Aqueduct » Content is still king

Content is still king

Posted by amy on April 6th, 2007 filed in Blogging about blogs, new media

or in this case, queen. This may be one of the most innovative websites I’ve run across in a while. The author is trying to sell something, something I didn’t even know I wanted before I clicked on to her page, and at the end, I couldn’t wait to have it.

Click on over, I dare you.


6 Responses to “Content is still king”

  1. Southview Says:
    April 7th, 2007 at 7:22 am

    Sorry it took so long getting here but I couldn’t figure out how to get to the comments. Soooo continue!

  2. Southview Says:
    April 7th, 2007 at 7:25 am

    AMY…..The problem starts when a State or City base your property value on the preceived value of your neighbors property and the price you possibility could realize if you sold your property. The value should be based on the actual historical sale amount not on a preceived amount. There should also be a longivity element involved. Your taxes should be based on Your property alone. When you sell, than the value is adjusted acording to the equity realized in the sale.

  3. Tom_B Says:
    April 8th, 2007 at 1:18 pm

    Wow, that’s a really terrific site. It made me laugh. It made me want to keep clicking. I don’t know that it’s going to make me click the BUY button right away, but I’ll certainly keep it in mind, and be more likely to pick up the item if I run across it in the real world.

    This sort of marketing is tricky; it’s entirely too easy to shoot past compelling and engaging and land somewhere in the demilitarized zone between overbearing and pretentious. She pulled it off, though.

  4. DWPittelli Says:
    April 8th, 2007 at 6:40 pm

    Southview,

    If you want a Senior discount that’s one thing. I wouldn’t vote for it, but at least it’s straightforward. Your preferred policy, based on purchase price, has major added drawbacks. Notably, no one who’s been in one place for a while ever wants to move.

    So people live farther from work than is ideal, meaning longer commutes and more congestion than otherwise. That is, if you change jobs, you might want to move closer to that job, but won’t if there would be a big tax increase.

    Another problem: People usually want a bigger house after they have kids. They will be penalized for such a move. Others get smaller houses when their kids grow up. This makes sense in terms of maintenance and other costs, frees up money for the downsizers, and also frees up big houses for the families having kids. But they too will be penalized for such a move.

    And of course, with the average house taxed based on an older (lower) value, the tax rate will of course have to be higher. So everyone just starting out will be screwed. With few willing buyers, house sales and values will also tumble. The old owners will likely take in tenants or rent out the whole house rather than sell, or make under-the-table deals with their relatives, or swap houses with other owners, and other games will ensue if these moves are not openly allowed at the old, lower tax valuation.

  5. Southview Says:
    April 9th, 2007 at 7:21 am

    DWPittelli….what ever it takes to protect what people worked their whole life for….after all isn’t that the objective of working in the first place…to acquire enough wealth and equity to be able to retire and enjoy what life has to offer?

  6. Jenn Says:
    April 12th, 2007 at 11:41 am

    I too looooved that soft sell! Wow!

Leave a Comment