define:redundant
define:superfluous
I agree with you that it was superfluous. I also still suggest that it is redundant, though, perhaps, still helpful to the unsuffistikated consoomer.
I’m probably splitting hairs, but I see a nuance with “redundant” as also being “the same (exact) thing”.
1 Like
Excerpt from doctor’s office voice mail message:
Maybe they randomly select a starting time from 11:15 to noon to take an hour lunch!?
I dunno . . . could be the data points needed to determine the conversion factor between a “normal minute” and a “New York minute” . . .
1 Like
I mean, doctors complain about what Insurance Companies reimburse them most the time. If it isn’t about $ they don’t care about numeracy? Not surprised.
From a voicemail I heard Sunday morning
(I was expecting to get them, was always intending to leave a message.)
Not an example but an article about it…kind of…
https://www.wsj.com/articles/consumers-percentages-marketing-study-11653506251
Even the article messed up:
1 Like
I’m still no good at percentages.
95% of the time, I’m pretty good with percentages.
The other 8% of the time, things can get a little dicey.
3 Likes
Obligatory Simpsons vid:
1 Like
1 Like
Hurdle to Broad Adoption of E.V.s: The Misperception They’re Unsafe
May 5, 2022 10:00AM
Though these fires generated headlines, E.V. angst appears to be unwarranted. AutoInsuranceEZ studied the frequency of fires — from all causes, including collisions — in automobiles in 2021. It found that hybrid vehicles, which have an internal combustion engine and an electric motor, had the most fires per 100,000 vehicles (3,475), while vehicles with just an internal combustion engine placed second (1,530 per 100,000). Fully electric vehicles had the fewest: 25 per 100,000. These findings were based on data from the National Transportation Safety Board and the Bureau of Transportation Statistics.
There are roughly 270M passenger cars registered in the US last year. Since the vast majority are ICE cars that seems like an awfully lot of car fires.
1 Like
New York Times screwed up a stat? Shocking.
Good article.
“Regardless of whether you drive a Rivian, a Prius, or a Cutlass Supreme donk, your car probably won’t ever catch fire. But if you still want to wear Nomex underpants, we’re not gonna stop you.”
:ctm: that was my first car! …oh, wait. It was a Cutlass Sierradonk. Nevermind.
My dad once was at the grocery store and the PA system announced “Would the owner of a blue station wagon please meet the fire department at your parking space where your car is on fire” and it turned out it was his car. Car was a total loss, which was probably like $3000 at the time.
1 Like
You might note that their statistics were against the number of sales, not against registered vehicles.
I agree that this article should be called out, but not necessarily for this so much as how they’re pulling “car fires” vs. “sales” . . . if a car sold (new) 8 years ago had a fire last year, is that fire counted against the sales last year or the sales of 8 years ago?
For those not familiar with donk cars, worth a google. SFW. I used to see them in Houston fairly often.
1 Like
I’ve seen “mis-pricing” such as that at Target quite a bit*.
*at least once before.