 for Villareal; and (3) P811,835.47 for Claudio.
Undaunted, PHIMCO appealed to the CA on grounds that the NLRC committed grave abuse of discretion when (1) it took cognizance of the 7 employees' motion for reconsideration despite its non-compliance with the requirements for perfecting an appeal; (2) ordered the reinstatement of two of the 7 who were already deceased and two who filed motions to dismiss the case; and (3) ruled that they were entitled to backwages and accrued salaries from June 26, 1995 to December 31, 2004.
With respect to the procedural question, PHIMCO argued that the NLRC should not have accepted the employees' appeal since it failed to comply with the requirements for perfection of an appeal. It pointed out that the appeal lacked a verification and certification of non-forum shopping and was not accompanied by an appeal fee. On the merits of the case, PHIMCO reiterated its argument that the former positions of the 7 employees were already abolished and the machines that they were using were dismantled as early as June 1995, rendering their reinstatement a legal impossibility. Under such a situation, it maintained, their backwages should be computed only up to the date their positions were abolished.
PHIMCO further argued that the March 28, 2005 resolution12 of LA Mangandog did not modify the February 27, 2005 decision13 of the CA in CA-G.R. SP No. 57988. The Mangandog resolution, it explained, simply applied Section 4, Rule 1, Book VI of the Omnibus Rules Implementing the Labor Code, requiring the payment of separation pay in case the establishment where the employee is to be reinstated has closed or has ceased operations or where his or her former position no longer exists at the time of reinstatement, for reasons not attributable to the fault of the employer.
In its first assailed decision,14 the CA denied the petition and upheld the NLRC rulings. It found that the NLRC committed no grave abuse of discretion when it accepted the employees' motion for reconsideration as an appeal. It stressed that the circumstances obtaining in the case warrant a liberal application of the rules of procedure considering the seriousness of the issue that had to be resolved, involving no less the alteration by LA Mangandog of a final and executory decision of the CA. Further, it sustained the NLRC's dismissal of the complaint with respect to Rosales, Caber, Dejan and Perea, as they or their heirs executed quitclaims in PHIMCO's favor.
The CA emphasized that the decision of its Special 12th Division in CA-G.R. SP No. 57988 became final and executory on December 4, 2001; thus, there is nothing more left to be done but to enforce it. It rejected PHIMCO's argument that since there were no more positions the remaining 3 employees could go back to, its only obligation was to give them separation pay. At any rate, it opined, even on the assumption that the employees' positions had been abolished in June 1995, that this circumstance would not justify a modification of the NLRC's final and executory reinstatement order inasmuch as (1) the abolition of the workers' positions occurred before the judgment had attained finality; and (2) the issue was raised only during the execution stage.
PHIMCO moved for reconsideration of the CA decision. It argued in the main that independent of the issue on the abolition of the employees' positions, their reinstatement should not have been upheld in view of the ruling of this Court in G.R. No. 170830, Phimco Industries, Inc. v. Phimco Industries Labor Association (PILA)15 (illegal strike case) promulgated on August 11, 2010, as well as the Court's Resolution in G.R. No. 192875, Phimco Industries Labor Association (PILA) et al, v. Phimco Industries, Inc.16 (illegal dismissal case) issued on January 19, 2011.
PHIMCO maintained that in the illegal strike case, the Court's 3rd Division ruled that the company had a just cause to dismiss the affected union members as they committed illegal acts during the strike. In the illegal dismissal case, on the other hand, the Court's 2nd Division took into consideration the 3rd Division's ruling in the illegal strike case which, it noted, had already become final and executory. Accordingly, the 2nd Division denied PILA's petition seeking (1) the reinstatement of the striking employees; and (2) the reversal of the decision of the CA 17th Division in CA-G.R. No. 83569 declaring the dismissal of the concerned employees valid.
PILA, for its part, argued that the procedural issue had already been passed upon by the CA in its decision of December 9, 2011 and PHIMCO had not presented any fresh argument to warrant a reconsideration. On the merits of the case, PILA maintained that since the reinstatement order of the CA Special 12th Division had become final and executory long before this Court's decision in G.R. No. 170830 and its resolution in G.R. No. 192875 were rendered, the rulings of the Court should not have affected the dismissed employees.
Through its amended decision of August 30, 201217 (on further reconsideration), the CA granted PHIMCO's motion for reconsideration, although it reaffirmed its finding that the NLRC committed no grave abuse of discretion in issuing its assailed resolutions of June 30, 2009 and July 21, 2010 as they were rendered in line with the ruling of the CA Special 12th Division in CA-G.R. SP No. 57988.
Invoking this Court's ruling in David v. CA,18 the CA held that while the judgment in CA-G.R. SP No. 57988 (sought to be enforced by the challenged NLRC resolutions) had attained finality, there were facts and/or events which transpired after the judgment was issued, which presented a supervening cause that rendered the final and executory decision no longer enforceable. The "supervening cause" CA had in mind referred principally to this Court's (3rd Division) ruling in the illegal strike case (G.R. No. 170830) promulgated on August 11, 2010 that PILA's members were validly dismissed as they committed unlawful acts during the strike. It also cited the Court's (2nd Division) resolution in the illegal dismissal case (G.R. No. 192875) issued on January 19, 2011 recognizing that the Court's decision in the illegal strike case had already become final and executory. The Court, in effect, denied PILA's prayer in G.R. No. 192875 to have the dismissed union members who participated in the strike reinstated, thereby acknowledging that they had been validly dismissed.
The CA took note that PHIMCO was able to identify the union members who participated and committed illegal acts (illegally blocking ingress to and egress from the company premises during the strike) through the affidavits of company employees and its personnel manager, as well as through photographs of the strike scene, as stated in the Court's decision in the illegal strike case.19The identified union members included Libongcogon, Villareal and Claudio, the remaining employees who were contesting their dismissal.
By amending its decision dated December 9, 2011, reversed the assailed NLRC resolutions in so far as they pertain to the reinstatement or payment of accrued wages, 13th month pay and service incentive leave pay of Libongcogon, Villareal and Claudio.
Aggrieved, Libongcogon, Villareal and Claudio now appeal to this Court on grounds that the CA committed grave abuse of discretion when (1) it set aside its previous decision and granted PHIMCO's motion for reconsideration and petition for certiorari despite its clear finding that the NLRC committed no grave abuse of discretion in its assailed resolutions; and (2) it applied in the present case the decisions of this Court in G.R. No. 170830 and G.R. No. 192875.
The petitioners bewail the CA's grant of certiorari to the company, which it had denied in its decision of December 9, 2011 (when it found that the NLRC did not commit any grave abuse of discretion in its appealed rulings). They find no justification for the CA's change of mind considering that even in its amended decision of August 30, 2012, the appellate court reiterated its opinion that the NLRC committed no grave abuse of discretion in its assailed resolutions of June 30, 200920 and July 21, 2010.21 They contend that the CA amended decision had no legal basis on both substantive and procedural grounds; it ran counter to both the basic tenet of a Rule 65 petition for certiorari, and rewarded PHIMCO for unduly derailing the enforcement of a final and executory decision rendered way back in 2001.
The three dismissed employees were surprised that despite the lack of any grave abuse of discretion in the NLRC resolutions, the CA reversed its previous decision and set aside said resolutions "merely by reason of the Hon. Supreme Court's subsequent decisions in G.R. No. 170830 and G.R. No. 192875 which the appellate court considered as supervening events,"22 in relation to its decision of February 27, 2001 decreeing their reinstatement. They submit that this Court's decisions were not raised by PHIMCO in its petition for certiorari before the CA and thus cannot be made a basis of the appellate court's decision. They maintain that the present case is separate and distinct from the cases in G.R. No 170830 and G.R. No. 192875 which was decided more than a decade ahead of the decisions of the Court invoked by the CA in its amended decision.
In its Comment (on the petition),25 the respondent PHIMCO asks for the dismissal of the petition on grounds that: (1) the CA is correct in relying on the decisions of this Court in the illegal strike case (G.R. No. 170830) and the illegal dismissal case (G.R. No. 192875) as basis for its amended decision; and (2) the rule on "commonality of interests" is applicable to the petitioners.
PHIMCO takes exception to the petitioners' claim that it never raised with the CA the issue of "supervening event." It contends that right after the filing of its Petition for Certiorari with Prayer for the Issuance of a Writ of Preliminary Injunction and/or Temporary Restraining Order dated August 9, 2010 with the CA, it filed an Urgent Motion for the Issuance of a Temporary Restraining Order (dated August 16, 2010)26 to enjoin the enforcement of the assailed NLRC resolutions.
PHIMCO maintains that when the CA denied its urgent motion, it filed on October 4, 2010 a Motion for Reconsideration with a Reply to the comment of the employees27 where it first attempted to raise the "supervening event" issue by manifesting before the CA that this Court's decision in the illegal strike case (G.R. No. 170830) positively identified the petitioners Libongcogon, Villareal and Claudio as among the union members who participated in the strike and who committed illegal acts during the strike. It adds that for this reason, the Court declared — in the illegal strike case — that they had been validly dismissed.
Thereafter, several other related incidents ensued where it again called attention to the "supervening event" issue, one such incident being the filing of the parties' memoranda28 on its petition. PHIMCO submits that the entry of the Court's ruling in the strike case in the Book of Entries of Judgments29 put an end to the issue of petitioners' illegal dismissal as upheld by the Court in its decision in the illegal dismissal case (G.R. No. 192875).
Under the circumstances, PHIMCO explains, the CA correctly yielded to the pronouncements of the Court in the two cases on the ground of res judicata as the two cases and the present one had identity of parties and issues. It thus maintains that the CA correctly considered in its amended decision of August 30, 2012 the Court's rulings in the illegal strike and illegal dismissal cases as supervening events which rendered the execution of the NLRC resolution dated July 21, 201030 unjust and inequitable.
Finally, PHIMCO argues that there is commonality of interests between the petitioners and the respondents in the illegal strike case as found by LA Mangandog since their rights and obligations originate from the same source—their status as PHIMCO employees and PILA members and, their participation in the illegal strike.
We now resolve the core issue of whether the CA committed a reversible error or grave abuse of discretion in relying on this Court's rulings in the illegal strike case (G.R. No. 170830) and the illegal dismissal case (G.R. No. 192875) as basis for its amended decision of August 30, 2012.
The petitioners contend that the CA contravened the doctrine of immutability of final judgments when it issued its amended decision of August 30, 2012 nullifying the final and executory decision of its Special 12th Division declaring their dismissal illegal. They insist that the CA ruling had become immutable and unalterable and may no longer be modified in any respect, even if the modification is meant to correct erroneous conclusions of fact and law, regardless of whether it will be made by the court that rendered it or by the highest court of the land. They invoke the Court's pronouncement in Silliman University v. Fontelo-Paalan,31 in support of their position. They submit that for this reason, even the Court's rulings in the illegal strike case and the illegal dismissal case cannot alter the fact that they had been illegally dismissed.
We disagree with the petitioners.
As the petitioners themselves acknowledge, the doctrine of immutability of final judgments admits of certain exceptions as explained in Hulst v. PR Builders, Inc.,32 which they cite to prove their case. One recognized exception is the existence of a supervening cause or event which renders the enforcement of a final and executory decision unjust and inequitable. In this particular case, a supervening event transpired, which must be considered in the execution of the CA decision in CA-G.R. SP No. 57988 in order not to create an injustice to or an inequitable treatment of workers who, like the petitioners, participated in a strike where this Court found the commission of illegal acts by the strikers, among them the petitioners.
As we earlier stated, the ruling of the Court's 3rd Division in the illegal strike case (which attained finality on November 20, 201036) became the basis of the Court's 2nd Division in rejecting PILA's prayer for the reinstatement of the dismissed union members in the illegal dismissal case, thereby recognizing the validity of their dismissal. Considering that the petitioners had been positively identified to be among the union members who committed illegal acts during the strike, these petitioners were therefore validly dismissed. It was in this context that the CA opined that the Court's rulings in the illegal strike case and in the illegal dismissal case constituted an intervening cause or event that made the CA Special 12th Division's final and executory decision in CA-G.R. SP No. 57988 unenforceable.
The petitioners were in the same footing as the other union members who were identified to have committed illegal acts during the strike and whose dismissal was upheld by this Court in the illegal strike and illegal dismissal cases. Nevertheless, they would want to be spared from liability for the illegal acts they committed during the strike by invoking the doctrine of immutability of final judgments. This is unfair, as the CA saw it, stressing that it would create an iniquitous situation in relation to the union members who lost their employment because of the illegal acts they committed during the strike.
We appreciate the CA's concern. The petitioners were also respondents in the illegal strike case,40 yet through the expedient of filing an illegal dismissal case separate from the main illegal dismissal action filed by PILA involving all the other union members dismissed by the company, they would go scot free for their commission of illegal acts during the strike.
It should be recalled that the CA Special 12th Division declared the petitioners to have been illegally dismissed when it issued its February 27, 2001 decision based on its finding that there was no showing at the time that they committed illegal acts during the strike. This Court's decision in the illegal strike case proved otherwise, inasmuch as the petitioners were positively found to have committed illegal acts during the strike.
Considering the substantial financial losses suffered by the company on account of the strike, it would indeed be unjust to the company and the dismissed union members to allow the reinstatement of the petitioners and to reward them with backwages and other monetary benefits. We thus find no reversible error or grave abuse of discretion in the CA amended decision.
In fine, we find the petition without merit.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the petition is DISMISSED for lack of merit. The amended decision dated August 30, 2012 of the Court of Appeals is AFFIRMED.
** Designated as Acting Member in lieu of Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio per Special Order No. 1696 dated June 13,2014.
1 Rollo, pp. 57-80; filed pursuant to Rule 45 of the Rules of Court.
2 Id. at 31-55; penned by Associate Justice Priscilla J. Baltazar-Padilla and concurred in by Associate Justices Jose C. Reyes, Jr. and Agnes Reyes-Carpio.
5 Id. at 119-135; penned by Associate Justice Rebecca de Guia-Salvador, and concurred in by Associate Justices Candido V. Rivera and Jose L. Sabio, Jr.
15 G.R. No. 170830, August 11, 2010, 628 SCRA 119.
18 375 Phil. 177, 186(1999).
19Supra note 3, p. 23, last paragraph.
22Supra note 1, par. 1.
23Supra note 1, p. 2, last paragraph.
24Hulst v. PR Builders, Inc., 558 Phil. 683, 703 (2007).
25Rollo, pp. 261-273; filed on February 8, 2013.
26 Id. at 280-282; dated August 16, 2010.
28 Id. at 415-449; PHIMCO's Memorandum.
31 G.R. No. 170948, June 26, 2007, 525 SCRA 759.
33Supra note 3, at 20-23; citing the decision of this Court in G.R. No. 170830 (illegal strike case).
34 LABOR CODE, Article 264(e).
35Rollo, p. 351, Decision in G.R. No. 170830, p. 22, last paragraph.
36 Id. at 563-564; Entry of Judgment in G.R. No. 170830 (illegal strike case).
37 LABOR CODE, Article 263(b).
38Decision in G.R. No. 170830 (illegal srtike case).
40Rollo, p. 293, caption of G.R. No. 170830 indicating that petitioners were among the respondents in the case.
41Torres v. National Labor Relations Commission, 386 Phil. 513, 520 (2000).


text:
2020 Nissan 370Z Base
See Details 0 $0.46 $14,120.00 $8,913.00 Sport/Specialty Cars 3.7L V6 SMPI DOHC 24-valve CVTCS Variable Valve Event & Lift (VVEL) (VQ37VHR) 19/26 $4,082.00 $30,957.00
2020 Nissan Altima S
See Details 0 $0.35 $12,055.00 $4,803.00 Mid-Size Cars 2.5L transverse Inline 4-cyl Direct injection DOHC 16-valve CVTCS (PR25DD) 28/39 $3,951.00 $23,359.00
2020 Nissan Armada SV
See Details 4000 $0.64 $23,394.00 $9,700.00 Large SUVs 5.6L V8 Direct injection DOHC 32-valve Naturally Aspirated Endurance Variable Valve Event & Lift (VVEL) (VK56VD) 14/19 $5,095.00 $41,064.00
2020 Nissan GT-R Premium
See Details 0 $1.15 $50,149.00 $10,565.00 Prestige Luxury Cars 3.8L V6 SMPI DOHC 24-valve Twin turbo CVTCS (VR38DE TT) 16/22 $7,566.00 $110,546.00
2020 Nissan Kicks S
See Details 1500 $0.28 $7,889.00 $4,659.00 Subcompact Cars 1.6L transverse Inline 4-cyl Direct injection DOHC 16-valve Naturally Aspirated CVTCS (HR16DE) 31/36 $3,717.00 $17,786.00
See Details 2500 $0.40 $19,506.00 $2,315.00 Compact Cars Electric 110kW Motor 124/99 $2,241.00 $28,360.00
2020 Nissan Maxima S
See Details 3000 $0.49 $16,796.00 $8,189.00 Mid-Size Cars 3.5L transverse V6 SMPI DOHC 24-valve (VQ35DE) 20/30 $4,135.00 $29,871.00
See Details 3000 $0.41 $13,637.00 $6,712.00 Mid-Size Cars 3.5L transverse V6 Direct injection DOHC 24-valve CVTCS (VQ35DE) 20/28 $3,818.00 $27,649.00
2020 Nissan NV 1500 S
See Details 1250 $0.52 $16,214.00 $10,368.00 Full-Size Vans 4.0L V6 SMPI DOHC 24-valve Dual stage CVTCS (VQ40DE) 13/18 $4,179.00 $28,787.00
2020 Nissan NV 200 S
See Details 1250 $0.36 $11,325.00 $6,196.00 Compact Vans 2.0L transverse Inline 4-cyl SMPI DOHC 16-valve Naturally Aspirated CVTCS (MR20DE) 24/26 $3,575.00 $21,672.00
See Details 1250 $0.54 $16,100.00 $12,035.00 Full-Size Vans 5.6L V8 Direct injection DOHC 32-valve Single stage CVTCS Endurance (VK56DE) 10/15 $4,651.00 $32,813.00
See Details 3750 $0.44 $14,645.00 $6,804.00 Mid-Size Cars 3.5L transverse V6 Direct injection DOHC 24-valve Naturally Aspirated CVTCS (VQ35DD) 20/27 $4,267.00 $26,743.00
See Details 0 $0.37 $12,126.00 $5,359.00 Compact SUVs 2.5L transverse Inline 4-cyl SMPI DOHC 16-valve CVTCS (QR25DE) 26/33 $4,232.00 $24,901.00
2020 Nissan Rogue Sport S
See Details 1750 $0.36 $11,349.00 $5,555.00 Subcompact Cars 2.0L transverse Inline 4-cyl Direct injection DOHC 16-valve CVTCS (MR20DD) 25/32 $4,267.00 $21,349.00
2020 Nissan Titan S
See Details 5900 $0.50 $14,965.00 $10,565.00 Full-Size Pickups 5.6L V8 Direct injection DOHC 32-valve Naturally Aspirated CVTCS Endurance Variable Valve Event & Lift (VVEL) (VK56VD) 16/22 $4,344.00 $30,269.00
2020 Nissan Titan XD S
2020 Nissan Versa S
See Details 0 $0.28 $9,113.00 $4,381.00 Compact Cars 1.6L transverse Inline 4-cyl SMPI DOHC 16-valve Naturally Aspirated CVTCS (HR16DE) 32/40 $2,749.00 $16,884.00
See Details 2500 $0.45 $13,274.00 $9,585.00 Sport/Specialty Cars 3.7L V6 SMPI DOHC 24-valve CVTCS Variable Valve Event & Lift (VVEL) (VQ37VHR) 19/26 $3,938.00 $28,361.00
See Details 2400 $0.34 $11,137.00 $5,379.00 Mid-Size Cars 2.5L transverse Inline 4-cyl Direct injection DOHC 16-valve CVTCS (PR25DD) 28/39 $3,818.00 $20,634.00
See Details 4400 $0.64 $22,683.00 $10,523.00 Large SUVs 5.6L V8 Direct injection DOHC 32-valve Naturally Aspirated Endurance Variable Valve Event & Lift (VVEL) (VK56VD) 14/19 $4,222.00 $40,416.00
2019 Nissan Frontier S
See Details 2650 $0.38 $10,335.00 $8,135.00 Mid-Size Pickups 2.5L Inline 4-cyl SMPI DOHC 16-valve Variable Induction System (VIS) CVTCS (QR25) 17/22 $3,760.00 $20,663.00
2019 Nissan GT-R Pure
See Details 0 $1.04 $43,390.00 $11,196.00 Prestige Luxury Cars 3.8L V6 SMPI DOHC 24-valve Twin turbo CVTCS (VR38DE TT) 16/22 $7,482.00 $97,562.00
See Details 2500 $0.35 $10,942.00 $6,722.00 Compact Vans 2.0L transverse Inline 4-cyl Direct injection DOHC 16-valve Naturally Aspirated CVTCS (MR20DE) 24/26 $3,553.00 $19,818.00
See Details 4250 $0.42 $13,656.00 $7,381.00 Mid-Size Cars 3.5L transverse V6 Direct injection DOHC 24-valve Variable Induction System (VIS) CVTCS (VQ35DD) 20/27 $4,329.00 $25,825.00
2019 Nissan Rogue Hybrid SV
See Details 2900 $0.37 $13,443.00 $4,548.00 Compact SUVs 2.0L transverse Inline 4-cyl Direct injection DOHC 16-valve Hybrid CVTCS (MR20DD) 33/35 $3,510.00 $24,268.00
See Details 2900 $0.36 $11,362.00 $5,968.00 Compact SUVs 2.5L transverse Inline 4-cyl SMPI DOHC 16-valve CVTCS (QR25DE) 26/33 $3,985.00 $21,737.00
See Details 2400 $0.32 $9,979.00 $4,795.00 Compact Cars 1.8L transverse Inline 4-cyl SMPI DOHC 16-valve CVTCS (MRA8DE) 29/37 $3,560.00 $16,505.00
See Details 6400 $0.43 $12,173.00 $9,520.00 Full-Size Pickups 5.6L V8 Direct injection DOHC 32-valve Naturally Aspirated CVTCS Endurance Variable Valve Event & Lift (VVEL) (VK56VD) 15/21 $4,027.00 $24,224.00
2019 Nissan Titan XD Diesel S
See Details 6400 $0.48 $13,769.00 $8,842.00 Full-Size Pickups 5.0L V8 Direct injection DOHC 32-valve Turbocharged Diesel Cummins 18/25 $4,738.00 $32,014.00
2019 Nissan Versa Note S
See Details 2400 $0.27 $8,059.00 $4,510.00 Subcompact Cars 1.6L transverse Inline 4-cyl SMPI DOHC 16-valve Naturally Aspirated CVTCS (HR16DE) 31/39 $2,904.00 $13,755.00
2019 Nissan Versa S Plus
See Details 2400 $0.25 $7,366.00 $5,023.00 Compact Cars 1.6L transverse Inline 4-cyl SMPI DOHC 16-valve Naturally Aspirated CVTCS (HR16DE) 31/39 $3,203.00 $12,637.00

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Enquiro Study Demonstrates How Vertical Search Becomes More Important as Business to Business (B2B) Purchasers Move through the Buying Funnel
Enquiro's survey data shows that when it comes to business to business buying decisions, online influences such as vendor websites, search engines, and industry information websites are surpassing offline influences such as word of mouth and trade publications.
Vertical search becomes more important as buyers move through the sales funnel. In the researching phase, a purchaser is five times more likely to turn to a generic search engine for information.
New York, NY (PRWEB) April 13, 2007
Enquiro CEO & President, Gord Hotchkiss unveiled findings yesterday from the latest Enquiro survey conducted with B2B purchasers. The presentation, which took place at the Search Engine Strategies Conference & Expo in New York, gives marketers information about influencing factors in business-to-business buying decisions.
The objective of the survey, conducted with over 1000 B2B buyers, was to discover how people research B2B buying decisions online and how this varies by role within a company and by purchase phase. How do people navigate from awareness, through research and negotiation phases to the actual purchasing decision? What is the balance between online and offline influences? Do purchasers use search engines, and if so, which search engines and why? Do they use specific B2B search engines? When do they refer to a vendor's site or an industry information site and what do they look for specifically?
Enquiro's survey data shows that when it comes to business to business buying decisions, online influences such as vendor websites, search engines, and industry information websites are surpassing offline influences such as word of mouth and trade publications. Also, nearly 70% of users use search engines as a primary research resource, and Google remains the first choice for B2B purchasing research. In his presentation, Gord Hotchkiss showed how, "Vertical search becomes more important as buyers move through the sales funnel. In the researching phase, a purchaser is five times more likely to turn to a generic search engine for information." Hotchkiss added, "However, as the purchaser moves from researching to negotiating, that gap closes, where nearly a third will look to vertical search engines such as business.com or KnowledgeStorm."
The B2B survey has been supported by MarketingSherpa which was also a partner for Enquiro's 2004 paper titled The Role of Search in Business to Business Buying Decisions. A newly added sponsor for this follow-up study is ZoomInfo. "As a leading business information search engine, ZoomInfo is a stakeholder and natural partner in the research that we are conducting," says Bill Barnes, Enquiro's EVP of Business Development. "They, along with others in the B2B vertical, will benefit from new data that is being released."
Further information on this B2B research is available through Enquiro's website. The comprehensive findings will be released as a whitepaper on the same website on April 30.
About Enquiro
One of North America's leading search marketing firms, Enquiro helps B2B clients maximize their online presence through balanced marketing solutions. Its strategies are based on industry research and expertise in usability, and natural and sponsored search. Enquiro has also authored eye-tracking studies which have given marketers a greater understanding of user interaction with the major search engines and defined "Google's Golden Triangle."
About Gord Hotchkiss, President & CEO, Enquiro
Gord has been active in the marketing and advertising industry for 18 years. Starting as an award winning radio copywriter, he founded Hotchkiss Advertising Inc. in 1988. He has extensive experience creating and implementing marketing strategies for businesses in all sectors. Since 1997, he has focused primarily on website design and online marketing. Gord serves as an expert on online marketing for both the Gerson Lehrman Group and the Round Table Group. He is current chairperson of the Search Engine Marketing Professionals Organization (SEMPO)
Andrew Spoeth
Enquiro Search Solutions, Inc.
Enquiro B2B Study - sneak preview Enquiro Search Solutions, Inc.


Umm Suqeim Veterinary Centre provides the most comprehensive medical and surgical companion animal care. It was opened by Dr Malcolm Rose in 2014 and his team of dedicated vets. Dr. Malcolm Rose and his wife, Dr. Monique Strange were the first to open a 24 hour veterinary clinic in the Middle East, and continue to forge new horizons to bring the best quality veterinary care to you throughout the life of your pet. Our services and facilities range from routine preventive care for young, healthy pets; early detection and treatment of disease as your pet ages; and complete medical and surgical care as necessary during their lifetime. We are the only facility in Dubai to be 24 hours which means we are fully staffed with vets, nurses and support every day and every night.
Our Veterinary Hospital is designated as Gold Standard Cat Friendly! This means we are passionate about the correct care and needs that cats have (and they are not just small sized dogs!) We have taken extra steps to understand your cat's unique needs.
-Help reduce the stress from visitingthe veterinary hospital.
-Improve the quality of care provided.
-Understand cats' distinct needs and behaviours making the visit more cat-friendly.
-Understand how to approach and handle cats in a gentle, sensitive, and caring manner.
-Create a physical space designed with you and your cat in mind.
-Meet standards for facilities and care of hospitalized cats.
We have a separate cat reception, separate cat wards, even a separate cat prep and surgical area! We have specialised equipment that we use every day for cats – from blood pressure monitors to miniature endoscopes, tonometers to blood testing… we are ready for your cats needs!
In short, we LOVE cats!
How do we provide the safest anaesthesia for your pets?


text:
Louis Néel Medal 1995 Jean-Paul Poirier
Louis Néel Medal
Jean-Paul Poirier
The 1995 Louis Néel Medal is awarded to Jean-Paul Poirier in recognition of his distinguished work in inferring the temperature, composition and dynamics of the Earth from fundamental laws of solid state physics of terrestrial materials.
Jean-Paul Poirier entered the geophysical community through the work on creep in oxides at the French Atomic Commission. He soon found ways to introduce knowledge from materials sciences to the understanding of problems of deformation in minerals and rocks that are at the physical core of solid state deformation of the solid Earth. He has examined slip systems in olivine, phase changes of mantle materials, transformational superplasticity, and creep measurements in minerals and rocks, among other related topics. In this connection, he wrote the standard work in this field, Creep of Crystals, subtitled High-Temperature deformation processes in metals, ceramics and minerals. This work is the starting point of connecting strength and deformation in minerals to the basic physics of these processes.
On the broader foundation of applying basic solid state physics, Jean-Paul Poirier has contributed to other topics such as transport properties in the core mantle composition in relation to elastic properties, melting of core material, use of transmission electron microscopy (TEM) in examining mineral microstructure, introducing the diamond anvil call to French experimental geophysics, and electrical conductivity of the deep mantle minerals. Again, this is only a partial list, but the breadth of his approach shows in the order of his influential books on geophysics, Introduction to the Physics of the Earth's Interior. As for his first book, this one has become the gateway for introducing students – and other geophysicists – to the solid state physics of geological materials at the extremes of planetary temperatures and pressures. Along the way, Jean-Paul Poirier has trained a substantial number of the next generation of French geophysicists and ensured that they maintained his international outlook.
Another principal contribution has been his service to the geophysical community. Thus, Jean-Paul Poirier serves as head of the IASPEI Commission on Physical Properties of the Earth's Interior, as an Editor of the Physics of Earth and Planetary Interiors, and as a member of the AGU Mineral Physics Committee.
Newsletter 55, 19, 1995.


Since late 2014, regulators have implemented a suite of policy measures in an effort to mitigate the risks associated with certain forms of housing lending. The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) imposed benchmarks on the lending of authorised deposit-taking institutions (ADIs) to investors and to borrowers taking out interest-only (IO) loans. APRA's policy response also included measures to strengthen lending standards, with a greater focus on lending that involves higher risks, including high loan-to-valuation ratios (LVRs) and high debt-to-income lending. In addition, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) increased its scrutiny of lenders' compliance with responsible lending obligations, with a particular focus on the appropriateness of IO lending.
Collectively, these measures have helped to reduce the riskiness of new borrowing. In turn, this has stemmed the increase in household sector vulnerabilities and improved the resilience of the economy to future shocks. The policy measures have required some borrowers and lenders to adjust their behaviour. However, there is little evidence to suggest that the measures have excessively constrained aggregate credit supply or had a significant impact on housing construction or competition for lending. This chapter outlines the policy measures and their impact on the riskiness of housing lending. It also presents quantitative analysis of the effect these measures have had on housing lending and the housing market more broadly.
In 2014, a growing risk to household balance sheets was judged to be coming from the rapid increase in the share of housing lending to investors, alongside high housing debt that was rising considerably faster than incomes. This followed almost a decade in which household debt had grown broadly in line with income. The strong growth in investor borrowing when prices were rising rapidly was increasing the risk that investor activity could be excessively boosting housing prices and construction and so increasing the probability of a subsequent sharp unwinding. In turn, this constituted a downside risk for economic activity because highly indebted households could sharply reduce their consumption in the event of falls in incomes or house prices. An increase in higher risk and IO housing lending added to the concerns about household balance sheets. The regulatory measures implemented over several years sought to address these risks (Table 5.1). These measures were targeted at the risks surrounding housing lending, not at housing prices.
APRA APRA issues mortgage guidance setting out its expectations for sound residential mortgage lending practices (APG 223).
Investor lending benchmark announced, with supervisors paying particular attention to annual investor credit growth exceeding 10 per cent.
Serviceability assessments standardised across ADIs (minimum 2 percentage point interest rate buffer and 7 per cent interest rate floor).
Guidance that ADIs should not undertake large volumes of, or increase their share of, higher-risk lending. This included lending at very high LVRs or very long terms and IO lending to owner-occupiers for extended periods.
ASIC Announces a review of IO residential mortgage lending, focussing on compliance with responsible lending laws.
APRA Results of the first hypothetical borrower exercise released, covering larger ADIs. The exercise found that serviceability practices had weakened in response to competition and contributed to a program of supervisory action to rectify these practices and a subsequent update of APRA's guidance to ADIs on residential mortgage lending practices.
lenders had not considered the borrower's actual living expenses when approving the loan but instead relied on expenditure benchmarks.
interest rate buffers and floors, including on existing debt.
ASIC Published a review of the lending practices of 11 large mortgage brokers in relation to IO loans. It identified good practices as well as opportunities to improve brokers' practices.
APRA Amendments to Prudential Practice Guide APG 223 finalised. These focused on prescribing minimum standards for serviceability practices as highlighted by APRA's hypothetical borrower exercises.
IO lending benchmark announced, at 30 per cent of new lending.
ADIs expected to place strict internal limits on IO lending with an LVR greater than 80 per cent, and ensure there was strong scrutiny of any instances of lending with an LVR greater than 90 per cent.
Investor benchmark reinforced, with breaches prompting an immediate review of the adequacy of the ADI's capital arrangements.
ASIC Published a review of the effect of remuneration structures in the mortgage broking market on the quality of consumer outcomes in response to a request from the Australian Government in November 2015. The review found that neither lenders nor brokers made sufficient inquiries into consumers' living expenses and that broker-originated loans were more likely to be larger loans and have IO periods.
ASIC Announced the findings of a review of the practices followed by eight lenders when making inquiries about borrowers' living expenses. As a result, these lenders committed to provide remediation to borrowers who suffer financial difficulty as a result of shortcomings in past lending practices. ASIC also announced it had begun examining whether lenders and mortgage brokers were recommending IO loans in appropriate circumstances.
serviceability standards implemented since 2015 remain in place.
ADI boards were also asked to set limits on residential lending with debt-to-income (DTI) ratios exceeding six.
The measures focused on lending that had greater potential risk for borrowers, lenders and the economy more broadly. High LVR loans pose risks to borrowers and ADIs because of the relatively small equity buffers available to absorb property price falls. IO loans can also be riskier for borrowers and lenders as the loan amount does not need to be paid down during the IO period. Investor loans have not historically had higher default rates than owner-occupier loans, at least when economic conditions are benign. However, these loans may prove to be at greater risk of default in an economic downturn. Further, investor lending poses risks to the financial system to the extent that it can amplify housing price cycles. Changes to loan serviceability assessment practices were critical in strengthening the overall quality of lending and providing greater consistency in serviceability risk assessment across ADIs. These changes resulted in reductions in maximum potential loan sizes offered by many ADIs, although actual loan sizes were mainly only constrained for higher risk borrowers. Notably, although the measures did not directly target the overall amount of household debt or the rate of growth in house prices, they may have had some effect on both.
In order to meet the investor and IO benchmarks, lenders chose to reduce the number of these types of loans demanded by increasing their interest rates on these products. Before this, the loan purpose or repayment type was typically not factored explicitly into loan pricing decisions. Advertised interest rates were the same for owner-occupier and investor loans, and for IO and principal and interest (P&I) loans. However, lenders did differentiate their interest rates based on other factors such as the size of the loan and borrower characteristics.
Lenders did not begin to adjust their pricing in response to the investor benchmark until around six months after the December 2014 announcement (Graph 5.1). Initial attempts to meet the benchmark by adjusting non-price measures such as lending standards proved to be insufficient, with the rate of investor credit growth remaining high until pricing changes were made. Initially, lenders increased their advertised interest rates by around 25 basis points. Following the March 2017 announcement by APRA, which reinforced the investor benchmark and also introduced the IO benchmark, ADIs once again increased their interest rates on investor loans. Data from the Reserve Bank's Securitisation Dataset demonstrate that these changes in advertised rates flowed through to the rates actually paid by borrowers, which include any discounts received. Variable interest rates on outstanding investor loans were on average around 10 basis points lower than those on owner-occupier loans before the benchmark, but by mid 2017 they had increased to be around 50 basis points higher.
ADIs responded more quickly to the announcement of the IO benchmark in March 2017. Advertised interest rates on IO loans increased by around 50 basis points relative to those on P&I loans. This increase applied to both owner-occupier and investor IO loans, resulting in advertised interest rates on investor IO loans currently being around 1 percentage point higher than those on owner-occupier P&I loans. Average interest rates on outstanding IO loans are now around 40–50 basis points higher than equivalent P&I loans.
Most ADIs chose to increase their interest rates on both new and existing loans. The investor benchmark applied to the growth of each ADI's total investor lending. Banks argued that increasing the interest rate for existing borrowers could help to meet this objective as it could encourage borrowers to repay their existing loans more quickly. In contrast, the IO benchmark was designed to apply to the flow of new IO loans, and so changes in the stock of existing IO lending did not help a lender to meet the benchmark. The Productivity Commission has raised concerns about the implications for competition of lenders' decisions to reprice existing IO loans. Notably, however, the imposition of the benchmarks does appear to have caused ADIs to reassess the risks involved with some types of loans and so the composition of lending they feel comfortable with. The 2017 increases in interest rates on investor and IO loans also broadly coincided with announcements from APRA regarding future increases in capital requirements for these types of lending. Given that any changes to capital requirements would apply to both new and existing loans, this may have also influenced lenders' decisions to reprice their existing investor and IO loans. As a result, it may be that some differential in loan pricing remains even with the progressive removal of the investor benchmark from July 2018.
The rate of growth in investor credit slowed significantly after the investor growth benchmark was introduced (Graph 5.2). Investor credit growth initially only slowed slightly after the announcement. But from mid 2015 when ADIs increased their interest rates for investors, investor credit growth slowed sharply. The tightening in serviceability standards, in particular the interest rate buffer requirements, as well as APRA's announcements in March 2017, are also likely to have slowed investor credit growth. In contrast, the rate of growth in owner-occupier credit has picked up since late 2014, in part reflecting lenders' competition for these borrowers. This has resulted in a noticeable shift in the composition of housing credit growth, but only a relatively modest decline in the overall rate of growth.
The introduction of the IO benchmark and resulting increase in interest rates on IO loans prompted a sharp decline in IO lending. The aggregate IO share of new loan approvals fell from almost 40 per cent of the total value of approvals in the March quarter of 2017 to around 15 per cent in the June quarter of 2018 (Graph 5.3). Although the interest rate premium for IO loans relative to P&I loans was similar for investor and owner-occupier loans, the decline in the IO share was more pronounced for investors than it was for owner-occupiers. This suggests investors are more price sensitive than owner-occupiers, presumably because they typically base the decision to have an IO loan on the cost benefits flowing from interest deductibility. In addition, because ADIs increased their interest rates on existing IO loans, many existing borrowers switched to P&I loans and were often encouraged to do so by their lender. This, coupled with the declining share of IO approvals, has resulted in a substantial fall in the IO share of outstanding loans. The IO share of outstanding loans is likely to decline for some time yet, as older IO loans transition to P&I repayments (IO loans typically have an interest-only period of around five years).
The share of new housing loans approved with very high LVRs (greater than 90 per cent) has declined since APRA strengthened its guidance to ADIs on high risk lending in late 2014 (Graph 5.4). However, the share of very high LVR loan approvals had been declining for owner-occupier loans for some time before the announcement, reflecting a combination of increased supervisory focus on higher-risk lending and changes in risk appetite at some ADIs.
Through its supervision process and updates to prudential guidance, APRA promoted stronger loan serviceability assessment practices in 2014 and 2015. These included establishing minimum expectations for interest rate buffers (including on a loan applicant's existing debt), the amortisation of IO loans after the IO period expires, 'haircuts' applied on rental and less stable types of income and measurement of household expenses. These changes reduced the maximum loan size available to many borrowers at many ADIs. In practice, most borrowers take out a smaller loan than the maximum that a lender might offer, which means the aggregate effect of these measures on credit supply is small (See 'Box B: The Impact of Lending Standards on Loan Sizes'). While the share of borrowers who take a loan near their maximum and so would have been affected by the changes is generally small, the extent to which borrowers are constrained will depend on their individual characteristics. For example, the impact on aggregate new borrowing of introducing income-adjusted benchmarking of borrowers' expenses depends on the distribution of income of prospective borrowers. Similarly, the impact of more stringent treatments of rental or irregular sources of income in serviceability assessments only affects investors and borrowers that rely on these income sources. Previous analysis undertaken by APRA quantified the impact of tighter lending standards for four 'hypothetical' borrowers and found that maximum, not actual, loan sizes declined by 12 per cent, on average, for investors and by 6 per cent, on average, for owner-occupiers between 2014 and 2015. Because of the many differing components of the tightening in lending standards, and that their impact depends on previous lender practices (which differed significantly across lenders) and individual borrower characteristics, it is difficult to quantify the impact of these measures precisely.
Quantitative analysis by the Bank provides strong evidence that the investor benchmark was effective in changing the composition of new lending. This analysis compares new housing lending by individual ADIs to investors and owner-occupiers before and after the imposition of the benchmark. Using data for individual ADIs helps to identify the policy impact because it assists in controlling for the range of other non-policy related factors that also influenced the demand for, and supply of, new lending, such as broader economic conditions at the time. Because several complementary measures were introduced within a relatively short period, the analysis is undertaken for the 2014 announcement as, in contrast to the 2017 IO announcement, the preceding period is not influenced by other substantive policy measures.
The impact on new lending is estimated by comparing each ADI's actual loan approvals following the 2014 announcement with a 'counterfactual' amount of loan approvals. The counterfactual approvals are an estimate of what each ADI's new lending would have been in the absence of the policy. It is estimated based on the historical relationship between loan approvals reported by each ADI and a number of ADI-specific factors that may influence their supply of credit along with aggregate demand factors (using a regression). The supply-side factors are ADI assets, the deposit share of funding, the liquid asset share of total assets and Tier 1 capital ratios. The demand-side factors are the cash rate, the rate of growth in real GDP, and changes in housing prices. The analysis includes lags to account for any delay by ADIs in changing their lending. Any systematic difference in the relationship between the counterfactual and actual loan approvals before and after the policy announcement provides an estimate of the impact of the policy measure.
The December 2014 investor announcement is estimated to have reduced the amount of new investor loan approvals by around 13 per cent in the four quarters following the announcement. This is equivalent to around 3 per cent of total outstanding investor credit at the time (Graph 5.5). However, it is also estimated that the announcement induced an increase in new owner-occupier loan approvals at some ADIs. The increase in owner-occupier loan approvals likely reflects a combination of factors. In reducing investor demand, the benchmark may have provided more opportunities for owner-occupier purchases. Also, some ADIs may have refocused their efforts on growing their owner-occupier housing lending portfolios given the constraints imposed on their housing investor lending growth. The net effect is estimated to have been virtually no change in the flow of total (investor plus owner-occupier) loan approvals in the four quarters following the announcement. This supports the assessment that the December 2014 policy prompted changes in the composition of lending at many ADIs, but did not lead to outright reductions in new lending.
The imposition of the investor benchmark appears to have constrained the gain in market share of some smaller ADIs and so diminished competition among lenders for some time. A constraint on an assessment of the impact of the benchmark on market share is that a number of lenders reclassified a greater-than-usual amount of their existing loans from investor to owner-occupier products around the same time. To avoid these, and any other, reporting changes driving market share trends, this section uses break adjusted lending data generated for the Reserve Bank's credit statistics. It is important to note that these are not the same data used by APRA to monitor compliance with the benchmark.
When the investor credit benchmark was imposed, aggregate investor credit growth was a bit over 10 per cent, but some institutions were growing substantially faster than this and gaining market share. In particular, a small number of non-major ADIs had collectively gained around 1½ percentage points of market share between 2012 and mid 2015 based on (the adjusted) outstanding investor loans (Graph 5.6). Constrained to grow their investor credit at less than 10 per cent per year, these institutions were limited in their ability to increase their market share after the benchmark was introduced. In contrast, these same ADIs continued to gain market share for owner-occupier credit, albeit at a somewhat slower rate than previously, suggesting that it was the investor benchmark that was largely responsible for constraining their investor credit growth rather than ADI-specific factors. However, the market share of other non-major ADIs that had been declining before the benchmark did not continue to fall following its introduction. Based on the adjusted lending data, the investor market share of the major banks had been stable before the investor benchmark, but increased after the benchmark was imposed. However, it is notable that, without adjustments for data reporting changes, the major banks' share of the investor lending market declined immediately after the investor benchmark was introduced. This seemingly reflects major banks being more likely than other ADIs to reclassify their existing investor loans as owner-occupier products in late 2015.
In any case, with aggregate year-ended investor credit growth declining from 5 per cent to less than 2 per cent over the past year and most individual ADIs' investor credit growth well below 10 per cent, the benchmark has not been a significant constraint on most ADIs growing their market share for some time. Indeed, the earlier trends apparent in investor credit market share appear to have resumed over the past year, with some of the smaller ADIs once again gaining market share from the major banks.
The IO benchmark had little effect on competition between lenders. The IO benchmark applied to the share of new loans at each ADI that were interest only, meaning lenders could continue to compete aggressively for new IO loans if they were also competing aggressively for non-IO lending. The aggregate share of new IO lending has declined to 17 per cent with many lenders even further below the 30 per cent benchmark. This suggests many lenders have ample capacity to increase their IO lending. That they have not suggests that ADIs have reassessed what they consider to be a prudent IO lending share.
A notable concern about the policy measures is that they could result in a significant tightening in credit availability. In a severe scenario, this could lead to a slowdown in economic activity and housing markets and so have adverse consequences for financial stability. However, as discussed in detail in 'Box B: The Impact of Lending Standards on Loan Sizes', only those most risky borrowers have actually been constrained by the tightening in lending standards, as most borrowers take out loans well below the maximum that are offered by lenders. Indeed, those borrowers are the most likely to experience repayment difficulty. So the impact of the measures on the aggregate quantity of credit supplied has been relatively moderate. Rather, the dominant effect of the measures has been to improve the quality or composition of housing lending.
However, the tightening in lending conditions disproportionately affects some prospective and existing borrowers and so could result in some adverse outcomes for them. A tightening in the supply of IO loans will have prevented some borrowers with IO loans from extending their IO period and required them to switch to higher P&I payments. Although this 'repayment shock' effect should be mitigated by a range of factors, a small share of borrowers could encounter financial stress. Liaison with ADIs suggests that some borrowers have encountered repayment difficulties after switching to P&I repayments at the end of their IO terms, but that many have subsequently been able to adjust to higher payments within a year. Loan level data from the Reserve Bank's Securitisation Dataset supports this. The share of loan balances that are between 30 and 90 days behind in their repayments increases within three months of switching. But this share declines to close to its pre-switching level within a year (Graph 5.7). While it appears that the share of loan balances more than 90 days in arrears has increased for loans that switch to P&I at the end of their IO period, this is likely to partly reflect the lower credit quality of loans switching at the end of their IO period. In contrast, the borrowers that choose to switch before the end of the IO period exhibit very low arrears rates, both before and after switching.
The tighter lending conditions have encouraged some borrowers to obtain finance from non-ADI lenders, in particular, prospective borrowers who were offered smaller maximum loan sizes or unable to obtain finance from ADIs. Given that non-ADIs are subject to less regulatory oversight, this could increase financial stability risks. Non-ADIs' housing lending has been growing rapidly, over twice the rate of growth of ADIs. An alternative measure of their growth comes from their funding – which mostly comes from residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS). Quarterly issuance of RMBS has averaged around $4 billion over the past two years, which is more than double its average over the previous five years (though still well below its pre-crisis levels) (Graph 5.8). The estimated non-ADI share of housing credit has also increased, although it remains low at less than 5 per cent of the total. Non-ADI lending is therefore unlikely to lead to systemic risks at its current level. If non-ADI lenders were at some future time to pose a material risk to financial stability, APRA now has the ability to invoke its reserve power to impose regulations on these lenders in order to manage these risks.
The close relationship between debt and housing prices means that the policy measures targeting housing borrowing are likely to have influenced housing market conditions. As discussed in the 'Household and Business Finances' chapter, housing prices have eased since late 2017, particularly in Sydney and Melbourne. The easing is consistent with a broad range of factors, including increased supply and moderating demand given the high level of prices, but there is evidence that the prudential measures also played some part.
While each of the measures set out in Table 5.1 is likely to have had some effect, the 2014 investor benchmark is analysed in this chapter as it was not preceded by other substantial measures that would have been already affecting housing market outcomes. One simple way to gauge the policy effect is to examine the relative performance of housing prices in regions that are likely to have been more heavily affected by the investor benchmark ('high investor regions') to those that are likely to have been less affected ('low investor regions'). The high and low investor regions are defined based on the share of investor-owned dwellings in each region before the policy measure. The high investor regions are those in which the share of investor-owned dwellings is in the top 25 per cent of the nationwide distribution. The low investor regions are those where the share of investor-owned dwellings is in the bottom 25 per cent of the nationwide distribution.
The difference in housing price growth in the high and low investor regions following the policy measures suggests there was an impact on housing price growth. The average price growth in these two groups was very similar in the lead-up to the investor lending benchmark, but since then, the high investor regions have experienced notably slower price growth than the low investor regions (Graph 5.9). Note that this analysis implies the policy measure affected the relative prices between regions, but it does not indicate whether there was an effect on overall housing prices. The stronger performance of low investor regions, which by definition have more owner-occupiers, could in part reflect the increase in owner-occupier credit growth.
The divergence in price growth began to open up around one year after the announcement of the investor benchmark. This was shortly after the introduction of differential pricing for investor loans. It widened further around the time of the March 2017 announcement of the IO benchmark (and reinforcement of the investor benchmark).
This evidence suggests that the investor benchmark led to an easing in housing price growth. But, other factors may have also contributed to the divergent price growth between the high and low investor regions. For example, regions with a high share of investors may have also experienced larger increases in housing supply and so slower price growth in the period after the benchmark was introduced.
To better isolate the impact of the policy measure, it is important to control for as many other factors influencing regional housing prices as possible. In addition to the differences by region in the investor share of dwellings, other potential explanatory factors include location-specific characteristics such as the location, population density and geographic size of each region, and market-specific characteristics such as the rate of increase in residential building approvals and the rate of housing price growth in the lead-up to the investor benchmark announcement. After controlling for these other factors (using a regression), it is possible to obtain a better estimate of the effect of the investor benchmark on prices., In practice, the estimated 'investor share (or 'policy') effect' will also partly reflect the effect of the IO benchmark, since IO lending was more common in high investor regions than in low investor regions. If anything, the restrictions on high LVR lending will have worked in the other direction by reducing the estimated investor share effect since high-LVR loans are more common among owner-occupiers than investors.
This approach enables the difference between the housing price growth outcomes of the high and low investor share regions to be separated into that part due to the policy measure and that part due to other factors (Graph 5.10). This exercise suggests that the policy effect accounts for around two-thirds of the 7 percentage point difference in average cumulative housing price growth between high and low investor regions from December 2014 to mid 2018.
Housing construction, in particular higher density building, has risen to a high level in recent years, and the pipeline of work yet to be done also remains high (Graph 5.11). Construction activity has been supported by strong population growth, low interest rates and encouraged by higher housing prices. An increased share of construction in recent years has been of higher density dwellings, a large share of which are purchased by investors. Off-the-plan sales are an important determinant of developers' ability to obtain finance to undertake construction.
However, construction activity is slowing as the large increase in supply meets demand with housing prices no longer rising. While this is not unlike past housing cycles, the reduction in investor borrowing and demand, along with tighter lending standards, have contributed, at least in part. Off-the-plan apartment sales in the major east coast cities have declined since around mid 2017, with developers citing weaker demand from domestic investors, as well as from foreign buyers. One risk is that tighter lending standards could amplify the downturn in apartment markets if some buyers of off-the-plan apartments are unable to obtain finance. This could lead to an increase in settlement failures, further price falls and even tighter financing conditions for developers. However, to date, there is little evidence of this.
While not directly related to the housing measures, there has been some tightening in credit availability for developers of residential property. This reflects lenders' desired exposure to dwelling construction, which is higher risk lending, particularly given the longer planning and construction lags of higher density dwelling construction. To the extent that the housing policy measures have contributed somewhat to the decline in investor demand and prices, they have indirectly affected developers' access to finance.
The policy measures were conceived in an environment of rising risks to the economy and financial system from housing lending. The riskiness of new borrowing was increasing against a backdrop of high and rising household debt relative to income. Since the measures were introduced, the composition of new lending has changed toward less risky types of loans. Tighter lending standards and the reduction in high LVR lending has resulted in a smaller share of new lending going to households that are more likely to struggle to repay their debt. The change in the composition of new debt has been rapid, with smaller shares of investor, interest-only and high LVR lending. Over time, the risk profile of the existing stock of debt has improved and will continue to do so as a greater share of outstanding loans have been written under more stringent lending standards.
While the policy measures have affected the composition of new lending, they have had less impact on the aggregate quantity of new lending. Evidence focusing on the 2014 investor benchmark shows this policy resulted in a marked decline in investor lending relative to owner-occupier lending, but had little direct impact on total housing credit growth. Since the investor benchmark constrained the growth of all ADIs' investor credit this had an effect on competition among lenders, but this does not appear to have been permanent. There is also evidence that, by affecting the composition of lending, the measures have influenced housing market conditions in those regions that were most affected by the change. In dampening investor demand, the measures are likely to have affected housing prices and construction dynamics in some locations, and so likely been stabilising for the housing market over the longer run. However, the measures have likely only had a moderate effect on aggregate housing prices given the evidence that at least the investor measure did not affect aggregate credit growth.
Overall, the available evidence suggests that the policies have meaningfully reduced vulnerabilities associated with riskier household lending and so increased the resilience of the economy to future shocks. However, the overall stock of household debt is high relative to income, suggesting that the associated risks remain.


Hair loss is an infrequent side effect of Paxil® (paroxetine hydrochloride). Hair loss that is Paxil-induced occurs in between 1 in 100 and 1 in 1,000 people who take the medication. If you experience hair loss while taking this drug, talk with your healthcare provider. Depending on how severe the hair loss is, there are things that he or she may be able to do. It is possible that your doctor may recommend adjusting the Paxil dosage or trying another medicine for your condition.


text:
Alyssa Maxwell Interview By E. B. Davis
In post–World War I England, Lady Phoebe Renshaw and her lady's maid,
Eva Huntford, step outside of their social roles and put their lives at risk
to apprehend a vicious killer…
http://www.alyssamaxwell.com/#!ladys-maid-books/c1dlr
I interviewed Alyssa Maxwell last year after reading her Gilded Newport Mysteries, set in the Rhode Island town at the beginning of the twentieth century. Her main character in this series was a likable young woman possessing pluck. When I heard Alyssa was starting a new "A Lady and Lady's Maid Mystery" series I wasn't sure what to expect.
I'm not a big historical reader, but I liked Alyssa's writing and was curious. The first book in the series, Murder Most Malicious, trashed my notion of a dry manor-house mystery. Once you read the interview, you'll understand. I hope you'll read the book. Move over Maisie Dobbs!
Welcome back to WWK, Alyssa! E. B. Davis
Thank you so much, I'm honored to be back!
Your new series is set in the years following the First World War. What drew you to write about that time?
In a word, CHANGE. WWI clearly marks the end of the old, traditional world and the beginning of the modern era. As they say about the war itself, "They rode in on horses and left in aeroplanes." But it wasn't only about modern inventions and conveniences. English society itself changed dramatically by the end of the war and kept on changing throughout the twentieth century. Prior to the war, class divisions were rigidly defined, with the notion ingrained in all that some people were simply born better than others. But in the trenches, aristocratic officers died just as horrifically as common-born foot soldiers. And while the men were fighting, young women, heretofore restricted to the home unless suitably chaperoned, were needed to fill the labor gap in occupations never before considered proper for "the weaker sex". This led to women earning their own money and getting their first true taste of independence. For many there was no going back, partly by choice, but also because "a generation of men were lost to the war," and for many young women, there would be no husbands. All of this created a climate of progress and change that makes the post war years both exciting and challenging – because people had to relearn their roles in society and change their thinking and ways of living.
The Gilded Newport series is set in the US. This one is set in England, where the social status and stratum were more defined. How did WWI change social conduct?
As I mentioned above, for the first time in history, really, women were free to move about in society independently. Suddenly women were going to the picture shows, restaurants, and dance halls and meeting men without prior introductions, and without the supervision of their families. Women over thirty who were married and/or owned property won the right to vote in 1918. Working outside the home brought about a rise in hem lengths to enable women to move about more freely. Steel was needed for the war effort in munitions factories, so it was no longer as readily available for use in corsets (yes, true!), and this gave rise to the modern brassiere. Finally, women were no longer caged within their own attire. Class distinctions still existed, as did different standards for men vs. women, but the lines became more blurred and society a tad more forgiving.
The English suffragette movement led the American rally. Normally, Americans initiate change more readily. Why do you think English women initiated this fight?
Honestly, I can't answer that question. But remember, in 1918 only women over thirty who were married and/or owned property could vote. It would take another 10 years for women's Suffrage to include all women over 21. In America, on the other hand, all women won the right to vote in 1920.
Each woman has lost male family members. Did the high casualties of the male soldiers help the women's cause?
Yes and no. The war created huge gaps in the labor force which opened up opportunities for women. But after the war, many of these women were expected to relinquish their jobs to returning soldiers and return home. A traditionalist segment of English society still considered the working woman an anomaly, and believed no woman could truly be happy without a husband and children to take care of. Never mind that the number of men who died meant that many women would never find husbands. The media cruelly dubbed them "surplus women" and treated them with very little sympathy. Some women were able to find meaning in their single lives, but others, affected by the biases, were never truly happy.
You've created two delightful, hardworking, and complex main characters. I can see parallels between the women, but you've also balanced them. Were there any historical figures you used as character prototypes?
No, I can't say that I based them on any historical figures, but rather on what I read about the class system and the "line" that was never supposed to be crossed between employer and servant. Eva truly does believe she can never be Phoebe's equal. This class distinction has been ingrained in her, and she doesn't necessarily see it as a bad thing. It's just life, and she's grateful for her position and the advantages it brings her. We have to leave behind our modern sensibilities and view it from her perspective. She's the daughter of poor farmers, so her situation could have been much worse. Phoebe, on the other hand, sees people in much more equal terms, but it makes sense for her to do so. Motherless from a young age, and then suffering the loss of her father during the war, she's had to grow up quickly and adapt to changing circumstances. Being young, only 19 in the first book, allows her the flexibility to view the world from different perspectives, and the one that pleases her most is one in which people are allowed to achieve according to their abilities and goals, rather than birthright.
Phoebe and Eva's behavior patterns were very different. Was it a challenge writing an upstairs versus a downstairs character?
It was actually a lot of fun, and I can't decide which I enjoyed more, writing the family upstairs with their petty dramas and problems, or the servants below, who led much tougher lives but possessed the resiliency to perservere.
Even though Phoebe and Eva have an employer/employee relationship, they seem the best of friends—but society won't stand for it. Does the distinction help or hinder their investigation?
What it does is allows them to be in two places at once. Phoebe can't very well start hanging around downstairs asking questions. Servants are always supposed to be on their best behavior around the family, and that isn't conducive to opening up and confiding in her. But with Eva, they're much more relaxed and willing to chat. Likewise, Eva could never question the "toffs" upstairs. Such impertinence would cost her her job. As far as their friendship goes, Phoebe is much more accepting of the idea. It's Eva who has trouble crossing that invisible line and overstepping her bounds. She's all about respect and loyalty. She feels an almost motherly devotion to Phoebe, but doesn't see herself as Phoebe's social equal.
Of all the characters, I found Phoebe's little brother, Fox, the most irritating. Is he just a pesky little brother?
Let's not mince words. Fox is a brat! As Viscount Foxwood and his grandfather's heir, he's full of himself and thinks he can do no wrong. Despite his youth, Fox has bought into the old ways of doing things, including marrying his sisters off so he won't have to support them once he inherits. Phoebe thinks he needs taking down a peg or two, and I agree.
Phoebe has an older sister, Julia, with whom she isn't close. Julia is an intriguing enigma. Are the two sisters different or is it just their methods that are different? Is age order a factor?
Poor Julia is caught between the old world and the new. She should have been married by now, but the war interrupted such things, and now she's more or less adrift. She knows what she wants in a man—she just can't find him. That, and the losses she has suffered, i.e., her parents, have made her extremely defensive and closed off from others. She's not all bad, but she sometimes appears to be, especially when Phoebe tries to get close to her. But Julia is her own worst enemy. I occasionally allow her to soften, but only slightly, and before she becomes truly vulnerable, she ices over again.
How did the new series come about? Did you propose it to Kensington?
I knew my editor was hoping to see something along the lines of Downton Abbey with a mystery twist. And I thought, why not? I'm a huge fan of that series, and also the original Upstairs Downstairs, so this was pure fun to develop.
Did you travel to England for research?
I visited England years ago but not again since, although I have made trips to Scotland and Ireland as well. I would love nothing more than to go back for some first-hand research. We'll see.
What's next for Eva and Phoebe?
Phoebe and Eva will be teaming up again in the spring of 1919 to discover who murdered the headmistress of the nearby Haverleigh School for Young Ladies, where the youngest Renshaw sister, Amelia, attends. The book is called A PINCH OF POISON. Can you guess how the victim dies? We'll also be seeing more of Owen Seabright and Constable Miles Brannock, along with the Renshaw family, in that story.
Labels: Alyssa Maxwell, E. B. Davis, New Mystery Series, Welcome Wednesday
What a wonderful, yeasty, period to write about. WWI was the dividing line between horse and modern in so many ways. Gender roles, society, and technology were all in a state of flux. A fascinating time. Can't wait to dig in.
It sounds like you've done your research and been able to develop a sympathetic understanding of various social classes. This sounds like it's a great series.
I am a fan of Downton Abbey and just returned from a visit to gilded Newport, so sign me up for your books, Alyssa! What a fascinating time period and a rich source for your fiction. I'm looking forward to this new series.
Gloria Alden said...
Alyssa, I loved your Gilded Newport Mysteries, and I also love the Maisie Dobb mysteries and Downton Abby, so I'm sure I will love your new series, too. And, of course, there's always the Dorothy Sayers mysteries, too. A good period to write about.
I enjoyed reading your book, Alyssa. The history reminds me of what we take for granted. Our rights have been hard won. Sexism, racism, etc., persist and are ingrained by each generation. But the fact is it still exists.
My husband, a building contractor, works with a woman architect. On the jobsite, he trails behind her because the workers harass her, which is especially ignorant since she's the boss. She hired their companies, but they are so ignorant they don't understand that a woman could have that authority. He fears for her safety, but if not for her--they wouldn't have jobs. How convoluted it that?
Alyssa Maxwell said...
Thank you all for reading and commenting, and thank you, EB, for such insightful questions. I enjoyed answering them very much. Yes, this is a fascinating and rich time in history, and I'm excited to be able to keep exploring it - there's always something new to learn. After all, it's the beginning of women being able to take their rightful place in society and the workforce. But as you point out, EB, we're not quite there yet. It amazes me that gender biases persist and yes, it's a sign of ignorance and of fear - fear of losing control I believe. Which all means women have to keep striding forward through determination and through education. You can't keep an educated person down for long.
Days of Wine and Chocolate
Why Do Perfectly Normal People Like to Read About ...
Mystery History
MY MARGARET MARON MARATHON
Interview with Terrie Farley Moran
Pleased to Meet You!
Deepening Character
The Thief of Time
Portlandish
FLIGHT BEHAVIOR by Barbara Kingsolver
An Interview with Eric Reed by E. B. Davis
The Show Must Go On by Paula Gail Benson
Mysteries for Young Readers by Shari Randall
Of Minstrels and Poets
Three Spoons
STARTING A NEW YEAR WITH WRITERS WHO KILL
Interview with Vickie Fee
Mystery Readers Book Club
The Beating Heart of Story
On Comparisons
For Auld Lang Syne by Nancy Cole Silverman
The Newest Book Craze
Birthing a Book! by Carla Damron
Scribbler to Scrivener by Shari Randall
Hello and Goodbye


If you don't like it heavy, here's a lighter option than the hard traincase. Store your hair and makeup tools in this Multiple Layer Soft Traincase from Suesh. It is very spacious, with additional plastic bins inside so you can organize your stuff well inside.


Officevibe does not yet feature on ApprenticeEye.
Do you work for Officevibe? Contact us to upload your company profile and reach a wide audience of relevant, industry professionals.
Could you be doing a better job at managing your apprentices? Check out this infographic from Officevibe which highlights the personality traits of a great boss.
Do you work for Officevibe? Upgrade this listing now and maximize your company exposure by featuring products on your profile.


Sturgis, S.D., Aug. 3–12—For those who have made the sojourn to Sturgis during any of the 78 annual rallies, there's a "coming home" feel to all the return trips. The journey turns into a sort of spiritual quest for each subsequent trip and eventually one finds themselves living out the year in anticipation of the adventure. The history of the run, the Black Hills riding and the sense of community that spreads out across the country as riders begin the annual migration tends to creep into your bones and the thought of missing a rally is incomprehensible. The Lakota, a word meaning "friends or allies," consider the Black Hills sacred, drawing much of their medicine from the area and have graciously shared their precious Hills with bikers who relate to the magic of the hills. There is nothing like cruising the canyons near the little city of Sturgis, South Dakota.
For the 78th annual rally, riders arrived to somewhat of a facelift along Main Street. A Jeff Decker bronze statue was erected just down the street from the Sturgis Motorcycle Museum, where a renovation meant added footage and breathing room for the exhibits while the board of directors discuss future plans for a large-scale museum elsewhere in Sturgis. The historic building that currently houses American motorcycle memorabilia long ago outgrew its footprint and fundraising has been a focus as the directors look to the future of the museum. The fundraising Hall of Fame breakfast, held each year during the rally, was sold out months in advance since this year the entire Hamsters MC was inducted. The Deadwood Lodge banquet room was awash in a sea of yellow during the ceremony that included the aforementioned sculptor, Jeff Decker, as well as Jack Hoel, Mondo Porras, Marilyn Stemp and Valerie Thompson. The Freedom Fighter for this year was Kirk "Hardtail" Willard with a special lifetime achievement award going to Fred Fox, who gave an entertaining address to the gathered crowd who just so happened to include Willie G. and Nancy Davidson.
For the story on the Sturgis Motorcycle Museum & Hall of Fame Breakfast, click here.
Also in the "new" category were early reports from the city that an unprecedented 30 percent of the attendees this year were first-time rally goers, and the demographics gleaned from a poll indicated that there was a dramatic increase in younger attendees, too. As riders age out, the focus has turned to bringing the next generation along and venues like the Buffalo Chip steps up each year with events to attract that crowd. With constant parties, flat track races and a Sportster bike show, the Chip hopes to create fun stuff that appeals to both greybeards and riders who are decades younger.
Across town, the Iron Horse Saloon held nightly concerts for all ages and during the day bike shows of every stripe were alternately splayed across the tarmac. The AMCA threw a little shindig for geriatric machines and held interviews with participants from the Motorcycle Cannonball while, as a stark comparison, the big-wheel bikes were lining up out at the Full Throttle. Over at the old Fairgrounds, Brittney Olsen was zipping around the dirt track with a few of her best antique-riding friends, where the combination of a young woman riding an old bike in a new event seemed to round out the entire list of desirable attraction categories, proving out that everything old is new again.
In recent years, racing of all sorts has become a huge draw for both competitors and spectators. But racing is nothing new during the rally; the Jackpine Gypsies Motorcycle Club, founded in 1937, earned their American Motorcyclist Association (AMA) charter in 1938, and that year, the AMA began promoting the Jackpine Gypsies' racing events. That first year was the inaugural Black Hills Classic where the event saw a lineup of only nine racers and a smattering of spectators.
Through the years, the event grew, expanding in size, scope and duration, eventually becoming known as the Sturgis Motorcycle Rally. Yet the rally has stayed true to its roots, always including competition of one form or another. This year, the Jackpine Gypsies presented about a dozen races at their club grounds, including hillclimbs, dirt drags, half-mile, short track and motocross. And the Sturgis Buffalo Chip again hosted American Flat Track racing, as did Black Hills Speedway in Rapid City later in the week. The Chip also served as a home for Hooligan flat track races, street drags, Supermoto races, and off-road racing in the dirt.
Much of the Sturgis racing in general has blurred the lines between racer and spectator. BAKER Drivetrain held its fourth annual "All-In To Go All-Out" drag races at Sturgis Dragway, featuring "Run What You Brung" racing, at no cost to competitors or spectators. Hooligan racing and other forms of competition are open to all, even without the help of big-name, big-dollar sponsors.
We couldn't help but notice the difference in flavor and focus with many of this year's Sturgis events, exemplified by Miss Brittney Olsen's The Spirit of Sturgis Vintage Motorcycle Festival held on Monday and Tuesday of the rally. Call it racing with a cause, if you will; Brittney, through her 20th Century Racing antique motorcycle racing team, not only wants to share her passion for the antique motorcycles and lifestyle, she is fighting to preserve Sturgis racing history and the Sturgis Half-Mile at the Sturgis Fairgrounds.
Conventional wisdom dictates that younger generations want experiences rather than just buying products or watching others have all the fun, and we're seeing more in the way of immersive experiences. Brittney, who is also the youth director for the Antique Motorcycle Club of America, wants to keep antique motorcycling alive for future generations, and to this end, offered learning sessions during The Spirit of Sturgis on how to kick start and hand shift antique bikes. And the Vintage Motorcycle Festival included organized rides to other antique and racing events as well.
Bike shows involve another set of activities that offers motorcycle enthusiasts of all ages the chance to participate at whatever level they choose—entering their pride and joy into the competition, voting for their favorite, or just salivating over the sometimes weird and often wonderful entries. Most all the shows are ride-in with no advance registration, with bikes running the gamut from antiques to choppers to full-dressed big-wheel baggers.
Of all the bike shows, the highest compliment is being asked by world-renowned photographer Michael Lichter to display your hand-built creation at his annual Motorcycles As Art exhibit at the Sturgis Buffalo Chip. This year's theme was Passion Built, featuring bikes built by those who aren't professional builders. We can't think of a better way to attain widespread recognition than this illustrious affair.
For the story on Passion Built: Garage to Gallery, click here.
Yet another new venue at Sturgis is Chopperville, the iconic Sugar Bear's chopper museum. Since 1972, Sugar Bear has been building bikes, and, most notably, springer front ends that have remained virtually unchanged all those years. During his travels around the country, he observed that most bike owners had no idea of the history, and people, of motorcycling. Sugar Bear decided to create a place to bring everyone together to educate and preserve motorcycling history. So he purchased land on Highway 79 in Vale, South Dakota, several miles north of the Full Throttle Saloon. Chopperville is still in the developmental stage; with a small art display, merchandising, repair shack, gathering area, and stage for presentations, we could easily envision what the 501(c)(3) non-profit could look like in the future.
Interestingly enough, Sturgis isn't always about the motorcycles. Just ask any music aficionado, who will tell you that Sturgis hosts 10 days of the largest number and widest variety of bands pretty much anywhere in the world. Tried-and-true classic acts such as Foreigner, Lynyrd Skynyrd, Marshall Tucker, and Kid Rock graced the main stage in the Buffalo Chip's amphitheater, while newer performers Yelawolf, Well Hung Heart and others appealed to a mostly younger crowd. Other venues successfully applied the same formula—the combinations of Asleep at the Wheel and Insane Clown Posse at the Iron Horse Saloon, and Trace Adkins and Tech N9ne at the Full Throttle Saloon, were about as far apart musically as one could imagine.
Not only was first-time attendance up with the rally seeing more younger attendees than ever, vehicular traffic entering Sturgis saw an increase of nearly eight percent over last year's rally. Based on rally traffic as well as a slight increase in tax collection, attendance in general seemed to be higher, although final figures aren't available as of this writing. The number of greybeards may be dwindling, but new blood is being infused, with everyone associated with the rally doing their best to continue that trend. You can bet that the Sturgis Motorcycle Rally isn't fading away anytime soon.


"Parents often think teenagers are overly obsessed with their best friends. They should let them be" (https://qz.com/1059666/having-a-stronger-closer-friendship-asa-teenager-predicts-less-depression-asa-young-adult). That's the conclusion from new research published in the journal Child Development. Turns out having a best friend when you're young impacts your life beyond your teenage years.
Help us welcome our new students with a picnic on the lawn immediately following second service on August 26 (this Sabbath). 75 volunteers are needed to provide lunch for yourself and a table of 8 students, as well as fellowship with our new friends. Your menu can consist of lasagna, tossed salad, and garlic bread. PMC will provide cookies and drinks.


BIODROGA MD SKIN BOOSTER Anti-Ox Retinol & Vitamin C Serum is a fat-soluble, essential vitamin. It efficiently improves the cell communication. It is able to adhere to almost any skin cell and to "instruct" it to act like a healthy, young skin cell. Retinol is an anti-oxidant that stimulates skin cell renewal, plumps up wrinkles, improves collagen production, enhances skin's texture, elasticity and firmness.
To use: Apply 2-3 times per week on a cleansed skin, followed by a moisturizer. If applying in the AM, use an SPF afterwards. Avoid contact with eyes. Keep out of the reach of children.