Understanding the AT&T v. Nascar Litigation

First of all, this is just my estimation based on having read the court filings (several hundred pages worth) and understanding the law as a practicing attorney. By no means am I saying this is going to happen. The district court or an appeals court may decide to take a different view of a particular contract clause, or evidence, or a particular rule of law. But based on what I have read and applicable law, this is my estimation of the AT&T v. Nascar case.

In 2000 the wireless communications company Alltel began its relationship with Penske Racing South to sponsor the 12 car. Sometime in 2001, Cingular LLC—a joint venture between and thus owned by SBC Communications and BellSouth—began a relationship with Richard Childress Racing and became the primary sponsor of the 31 car for the 2002 season.

In the latter half of 2003, Nascar and Nextel began to formalize the agreement by which Nextel would become the cup series’ title sponsor for 10 years. Nextel wanted to be an aggressive and integrated sponsor for the series, and unveiled its plan to develop a new wireless information and communications device that Nascar fans could use at cup series races to follow the action and listen to communication. Nextel offered to pay Nascar $750 million to become the cup series title sponsor, but for this, demanded that Nascar sign an exclusivity agreement making Nextel the only wireless communications provider associated with events at the track during cup races. (The agreement would not affect television advertising).

Nascar made it clear to Nextel that while it did not have a problem granting exclusivity going forward, it was uncomfortable both legally and personally with the idea that the exclusivity agreement would supplant the sponsorships existing at RCR and Penske. Through discussions, it was determined that the parties agreed to allow the existing sponsorships to continue—and even be extended—provided that the sponsor remains with the same car, and does not increase “its position” on the car (meaning that if the sponsor is a secondary sponsor, it cannot become a primary sponsor).

After these discussions, Nextel’s sponsorship of the cup series was finalized, including an exclusivity agreement wherein Nextel was named exclusive wireless communications sponsor of the cup series beginning in 2004 and Nascar agreed to forbid any sponsorship participation by Nextel’s competitors, which were listed by name in the exclusivity agreement and included Cingular, Alltel, AT&T, Sprint, Verizon, etc. The Nascar/Nextel agreement noted that it was subject to the grandfather agreement that would be executed between Nascar and its race teams with existing telecom sponsors, and provided that Nextel recognized that existing agreements between teams and “sponsors” would be allowed to continue.

Nascar isn’t a party to raceteams’ sponsorship agreements, but Nascar requires car owners and drivers to sign annual “Driver and Car Owner Agreements.” The grandfather agreement between Nascar and the teams with existing telecom sponsorships was incorporated into the Driver and Car Owner agreements beginning in 2004. It provided an exception to the exclusivity agreement that, as discussed, is entirely phrased in terms of “existing product licensing relationships” and allows “the sponsor” to remain as long as the sponsor remained with the same car and did not improve its position on the car. Nascar also alleges that it advised Cingular and RCR that “third-parties” would not be allowed to join the sponsorship by buying Cingular. There is some debate over what was actually said.

The annual agreements also clearly provide that all activity is subject to Nascar’s rule book, which gives Nascar broad discretion to regulate the sport, and expressly includes Nascar’s right to govern what advertising and paint schemes are allowed on the track. Nascar makes all drivers, owners and series’ sponsors annually agree to be bound by the Nascar rule book. This included Cingular, which also agreed to be bound by Nascar’s rules.

In 2005, SBC Communications acquired AT&T. However, to capitalize on the worldwide brand recognition of AT&T, SBC changed its name to AT&T. Concerned about these developments, Nextel pressured Nascar to notify RCR that Cingular would not be permitted to change its brand name or logo. Nascar sent a letter to RCR advising it of this in April, 2005. In late 2006, SBC Communications (now AT&T) merged with BellSouth. The resulting company kept the name AT&T, but since Cingular LLC was no longer a joint venture (as its two owners were now merged), AT&T desired for all the companies to have the AT&T brand. It then legally changed the name of Cingular LLC to AT&T Mobility LLC and began the transition from the Cingular name and logo to the AT&T name and logo in its worldwide wireless activities.

In preparation for the 2007 cup season, Cingular (now AT&T Mobility) exercised its right in the sponsorship agreement with RCR to determine the name and logo on the 31 car, and submitted a new paint scheme featuring the AT&T name and logo. RCR submitted the new scheme to Nascar, which rejected it. Nascar advised RCR and AT&T Mobility that it held the right under the rules to make paint scheme decisions and that it was precluded by the exclusivity agreement from allowing the AT&T name and logo. Nascar told RCR and AT&T Mobility that the grandfather agreement didn’t allow a name change and that it had advised them that new third-parties would be allowed to join the sponsorship.

In March 2007, AT&T Mobility filed suit against Nascar alleging that it was not a third party to the sponsorship agreement or the grandfather agreement, and that it was allowed under the law to change its name without affecting its contractual rights, and that the grandfather agreement did not limit “the sponsor” to a particular name or logo. Thus, AT&T argued, Nascar was violating its contractual rights by requiring that only the Cingular name and logo could appear on the 31 car. AT&T argued that it was being damaged by Nascar’s refusal because it inhibited its brand transition and was likely to confuse race fans because Cingular appeared to still be an active brand when it was not.

Nascar responded that it had broad discretion under its rule book to regulate advertising on cup cars and it was exercising this discretion by keeping the AT&T logo out of cup racing. Nascar also alleged that it advised Cingular and RCR on numerous occasions that it could not change the brand name on the 31 car.

The federal judge in Atlanta, where the suit was filed, issued his ruling on May 18, granting AT&T Mobility an injunction that temporarily ordered Nascar to allow the AT&T name and logo. Judge Shoob found, preliminarily, that the grandfather agreement did not limit Cingular’s sponsorship rights to a specific name or logo, and that AT&T Mobility was not a third-party, but instead Cingular, with the same ownership but only with a new name. The judge agreed that AT&T Mobility was being damaged by Nascar’s refusal to allow the change and that it was likely to cause confusion in the marketplace. With regard to Nascar’s rule book, the judge found that the general rule that Nascar has the broad discretion to govern advertising is trumped by the specific agreement to allow Cingular’s sponsorship rights to continue.

A preliminary injunction does not mean the case is over. And it does not mean that the judge will maintain his position on the issues influencing his decision to award the injunction. It only serves to establish certain rights—based on a specific showing of certain factors—to be in place while the full litigation continues. Nascar appealed the judge’s ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, but it was denied.

Thus, the litigation continues, with the preliminary injunction in place. For now, AT&T Mobility can use its logo on the 31 car. AT&T must feel pretty confident about its chances in the litigation because it just announced a sponsorship extension with RCR to sponsor the 31 car through 2010. It is unknown whether the extension is contingent on any specific result in court. Also this week, Nascar countersued AT&T for $100 million for interfering with its sponsorship with Nextel and for failing to honor its commitment to follow Nascar’s rule book, which gives the body broad discretion to govern the sport. Nascar also asked the court to rescind the grandfather agreements and force non-Nextel telecom sponsors out by 2008. Given that this is now a full blown corporate litigation, it is unlikely that the trial court will come to any complete disposition of the case anytime in the near future. The case must now either be ruled on by a summary judgment motion, a trial verdict or be settled by the parties.

Personally, I don’t think this case is all that unique, and I don’t think Nascar realizes that. In our society, rights and obligations are determined by law and by contract. And there is a complete body of law and principles that govern how these disputes are to be determined. Speaking generally, here are 5 general principles that matter in this case:
1. Companies are allowed to change their names without affecting their contractual rights or obligations, unless those rights or obligations are specifically limited and prohibit the company from changing its name.
2. When it comes to interpreting contracts, the “letter of the agreement”—that is, what the words actually say—is generally given the most weight. Evidence about conversations, or one-sided writings such as letters, are considered “collateral” and generally will not modify that which is contained in the written word of a contract.
3. Once written contracts are finalized, they cannot be modified without the written agreement of both parties to effect a modification.
4. When conflicting provisions within a contract, or multiple contracts or agreements are involved, a specific clause or provision is generally given more weight than a general clause or provision. When two provisions are in apparent conflict, the specific provision trumps.
5. A party generally cannot be found liable for damages to another as the result of the party’s action that was specifically ordered by a court.

When you look at this case with these principles in mind, it is difficult to see how Nascar can prevail. If the court finds that AT&T Mobility is simply Cingular by a new name—and the facts currently known strongly suggest that because AT&T did not buy its way into Cingular, rather Cingular’s owners themselves bought AT&T—then the idea that AT&T is a third-party is out the window. The question is then what rights does Cingular have to change its name to AT&T and determine the appearance of the 31 car based on its sponsorship. The grandfather agreement does not limit Cingular to a specific name or logo and only refers to “the sponsor.” Therefore by the general principle, Cingular has the right to change its name without affecting its contractual rights. A name change does not appear to matter under the grandfather agreement so long as the company (“the sponsor”) remains the same. (It is unlikely that any court would interepret “the sponsor” to mean a specific name, it instead refers to a company and companies are normally allowed to change their name).

So it appears that the grandfather agreement doesn’t limit Cingular to a specific name or logo. Nascar will allege that it told Cingular and RCR that it could not change the sponsor’s name but there are two problems with that. First, if Nascar told Cingular and RCR about this before the grandfather agreement was finalized, why isn’t it written in the agreement? Again, the word of a written agreement will prevail over other evidence. And secondly, if Nascar told them after the agreement was finalized, it is a modification that must be agreed upon and written—and there is no evidence that such an agreement to modify was ever made.

What might be most difficult for Nascar to accept is that it doesn’t have unlimited discretion to govern the sport by mere operation of its rule book. By operation of these legal principles, Nascar’s general rule that it maintains all discretion to determine advertising is trumped by the specific grandfather agreement. This must be the case because otherwise, if Nascar always had the right whenever it wished, to keep Cingular off the 31 car, then the entire set of agreements would be meaningless. If Nascar is going to be party to contracts, those contracts must be given effect—Nascar can’t maintain the option to render them meaningless whenever it so chooses. Our system doesn’t work that way.

As far as Nascar’s claims, they are also likely to be rejected. Nascar claims to have been damaged by $100 million by AT&T’s participation and desire to be allowed to put its name and logo on the 31 car. AT&T’s participation in cup racing since the All-Star race was done so by express operation of a federal court order. Nascar is not entitled to damages for AT&T’s activity expressly ordered by the court. Secondly, aside from attorneys’ fees and costs, a party is not entitled to claim damages that result from another party’s lawsuit asking the court to determine relevant rights and obligations under the law. AT&T’s lawsuit cannot be the basis of contractual interference with the Nextel sponsorship.

With regard to Nascar’s request to kick all telecom sponsors out by 2008, I wouldn’t worry to much if you’re a Ryan Newman fan. The fact remains that Nascar gave these telecom companies rights in the grandfather agreement, and so long as that agreement remains in effect, Nascar can’t unilaterally rescind the agreement and it is unlikely that the court will simply throw out the grandfather agreements just because Nascar wants it to. There has to be a legitimate legal reason to undo the grandfather agreements and I haven’t yet seen that Nascar has a basis to make this demand.

At the same time, I’m not so sure that Nascar should be all that afraid of what Nextel might do. If Nextel knew about the language of the grandfather agreement, and even consented to it, Nextel has no claim that Nascar has fouled here. In fact there was express reference to it in the Nascar/Nextel agreement. In this situation, it doesn’t seem like Nextel will have much success at arguing that Nascar failed to protect its exclusivity when Nextel was aware of the grandfather agreement and its language and made no protest. If the court finds that AT&T can participate in cup racing by operation of the grandfather agreement, Nextel isn’t going to have much of a case against Nascar.

BUT- this lawsuit shouldn’t be groundshaking to the world of Nascar. The principles of our general legal system have always been an underlying part of Nascar. Just as Nascar couldn’t sell crack at the racetrack to spectators just because it wants to, the law also prevents Nascar from entering contracts and then not abiding by them. Nascar has the right to grant exclusivity agreements and grandfather agreements, but when those agreements are subject to dispute, Nascar is going to be bound by the commercial laws of this country. This is nothing new.

Nascar will still have discretion to run the sport and enter into whatever agreements allowable by law. Nascar can still have its rule book. But those rules and Nascar’s authority will be subject to modification by the contracts that Nascar enters. Nascar has become a rich, powerful entity. But it needs to learn, and I think that this lawsuit is going to teach it, that often in business, you’re only as good as your lawyers. If Nascar and Nextel wanted to limit Cingular to a specific name and logo, all it had to do was say that in the grandfather agreement. It is just that simple. Had it done that, none of this would have happened. But at the same time, you have to live with your mistakes and learn from them.

Just my take at the present time, based on what has been filed.

The Chicken War Escalates?

Allied in their goals, Pamela Anderson and Pakistani rioters have moved into operational phases of their war against Kentucky Fried Chicken. The fried chicken company now finds itself, like Germany in world wars I and II, fighting a two-front war against a clearly capable and cunning foe. On February 13, the Pamela/Pakistani Axis’ Asian units attacked and burned KFC restaurants in separate incidences in Peshawar and Lahore, Pakistan. Police units responded to the attacks with teargas, but the chicken restaurants were nonetheless badly damaged. Here in the United States, Ms. Anderson has aimed higher so to speak in demanding that the bust of KFC founder Harland Sanders be removed from the Kentucky state capitol.

Seeming to confirm what the Pakistani units of the anti-KFC Axis believe: that KFC is one and the same with elements of Government in the United States, a spokesperson for the Governor of Kentucky replied to the Anderson attack in saying “[We have] no intention of moving [Sander’s] statue. If we were going to move it, it would be to a more prominent position where more people could see it.” These statements were made just weeks before the Pakistani attacks and it is unknown to what extent the Kentucky Governor’s dogged defiance of Ms. Anderson’s demands sparked the Central Asian offensive.



The Pamela/Pakistani Axis’ dual attack strategy is classic: while the former Baywatch star uses her allure and clout with CNN’s Larry King to attempt to discredit and symbolically decapitate KFC in what amounts to a political attack, Anderson’s counterparts in Asia have struck a blow to the chicken restaurant’s actual operations. The United States employed a similar strategy to confront the installation of nuclear weapons in Cuba during the Cuban Missile Crisis. As U.S. military units were blockading Cuba at sea and sending combat and reconnaissance aircraft over the missile installations, U.S.
Ambassador to the United Nations, Adlai Stevenson, vigorously demanded with now famous rhetoric that the Soviet Union admit that it has weapons in Cuba and vow to remove them immediately.

The capability and classically brilliant strategy employed by the Pamela/Pakistani Axis begs the question of whether there is a mastermind behind the scenes coordinating this powerful attack. Is it Osama Bin Laden? Has he somehow been able to influence the beloved Pamela Anderson? Did he find a finger in his 30 piece family box? While intelligence on this issue remains absent, the answer may lie elsewhere, and in a place that gives a third “P” to the Pamela/Pakistani Axis: Popeyes Chicken and Biscuits.

Popeyes began to assert itself as a player in the global chicken market in the mid-1980s. In 1987, a nationwide taste-test crowned Popeyes as “America’s Fried Chicken Champ.” In 2001, Popeyes earned a Gold Award from “Nation’s Restaurant News” an industry publication. Most people who know the difference believe that Popeyes has better chicken. Yet, in 2003, KFC continued to hold 46 percent of the fast food fried chicken market, compared to Popeyes’ 11 percent. A recent survey of chicken eaters showed that 79 percent of respondents had eaten at KFC in the past six months, only 46 percent had eaten at Popeyes. Certainly, Popeyes must have felt frustration with the continued dominance of KFC’s less inferior product. But, as an American Corporation traded publicly on the NASDAQ stock exchange (AFCE), it is unlikely that frustration with mere business cycles would lead Popeyes to organize and carry out a militarized effort to bring KFC to its knees.

Then came Hurricane Katrina. While elements in Government, such as the Governor of Kentucky come to the prompt and vehement defense of KFC, Popeyes restaurants were left to rot in the toxic soup that New Orleans became after August 29, 2005. The storm knocked out a Popeyes production facility at which red beans, dirty rice, macaroni and cheese and its poultry batter are created. Katrina caused the destruction or temporary closure of more than 100 Popeyes restaurants. As Popeyes was certainly asking “Where is the Government? The same Government that rushes to the aid of KFC??” it is now known that agencies at all levels sat idly by, or at best mustered a passive, “woefully inadequate” response to Katrina while the Popeyes restaurants of the Gulf South sat in four to eleven feet of water. This, to Popeyes, may have been the final straw.


In the face of sheer neglect by a Government that so staunchly supports it bitter rival, Popeyes may have executed a plan straight out of business/marketing 101. In the Pakistani militants, Popeyes may have found the one ally brave enough to challenge the Government-supported KFC at an operational combat level. While China and KFC do not have a friendly past (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4356965.stm) the Communist nation was not likely to enter a global poultry war with the United States. No, only Islamic militants offered the results Popeyes needs to win this war. And while we may never be able to ascertain Pamela Anderson’s true motives, simple marketing strategy suggests that a well-known, public personality will only help in your efforts.

Does this all seem too far-fetched to swallow like so many popcorn shrimp? Are these mere coincidences? Perhaps, but Popeyes has restaurants in Saudi Arabia, Indonesia and Jordan, all Islamic nations. And yet, not a single Popeyes restaurant has been harmed in the uproar that has swept the Islamic world in the past few weeks. While Pamela Anderson continues to speak out against KFC and even cruelty to chickens, she has noticeably never mentioned Popeyes.

As Americans, we must ask ourselves: Whose side are we on in this war? Is it right that our Government will so doggedly defend one chicken chain, while leaving another to drown in the wake of natural disaster? These questions may a bit too heavy for some, and there may be a simpler solution. Have you ever had a spicy Popeyes drumstick at 10a.m. with a hangover? Have you ever had Popeyes onion rings during an NFL game? I say let KFC burn.

Sources:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/02/15/pakistan.cartoons/index.html
http://money.cnn.com/2006/01/13/news/newsmakers/anderson_sanders/index.htm
http://www.yum.com/investors/annualreport/01annualreport/pdf/TGR_p16_24.pdf
http://www.popeyes.com/popeyesstory3.asp
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/food/2005-12-08-katrina-popeyes_x.htm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4356965.stm

The Big Band in the Sky Has a New Precussionist

I really don’t mean for this to be a Hurricane Katrina blog. But as a lifelong New Orleanian, I can’t really help it right now. I go on with my daily life but Katrina looms in the shadows, continuing to make her presence known from time to time.

For example, today I read something that made me take pause in my new life in D.C. In New Orleans there is, of course, Pat O’Brien’s, a world famous location in the French Quarter for libation and merriment for generations. Most who have been to the French Quarter, either as tourists, conventioneers or locals, have been to Pat O’Brien’s, home of the world famous New Orleans Hurricane beverage. The drink is aptly named because it will wipe you out. The bar's motto is simply "Have Fun!"

Somewhat less famous than the Hurricane drink, however, was the ever-lively Eddie Gabriel. For the last 67 years, the kind, music-loving, slight-of-build, black man entertained the crowds within the very popular piano bar portion of “Pat O’s.” He never failed to delight with his fingernail tapping on the bottom of a metal serving tray. Always smiling, always on-time and perhaps more “Pat O’s” than the Hurricane itself was Mr. Eddie. He was just there; you didn’t really even think about it, but he always made the piano bar a better experience with his mere presence. His years as a musician and his undeniable New Orleans flavor made the incessant tourist-requests for “Piano Man” bearable- he gave credibility to the place no matter how many middle-managers from the Mid-West filled the joint.

I read today that Mr. Eddie Gabriel was a casualty of Hurricane Katrina. Yes, at 95, the man was old and probably not much longer for this earth anyway. But Eddie Gabriel worked the night before the hurricane. He was still working and who knows how long he would have continued to provide his unique presence to Pat O’Brien’s. After the piano bar closed that last night, Gabriel returned to his home to ride out Katrina. His long ride as a fixture of New Orleans came to an end during the storm, as he drowned in the rising flood waters. It wasn’t until just before Christmas that the morgue finally made a DNA match.

Like much of New Orleans, Mr. Eddie is just a memory now. In my mind I can see his smile and hear his signature fingernail-tapping on that metal tray- knees bent, face full of delight. And like much of New Orleans, I don’t think we realized what we had until it’s gone. Sure, these things were old, but they were working, and working in a way that, like Mr. Eddie Gabriel, was so often unique and wonderful. And who knows how long they would have continued working and bringing joy to tourists, conventioneers and locals alike. But we will never know, and this, too, will pass. Rest in peace Mr. Eddie.


If you want to read more about him, check this story out from 1997.
http://www.patobriens.com/pressrelease8-26.html

The Porsche 911 (No, Boxsters don't count silly)

There really is no substitute. No, the old adage about men having sportscars in order to compensate for a small package isn’t true, at least not in this case. But in a more general view, perhaps it is about compensating for something, and perhaps in a more positive view, anything at a given moment This is an amazing thing and something that perhaps non-Porsche owners can’t really fully comprehend (kidding, but you’ll get my point in a bit).

Feeling a sense of loss? Roll down your windows and drive your Porsche. So you fell in love when you shouldn’t have? Roll down your windows and drive your Porsche. Did the stock market crash on you? Roll down your windows and drive your Porsche. Did your city get destroyed by a hurricane? Roll down your windows and drive your Porsche.

The reality is that any or all of those things may have happened to you, and Porsche or no Porsche, you’re gonna have to deal with it, whether it be money, or love, or the imminent collapse of your favorite sports team. But with the Porsche 911 that sense of kick-in-the-gut can be placated, if not forgotten about, at least for a moment, by a brisk drive in a world-class automobile. Reliable and unconditional (shy of a little maintenance), the love this vehicle gives is just enough to soften any particularly intense blow.

So I freely admit it: The Porsche 911 is a sign that its owner is compensating for something. But hey, don’t we all have something for which to compensate?? I call it “compensating like a mother fucker.”



P.S.- This isn’t about money or elitism. The 911 doesn’t have to be new, it just has to work. Hell, it doesn’t even have to be about cars...just find your own 911 and compensate man, compensate.

More, "No he didn't just say that..." From the World of Sports

Okay, I think I'm going to give you these when I hear them. Maybe I'll start a log..
But anyway, I'm watching the NBA on ESPN, Houston Rockets at Golden State Warriors. So Derek Fisher sinks a second three-pointer bringing the Warriors three point total to 14, their season high... and the announcer drops this little gem:

"We have seen more 3's tonight than a Dale Earnhardt memorabilia show."

hahahaha. I laughed out loud from the kitchen. The best part is that you could hear it that he said the first part (we have seen more 3's THAN...) and he needed a finish, but he had started the cliche without a finish in mind and he was suddenly getting close to having to bail on it, buy hey, what is something that has a lot of 3's?? Oh right, a Dale Earnhardt memorabilia show. Swish!

A little more about me...

In case you're confused, that last post wasn't about groceries, by the way. And again, the putative reader to which I speak may be purely hypothetical. But I think maybe somebody out there is reading this. That thought at least makes me happy.

So it says I live in D.C. That is a new development for me. You see, I had a house, a company, a family and a life in a great city in this country. The city was old and had been through a lot. America loved that city. It held its conferences there. It held its Super Bowls there. It looked to that city for escape and fun, culture and cuisine. And most importantly it looked to that city for utility. That city served this country in the most loyal way, through centuries, providing a nonstop, 24-7 stream of commerce. Every coffee bean in the U.S. went through that city. Every banana in this country went through that city. The Mississippi River, the most economically important inland waterway in the entire hemisphere, met the world's ocean system there. A huge percentage of the nation's domestic and foreign oil had something to do with that city and its immediate region.

But as usual, humankind managed to do what mother nature could not. For hundreds of years that city sat in the same place. It endured storms and plagues, disease and fire. But in the last thirty years, the nation needed more from that city than it was willing to give back. Canals and efficient waterways were constructed around the city to ease the flow of goods and oil. The human intervention in the geography of the area around that city, over the course of the last 30 years, led to a alteration of the area's natural defenses to storms, plagues, disease and fire. What used to be a buffer of 120 miles was depleated to 40 miles in some places.

It isn't hard to understand. Go to the beach. Build a sand castle 5 yards from the water. Watch the tide. Does the water affect your sandcastle? No, because you have 5 yards of buffer. Now dig a deep trench from the water to your sandcastle. Maintain that trench's depth. What happens now?

People say, "Why did they build a city where it could be flooded?" or "Why did you live below sea level?" We didnt' choose where the most important inland waterway in this hemisphere met the ocean. There is simply no way around that and anyone who says that the city shouldn't have been there is simply ignorant of the concept of an economy. Such individuals need to be left to their own idiocy.

But what we did choose is to let our own safety be compromised in the name of the economic development of this nation. And in the name of almighty oil. Sure, it was profitable, and sure, many of that city's very own turned a blind eye to the rising threat, in the name of the dollar. This nation built those trenches from the ocean to the castle, and it maintained them. The trenches caused the buffer zone around them to be washed away. The trenches streamlined movement from the ocean to that city in a way that benefitted ships, oil, and sadly, a hurricane.

But it happened and we are ALL to blame. Yes I said ALL. Anyone in Maine who has ever eaten a banana is to blame. Anyone in Chicago who enjoys coffee is to blame. Anyone in Denver who has bought a gallon of gas is to blame. Yes, some people were supposed to be on watch, but we are all to blame. And what's done is done. We can and we SHOULD rebuild it. The whole of this nation owes a debt of gratitude to that city for giving itself, literally, to the needs, both economic and aesthetic, of this country. I hope we at least chose to pay that city back for all it has given to us.

But now I live here in DC. Things happen. Lives change. This is where I am now and we'll see how it goes. At least I am alive.

Paper or Plastic?

I like to cook. As a transplant to a new city, I tend to cook a lot for myself, dinners for one. I don’t know all that many people here with whom to be having dinner, and frankly the cost of eating or ordering out every night is a bit ridiculous when you know how to cook for yourself. So I cook a lot here in my new kitchen.

When I first got here, I needed to find my grocery store. You know, that one that makes you feel at home, that one where you know where everything is. I spoke with friends and asked around to find my nearest stores, and check them out. The first store I went to was nearby, and I was impressed with it in some ways. The produce was in good shape, which is key, but I just didn’t get the feel like this store had everything I needed. It lacked flare, the prepared foods were overcooked, it lacked music, and it lacked shrimp. I really like shrimp and need my store to have them.

While my initial efforts at storefinding weren’t disasters, I found myself continuing to shop at Lanigain’s. I knew Lanigain’s when I first arrived to stay in Alexandria, VA with my childhood friend while I looked for a place in DC. I knew the place because I had already become familiar with it, and liked it, in October when I visited my friend from New Orleans who had temporarily relocated here after the hurricane. So, when I moved in here, I liked it so much that I kept shopping at Lanigain’s.

Lanigain’s is an attractive store, with fresh produce, quality management and an overall ease of shopping for which I have the utmost regard. Lanigain’s has great wine, great seafood and great steaks. But there is something beyond these criteria: Lanigain’s is beautiful on the inside, in the essence of the store. At Lanigain’s you will find a wide range of intelligent, if not rare products, all while the store remains wonderfully unpretentious. The deli clerks smile and encourage your temptation to spoil yourself. The checkout girls are youthful and vibrant, brightening your day while cool music plays. And the shrimp: Lanigain’s has shrimp, Lanigain’s likes to have shrimp and Lanigain’s even wants to know how I cook my shrimp.

So what is the problem with this store you ask? The sharp reality is that it isn’t good for me to shop at Lanigain’s. Well, for one, the store isn’t accessible for me. Sure, as the crow flies, it isnt’ very far; but on any given day in my life there is a lot of clutter that stands between me and Lanigain’s. I usually attempt to traverse the clutter, but over time I know it will wear me out. I invest (I see my groceries as an investment, not a cost) too much at Lanigain’s, and the traffic is frequently difficult in the area. The really special items are usually reserved before they are available. I love that store but it just simply fails to make sense for me to shop there in the grand scheme of it all. It is best, instead, for me only to shop at Lanigain’s on a more casual, if not “friendly” basis, when I’m in the area and the store is open. I’d rather shop there more often, but I recognize reality. I never was fully in the neighborhood at Lanigain’s; I was more a stranger who chose to stop and shop for a while.

The good thing for me is that Lanigain’s is closing. They aren’t sure if they are going to reopen but for now the ownership is concentrating their efforts on business further south. I am certainly not glad that the store is closing- I will miss it tremendously. And I hope they find a way to re-open. But the reality of it is that, even though I knew it wasn’t the best choice, I continued to shop at Lanigain’s because I simply love that store. As unlikely as it seems, maybe there is store like Lanigain’s nearby. Or maybe I’ll a find another store, endearing for a whole different set of reasons. Or maybe there won’t be another Lanagain’s. As I’m sure I’ll keep cooking, I'll have to keep shopping. Of course, it will be at Lanigain’s until it closes because I just can’t help myself.

"Are you Tony Hawk?" I Wish!

I’m not a skater. Sure, I had a skateboard once when I was about 12, but I didn’t take to it; it was more a mode of transportation than anything else and as modes of transport go, skateboards fall pretty low on the list, just above walking. So my skating days were few. No, my knowledge and respect for Tony Hawk doesn’t come from a passion for skateboarding, it comes from the undeniable fact, learned over the past 20 years, that Tony Hawk is a pretty amazing person. As he has now achieved pop-icon status, just about every American under 40 knows who Tony Hawk is, but not all that many can tell you why.

Tony Hawk grew up in San Diego, California in the 70s and 80s. He was a goofy, lanky kid who was obsessed with competition and performing at his best. Once, after striking out in a baseball game, Tony exiled himself to a nearby ravine and remained there until his father removed him forcibly. Tony Hawk’s life changed when his brother gave him a skateboard at age 12.

With the support of his parents and his natural desire for victory, Tony began entering and winning skateboard competitions…just as the skate craze took over Southern California and then the nation in the 80s. By age 14, Tony was a professional skateboarder with sponsors and earnings. When Tony Hawk was 16, he was widely considered the best skateboarder in the world.

By his senior year in high school, Tony owned his own house and made enough money to fly his friends with him to competitions. By 21, Tony had bought his second house, a 4-acre mansion complete with a skate park and a fleet of Lexi (or Lexuses if you prefer). However, one day in 1991 Tony suffered an aneurysm- just as the popularity of skating was freefalling. Tony’s health, combined with the market downswing for skateboarding ruined Tony Hawk’s livelihood. Over the next several years, Tony Hawk went from prodigal success to a man with a five dollar a day Taco Bell budget. He lost his house, his wife, his cars and his career.

But Tony Hawk didn’t feel sorry for himself. Tony Hawk didn’t develop a debilitating drug habit or leech on his family and friends. Instead, Tony formed a skateboard company with a friend and kept doing what he loved, even without the fortune and glory. After several years, skateboarding in America took another upswing and Tony was back in business. His skateboard company soon became one of the top in the world. Tony also launched a children’s skate clothing company which was bought by the Quicksilver corporation… all while Hawk continued to skate. Over the course of 17 years, Tony Hawk entered an estimated 103 skate contests, winning 73 of them and placing second in 19. These numbers are really ridiculous if you think about it. When the X-Games brought skateboarding competitions to television, the rest of America could now watch Tony Hawk continue to dominate a sport filled with young, fearless Hawk-clones who still could not beat their idol.

Tony has appeared in twelve motion pictures and his is now a household name. But Tony Hawk’s biggest success, and the one that he is probably most proud of, is the Tony Hawk ProSkater video game series. Always a technophile, Tony eagerly accepted Activision’s proposal to create a skateboarding video game in 1997. Unlike other video game namesakes, Tony involved himself heavily in the creation and marketing of the video game, with an emphasis on actual game play instead of hype and gimmicks. Tony didn’t just lend his name to a video game, he, like always, did everything he could to ensure that his name and likeness were associated with a top-quality product. The Tony Hawk video game series is one of the highest selling video games of all time, and has brought Tony and his family (remarried in 1996 with three children) financial success beyond what he may have imagined in 1997.

I think the coolest thing about Tony Hawk is simply that… he is cool. As he is a reasonably well-known celebrity over the last 15 or so years, I have never heard anything but good about Tony Hawk. In interviews he is a chill, mature but fun-loving, all-American guy. He appears on television frequently and always has a smile; I have never heard anyone say they didn’t like Tony Hawk. He donates his time generously to charity and the Tony Hawk Foundation is very active in bringing skating and other outdoor recreation to inner-cities and other low income areas.

I was on a cruise about two years ago and there was a group of kids, probably 13 or 14 years old that I observed were looking at me beyond a mere glance. It was noticeable; not just a coincidence and it continued. I mentioned to Erin, my girlfriend at the time and companion on the cruise, that these kids were looking at me. We laughed it off- but it happened again and again over the next day or so. Finally, the next night at the late night buffet, one of them approached me. I was eager to find out the nature of their curiosity, so I smiled and said “hey man, how’s it going?” He said “…um…are you Tony Hawk??” I laughed and said “I wish.”

Well, so convinced that I was Tony Hawk the kid didn’t believe me. I guess he thought if I was Hawk, I wouldn’t admit it… trying to be incognito on this bargain Carnival Line cruise. Riiiggghhttt. But the kid eventually accepted it and walked away. The last day of the cruise, he came back and asked if he could take a picture with me. Of course, I had no problem with it and his friend actually took several snapshots; But hey, who wouldn’t want to be Tony Hawk for a day or two?