Well we all know your objective, what's your strategy to get us there?

Hi T! I was at the game yesterday in Norman. It's kind of like Tennessee last night. They were up against a really tough team. Circumstances did not favor victory for them. In the end, they didn't completely achieve their objective (winning the game). But they fought hard, never gave up, and earned the respect of thousands of Sooner fans. I would imagine their objective was to win the game, and they had a plan supported by strategies they had developed to do just that. But imagine if their objective was not necessarily to win the game. Imagine if all they really cared about was making a few first downs and maybe kicking a field goal or two. Do you think they would have done as well as they did?

I'm not an expert at labor relations or negotiating. Once we have a clearly defined objective, I suspect we have the talent and expertise available to us to develop an appropriate plan with strategies designed to achieve the objective. But until we define that objective, we're just a rudderless ship going wherever the current takes us.

On a side note... It was kinda funny today at the OKC airport. I had the jumpseat on an MD-88 back to ATL. The flight was big time oversold and they were asking for volunteers. Cracked me up every time they asked if their were any "volunteers" in the gate area and all the folks wearing orange shirts looked up! :D

That's hilarious! :)

It's not an analogy, it's an example of the sunk cost fallacy. You know, the same fallacy which you used to determine what you think our negotiating objective should be. You still haven't explained why you think "restoration" is sound economic decision making.

You'll have to forgive my assumption that "restoration" is your strategy. You haven't offered any other plan or even what you think our leverage is. Do you think stating the objective of "restoration" provides leverage? How?

When you write about restoration this is what I think of...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...nomes_plan.png

1. Restoration!
2. ??
3. Profit!

Sorry, but I just can't resist...

I have to imagine that there are some Volunteer fans who have given up their season tickets because, for whatever reason, the team is not matching up to where it once was. In spite of the circumstances that cause the talent level to be where it is today, in spite of the fact that the coaches and players continue to fight as hard as they can for every yard, every first down, and every point, it's not enough.

The Volunteers used to be title contenders every year, and until they are again, for these fans it's just not worth taking part.

The team and coaching staff were under no illusion that they had a realistic chance of winning that game. Rather, they look upon it as an opportunity to move forward, to develop, to gain experience, and to build back what they've lost.

Too funny!! :D

When you continue to write about the sunk cost fallacy it makes me think you should find a better theory from Wikipedia where you found the first one. And, it was an analogy you were trying to use. Just a very poor one.

I didn't see anyone say restoration was a strategy. That doesn't even make any sense.

The sunk cost fallacy isn't a theory from Wikipedia it's a real term economists use to describe economic decision making based on what is already invested. I used Wikipedia as a resource so I didn't misuse the term. That doesn't change the argument.

No one has addressed the issue. Basing your decision making on the next contract on the fact that you lost money in past contracts is a poor way to do it. Disagree with that? Argue your case. When you (and others) attack me instead of my argument I can only conclude that you don't have a lucid argument. I'm willing to listen to your argument. If you have a better way of doing things I'd like to hear it.

How does stating the objective as restoration give us leverage or help in any meaningful way? Without an explanation one can only conclude that those preaching "restoration" view the act of or representatives saying "restoration" somehow improves our bargaining position on it's own. I don't see benefit. If restoration isn't the strategy, what's the strategy?

Interesting analogy. bUTch Jones' philosophy in rebuilding Tennessee football to it's former level has been "brick by brick". He now has the foundation. We will build upon that with great recruiting, and continuing to schedule hard opponents. He has never simply stated "we are gonna win." Team 118 will build on the foundation we now have. dALPA is doing the same. brick by brick.

You, on the other hand have yet to supply me with a strategy other than continually repeating your objective. Set goals. Make a statement. I get it, but neither is a strategy. I am asking what YOU would do to get us from your goal/objective statement to one of realizing those goals. And I do not believe for a second that you would be satisfied if dALPA came out and made the simple statement that "restoration" was our objective.

The gatehouse story was very funny.

GBO/VFL

And I have yet to hear any of those that are clamoring for it so vociferously present a strategy for achieving it.

So Endeavor pilots get rooms for all training but other new hires don't? :eek: