#joan jetson | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

john-bracket · 1 year

Text

Significant Jother Prelims!

The prelims for Jacket 4 will come in two waves after the winner’s bonus poll ends on Sunday, so get your votes in there.

First, there will be the prelims to decide between love interests for Johns/Jacks/Variants who had multiple submitted. There are eight of those matches, and they will be released throughout the day on Monday, July 10.

Then, there will be the prelims to decide which single nomination significant jothers will make the bracket. If a nomination was submitted multiple times as the only love interest, they are already in. There are 11 polls of four significant jothers, and the winner of each will make the bracket. Prelims were seeded by submission order, and those polls will be released throughout the day on Wednesday, July 12.

Match-ups below the cut!

Monday Match-ups: Who shall win the jand?

Prelim #1: Martin Blackwood (11) vs Georgie Barker (1) for Jonathan “Jon” Sims (The Magnus Archives)

Prelim #2: Jason Mendoza (5) vs Derek (1) for Janet (The Good Place)

Prelim #3: Mercymorn (2) vs Alecto (1) vs Augustine (1) vs Mercymorn + Augustine (0 but throuple rights) for John Gaius (The Locked Tomb)

Prelim #4: Zatanna Zatara (2) vs King Shark (2) for John Constantine (DC)

Prelim #5: Nisha Kadam (2) vs Moxxi (1) for Handsome Jack (Borderlands)

Prelim #6: Brad Majors (2) vs Frank-N-Furter (1) for Janet Weiss (Rocky Horror Picture Show)

Prelim #7: Shayera Hol (1) vs Mari McCabe (1) for John Stewart (DC)

Prelim #8: Rafael Solano (1) vs Michael Cordero (1) for Jane Villanueva (Jane the Virgin)

Wednesday Match-ups: I don’t have a funny name

Prelim A: Phryne Fisher for Jack Robinson (Miss Fisher’s Murder Mysteries) vs Kitty for Johnny Thirteen (Danny Phantom) vs Marguerite Baker for Jack Baker (Resident Evil) vs James “Jamey” Emerson Fletcher for Mary “Jacky” “Bloody Jack” Faber (Bloody Jack)

Prelim B: Naomi Herne for Evan Lukas (The Magnus Archives) vs Pete Tyler for Jackie Tyler (Doctor Who) vs Agnes Montague for Jack Barnabas (The Magnus Archives) vs Eric Bittle for Jack Zimmermann (Check, Please!)

Prelim C: Anna Bates for John Bates (Downton Abbey) vs Rose DeWitt for Jack Dawson (Titanic) vs Wendy Torrance for Jack Torrance (The Shining) vs Samatha Carter for Jack O’Neill (Stargate SG-1)

Prelim D: Joan of Arc for JFK (Clone High) vs JFK for Joan of Arc (Clone High) vs Elvira for Don Juan (Moliere) vs Pocahontas for John Smith (Pocahontas)

Prelim E: Penta Roujeat for Jack Wright (Namesake) vs Jethro Bodine for Jane Hathaway (Beverly Hillbillies) vs George Jetson for Jane Jetson (The Jetsons) vs Peter Parker for Mary-Jane Watson Parker (Marvel)

Prelim F: Thor for Jane Foster (Marvel) vs David Read for Jane Read (Arthur) vs Marla Singer for Jack/The Narrator (Fight Club) vs Sophie Aubrey for Jack Aubrey (Master and Commander)

Prelim G: Jay Nakamura for Jon Kent (DC) vs Satinder Hall for Ivo Keys (Shaderunners) vs Edward Rochester for Jane Eyre (Jane Eyre) vs Co Bao for John Rambo (Rambo)

Prelim H: Rosemary for Jack/Raider (Metal Gear Solid) vs Vriska Sekret for John Egbert (Homestuck) vs Maddie Fenton for Jack Fenton (Danny Phantom) vs Minnina for Jonathan Ratker (Dracula Starring Mickey Mouse)

Prelim I: Clary Fairchild for Jonathan Christopher “Jace” Herondale (The Mortal Instruments) vs Marisol Garza for Jonathan “Jon” Cartwright (The Shadowhunter Chronicles) vs Jo Lupo for Zane Donovan (Eureka) vs Robert Martin for Janet van de Graff (The Drowsy Chaperone)

Prelim J: Rebecca St. Claire for Jack Secord (Warehouse 13) vs David for Giovanni (Giovanni’s Room) vs Lucy Moderatz for Jack Pullman (While You Were Sleeping) vs Petra Solano for Jane “JR” Ramos (Jane the Virgin)

Prelim K: Scott Summers for Jean Gray (Marvel) vs Hessa for John the Baptist (The Wife of John the Baptist) vs Helen Wick for John Wick (John Wick) vs Patrick Bateman for Jean (American Psycho: The Musical)

#yeehaw #proper tags what are those #they’ll be on the individual polls #but there are over fifty here so #also let me know if I messed up anything #so I can correct it before I make the polls #don’t ask how long this took

9 notes · View notes

nyt-crossword · 9 months

Text

NYT Crossword 14 January 2024

Across Hints

Hurricanes and tornadoes NYT Crossword Clue

One of 12, biblically NYT Crossword Clue

”Way to go, me!” NYT Crossword Clue

Grape from France’s Côte-d’Or NYT Crossword Clue

Great ape? NYT Crossword Clue

Erotic artist? NYT Crossword Clue

5-Down’s pet NYT Crossword Clue

Ooze NYT Crossword Clue

Yesterday, in Spanish NYT Crossword Clue

___ Jam (record label) NYT Crossword Clue

”Let me be perfectly ___” (Pride slogan) NYT Crossword Clue

Guinness of “The Ladykillers” NYT Crossword Clue

Street magician? NYT Crossword Clue

Made, as a putt NYT Crossword Clue

Stockpile NYT Crossword Clue

Linger NYT Crossword Clue

Rock’s ___ Fighters NYT Crossword Clue

Toast with a raised stein NYT Crossword Clue

Bad thing to drop in polite company NYT Crossword Clue

Anthony Hopkins won this with only 16 minutes of screen time NYT Crossword Clue

Reply of disgust NYT Crossword Clue

One hitting the space bar? NYT Crossword Clue

Muscat resident NYT Crossword Clue

Leaves slack-jawed NYT Crossword Clue

Farmers? NYT Crossword Clue

Took big steps NYT Crossword Clue

Unplanned preview, perhaps NYT Crossword Clue

See here! NYT Crossword Clue

___ of Orleans, moniker for Joan of Arc NYT Crossword Clue

Supply, as elevator music NYT Crossword Clue

Switch hitter? NYT Crossword Clue

Zeno of ___, paradoxical thinker NYT Crossword Clue

Fastest train in the U.S. NYT Crossword Clue

Spot for a microphone NYT Crossword Clue

What might be drawn with a “C” in cartoons NYT Crossword Clue

Plans of study NYT Crossword Clue

Time’s 2023 Athlete of the Year NYT Crossword Clue

Appropriate NYT Crossword Clue

Hail, to Caesar NYT Crossword Clue

Warm touch NYT Crossword Clue

Gunpowder ingredient NYT Crossword Clue

Top pair NYT Crossword Clue

Animal tranquilizer? NYT Crossword Clue

Trash NYT Crossword Clue

Pan handle? NYT Crossword Clue

Communication with one’s hands, for short NYT Crossword Clue

Target of Y.A. fiction NYT Crossword Clue

Word with straw or swing NYT Crossword Clue

Big Apple figure NYT Crossword Clue

”Boy Wonder” of comics NYT Crossword Clue

With 117-Across, the Grim Reaper? NYT Crossword Clue

See 113-Across NYT Crossword Clue

Live content creators NYT Crossword Clue

They might be flagged as “Potential Spam” NYT Crossword Clue

Seasonal charity event NYT Crossword Clue

Cuts down to size NYT Crossword Clue

Down Hints

V on the N.Y.S.E. NYT Crossword Clue

Albatross, metaphorically NYT Crossword Clue

Hypnotized, say NYT Crossword Clue

Some closet organizers NYT Crossword Clue

”The Jetsons” boy NYT Crossword Clue

Crossed (out) NYT Crossword Clue

Online school closing? NYT Crossword Clue

Nurses NYT Crossword Clue

Dash’s partner NYT Crossword Clue

Ancient Romans made it from soot NYT Crossword Clue

Purchase for a golf course NYT Crossword Clue

Nexus: Abbr. NYT Crossword Clue

Peeved NYT Crossword Clue

Indigo Girls song with the chorus “Adding up the total of a love that’s true / Multiply life by the …” NYT Crossword Clue

Creditor’s security NYT Crossword Clue

Makes a misstep NYT Crossword Clue

Ready, with “up” NYT Crossword Clue

Wrinkle-faced dog NYT Crossword Clue

Cash in NYT Crossword Clue

Disney villain who’s the grand vizier of Agrabah NYT Crossword Clue

/ NYT Crossword Clue

Replies of disgust NYT Crossword Clue

Stoolie NYT Crossword Clue

Somewhat NYT Crossword Clue

Section of a syllabus NYT Crossword Clue

___ Griffin, civil rights pioneer NYT Crossword Clue

Meat jelly NYT Crossword Clue

Butler on “The Addams Family” NYT Crossword Clue

Japanese mushroom NYT Crossword Clue

”Pass,” in a casino NYT Crossword Clue

Quadcopter, e.g. NYT Crossword Clue

Concrete support NYT Crossword Clue

Straws in the wind NYT Crossword Clue

Sweet-talked NYT Crossword Clue

Origin of the words “cake” and “egg” NYT Crossword Clue

Actor George who wrote the 1994 autobiography “To the Stars” NYT Crossword Clue

Police accountability tool NYT Crossword Clue

Rapper ___ B NYT Crossword Clue

List NYT Crossword Clue

Demure NYT Crossword Clue

E.R. shout NYT Crossword Clue

Author Gaiman NYT Crossword Clue

#nyt crossword

0 notes

transgraps · 2 years

Text

Let’s talk WrestleQueerdom!

Hello! We’re promoting an upcoming wrestling event, WrestleQueerdom 8.6 in the Hampshire Dome! It’s a first-of-its-kind event for Western wrestling, being an event composed entirely of transgender/nonbinary/otherwise gender non-conforming talents in the world of professional wrestling! We’re very excited for this event on August 6th and we want to share all of the goings on with all of you!

First things first, if you wanna watch the event either in person or online, the links are as follows:

Tickets for live attendance:

https://www.eventbrite.com/e/wrestlequeerdom-in-hampshire-dome-tickets-335918099077

Tickets for PPV + Virtual Meet & Greets: https://app.loopedlive.com/c/3874

The virtual Meet & Greet options are VENY (She/Her), Candy Lee (She/Her), Sazzy Boatright (They/Them), Kidd Bandit (Any/All) and Gisele Shaw (She/Her.) The schedule is on the website!

Commentary will be provided by our friend Gwen Neodonna (They/Them/She/Her/It/its) , and the ring announcer for the event is Wren Hawthorne (They/She.)

Now that we’ve gotten all of that out of the way I’d like to run down the card for you guys!

First to talk about is our Main Event match, VENY (She/Her) vs. Edith Surreal (She/Her)! This is VENY’s United States debut, and for such a monumental occasion we wanted to go all out and get her the best opponent possible. Enter Edith Surreal, who I feel is maybe the best wrestler on the independent scene today. Can Edith solidify that spot by taking down one of the best wrestlers in the entire world, or will VENY be the one to shine in her first match on American soil? I don’t know but I expect it to be a really great showing from both of them and something that fans will be taking to the MOTY ballots. There is no better way to cap off this historic evening than with this real international dream match.

The next match we’re talking about is the Diva Throwdown, as the Ultimate Diva Candy Lee (She/Her) takes on the Quintessential Diva Gisele Shaw (She/Her.) Gisele is one of the most accomplished women’s wrestlers in the UK over the past few years I’d wager, dominating in companies like PROGRESS and RevPro. Meanwhile Candy’s career was kinda put on hold during the lockdown, despite 2020 looking like it was for sure going to be her breakout year. Now Candy is back, and after winning the Grand Prize championship at Paris is Bumping she’s looking for more competition. These two both profess themselves to be Divas so we’re here to see who the most Total Diva is among them.

Max the Impaler (They/Them) was the first talent announced for WrestleQueerdom, and they came to the show looking for a fight. Kota Holliday (She/They) might not be good enough or famous enough to call Max out, but that’s what Kota chose to do. Kota has said it herself, she wants Max to put her in the dirt. And I don’t think Max has any objections to their proposal. This one will be violent. It’s gonna fucking rock.

Eden von Engeland (They/Them) and Shea McCoy (She/Her) have had something of an accidental rivalry over the last couple of years. Perhaps its because of their similar backgrounds but they often find themselves facing off with each other... And Eden has come up on the winning side every single time. With two singles wins over Shea and two tag wins, can Eden maintain this dominance over their rival or will Shea finally be able to get one up on them? Will the traditional wrestling rules benefit either of them as opposed to the CFU or UWFi rules matches they’ve had in the past? Only one way to find out and that’s to watch the match.

In the last year, Kidd Bandit (Any/All) has taken the world by storm with a unique array of offense, a great aesthetic and a general positive attitude towards their community. Their growth is almost unprecedented within wrestling. Don’t Die Miles (He/They) is another really fantastic, uniquely talented younger wrestler with similar nerdy characteristics and good vibes. I put them together for the specific purpose of having high flying exciting action, and I think it’s gonna be an absolute spectacle for the world to see.

Richie Coy (they/them) and Zeke Mercer (they/them) are two really underrated wrestlers who deserve bigger platforms and this match entirely exists for more people to see how good they are.

The final match of the evening is one I’m really excited for, the UNO Battle Royale. 8 wrestlers will enter, divided into groups of 2 based on the colors of UNO Cards, into a battle royale with a final entrant, the WILD CARD, being a surprise participant. Current confirmed entrants are Cameron Saturn, Nick Pierce, Sazzy Boatright, Joan Jetson and Anastasia Morningstar. This is in no way inspired or based off of any similar match concepts.

We’ll also have two spectacle attractions, first up being THE ROAST OF CANDY LEE as hosted by Eddy Joanne-Elizabeth McQueen! We all love Candy and we’re all gonna have a good time with this one, even if she throws hands over it.

Finally, we will induct the first member of the TransGraps Transgender Wrestling Hall of Fame!

So that’s everything you need to know about our spectacular event, the first of its kind in the western scene, only second in the entire world to Dynamite Vamp. I hope you support us, thank you for reading all of this! We can’t wait to build a further connection with the tumblr community.

172 notes · View notes

mybillboredpnx · 3 years

Photo

#joan #jetson https://www.instagram.com/p/CVf1DXQvx77/?utm_medium=tumblr

#joan #jetson

0 notes

tabloidtoc · 4 years

Text

National Examiner, February 15 -- part 1 of 3

You can buy a copy of this issue for your very own at my eBay store: https://www.ebay.com/str/bradentonbooks

Cover: Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip's final goodbye

Page 2: Celebs Who Came Close to the End -- near-death experiences of the rich and famous -- Gary Busey, Johnny Depp, Donald Sutherland, Sharon Stone

Page 3: Martin Lawrence, Emilia Clarke, Stephen King, Tracy Morgan, Christie Brinkley, Ozzy Osbourne, Jane Seymour, Chevy Chase

Page 4: Arnold Schwarzenegger's movie roles

Page 6: After serving nearly two months in a California prison for her role in the high-profile college admissions scandal Lori Loughlin is happy to be back home -- while she celebrated her December 28 release with gratitude and prayer she knows there is still a lot to work through and most important is regaining the trust of daughters Olivia and Isabella -- her husband Mossimo Giannulli is currently serving a five-month prison sentence for his involvement in the scandal and Lori speaks to him as much as she can and it's all about getting through this and moving on

Page 7: Things You Don't Know About Our New Veep -- Kamala Harris makes history

Page 8: Petroleum jelly can get you out of a jam

Page 9: Lower blood pressure fast

Page 10: Harper is only in the fourth grade, but her heart is huge -- the Kentucky youngster tucked her allowance into a plastic baggie and sent it to Gov. Andy Beshear to help him out during tough times

Page 11: Get fit by making a clean sweep -- it turns out cleaning your home is just as effective as sweating through hundreds of situps

Page 12: Celebrities who nabbed the jab -- these celebs who are at high risk of coronavirus complications and even death because of their ages and health conditions stepped up to the plate and took their best shot -- Arnold Schwarzenegger, Joel Grey, Judi Dench, Rupert Murdoch, Willie Nelson, Steve Martin, Joan Collins, Martha Stewart, Dan Rather

Page 13: Al Roker, Pope Francis, Tony Bennett, Buzz Aldrin, Ian McKellen, Oliver Stone, Norma Kamali, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Loretta Lynn, Tom Jones

Page 14: Dear Tony, America's Top Psychic Healer -- the world belongs to all of us so don't opt out, Tony predicts a bright new star in the movie world Anya Taylor-Joy who shines in The Queens Gambit: give her time because she will be huge

Page 15: Frank Stallone is Sylvester Stallone's younger's brother and while Frank is an actor too, there is no doubt Sly is more famous but there's no hard feelings

Page 16: The Judds fix 40-year feud -- Naomi Judd who suffered from mental illness struggled to raise two daughters on her own -- Wynonna Judd once cut off communication with her mother for three years -- for 40 years mother-daughter country duo Naomi and Wynonna fought and feuded like wildcats but they've finally kissed and made up so 75-year-old Naomi can go to her grave with a happy heart

Page 18: Madeleine Fugate put her sewing skills and a compassion that is beyond her years to good use as she stiches together a giant quilt paying tribute to the tragic victims of COVID-19 -- maybe it's in her blood because her mother Katherine worked on the NAMES Project AIDS Memorial Quilt 35 years ago

Page 19: We've been waiting for a flying car ever since the 1960s TV show The Jetsons and finally one seems ready to touch down -- a Japanese startup has been road testing it new flying vehicles and says a fleet of there air taxis could be ready by 2023

(continued)

4 notes · View notes

indelibleevidence · 5 years

Text

Looks like we have new ship names for season 5, guys. :D

Joan Boe and Chet Hetson = Jetson

Rebecca Johnson and Frank Rossi = Rerossi (trying to get some kind of approximation of Repata there, though I guess if you follow the ‘Reade’s surname into Tasha’s surname’ format it’d be Rossison, or Ronson)

I guess we don’t know what Patterson’s fake name is, especially since she used her real first name, so sorry to the many Zapatterson shippers for not including you in this post. ;D

#ship names according to patterson #blindspot

20 notes · View notes

glittery-fbi-agent · 6 years

Text

Ooc ?

Because its never a bad time to look at pictures of random dogs on the internet I present to you: Jayden and Joane’s dogs

Zuko

Uno

And Jetson

#ooc?#dogs

5 notes · View notes

huggableduck · 6 years

Text

joan: reinhardt main

macklemore: tracer main

doctor dan: mercy main

wonderwall: genji main

m-seq: dva main

jetson: zenyatta main

#personal #white 2 liveblogging

1 note · View note

transgraps · 2 years

Link

9 notes · View notes

aion-rsa · 4 years

Text

Sci-Fi Explosion: Join Den of Geek and Warner Archive for Virtual Fun, Trivia, and Prizes

https://ift.tt/eA8V8J

We’re hosting another Sci-Fi Explosion in conjunction with the Warner Archive Collection, here’s the details!

Far beyond the usual sci-fi space stories there lies a strange galactic outpost where inexplicable Star Wars-themed music videos rub shoulders with cosmic cartoons, weird robot PSAs and other forgotten orphans of genre insanity.

This is the domain of Sci-Fi Explosion.

For the past six years I have been bringing this cosmic cabaret of craziness to conventions and other genre events throughout the East Coast, and I’m beyond pleased to be teaming up with Den of Geek this Friday night for a celebration of the Warner Archive Collection.

In case you are new to this galaxy, let me bring you up to speed. Since 2009 the Warner Archive Collection has been bringing a jaw-droppingly diverse assortment of titles from the studio’s impressive catalog to Blu-ray and DVD, manufactured on-demand. What this means is that thousands of film and TV tiles from Warner Bros. ranging from film noir favorites such as The Big Sleep to obscurities like The Completely Mental Misadventures of Ed Grimley (one of the best forgotten cartoons ever) are available on physical media. A lot of these are niche releases, meaning that without the Warner Archive they would evaporate into the mists of forgotten media.

cnx.cmd.push(function() { cnx({ playerId: "106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530", }).render("0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796"); });

I’ve been a fan of the work being done at the Warner Archive Collection since its inception, so you can imagine how thrilled I am to have the opportunity to put together a showcase of the label’s greatest sci-fi and genre titles for this week’s Den of Geek collaboration.

And what a show it will be!

Among the features included will be the following:

• A tribute to The Green Slime (and its rocking theme song), perhaps the best science fiction film you’ve never seen! Seriously, your brains aren’t prepared for this.

• A retrospective on the V mini-series’, including footage and an analysis of their enduring pop culture impact.

• Celebrations of the TV series’ Beyond Westworld, Logan’s Run, The Man from Atlantis, and other short-lived sci-fi favorites.

• An exploration of some of the great cartoons for genre lovers that are available through the Warner Archive Collection — from The Jetsons to Josie and the Pussycats in Outer Space!

• Examining why the Joan Crawford film Trog is a quiet masterpiece.

• And much more, including trivia and giveaways!

This all takes place this Friday night, September 18th, at 8:30pm EDT on our Twitch channel. (Click here for the Facebook event). We encourage you to not only watch, but get involved in the discussion by commenting live and sharing the fun with our entire Twitch community.

Sci-Fi Explosion: Warner Archive Edition is going to be one for the ages. Don’t miss it!

The post Sci-Fi Explosion: Join Den of Geek and Warner Archive for Virtual Fun, Trivia, and Prizes appeared first on Den of Geek.

from Den of Geek https://ift.tt/2GWt2zE

#aion-rsa #Den of Geek

0 notes

wineanddinosaur · 5 years

Text

Before Dating Apps, Retro-Futuristic Telephone Bars Nurtured Introvert-Friendly Flirtation

The sign on the bar’s front door sounds almost quaint for this era: “By entering these premises, you hereby waive the following rights: To privacy. To publicity. To bring a claim against C.E.V.”

C.E.V. stood for Controlled Entropy Ventures, the experimental technology company behind Remote Lounge, a concept bar that opened in NYC’s East Village less than a month after 9/11/2001. Inside the lounge were 60 miniature cameras (or was it more?) that filmed patrons and allowed them to surveil each other in hopes of generating love connections — or impromptu hookups.

Considered mind-blowing and transgressive at the time, Remote Lounge seems antiquated if not downright childish today, when literally everyone at every bar has their head head, staring at their phone. Still, looking back at the bar offers a fascinating insight into social culture in the final days before iPhones and dating apps. While hardly remembered today, Remote Lounge rather presciently foreshadowed the vaguely performative, look-at-me digital narcissism that has pervaded, if not somewhat ruined, modern nightlife in NYC and worldwide.

The Telepresence Bar

“The genesis of the idea came from working with Josh Harris,” explains Leo Fernekes, one of the three partners of C.E.V. “He basically funded these crazy experimental ideas and I used them as a paid lab learning experience.”

Labeled New York’s first Internet millionaire, Harris was the founder of live streaming network Pseudo Programs — and a bit of a conceptual artist. With $85 million in his bank account after cashing out an early dot-com IPO, he hired C.E.V. to produce “Quiet: We Live in Public” in December 1999. It was a “Truman Show”-esque experiment in which 100 volunteers lived in a four-story human terrarium in SoHo, filled with free food and drink, not to mention machine guns, while webcams followed their every move.

“People want to turn the camera on themselves,” Harris told Wired at the time. “There is a pent-up desire for personal celebrity.”

The toilets lacked walls, the only shower was in a see-through geodesic dome, and the basement had a system that allowed residents to control cameras to watch their housemates having sex. A giant sign constantly warned the residents: “WE LIVE IN PUBLIC.” Their experiment later became the subject of a 2009 documentary of the same name.

“One thing that convinced me to open Remote Lounge is that Josh threw a party with all those cameras,” Fernekes says. “There were cameras in the bathroom and during the party, people would go in and perform for them. Doing sexy, naughty things, knowing they were being broadcast and monitored outside. Then they’d come out of the bathroom and people would cheer.

“‘Wow, that’s something I’ve never seen before!’” Fernekes remembers thinking. “It seemed natural to extend it into a business concept.”

A bar appeared to be the most practical move, especially since another one of C.E.V.’s partners, Bob Stratton, a software developer, knew the industry a bit from his stint as a bartender at 2A, a dive on 2nd Street and Avenue A.

“Our concept of voyeurism is very much along the lines of a normal bar,” Stratton told the L.A. Times. “People are constantly checking each other out anyway.”

The startup took over a storefront on the skid row Bowery where Bowery Electrical Supply Company, an electrical wiring outfit, had resided since 1947. They cleaned up the space’s rotted floors and outfitted it with cameras and monitors. The equipment was hardly state of the art, even by nearly 20-year-old standards.

“This has to be as inexpensive as possible,” thought Fernekes, claiming if he had developed a fancier bit of technology he wouldn’t have wasted it on a bar. They used the cheapest possible consumer-grade televisions and mounted them in interesting places around the space. There were 12 cameras over the bar, six more scattered in random places, and 24 cameras placed at custom-designed “Cocktail Consoles.” They were all rigged together like a cable TV set-up — each console had joysticks that could move any camera 360 degrees, able to see every inch of the bar — as well as a monitor that customers could tune to any camera’s black-and-white broadcast.

C.E.V. called Remote a “telepresence” bar, but critics thought the NASA-gray consoles and traffic-cone-orange seating was more “retro-futurist.” Based on this 2002 picture of Remote Lounge, it resembles a 1960s vision of the future; “The Jetsons,” if you consider that a positive, or “2001: A Space Odyssey” if you don’t.

Fernekes estimates it cost them about $1 million to set up the bar, but about 75 percent of that was just exorbitant Manhattan real estate costs.

“My partners and I were high on the total hubris of the dot-com era,” Fernekes says. “We were delusional in the thought that everything we touched could be turned into gold. I look back at it now and it’s a little sad. Sad, but humorous.”

Remote Lounge opened in NYC in 2001 with retro-futurist interiors. Credit: JPDA.net

A Digital Playhouse for Local Hipsters

Yet Remote Lounge was almost immediately a hit with the “in” crowd, and it quickly (and briefly) became a part of the East Village party circuit. From its October 9, 2001 opening onward, there were lines to get in every night for the first six months. Microsoft and Apple even fought over which would be the first to hold a party there (Microsoft won).

“The whole city was still in mourning, in shock and disbelief [over 9/11] and Remote kind of popped up as this cute, happy story,” Fernekes says. “The media also went bananas for it.”

Within the first month The New York Times called it, “perhaps the most media-intensive public setting in the city.” CIOL thought it was “a digital playhouse for local hipsters.” Reading these articles in 2019 is incredibly amusing, given the very public nature of social media, dating apps, and nearly every other facet of modern society.

“The concept is incredibly simple: hand over your privacy at the front door and enter a world where anyone anywhere can follow your every move,” proclaimed a 2001 BBC News article, crediting its development and acceptance to “a mix of instant messaging and reality TV, both becoming extremely popular in the last few years.”

Early Yelp reviews are even more hilarious: “It’s like on-line/chat room dating but you’re in a real room and everyone’s eerily watching you! (sic)” “I guess you can call it ‘instant’ video-dating?” “why would you call someone on the phone when they’re in the same room with you??”

Adding to the surreality, Fernekes would often lie about how many cameras were actually in the bar (that BBC article claims a remarkable 120) and made up names for the drinks they served (he told writers their most popular cocktail was the Vertical Hold, an archaic term for adjusting a tube television set).

In actuality, Remote Lounge was like any other bar, serving Brooklyn Lagers and vodka sodas in the early-aughts era of New York nightlife — except for all those creepy cameras.

“Culturally the world was evolving to having a greater comfort for these ideas,” Fernekes says.

The visionary Harris had previously predicted to Business Week that the world was already headed toward a place where “people want their fame on a day-to-day basis, rather than in their lifetime.” And Remote Lounge fit the bill, even screen-grabbing the most outrageous moments of the night — which often involved nudity — and uploading them to the lounge’s website instantaneously. This encouraged introverts to monitor what was happening at the bar and, if they saw something they liked, hopefully lure them out for the evening. (Curious to see what they were seeing? You can! For unknown reasons, someone is still fitting the website’s hosting bill.)

Still, if Remote Lounge was the world’s first “telepresence” bar, Fernekes knew there was a bit of a precedent in the form of “telephone bars.”

A Neat Party Trick

Telecommunications have a long history in nightlife. The telephone was invented in 1876, and by the early 1900s, diners at higher-end restaurants could request to have phones brought to their tables for important calls.

In 1920s Berlin, some nightclubs had installed tischtelefonen on every table, so Weimar-era partiers could dial up random guests at any other table, which were marked by lighted numbers. At Femina and the Resi, two Berlin dance clubs that each held thousands, customers could even send pneumatic tubes filled with cigarettes, Champagne bottles, and notes to other tables. (Though nothing too provocative, as “messages sent by tube [were] checked by female ‘censors’ in the switchboard room,” according to The Chicago Tribune.) This gimmick was memorialized in “Caberet’s” “Telephone Song” and still occurs at Ballhaus Berlin.

A few decades later, in 1968, a pricey joint called Ma Bell’s opened in New York’s Times Square. Each table at Ma Bell’s had its own “old-timey” landline with free calling privileges (even long distance!). It was open until the mid-1980s and was featured as a setting in a Season 6 episode of “Mad Men.” While bar-hopping, Joan (Christina Hendricks) and a visiting gal pal hit the new spot, noting that, “Apparently, there are quite a few men here who go for a certain type.”

Yes, whether Berlin in the 1920s, Times Square in the ’60s, or the Bowery at the turn of the 21st century, these bars were, of course, mainly designed for amorous purposes. USA Today believed that, with Remote Lounge, C.E.V. had created “a setting that could revolutionize flirting in New York.” The L.A. Times wasn’t quite as certain, mocking the bar as a place “where Stanley Kubrick and Michel Foucault would go scouting for dates.”

But 20-something New Yorkers immediately loved the concept, a harbinger of their technological dating futures to come. “Around midnight, a long-haired man dressed in requisite all-black, sidles up to writer Kate for a rare moment of face-to-face human interaction,” observed journalist Lauren Sandler in 2002. “His parting words are the ultimate postmodern pickup line … ‘Find me on screen later.’”

“It’s a legalized version of stalking,” a female NYU student told CIOL on opening night, observing how the monitors only showed grainy, black-and-white images. “It makes people look a lot better than they do in person, masking their flaws and making them look more attractive.”

That was intentional. Fernekes had realized that the impersonality of it all was why the concept worked so well. When the place was packed, you could be ogling a person on the monitor with no sense that they were just five feet away from you, unaware where you were as well. If both parties actually liked what they saw on their monitors, you could message a “hello” using the system’s crude text-messaging capabilities or ask to speak to them on the console’s land lines.

“That gave you the freedom to say outrageous things, as if the person wasn’t really there,” says Fernekes. “This chaos diffused into a sense of detached, impersonal anonymity.”

Rejection didn’t hurt as much either, claims Fernekes, because, unlike a face-to-face interaction in the real world, you didn’t have to actually see them reject you. They could just ignore your console-to-console texts. It became a total free-for-all, with customers trying to pick up as many people as they could at one time. Get rejected, and you could simply flip the TV channel, quickly moving onto the next person on screen, then the next. If in-person pick-up culture used to favor the bold, Remote Lounge favored the shy and timid.

“Remote Lounge provides yet another opportunity to erect a barrier between ourselves and the people we hope to meet. It is almost as though we yearn for the days of an appointed chaperone to play interference,” Stacy Kravetz wrote in her 2005 book “The Dating Race,” ultimately denigrating the cameras and monitors as nothing more than a “neat party trick, a way to entertain myself while I sit at a table.”

Our Technologically Perverted World

“Twelve years later, it’s funny to think how this novelty bar in NYC would so closely mirror our modern experience,” says Brian C. Roberts, a popular online personality. “Sometimes I’m shocked at how my experiences at the Remote Lounge would be recreated time and time again by following a hashtag on Twitter, to a photo on Instagram, to a small conversation online, and finally with meeting someone face to face … all over the course of 10 or 20 minutes on my iPhone at a local bar.”

Unfortunately, though, whether Remote Lounge was shockingly prescient, or just a neat party trick — or probably both — it ultimately wasn’t enough of a gimmick to create a thriving business. Nor was all that media coverage.

“The truth is, [Remote] reached a huge international audience,” explains Fernekes, “but those people couldn’t come to our bar, so it was lost at that point.”

C.E.V. had once hoped to franchise its idea, with pop-up Remote Lounges all over America and Europe. It hoped to then connect them all through the same system so drinkers in, say, Dallas could flirt with bar patrons in Amsterdam — “the time-shifting of content,” Fernekes called it. “The problem is, the only way we were making money is by selling drinks and there’s a limit to what you can charge people for a cocktail. It just didn’t make much economic sense.”

Eventually, Fernekes realized the bar also suffered from what you would call a “critical mass” problem. A packed house on Saturday was great. But what if you came in on a Monday evening and there were only two other customers in the bar?

“It was very uncomfortable, like going into a hall of mirrors,” Fernekes says. “If the bar had less than three or four people, it was a very unpleasant experience.”

People quickly realized that as well. First, Mondays started being dead, then Tuesday, then the whole week, and little by little Remote Lounge was only getting viable crowds on the weekends. Soon the cameras and monitors quit working; drunk and disorderly patrons even broke a few. Eventually you had a mostly empty, windowless, retro-futurist bar with dozens of monitors broadcasting bright-white static.

“It was a novelty at first, but gave way quickly to just being creepy,” Eater wrote in a 2007 postmortem. “The crowd got seedier over time.”

The real world was changing, too, and finally catching up to Remote Lounge’s vision. In 2007, Americans sent more texts than phone calls. Dating websites were becoming more prominent and mainstream. Then, in June 2007, the iPhone hit the market. This was perhaps the final nail in the coffin for Remote, and the one topic Fernekes seemed unwilling to discuss still today. Remote Lounge closed a few months later in November 2007.

“Nowadays you’re just numb to all of it. It’s too much of a technologically perverted world,” Fernekes says. “I think Remote definitely alluded to the perversely artificial and competitive nature of Instagram. The technologically augmented social interactions that are completely fabricated and just designed to tap into the human instincts. It’s a bit perverse and unhealthy. Our genetic, instinctual evolution has not caught up with the technology.”

And the technology is still racing forward. Smartphones have gotten better and more widespread in the last decade. Meanwhile, texting grew more prominent, and a plethora of dating apps arrived. In 2009, Grindr launched, and in 2012 Tinder. Now all the pieces are in place — everyone has a tiny Remote Lounge in their pocket or purse at all times. You just need to add drinks.

“I see kids on their phone today [at the bar],” says Fernekes, now 56 and living in Bangkok. “And I think, wow, that looks kind of sad. It’s just not a reality that seems very interesting to me.”

The article Before Dating Apps, Retro-Futuristic Telephone Bars Nurtured Introvert-Friendly Flirtation appeared first on VinePair.

source https://vinepair.com/articles/back-to-the-future-flirting/

0 notes

adambstingus · 6 years

Text

5 BS Celebrity Stories We Need To Stop Clicking On

We are currently drowning in a sea of entertainment news. For every one event in Hollywood, there are 500 articles written about it. This means that in order to get hits, some websites find themselves bending the truth eeeeeever so slightly. Or in the case of headlines like these, they take the truth, put it in a paper bag, and light it on fire on your doorstep for you to stomp out.

Your Favorite Star Just Teased Their Next Big Movie! Or Not!

Before the internet, you mostly found out that a new movie was going to be released when you saw a trailer which confirmed that yes, Batman would be returning. Now, you can learn such information years in advance, due to headlines screaming that the star or director has proclaimed a movie is “in the works,” or something to that effect. Then, two years later, you’re like, “Wait, wasn’t that thing supposed to be out by now?” That’s because those headlines are usually manufactured bullshit.

For example, while I was writing this, Rotten Tomatoes said the biggest story of the week was Steven Spielberg revealing that after Harrison Ford goes scowling into retirement, the next Indiana Jones would be played by a woman:

Stuff

Complex

CNN

But Spielberg didn’t really say that at all. He said the upcoming Indiana Jones film would be the last for Harrison Ford, so the series could only continue in a different form (i.e. as a reboot). A tabloid straight up asked him about going with a female lead, and he said that there was nothing wrong with it and joked, “We’d have to change the name from Jones to Joan,” revealing that, while he is a master filmmaker, he is first and foremost a dad.

Throw in the fact that Spielberg doesn’t own the rights to Indiana Jones (Disney will decide where the franchise goes next), and you realize that asking about anything beyond his personal involvement is futile. But interviewers do this all the time. They give a leading question about a film, get a vague “sure,” then run with the scoop. For example, interviewers have been asking Scarlett Johansson about a solo Black Widow movie for years, resulting in headlines like …

Polygon

… which is misleading, because there is no “Black Widow movie” set in stone yet. Or they’ll ask Marvel captain Kevin Feige, leading to the headline …

Empire Online

… even though an exec saying they’re “creatively and emotionally … most committing to” Black Widow but not actually putting it on their three-year schedule is the exact opposite of a commitment. It’s like when your parents said “We’ll see” when you asked them to buy you a drum kit.

No matter what project it is, whether it’s a TV show or a movie or a stick figure flipbook of a boy hitting a can with a stick, you’ll find the same bullshit. Asked about a Family Guy movie, a producer said, “There are no specific plans,” but also, “if I were a gambling man, I’d say within the next five years,” and joked that he was putting money on that. Thus, headlines read:

Independent

This is a pattern you’ll see throughout this article — celebrities will say vague shit off the cuff, and journalists will dig through it for a headline. In fact, it’s pretty hard to find an actual article about an interview that feels honest. One of the few that I found concerned Daniel Craig, who, when asked about playing James Bond after Spectre, said, “I’d rather break this glass and slash my wrists.”

The 25th James Bond film stars Daniel Craig and hits theaters next year.

A Celebrity Admitted That They HATE Their New Film! But Not Really!

When an actor hates life on set or hates their famous role, that makes for a hell of a story. But you’re probably only going to hear it years later, because no actor wants a reputation for sabotage. So every time you see a headline about an actor badmouthing their movie, there’s a good chance that they … didn’t badmouth anything. For example, apparently, the lead actress in the new Tomb Raider began literally taking a dump on a film reel when asked about her experience playing Lara Croft.

Bounding Into Comics

Wow, Alicia Vikander trashes Tomb Raider? Let’s see this clip, in which she says … the previous movies were good, hers is also good, the video game’s realism was good, a sequel might be good, and, in the last 15 seconds, she agrees with the interviewer that it’s weird that the film has so few women in it. Huh. She didn’t trash anything.

OK, well then how about when Jennifer Lawrence spontaneously burst into flame when asked about playing Mystique one more time:

Refinery29

Lawrence’s first quote in the article is “I love these movies.” She then says that she loves the director, and loves fans, and that Dark Phoenix is her best experience yet. So what does she hate? “The paint.” Getting into costume is difficult. You might notice that this isn’t bashing the film. Very few people like to be doused in paint and latex for 16 hours a day. Most people don’t like wearing pants for 16 hours a day. So it’s not unreasonable, and it sure as hell doesn’t mean that she “hates being in X-Men,” as the headline proclaims.

OK, fine. So it seems like a lot of these sites are blowing minor things out of proportion. But how about the time that Batman v Superman was so boring that it caused Michael Shannon to slip into a coma?

First off, Shannon wasn’t in Batman v Superman. They used a rubber model of him. He was never on set, and though he recorded a few lines, they weren’t used. Also, he fell asleep while watching it on the tiny screen on an airplane, because it was an international flight and he was tuckered.

But what about actors who hate their characters? That’s got to be something that happens in real life. Actors who find the characters they play to be so morally reprehensible that they have to shout it out loud. Actors like Jamie Dornan, the guy who portrayed Christian Grey, who was apparently doing something to the extent of burning copies of Fifty Shades Of Grey on set.

The Loop

Nope, he only says that Christian’s “not the sort of bloke I’d get along with. All my mates are easy going and quick to laugh.” And who would want to hang out with the characters they portray? Jack Nicholson doesn’t sit around waiting for homicidal clowns to buy him a beer, and Dornan probably won’t be chilling with any sociopathic billionaires in the near future.

This Celebrity Is Fed Up With Political Correctness! Maybe?

Hollywood is known as a bastion of liberalism, but if you believe clickbaity headlines, aging actors with no stake in the matter are calling press conferences to loudly tell they world that they’re not going to take it anymore. You tell ’em, boys!

Express

AOL

Read Next

Create A Jetson's Future With This Machine Learning Bundle

Hollywood Reporter

DailyWire

But that’s all old news. Here’s the latest on Seinfeld and Alec Baldwin literally calling the #MeToo movement shit!

Page Six

Famous News

Must Haves

When Matt Damon was interviewed about #MeToo, one line got quoted again and again. “There’s a difference between, you know, patting someone on the butt and rape or child molestation, right?”

Huffington Post

Boston

But the headline’s going to be whichever part grabs the most outrage. If manufacturing disagreement and drumming up hatred is what it takes to pay the bills, then that’s what they do.

Holy Shit, The Star Was Injured On Set! Or Maybe They’re Just Joking!

Acting can be physically challenging. And like any activity that requires movement, you can get injured while you do it. SERIOUSLY injured. Like Jennifer Lawrence in Mother! levels of injured:

Indiewire

LADBible

Indy100

But no one apparently cares enough to clarify. Also, “breathing so hard she ripped herself open” is apparently a whole genre of on-set accident:

Express

US Magazine

And wait till you hear about poor, afflicted Gary Oldman:

Screenrant

NME

Independent

A Celebrity Confirmed Your Favorite Fan Theory! If You Twist Their Words A Bit!

Pretty 52

Digital Spy

The Sun

Vanity Fair‘s headline about that interview with Hamill:

Vanity Fair

CONFIRMED! THANKS, MARK!

Follow Ryan Menezes on Twitter for bits cut from this article and other stuff no one should see.

Start collecting your own sound bites for the world to misinterpret, get yourself an audio recorder.

Support Cracked’s journalism with a visit to our Contribution Page. Please and thank you.

For more dumb news that shouldn’t be news, check out 5 Stupid Things We Need To Stop Clicking On and 6 News Stories Everybody Needs To Stop Sharing On Facebook.

You SHOULD click on THIS LINK and follow us on Facebook.

Source: http://allofbeer.com/5-bs-celebrity-stories-we-need-to-stop-clicking-on/

from All of Beer https://allofbeer.wordpress.com/2019/02/06/5-bs-celebrity-stories-we-need-to-stop-clicking-on/

0 notes

sohannabarberaesque · 6 years

Link

Don Yowp, who also blogs at “Tralfaz” (itself devoted to older cartoons and Old Time Radio and early television comedy), opens this somewhat historical post explaining how Saturday morning television evolved into what we fondly recall it as, thus:

There are people who take it for granted that Saturday morning television was always a land of cartoons, and how dare it not be that way today. Well, of course, that wasn’t always the case. Like weeds choking a garden, cartoons slowly took over the Saturday morning landscape until they killed kids hosts like Shari Lewis and tired old filmed programmes like Fury. Television was still developing in the early 1950s. The FCC had imposed a freeze on construction of new stations in 1948 because it had to sort out things like channel assignments, interference, and colour systems. The bureaucrats took their sweet time and lifted the freeze on April 14, 1952, though the colour battle continued. More stations meant more people watching. Networks were now being able to tell ad agencies and potential sponsors there were more eyes on television, and coax them into buying time periods that were comparatively dirt cheap—like Saturday mornings.

At any rate, until around 1960, Saturday-morning network television was basically a wasteland of old theatrical cartoons and reruns of shows like The Lone Ranger, Highway Patrol and Fury; as Yowp notes, CBS’ acquisition of the Terrytoons studio (and its film library) would be an early “crack in the door” for cartoons becoming a staple of Saturday-morning television:

CBS had purchased the Terrytoon studio—it had been running Terry cartoons on its Barker Bill show twice weekly starting in November 1953. Now it went through with plans for a new show called Mighty Mouse Playhouse, which debuted at 1:30 p.m. on Saturday, December 10, 1955. For the record, the cartoons were “The Uninvited Pest,” “The Exterminator” and “Svengali’s Cat.” The show was moved to 11 a.m. the following Saturday, then to 10:30 the following April 7th.

(Times quoted are Eastern.)

The role of Hanna-Barbera in Saturday morning goes back to November 1957, when Ruff and Reddy debuted on NBC in partnership with Screen Gems; such included hosted segments and older Columbia/Screen Gems theatrical flicktoons. Yowp continues:

As for the first all-cartoon show made for television on Saturday mornings? The honours go to King Leonardo and His Short Subjects, which replaced Ruff and Reddy in the 1960-61 season. No human host, no tired theatricals. Just brand-new cartoons made by Total Television Productions (the first ones were animated at Creston Studios, aka TV Spots, in Los Angeles but the voice tracks were cut in New York). Still, Saturday mornings network television time was mainly occupied—and networks were still signing on comparatively late—with old films or hosted shows, but things started to change in 1962. And you can credit (or blame) the Great Prime Time Failure of cartoons in the 1961-62 season. The Alvin Show and Top Cat were ratings busts in the evening. So, the following year, they were rerun on Saturday mornings. They were hits. The Bugs Bunny Show was moved to Saturday morning. Another monster hit. And Hanna-Barbera managed to resurrect reruns of Ruff and Reddy. Saturday mornings became the place for castoffs from other time slots. The following season, Beany and Cecil joined the line-up. Two new made-for-TV shows, Tennessee Tuxedo and Hector Heathcote, found Saturday morning homes. Casper the repetitious ghost made a comeback, with old theatricals mixed in with new TV cartoons (the latter three shows, incidentally, voice-tracked in New York). By the time 1965 rolled around, when Hanna-Barbera made its first made-for-Saturday-morning shows, Secret Squirrel and Atom Ant, the bulk of programming was animated. Most of the non-cartoon holdouts aired after 11 a.m.

By which time Saturday morning television and cartoons would effectively become synonymous, and Hanna-Barbera became associated with television flicktoonry almost immediately, even allowing for Huckleberry Hound, Quick Draw McGraw, Yogi Bear, Magilla Gorilla and Peter Potamus being originally produced for syndication and The Flintstones and The Jetsons being prime-time product for ABC, the former not ending its prime-time run until 1966.

Yowp summarises thus before going into a review of network schedules for Saturday mornings between 1951-52 and 1965-66 (which, until 1955, included the ill-fated DuMont network, whose only Saturday-morning foray was in the 1952-53 season):

Hanna-Barbera’s success on Saturday mornings did two things. One, is it saved the studio. Networks weren’t interested in prime-time cartoons because they attracted the wrong demographics. But they attracted the right ones on Saturday morning and H-B could make shows within a sponsor’s budget. And two, it spurred a Saturday morning cartoon industry that stayed around until the networks realised they could make—and own—their own Saturday morning live-action shows, like Saved by the Bell.

(Which the networks had previously been prevented from because of the FCC’s Financial Interest and Syndication Rules, which prevented the networks from profiting directly off syndicated reruns of old network shows.)

Interesting to note: In the early part of the 1955-56 season, NBC’s Saturday-morning programme included The Paul Winchell Show at 10:30 Eastern; Winchell, then a ventriliquist, would later become one of 3400 Cahuenga’s most famous vocal artists, notably as Dick Dastardly in Wacky Races and its later hiveoff, Dastardly and Muttley in Their Flying Machines ... and on The Banana Splits as Fleagle, the bowtie-wearing beagle and the only one of the quartet not wearing sunglasses. Later in the season, Winchell’s slot on NBC would see reruns of I Married Joan, as if the move of its children’s chestnut Howdy Doody to Saturday mornings at 10 Eastern wasn’t good enough (recall that “Buffalo Bob” Smith, Howdy Doody’s host, had a heart attack in the late summer of 1955 as forced him off the air for some while).

Note also from the schedules that, until the 1964-65 season came along, network service usually ended on Saturdays between 12:30 and 2 Eastern, depending on the network, whence such went to local stations until early evening; it was not until 1968 that NBC and CBS would introduce Saturday-evening editions of their dinnertime news bulletins.

0 notes

garynsmith · 7 years

Text

Robots and real estate: Why agents have nothing to fear

http://ift.tt/2u76fGj

A friend of mine sent me an article about robots replacing real estate agents. The article described an Alexa-type object that answered questions about a property at an open house. Cute. A bit of a gimmick that might distract from the home, but cute nonetheless.

I recently bought an Alexa for my son’s 18th birthday. It’s a fun toy. It can answer a lot of questions — some correctly and others with wit. But after a few weeks, Alexa is lying uncharged in a bookcase.

The novelty wore off. It wasn’t taking on any tasks that we couldn’t do more efficiently.

The rise of the robots?

The idea that machines or technology can take over human chores fascinates me. I loved watching “The Jetsons” when I was a kid.

One of the many fun aspects of my position as a sales manager at a tech-based real estate startup is having a meeting (virtually) with our developers.

We utilize technology to streamline complex, paper-driven and time-consuming tasks, and we’ve only just begun.

Your online reputation will make or break your business

Foster a thriving business by cultivating and distributing glowing client recommendations READ MORE

The potential for technology to impact the real estate industry is both mind-boggling and happening quickly.

However, there’s a limit to how far technology can take us. In other words, the agent’s role as real estate adviser, advocate and coordinator is safe. Technology provides fantastic data to aid in decision making.

However, we, as agents, know that data is not the only driver affecting an emotional decision, such as purchasing or selling a home.

More ambiguous and less quantifiable drivers also influence the decision to buy or sell, such as the client’s’ long-term financial plans, how they entertain, their lifestyle, etc.

There is a nuance in advising clients and negotiating on their behalf that cannot be recreated by artificial intelligence.

Examples of human-driven tech

These are a few examples of great technology that won’t do more than aid a real estate agent in buying and selling homes.

Zestimates

As any good appraiser or real estate agent will tell you, estimating the value of a home requires a site visit. Factors such as renovations, views and condition can significantly alter the value of a property.

We use some great comparable market analysis (CMA) tools, but never provide an estimated value without visiting with the homeowner in their home.

CRMs

We love our customer relationship management (CRM). It greatly enhances our outreach and our ability to get referral business and to convert inbound leads.

However, it does require a human touch. An email outreach campaign is minimally effective if it is not combined with telephone calls and face-to-face appointments.

In addition, our agents check their dashboard before each email is sent out to ensure that it is consistent with past communication.

Robocalling

Has this ever happened to you?

Your phone rings from an unfamiliar number in your ZIP code – it could be your next buyer or seller, so you answer the phone immediately.

“Hello.”

Silence.

“Hello?”

Silence.

“Hello?” (Suppressing exasperation.)

Silence followed by “Hello. I’m calling about your credit card account …”

“Sorry to interrupt. Please remove me from your call list.”

That conversation, which I have had more than once, is a sure sign that I am the victim of mass-marketing. Knowing that I am being robo-called makes me feel inhuman, so I prefer not to engage.

Virtual staging

Buyers often cannot visualize furniture in an unfurnished room. They cannot conceptualize the size or dimensions of their sofa or bed in an empty space.

Virtual staging seems like a less expensive solution to this problem than actual staging. However, in reality, virtually staged images generally appear a smidgen off-kilter.

3-D tours

We have a lot of vendors sending us their 3-D tours and trying to get our business.

Some of them make me feel nauseated (not a good connection to make with a potential home). Even those that move more like a carousel then a roller coaster don’t provide more information than a good floor plan and excellent photos.

The true value of an agent

I have a theory that most jobs look much easier from the outside than they really are. We don’t see the hours of curriculum planning and lesson preparation that teachers do when they’re not in front of their students or the hours of research a doctor conducts when he or she is not with a patient.

Likewise, there’s so much preparation that a real estate agent does that doesn’t take place in front of the client.

I’ve often heard people say, “I’m going to get my real estate license, so I can make extra money on weekends. I could do an open house and make a 3 percent commission.”

As real estate professionals, we understand all of the work that goes into landing that exclusive and preparing a listing and an open house. Our job is not just hosting an open house and answering questions, like a robot could, but also knowing when to provide the information and to whom.

Technology is only as good as the people implementing it.

I buy groceries online as it’s a great time-saver. However, if the person filling my order misreads an item or if it wasn’t described properly in its online description, then I don’t receive the order that I wanted, and I still have to stop at the grocery store.

Let’s embrace the progress that technology brings us. Let’s use our imagination like the creators of “The Jetsons.” And let’s remember that the purpose of technology is to provide humans with more information and make us function more efficiently, not to make us obsolete.

Joan Kagan is a sales manager/licensed associate real estate broker for Triplemint in New York City. Connect with her on LinkedIn, Facebook or Twitter.

from Inman http://ift.tt/2u6U2kF via IFTTT

0 notes