On Friday, April 7, 2023 at 11:24:19 AM UTC-4, Paul S Person wrote:
> On 6 Apr 2023 20:42:30 GMT, Jaimie Vandenbergh
> <jai...@usually.sessile.org> wrote:
>
> >On 6 Apr 2023 at 20:13:21 BST, "Dimensional Traveler"
> ><dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On 4/6/2023 9:14 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
> >>> On Wed, 5 Apr 2023 14:28:50 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
> >>> <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 4/5/2023 8:41 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
> >>>>> On Tue, 4 Apr 2023 16:21:42 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
> >>>>> <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 4/4/2023 2:33 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> >>>>>>> Dimensional Traveler <dtr...@sonic.net> writes:
> >>>>>>>> On 4/4/2023 9:40 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Dimensional Traveler <dtr...@sonic.net> writes:
> >>>>>>>>>> On 4/4/2023 7:49 AM, James Nicoll wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> In article <642c35d3.949613562@localhost>,
> >>>>>>>>>>> Bice <eichlertwothed...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 10:31:08 -0700, Alan <nuh...@nope.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2023-03-30 09:53, Bice wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The switch will never happen though because teams would have to remove
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the first couple rows of seats and lose the corresponding ticket
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> income.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> You need to think that last statement through...
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> In what way? Switching to a bigger rink would mean removing a couple
> >>>>>>>>>>>> hundred of the highest-priced seats, and hockey is still a sport that
> >>>>>>>>>>>> relies fairly heavily on gate income. Yes, there would still be
> >>>>>>>>>>>> rinkside seats, but there would be fewer seats overall.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> You might be able to recover the lost seats by raking the seats
> >>>>>>>>>>> more steeply.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> That doesn't increase the square footage available to put seats in.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> It does, however pack the seats more densely in the same area, thus
> >>>>>>>>> increasing seating capacity.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> How? (Not a snide question, honestly curious.)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> By pythagorean theorem. The hypotenuse gets longer.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> That doesn't sound right to me. The seats aren't put on an inclined
> >>>>>> plane (the hypotenuse) but on the horizontal "steps". The horizontal
> >>>>>> space available is the same whether stepped or not.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The horizontal space does stay the same. As does the horizontal size
> >>>>> of the seats.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So, for that matter, does the vertical space. As does the vertical
> >>>>> size of the seats.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> But the seats are not on the vertical plane. They are on the
> >>>>> hypotenuse, so the number of seats depends on the length of the
> >>>>> hypotenuse divided by the vertical size of the seats.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In effect, the seats are on terraces carved out of the hypotenuse.
> >>>>
> >>>> _
> >>>> |_
> >>>> |_
> >>>> |_
> >>>> |_
> >>>> |_
> >>>>
> >>>> _
> >>>> |
> >>>> |_
> >>>> |
> >>>> |_
> >>>> |
> >>>> |_
> >>>> |
> >>>> |_
> >>>> |
> >>>> |_
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> ___________
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Which one of those three has the most space available for seats.
> >>>
> >>> You are missing the point:
> >>>
> >>> *_
> >>> |
> >>> *_
> >>> |
> >>> *_
> >>>
> >>> vs
> >>> _
> >>> |
> >>> _
> >>> |
> >>> _
> >>> |
> >>> _
> >>>
> >>> producing /four/ seats occupying the same horizontal space of /three/
> >>> seats.
> >>>
> >>> The ledges are narrower. And so are the seats. Or the space between
> >>> rows. Or both.
> >>
> >> Which has NOTHING to do with how steep the slope they are on is. You
> >> can increase the density of seating exactly the same on a non-stepped,
> >> horizontal surface.
> >
> >Not for seated people. Butt to knee distance limits horizontal packing.
> >Raise the tier behind so their knees are over the front tier's heads and
> >you can squeeze them tighter.
> He's got a bee in his bonnet and can't hear anything else.

I nominate this sub thread for The Most Pointless Argument on
Rasfw this Year Award.

Just drop it, both of you. You're making yourselves look stupid.

Pt

On 8/04/23 03:29, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Fri, 07 Apr 2023 14:06:39 GMT,
> eichlertwothedigitnotspelled@comcast.net (Bice) wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 6 Apr 2023 21:44:25 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2023-04-06 05:36, Bice wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 4 Apr 2023 16:38:54 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2023-04-04 07:39, Bice wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 10:31:08 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2023-03-30 09:53, Bice wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The switch will never happen though because teams would have to remove
>>>>>>>> the first couple rows of seats and lose the corresponding ticket
>>>>>>>> income.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You need to think that last statement through...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In what way? Switching to a bigger rink would mean removing a couple
>>>>>> hundred of the highest-priced seats, and hockey is still a sport that
>>>>>> relies fairly heavily on gate income. Yes, there would still be
>>>>>> rinkside seats, but there would be fewer seats overall.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm honestly puzzled on what you're saying I need to rethink.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- Bob
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Because the seats they would lose would be the CHEAPEST seats.
>>>>>
>>>>> What?
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, What? You know the rinkside seats aren't the cheap seats,
>>>> right?
>>>
>>> You know whichever seats BECOME the rinkside seats would have their
>>> price bumpt up, right?
>>
>> Which in no way changes the fact that they'd still lose a couple
>> hundred high-priced seats.
>
> Well, let's see:
>
> before change, say, 600 high-priced seats
>
> 100 seats removed
>
> 100 seats repriced to high-priced
>
> 600 high-priced seats still exist
>
> Nope, they won't, in the only sense that matters.
>
> Physically, of course, the seats would be gone. But that's not the
> issue here.
>
>>>>> You don't think that they can figure out that if the front row seats get
>>>>> taken out...
>>>>>
>>>>> ...then the people who paid for those seats will pay the same amount for
>>>>> the seats that become the new front row?
>>>>>
>>>>> Hence, the need to rethink how it would work.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Have a look at the seating chart for the Wells Fargo Center in Philly,
>>>> specifically the Flyers layouts:
>>>>
>>>> https://www.wellsfargocenterphilly.com/events/seating
>>>>
>>>> Now expand the rink and take out the first few rows of the 100 level.
>>>> Yes, there would still be rinkside seats, but a big chunk of the most
>>>> profitable seating would gone. I guess you're saying people up in the
>>>> 200 level would be happy to pay more for the nosebleed seats just
>>>> because part of the 100 level disappeared.
>>>
>>> Nope. Because they'd shift the pricing out to match the new layout.
>>
>> OK, whatever, you're obviously just arguing to hear yourself argue at
>> this point. If you want to believe that removing hundreds of
>> high-priced seats from an arena would not affect ticket income in any
>> way, go ahead.
>
> That's a different assertion. But (using the example above) adding
> another 100 seats way up in the clouds would produce the exact same
> number of seats, and the pricing adjustments don't have to stop with
> the highest-cost seats.

Back to the Lowpotenuse theory or trolling?

>
> If they are physically identical, it might even be possible to just
> /move/ the 100 high-priced seats to the uppermost level and reprice
> them accordingly. Then it wouldn't just be the same number of seats,
> but the very same seats. And how is that going to reduce income?

Was that comedy or what?

On Friday, 7 April 2023 at 17:07:44 UTC+1, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
> In article <94XXL.1959030$iU59.1...@fx14.iad>,
> Scott Lurndal <sl...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> >Paul S Person <pspe...@old.netcom.invalid> writes:
> >>On 6 Apr 2023 20:42:30 GMT, Jaimie Vandenbergh
> >><jai...@usually.sessile.org> wrote:
> >>
> >
> >>>>>>=20
> >>>>>> Which one of those three has the most space available for seats.
> >>>>>=20
> >>>>> You are missing the point:
> >>>>>=20
> >>>>> *_
> >>>>> |
> >>>>> *_
> >>>>> |
> >>>>> *_
> >>>>>=20
> >>>>> vs
> >>>>> _
> >>>>> |
> >>>>> _
> >>>>> |
> >>>>> _
> >>>>> |
> >>>>> _
> >>>>>=20
> >>>>> producing /four/ seats occupying the same horizontal space of /three/
> >>>>> seats.
> >>>>>=20
> >>>>> The ledges are narrower. And so are the seats. Or the space between
> >>>>> rows. Or both.
> >>>>=20
> >>>> Which has NOTHING to do with how steep the slope they are on is. You
> >>>> can increase the density of seating exactly the same on a non-stepped,
> >>>> horizontal surface.
> >>>
> >>>Not for seated people. Butt to knee distance limits horizontal packing.
> >>>Raise the tier behind so their knees are over the front tier's heads and
> >>>you can squeeze them tighter.
> >>
> >>He's got a bee in his bonnet and can't hear anything else.
> >
> >If they couldn't change the rake, they'll likely just use narrower
> >seats to pack more into the same horizontal space anyway, or up the
> >prices across the board to accomodate any lost revenue, or add a row
> >along the refreshments concourse, et alia.
> Or they could hire smaller players to solve the original problem of making
> the play surface proportions larger.

But that's the same as having the larger play surface,
but the players are farther away.

Still, making the players smaller is good science fiction
at least. It's also been offered as an remedy for over
population, by making the entire population smaller.
As in, less tall. Etc.

(Not for Canada specifically. But why not!)

Bice wrote:

> Have a look at the seating chart for the Wells Fargo Center in Philly,
> specifically the Flyers layouts:
>
> https://www.wellsfargocenterphilly.com/events/seating

Here's my view. By "rinkside" I naively mean it literally, "the front row," where, if the player is shoved up against the glass, you can count his teeth. By even the second row, the immediacy begins to lose its immediacy, and is, by that amount, less desirable. Comes some distance back where a player on the glass is not strikingly closer than a player in the middle of the ice. You would begin to think of your distance as from the center rather than from the closest edge. If the detail map of the lower level is to scale, the colors change from bright to darker about half the rink width away, which looks about right to me. Those seats gain no advantage of being closer to the action (when the action happens to come closer to them), and would see no change in value with a change in the size of the rink.

What kind of numbers are we talking about? Is the NHL rink officially 200 by 85 feet and the Olympic one 60 by 30 meters? Because it sounds wonderful to say it that way. 60 meters is close enough to 200 feet (98.4% of it), so the 30 meters is about 100 feet, or 15 feet wider, or 4.5 meters, so 2.25 meters out from each side. How many rows is that? From my knees to the back of my desk chair here is 0.8m. I don't think we're going to get down to 0.7m to fit three rows in the first 2.25m, so I'm going to be generous with room in front of my knees for someone to pass down the row and give it a meter per row, and we lose the first two. The rink isn't getting any longer, so it's a nice, straight length of 60 meters. Between the centerpoint of the armrests of my chair is 0.5m so 120 seats that we're zamboniing over, two rows, on each side, so 480 total, if we don't think about the need for aisles[1]. The seats at the ends of the rink have not moved, so this section, 85 feet wide, is unchanged in price, the 60 meter swath along the sides has each row taking the place of the row two ahead of it, as Alan would say, out to the walls, for me, to the point of diminished returns, half the rink width, or 15 meters, or 15 rows back.[2]

Now we add seats, around the corners where the alongside rows meet the across rows. I'm basing this on a sheet of graph paper, despite the fact that we're in the area between approximating it with a square grid and approximating it with the perimeter of circles[3]. The widening of the rink adds two meter-wide boxes (each holding two seats) to each corner of the rows at the end of the rink. Moving down this row, (pardonme, excuseme,) we come to the corner box which we hadn't counted as alongside or across (and which somehow holds two seats a half-meter wide and meter deep despite them being at some angle to the 1-meter grid; this probably has something to do with the corners being rounded, which I'm otherwise ignoring,) we'll turn these seats to face down the ice; we next come to a meter block (holding two seats) that was part of the second row alongside, now part of the first row across; then we come to a former third row block, now the new corner to the new front row alongside. The second row goes the same, with an additional block (of two seats) before we get to the old corner and an additional block (of two seats) after we turn the new corner. Generally, the corner of row N will have N*2seats still in the same row, 2 seats formerly thought of as one row back, and N*2 seats formerly thought of as two rows back. For the difference they make in income, the first factor does not enter in, the second factor depends on the difference in price, call it d$(N, N+1), the third on the d$(N, N+2). d$ is probably a lookup table.

4 * (the sum as N goes from 1 to 15 of ( 2*d$(N, N+1) + 2*N*d$(N, N+2)))

to be revenue neutral that would have to equal the seats lost:

2 * ( 120*cost of row16 + 120*cost of row17)

In the interest of getting this out of my head and into yours, let me try one pricing strategy: the difference in cost between rows is a constant. Hence the difference to jump two rows is twice that of one row. d$(n, n+1)=D$, a constant. d$(n, n+2)=2*D$.

Factoring 8 out of both sides of the equation to make it more compact:

Sum as N=1->15 (D$ + N*(2*D$)) = 30*(cost row17 + (cost row17 +D$))

The left is 255*D$, the right 60*cost row17 + 30*D$.
The cost to move one row closer is 21% the cost of a 17th row ticket, which I admit sounds high. Sitting in the 12 row costs twice as much, the 7th three times as much, in the second row, four times as much. And that was the assumption most favorable to making money. The rows further back, where we are adding the most seats, have a smaller difference between them, which should be reflected in smaller price differences.

[1] The color-coded seating prices were made manifest in the old Riverfront Stadium in Cincinnati, with the plastic of the seats and backs infused with color and the metal assembly painted to match. The isobars of interest are a bit different for baseball, mostly focused on the diamond, but the outfield keeps seating away from two sides of it. Red seats were in the highest ring all the way around the stadium, Blue a balance of value/view, Yellow and Green also available. When the Reds were sold to an owner with a reputation for cheapness, there was a joke made about tickets being sold for the "Gray Seats," that is, being allowed to sit on the steps of the aisles.

]2] I'm basing the change from row pricing to bulk pricing on the idea of diminished perspective, or the difference in distances across the field of play. On the old rink the line would be 42.5 feet from the sidelines, or 13 rows back. I'm not going to recalculate to take this into account. (Have I created a proper model by this approach? Take an extreme case: reduce the size to 6m square; of course, we reduce the teams to one player each, and demand they remove their skates -but not their gloves- when they fight; they'll be fighting so much they'd normally get sent to the penalty box, so we'll call this "boxing." By my calculation, only the first three meters, or three rows from the ring, get the special pricing. That doesn't seem quite right to me.)

[3] It's hard for me to say when approximating it with circles can take over. It's probably not to far from the actual back row that our 60m straight line of seats contains the arc around the center of the arena, but there's the way we start with a rectangle twice as long as it is wide. Five kilometers out, a rough oval 10,060 by 10,030 looks an awful lot like a circle, but take another point of view, a fan seated right behind the goal, who can't get over the fact that (unless the peculiarities of spherical geometry can do something) the approximating circle will always be 15 rows closer to the action than the actual seat.

--
-Jack

On 4 Apr 2023 12:13:55 GMT, ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>)
wrote:

>>(Besides there are NHL teams in Florida so why do you think 'being a
>>Southerner' gets you off the hook?)
>
>Well, FL, below Jacksonville, is not the South...

I did specifically use plural since the Florida Panthers play in an
outer suburb of Miami while the Tampa Bay Lightning.....

And while I may be on the west coast of Canada, I have been to Miami
(Miami and Vancouver are probably the two North American major cities
furthest apart) so you can reasonably assume I know where
Jacksonville, Orlando and Miami are.

In article <iur33i9jdcst45oijrltlrnubp3hib1d3h@4ax.com>,
The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
>On 4 Apr 2023 12:13:55 GMT, ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>)
>wrote:
>
>>>(Besides there are NHL teams in Florida so why do you think 'being a
>>>Southerner' gets you off the hook?)
>>
>>Well, FL, below Jacksonville, is not the South...
>
>I did specifically use plural since the Florida Panthers play in an
>outer suburb of Miami while the Tampa Bay Lightning.....
>
>And while I may be on the west coast of Canada, I have been to Miami
>(Miami and Vancouver are probably the two North American major cities
>furthest apart) so you can reasonably assume I know where
>Jacksonville, Orlando and Miami are.

I'm not sure what we're arguing about here, if we are arguing.

My point was that areas of Florida south of Jacksonville are not
in "The South" as that part of FL has a different culture & history.
Both Miami & Tampa are not "Southern" cities.
--
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

On 9 Apr 2023 03:38:01 GMT, ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>)
wrote:

>In article <iur33i9jdcst45oijrltlrnubp3hib1d3h@4ax.com>,
>The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
>>On 4 Apr 2023 12:13:55 GMT, ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>>(Besides there are NHL teams in Florida so why do you think 'being a
>>>>Southerner' gets you off the hook?)
>>>
>>>Well, FL, below Jacksonville, is not the South...
>>
>>I did specifically use plural since the Florida Panthers play in an
>>outer suburb of Miami while the Tampa Bay Lightning.....
>>
>>And while I may be on the west coast of Canada, I have been to Miami
>>(Miami and Vancouver are probably the two North American major cities
>>furthest apart) so you can reasonably assume I know where
>>Jacksonville, Orlando and Miami are.
>
>I'm not sure what we're arguing about here, if we are arguing.
>
>My point was that areas of Florida south of Jacksonville are not
>in "The South" as that part of FL has a different culture & history.
>Both Miami & Tampa are not "Southern" cities.

More (1) reminiscing and (2) a Canadian getting snarky about somebody
who thinks he should know nothing at all about the US south.

For what it's worth, my late wife's cousin is now retired but spent
20+ years in Atlanta with Coco-Cola (before retirement he was a
commodities buyer for them) and his 3 youngest children were born
there. I'm pretty sure he's still there. I've been there for a
corporate course but didn't see him there. Had a darned good time in
Atlanta but was somewhat intimidated by the airport.

Among the things The Horny Goat wrote:

> Had a darned good time in
> Atlanta but was somewhat intimidated by the airport.

You've heard the joke that when you die and go to your final destination, they route you through Atlanta?

--
-Jack

In article <hvif3il74ifhbg9sa9kgl6p3q4l9ajgvec@4ax.com>,
The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
>On 9 Apr 2023 03:38:01 GMT, ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>)
>wrote:
>
>>In article <iur33i9jdcst45oijrltlrnubp3hib1d3h@4ax.com>,
>>The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
>>>On 4 Apr 2023 12:13:55 GMT, ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>)
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>>(Besides there are NHL teams in Florida so why do you think 'being a
>>>>>Southerner' gets you off the hook?)
>>>>
>>>>Well, FL, below Jacksonville, is not the South...
>>>
>>>I did specifically use plural since the Florida Panthers play in an
>>>outer suburb of Miami while the Tampa Bay Lightning.....
>>>
>>>And while I may be on the west coast of Canada, I have been to Miami
>>>(Miami and Vancouver are probably the two North American major cities
>>>furthest apart) so you can reasonably assume I know where
>>>Jacksonville, Orlando and Miami are.
>>
>>I'm not sure what we're arguing about here, if we are arguing.
>>
>>My point was that areas of Florida south of Jacksonville are not
>>in "The South" as that part of FL has a different culture & history.
>>Both Miami & Tampa are not "Southern" cities.
>
>More (1) reminiscing and (2) a Canadian getting snarky about somebody
>who thinks he should know nothing at all about the US south.
>
>For what it's worth, my late wife's cousin is now retired but spent
>20+ years in Atlanta with Coco-Cola (before retirement he was a
>commodities buyer for them) and his 3 youngest children were born
>there. I'm pretty sure he's still there. I've been there for a
>corporate course but didn't see him there. Had a darned good time in
>Atlanta but was somewhat intimidated by the airport.

In my flying days I got to the point where I kinda liked ATL. Of course
I never actually started or ended there, as a transfer point it was quite
nice and I got to the point where I had favorite shops. There was even
a decent bookstore where I picked up a fairly niche book listing and reviewing
all of (at that time) the Looney Tunes/Merrie Melody shorts.
--
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

Jack Bohn <jack.bohn64@gmail.com> writes:

> Among the things The Horny Goat wrote:
>
>> Had a darned good time in
>> Atlanta but was somewhat intimidated by the airport.
>
> You've heard the joke that when you die and go to your final destination, they route you through Atlanta?

Unless of course you've been naughty, in which case that airport *is*
your final destination...

On 13 Apr 2023 12:21:53 GMT, ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan
<tednolan>) wrote:

>In my flying days I got to the point where I kinda liked ATL. Of course
>I never actually started or ended there, as a transfer point it was quite
>nice and I got to the point where I had favorite shops. There was even
>a decent bookstore where I picked up a fairly niche book listing and reviewing
>all of (at that time) the Looney Tunes/Merrie Melody shorts.

Blue cover? I managed to pick that up in the nineties in one of the
London bookshops with a US imports section.

It was most likely "The Book Inn" on Charing Cross Road, which
incorporated "The Fantasy Inn" below ground (I got my copy of "The
World is Round" there). The staircase down had a sign "Please Mind
Your Head", with "the scanners are about" in smaller letters below.

It eventually burnt down <sniff>.

--
Jerry Brown

A cat may look at a king
(but probably won't bother)

On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 07:58:16 -0700 (PDT), "pete...@gmail.com"
<petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Sunday, April 16, 2023 at 2:05:21?AM UTC-4, Jerry Brown wrote:
>> On 13 Apr 2023 12:21:53 GMT, t...@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan
>> <tednolan>) wrote:
>>
>> >In my flying days I got to the point where I kinda liked ATL. Of course
>> >I never actually started or ended there, as a transfer point it was quite
>> >nice and I got to the point where I had favorite shops. There was even
>> >a decent bookstore where I picked up a fairly niche book listing and reviewing
>> >all of (at that time) the Looney Tunes/Merrie Melody shorts.
>> Blue cover? I managed to pick that up in the nineties in one of the
>> London bookshops with a US imports section.
>>
>> It was most likely "The Book Inn" on Charing Cross Road, which
>> incorporated "The Fantasy Inn" below ground (I got my copy of "The
>> World is Round" there). The staircase down had a sign "Please Mind
>> Your Head", with "the scanners are about" in smaller letters below.
>>
>> It eventually burnt down <sniff>.
>
>That brings back memories of Dark They Were, And Golden Eyed, just
>off Soho Square, in the. 70s.

In my mid-teens I used to go there every Saturday with like-minded
school mates. I just looked it up on Wikipedia and it lasted far less
time that I remembered.

Forbidden Planet is still going strong, but turned from books to
media&comics-centric a long time ago. Back in the 80s I remember
chatting with one of the founders Mike Lake while I was waiting in the
queue for a signing and he said that they lost money on such events
and only did them so they could get their own collections signed
before the public were let in. Those were the days!

I visited the London FP last weekend and was not impressed.

--
Jerry Brown

A cat may look at a king
(but probably won't bother)

On Sunday, April 16, 2023 at 2:05:21 AM UTC-4, Jerry Brown wrote:
> On 13 Apr 2023 12:21:53 GMT, t...@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan
> <tednolan>) wrote:
>
> >In my flying days I got to the point where I kinda liked ATL. Of course
> >I never actually started or ended there, as a transfer point it was quite
> >nice and I got to the point where I had favorite shops. There was even
> >a decent bookstore where I picked up a fairly niche book listing and reviewing
> >all of (at that time) the Looney Tunes/Merrie Melody shorts.
> Blue cover? I managed to pick that up in the nineties in one of the
> London bookshops with a US imports section.
>
> It was most likely "The Book Inn" on Charing Cross Road, which
> incorporated "The Fantasy Inn" below ground (I got my copy of "The
> World is Round" there). The staircase down had a sign "Please Mind
> Your Head", with "the scanners are about" in smaller letters below.
>
> It eventually burnt down <sniff>.

That brings back memories of Dark They Were, And Golden Eyed, just
off Soho Square, in the. 70s.

Pt

On 4/15/23 23:05, Jerry Brown wrote:
> On 13 Apr 2023 12:21:53 GMT, ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan
> <tednolan>) wrote:
>
[stuff deleted[

> It was most likely "The Book Inn" on Charing Cross Road, which
> incorporated "The Fantasy Inn" below ground (I got my copy of "The
> World is Round" there). The staircase down had a sign "Please Mind
> Your Head", with "the scanners are about" in smaller letters below.
>
> It eventually burnt down <sniff>.
>

The Fantasy Inn.

There was a motel in Lake Tahoe back in the 80's (or earlier) called the
Fantasy Inn. It was, um, "adult themed". My wife and I were up there for
Christmas with my family. We had gone to the casino, probably Harvy's,
and I did pretty well at blackjack and won $200 or so whole dollars. I
told her we should go to the Fantasy Inn to celebrate. It didn't happen.
Alas.

--
Dave Scruggs
Captain, Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
Sr. Software Engineer (Retired, mostly)

In article <4h3n3i176d2abt3c5ui7al9h2hioijdjst@jwbrown.co.uk>,
Jerry Brown <jerry@jwbrown.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>On 13 Apr 2023 12:21:53 GMT, ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan
><tednolan>) wrote:
>
>>In my flying days I got to the point where I kinda liked ATL. Of course
>>I never actually started or ended there, as a transfer point it was quite
>>nice and I got to the point where I had favorite shops. There was even
>>a decent bookstore where I picked up a fairly niche book listing and reviewing
>>all of (at that time) the Looney Tunes/Merrie Melody shorts.
>
>Blue cover? I managed to pick that up in the nineties in one of the
>London bookshops with a US imports section.

Yep. This one: https://tinyurl.com/53v8z3pz

There have been a handful of theatrical LT shorts since then, but fewer than
one might hope.

>
>It was most likely "The Book Inn" on Charing Cross Road, which
>incorporated "The Fantasy Inn" below ground (I got my copy of "The
>World is Round" there). The staircase down had a sign "Please Mind
>Your Head", with "the scanners are about" in smaller letters below.
>
>It eventually burnt down <sniff>.
>

By the time I finally found genre bookstores, the Internet had basically
made them moot.

--
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

On Monday, 17 April 2023 at 07:50:48 UTC+1, Jerry Brown wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 07:58:16 -0700 (PDT), "pete...@gmail.com"
> <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Sunday, April 16, 2023 at 2:05:21?AM UTC-4, Jerry Brown wrote:
> >> On 13 Apr 2023 12:21:53 GMT, t...@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan
> >> <tednolan>) wrote:
> >>
> >> >In my flying days I got to the point where I kinda liked ATL. Of course
> >> >I never actually started or ended there, as a transfer point it was quite
> >> >nice and I got to the point where I had favorite shops. There was even
> >> >a decent bookstore where I picked up a fairly niche book listing and reviewing
> >> >all of (at that time) the Looney Tunes/Merrie Melody shorts.
> >> Blue cover? I managed to pick that up in the nineties in one of the
> >> London bookshops with a US imports section.
> >>
> >> It was most likely "The Book Inn" on Charing Cross Road, which
> >> incorporated "The Fantasy Inn" below ground (I got my copy of "The
> >> World is Round" there). The staircase down had a sign "Please Mind
> >> Your Head", with "the scanners are about" in smaller letters below.
> >>
> >> It eventually burnt down <sniff>.
> >
> >That brings back memories of Dark They Were, And Golden Eyed, just
> >off Soho Square, in the. 70s.
> In my mid-teens I used to go there every Saturday with like-minded
> school mates. I just looked it up on Wikipedia and it lasted far less
> time that I remembered.
>
> Forbidden Planet is still going strong, but turned from books to
> media&comics-centric a long time ago.

It looked comics oriented in 1977 when Captain Britain
fought Slaymaster there :-) They had "Uncanny X-Men #137"
in the window, until Cap put Slaymaster through it.

> Back in the 80s I remember
> chatting with one of the founders Mike Lake while I was waiting in the
> queue for a signing and he said that they lost money on such events
> and only did them so they could get their own collections signed
> before the public were let in. Those were the days!
>
> I visited the London FP last weekend and was not impressed.

In Glasgow I think most of their book range is "character"
in the sense of Star Trek and Star Wars and Batman,
but there is a fair range of "real" science fiction at one
of the last standing pure-ish bookselling chains,
Waterstones. Or you could try W. H. Smith, which was
somewhat significant in the history of paperback books...
probably not in that particular location.

On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 14:20:18 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
<rja.carnegie@excite.com> wrote:

>On Monday, 17 April 2023 at 07:50:48 UTC+1, Jerry Brown wrote:

<snip>

>> I visited the London FP last weekend and was not impressed.
>
>In Glasgow I think most of their book range is "character"
>in the sense of Star Trek and Star Wars and Batman,
>but there is a fair range of "real" science fiction at one
>of the last standing pure-ish bookselling chains,
>Waterstones. Or you could try W. H. Smith, which was
>somewhat significant in the history of paperback books...
>probably not in that particular location.

I embraced The Dark Side and switched to Kindle over a decade ago.
Gallancz have released pretty much all their SF to eBook, so, for
example, I was able to get 95% of Bob Shaw's fiction for my recent
complete reread (For some reason only "Other Days, Other Eyes" wasn't
available but I had an old pb of that), and all his fanwriting is
available online.

I do still get books with extensive illustrations (especially "coffee
table" ones) in physical form.

I know some books may never be eBooks - one of these days I intend to
finish off "New Writings in SF" after a multi-decade break, so will
have to look on abebooks and so on for the ones I haven't already got.

--
Jerry Brown

A cat may look at a king
(but probably won't bother)

On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 08:15:51 +0100, Jerry Brown
<jerry@jwbrown.co.uk.invalid> wrote:

<snip>

>I was able to get 95% of Bob Shaw's fiction for my recent
>complete reread (For some reason only "Other Days, Other Eyes" wasn't
>available but I had an old pb of that)

And his final collection "Dark Night in Toyland" which I also had as a
pb.

I also had to get the coffee table book "Galactic Tours" off eBay.

--
Jerry Brown

A cat may look at a king
(but probably won't bother)

On Friday, April 7, 2023 at 4:01:00 PM UTC-4, pete...@gmail.com wrote:

[snip]

> I nominate this sub thread for The Most Pointless Argument on
> Rasfw this Year Award.
>
> Just drop it, both of you. You're making yourselves look stupid.

I'm a hockey fan but....

How would the larger surface affect Rollerball? :)

{Arenas that host ice hockey in Europe have a wider surface
and on average fewer seats.}

Colorado Springs ' late Broadmoor World Arena had the wider rink
(100 feet across) as does its replacement. Ginny Heinlein and RAH
would skate at the original. Colorado College Tigers played at the first
one, though now they have Robson Arena, on campus. Ice width is 85'
That's the NHL standard.

Heinlein wrote at least one skating-themed story but it wasn't SF.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poor_Daddy

The flying cave in "The Menace From Earth" s reminiscent of an
indoor skating rink with appropriate squinting.

--
Kevin R

On 16 Apr 2023 17:26:36 GMT, ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan
<tednolan>) wrote:

>By the time I finally found genre bookstores, the Internet had basically
>made them moot.

I dunno - when I went to London in 2016 I spent 200+ pounds on chess
books in a store on Baker street about 3 blocks from 221 Baker Street.

Had to pay 65 pounds in excess baggage to bring them home - but then
this place is considered almost cathedral-like amongst chess
bibliophiles. And 2016 is definitely Internet era.

On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 09:02:46 -0600, Joe Pfeiffer
<pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> wrote:

>Jack Bohn <jack.bohn64@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Among the things The Horny Goat wrote:
>>
>>> Had a darned good time in
>>> Atlanta but was somewhat intimidated by the airport.
>>
>> You've heard the joke that when you die and go to your final destination, they route you through Atlanta?
>
>Unless of course you've been naughty, in which case that airport *is*
>your final destination...

Actually I hadn't but then I'm in Vancouver which is probably the
North American city over a million population furthest from Atlanta.

We used to think of SeaTac (Seattle) and LAX in the same terms.

The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> writes:
>On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 09:02:46 -0600, Joe Pfeiffer
><pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> wrote:
>
>>Jack Bohn <jack.bohn64@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> Among the things The Horny Goat wrote:
>>>
>>>> Had a darned good time in
>>>> Atlanta but was somewhat intimidated by the airport.
>>>
>>> You've heard the joke that when you die and go to your final destination, they route you through Atlanta?
>>
>>Unless of course you've been naughty, in which case that airport *is*
>>your final destination...
>
>Actually I hadn't but then I'm in Vancouver which is probably the
>North American city over a million population furthest from Atlanta.
>
>We used to think of SeaTac (Seattle) and LAX in the same terms.

Neither are close to comparable with Atlanta. ORD, on the other hand....