The Lunatics Take Over – Yippee! February 11, 2000February 15, 2017 Spouse really getting on your nerves? Not that I want to encourage it (you can work it out! you can!), but check out: split-up.com. The bottom line from yesterday: If you inherit an IRA, be sure to tell your tax-preparer if estate taxes were paid on it after its owner died. This is a commonly overlooked potential deduction. And now . . . (drum roll, please) . . . Did you notice Calton — CN — first suggested here in August 13, 1998, at 60 cents a share? At that price it was a somewhat dicey but, I thought, interesting speculation. And what fun to be able to buy, say, 10,000 shares of a stock! (You might want to check with your broker before making trades like that. A discounter like Fidelity charges $200; one like Ameritrade charges $13.) A few weeks later — to my amazement (great minds think alike?) — Calton was acquired at $1.70 a share . . . sort of. That is, all its assets and liabilities were taken over, leaving just the public shell (itself of some modest value to someone looking to “go public” without having to go through all the effort and expense), and $1.70 or so a share in actual cash. You might think this would be one of the easier stocks to analyze: No assets, no liabilities, no business — just $1.70 a share in cash. (The company did have about $1.3 million in annual expenses for four employees and its office space. But that was matched by a four-year $1.3-million-a-year “consulting contract” with the acquiring company.) What might shares of such a stock be worth? If you guessed . . . “about $1.70?” . . . you would show your extraordinary naivete. Who wants actual cash money, an all but archaic concept, when you can have stock in an exciting money-losing company? And it wasn’t really cash, as I say, because you didn’t get your $1.70 a share directly — the company said you would have to wait 18 months before they distributed it to you, and that in the meantime, if opportunities arose, they might invest some or all of it and maybe not distribute it. My own theory was that, sure it was worth $1.70, give or take, because the cash was there, mostly in Treasury securities, earning interest, and the guy running the company had 11 million reasons not to blow it. That’s how many of the then roughly 28 million outstanding shares he owned (last I looked, more like 14 million). But this is called “value investing,” or some variation on value investing, and who wants that? So the market valued CN at 95 cents after announcement of this $1.70 deal, and I wrote about it again. Now, it seemed to me, though still not a sure thing (what ever is?), it was a seemingly low-risk way to make a very fat return within 18 months. And for the longest time, even after the deal closed, the stock was barely over a dollar. No one wanted it. Who wants to pay $1.10 for $1.70 in cash? Boring! Old-fashioned! Then the company quietly blew a bit of its cash on some money-losing Internet developer — with all due respect to the 62-year-old founder/CEO of Calton, he was a homebuilder, what did he know about the Internet? — and the few people following this stock on the Yahoo! message board were consumed with disgust. He was blowing our cash on stupid speculations! So the stock remained well under the value of its cash. But now the company has made a few more very modest Internet-related investments — a few hundred thousand dollars — and put an “e” in front of its name — eCalton. And maybe now, one thing and another, it still has $1.70 or so per share in cash (what with the interest it’s earned in Treasuries, plus purchasing some shares itself at less than $1.70 each, thus enhancing the value of the rest). The message boards have exploded, at least relative to what they were before, and people who seem to have no idea of any of this background are talking about “an Internet incubator” and “the next CMGI” — all this because this one-time homebuilder put a few million dollars into a couple of dot-com ventures. When a $45 million pot of cash was valued at $27 million, no one was interested. When it reached a valuation in excess of $45 million, it began to attract the attention of today’s savvy investor. Two days ago it closed at $3.50 a share, almost double the value of the cash. Yesterday, it jumped a further 34%, to 4-11/16 on volume of more than 2 million shares (nearly 10% of all the shares). I have no clue what it will do today, but especially if it goes up, I will continue to sell. (Let me hasten to advise newcomers to this column and remind veterans: the list of my investment failures is long and loathsome. I am not for a moment suggesting that my success with CN is typical. And of course, if I’m so smart, why didn’t I buy even more at 95 cents? And why did I begin selling at $1.75?) Two things are going on here, and I have no idea how to weight their relative importance. The first is that the winds of this crazy market have happened to blow our way, and, like a candy wrapper in the gutter, CN has suddenly got caught up in the draft. The people on the message boards are cheering for the stock like bettors around a craps table cheering on a lucky player. (I’ve never quite figured out how craps is played, but we’ve all seen the movie.) So, heck! Four is a small number. If the stock can be four, why can’t it be 10? Or 30! That’s still a small number compared to some. And splits! Don’t forget splits! The second thing going on is that you have a smart, capable guy who has $40 million or so to play with and a plan to build an Internet company of some kind, or at least to satisfy the market’s craving for such things — and who’s to say he won’t succeed? Maybe the $5 million or so he’s bet on a few Internet ventures has suddenly added $60 million to the company’s value. And maybe this is just the wee beginning. (I say the CEO is smart and capable. I’ve never met or spoken with him. But this seems a reasonable assumption based on his having built a successful American Stock Exchange homebuilder, which only tanked after he sold it to someone else; then came out of retirement to bring it back from the dead, which in fairly short order he did.) But can it be this easy? Back a few Internet start-ups, issue a few press releases, and add $60 million in value in a few short months, much of it yesterday? I hope so! I was buying my $1.70 wallets for 95 cents (why was anyone selling?); and I have been selling at prices ranging from $1.75 to $4 (why is anyone buying?). But I still have quite a few left, because through a combination of the market’s madness and Calton’s business savvy, who knows? These days, I guess anything is possible. (Executive summary: Do not buy this stock. But feel free to follow the drama — and to try to dope out what it may tell us, or not tell us, about the tenor of the times.)
Slightly Frightening E-Mails February 10, 2000January 28, 2017 You send me a lot of e-mail, most of it wise and witty. But not all. SCARIEST EMAILS OF THE MONTH Runner up: “hi how are you? i m a student physic university.what is your job?what are you like?what about you write me . thank you goodbye taylan” Winner: “Kindly do not reprint this inquiry as I would like it to remain confidential. My company [a well-known high-sales-fee mutual fund company], is co-sponsoring a research study called [something demographic] and we would like to have a financial writer or journalist ghost write two Wall Street Journal op-ed pieces on behalf of our senior executives that incorporate some of the more interesting results of the study. Would you be willing to undertake this project? This is a well-paid ghost writing assignment.” And while I’m on the topic of scary missives . . . SCARIEST SNAIL MAIL OF THE MONTH “Dear Mr. Tobias, It is the greatest privilege of my tenure as Chairman of the Republican Party to inform you that you’ve been selected to receive the Republican National Committee’s highest honor. Mr. Tobias, you have distinguished yourself as one of our strongest leaders by proudly standing firm in your support of our Republican Agenda, never wavering in your principles. It is therefore my distinct privilege to present you with your 2000 President’s Club Inaugural Platinum Card on behalf of every Republican leader nationwide . . . an exclusive honor offered only to an elite few selected for their specific service to the Republican Party.” WAS OUR 99.6% “WORST CASE” TAX BRACKET ON AN INHERITED IRA CORRECT? Last Friday’s column about Inheriting an IRA posited a worst case where, between estate tax and income tax on the withdrawals, a $1 million IRA could be subjected to $996,000 in taxes, leaving the grieving heirs a mere $4,000. A couple of you kindly pointed out that Less failed to take into account a deduction that would make this horrifying worst case slightly less horrifying. Less replies: “Yes, I ignored the possible estate tax deduction for income in respect of a decedent — which will amuse my students, since I teach that deduction in class. But since we were trying to come up with the worst-case scenario, it is worth noting that 80% of the estate tax deduction will be lost if the taxpayer’s Adjusted Gross Income is high enough. Thus, only $120,000 of the $600,000 estate tax will be deductible in the worst case, resulting in a reduction of the income tax of only $120,000 x 39.6% = $47,520. So the worst case scenario from a federal point of view is not $996,000 in taxes, as I suggested, but “only” $948,480. Yet that doesn’t include state taxes, so the $996,000 may not be far off, in the worst case, after all!”
Explosive Cooking News February 9, 2000February 15, 2017 Bruce Bouts, MD: “Re: Cooking Like a Guy™ — a warning. Some may be tempted to cook an egg in haste by nuking (microwaving) it. Never nuke an (uncracked) egg!!! They explode. Saw an uncomfortable bachelor while I was in Residency a few years back who had done just that. He received a faceful of second degree burns.” The pain! The embarrassment! Talk about egg on your face. And in a similar vein . . . Steve Gilbert: “You probably mentioned this (I somehow missed any prior discussion about heating beans in a can, but I can imagine you suggesting it), but it’s a good idea to open the can prior to heating. Minimizes explosions.” Well, of course, any guy knows you can’t put cans, or any metal in a microwave. And as one who long ago tried boiling a can of Spaghettios, I can tell you that the problem is less explosive than manipulative. That is, how exactly do you grab the incredibly hot can out of the boiling water and open it? I mean, OK, with the right tongs and asbestos kitchen mitts, I suppose it can be done — but what self-respecting guy has tongs or a kitchen mitt? Few pairs of pliers are sufficiently wide-jawed for the job. Plus you’re right — you could have bean juice spewing all over the kitchen, or even an explosion. (There is a small school of thought that rejects the comet theory for that massive crater in Siberia — was it 1908? — and suspects exploding beans.) Which is why I quickly learned to open the can first and allow it to bob in the boiling water, open end up. You just have to experiment to make sure it doesn’t tip over. Put two or three cans in at once, in a small pot, so it is geometrically impossible for any of them to tip over. Or do what I’ve come to do with age and increasing sophistication — just open the can and start eating. Who says beans have to be hot? Tomorrow: Was Our 99.6% “Worst Case” Tax Bracket on an Inherited IRA Correct?
Saving for College – Part II February 8, 2000February 15, 2017 A while back I suggested that Qualified State Tuition Programs — QSTPs — far outshine the so-called Education IRAs . . . and that of all the state plans, the one to be sure to look at, no matter where you live, is Indiana’s. It lets you put in far more money (in excess of $100,000, versus $500 a year in an Ed-IRA) and it is open to residents of all states, regardless of income (high-earners don’t qualify for Ed-IRAs) and regardless of where your kid or grandkid (or your butler’s daughter) winds up going to college. And you don’t lose control of the money when the child reaches college age. And you have good choices on how the money is invested. And more. It appears to be a very good deal. Mike Welsh: “I have been a participant in the Indiana College Savings Plan since the DOW was below 8,000. The fund has done almost nothing but lose in an age of widespread prosperity. ICSP has had to change vendors in this time (still without profit) and has refused to let me, as a dissatisfied client, talk at their meetings. I would very much like to reinvest elsewhere, but the fees to withdraw are prohibitive. I hope that your readers to not enter a similar trap.” Denise Neal: “I wrote to you before and I NEVER received a reply. I am the lady who invested $15,000 in The Indiana College Savings Plan and after over two years of RECORD HIGHS in the stock market my daughter’s fund showed a measly $403 in earnings. I even entered the fund into YOUR fund analysis link and it told me to DUMP it! Listen to me, Andy!! I went to a ‘simple’ Purdue ‘extension’ to study ‘Nursing’ … I certainly didn’t study ‘high finance’ at Harvard and even I can tell you that The Indiana College Savings Plan is nothing I would recommend to ANYONE! And to think when I called downstate they sent me a copy of your column and told me I would LOSE 10% if I chose to withdraw the money!!! I want to know just HOW I am supposed to pay for my daughters college with such paltry returns???” Well, yes. At the time Mike and Denise went into the plan, it was rotten, and certainly not recommended here. It was, in the words of my QSTP expert Less Antman, “an absolute piece of garbage.” But that was then. In March of 1999, their lousy investment adviser was replaced. They added an index fund option and, in June, significantly reduced their fees. I would not have advised someone to invest in the Indiana plan that existed prior to June 1999. We can all agree that the State of Indiana should have been ashamed of itself for the plan it used to have. In fact, I guess it was ashamed of itself — and so made radical changes. (Utah also had a terrible plan until very recently.) So now it’s a different story. As for the 10% penalty Denise refers to, it is not some Indiana cruelty, but a federal penalty for early withdrawal form such plans. And it is levied on the earnings only, so it would be $40 (10% of $403) plus, I think, a small processing fee, rather than something huge. But I wouldn’t advise withdrawing the money now that the plan’s been fixed. UTAH VERSUS INDIANA Meanwhile, another of you wrote in to say that Utah’s plan was actually better than Indiana’s. Lower expenses, for one thing. Well, Utah’s plan is good, too, and worth a look. But for now, we’ll stick with Indiana. (You can find information on all these plans at savingforcollege.com.) (1) The annual administrative fee in Indiana is 0.5%. In Utah, only 0.25% — but with an additional $25. For small savers, that extra $25 can actually make Utah more expensive. Only once they have more than $10,000 in the plan will Indiana’s costs begin to exceed Utah’s. And Utah’s plan specifically reserves the right to raise it’s annual fee to 0.5% plus an additional $50 at any time. Indiana has committed to its current fee structure. (2) Utah’s Vanguard Index Fund, at 0.06%, is clearly lower in cost than Indiana’s One Group Index Fund 0.36%. Indiana recently added a Vanguard bond fund to its list of choices, and might very well add more in the near future, but at the moment, this clearly is in Utah’s favor. (3) Indiana permits $30,000 more to be sheltered. (4) Utah requires the beneficiary to be 16 or younger when the plan is opened, while Indiana has no age restriction. Utah effectively requires the distribution of funds to start before the beneficiary reaches age 27, while Indiana will wait 17 more years (if I remember right). Indiana’s approach would allow a couple to start saving before the kids are born, by naming each other as beneficiaries and then rolling the plans over to the children, once they are born. A person may even be able to name himself beneficiary in the Indiana plan, while it is directly prohibited in the case of Utah. (5) Utah forbids the rollover of funds to another beneficiary once the original beneficiary enrolls in college (even then, the substituted beneficiary must be 16 or younger), so any leftover income following graduation will be penalized and the remainder taxed to the owner of the plan. You have to make absolutely sure you don’t save too much. Indiana allows rollover of any remaining funds following graduation to another beneficiary. Anyone who might want to help more than one child go to college and who isn’t capable of precisely determining the cost of college for each one will appreciate Indiana’s flexibility. (6) It isn’t fair to criticize Indiana’s more expensive investment alternatives, since Utah allows no choice among stock market mutual funds. With Utah, it’s an S&P 500 Index Fund — period. Small cap and international investing are more expensive, and Indiana should not be punished in a comparison with Utah for offering a unique fund-of-funds approach with a globally diversified portfolio. Someone who thinks that a portfolio exclusively invested in large U.S. stocks today might be dangerous will appreciate Indiana’s fund-of-funds choice. So Utah’s plan is excellent compared with other states, but Indiana’s, for many people, seems better still. Don’t forget, you can find information on all of these plans at savingforcollege.com. [See March 13, 2000 update: Indiana downgraded for poor customer service, administrative errors.] Tomorrow: Explosive Cooking News
Short Takes February 7, 2000January 28, 2017 MERGERS AND AGGLOMERATIONS Bob Hendel: “The link in a column you had last month about the AOL/Time merger didn’t work and I’d really like to read your comments on The Day They Couldn’t Fill the Fortune 500. Could you fix that?” Oops. Fixed.. LDL ALERT Rob Schoen: “You write one measly of your wittiest columns in months about cheeseburgers, and somebody has to remind you about a coronary bypass? What’s this world coming to? Oh, the fat! Oh, the calories! Oh, the cholesterol! . . . Oh, shut up!” FREE MONEY! Brooks Hilliard: “Regarding free cash, check out: Signupmoney.com. It lists all the sites that offer cash to sign up as well as other offers. Includes all those on Gomez (which is also a great site).” And don’t forget to get your free $20 by opening a free bank account at X.com. (I get $10 if you do, or did until I reached the $1,000 limit — thanks.) As crazy Internet promotions go, this one’s not so crazy. X.com is potentially a very efficient financial institution — no bricks, no mortar, no Superbowl ads. If it costs them $30 to open an account . . . $20 to you and $10 to the referrer . . . that’s $30 million for 1 million customers. Less than the cost of a nicely outfitted corporate jet. Hmmm, let’s see: we can buy the jet or we can have 1 million new customers. Tough choice. YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH I caught the last hour of Tom Cruise / Jack Nicholson’s A Few Good Men on TV last night. With a really good movie, I tend to stay somewhat transfixed at the end, watching the credits roll. Did you know who the “key grip” was on A Few Good Men? Jeffrey Kluttz. (And I’m here to tell you that, to my untrained eye, at least, he did a great job.) QUICKBROWSE SENSIBILITIES A friend: “I read recently that you are a financial backer in Quickbrowse. This is an excellent service. One suggestion. Some may find the Quickbrowse channel button labeled Gays/Lesbians offensive. May I suggest, that you and Quickbrowse consider the more politically correct non-offensive button title of ‘Lifestyles.’ I am certain that certain groups would refuse to use Quickbrowse otherwise. What do you think?” I think they should find a different service. Not to be insensitive to their concerns, any more than in 1958 I would have wanted to offend white patrons by allowing black ones in my restaurant, but c’mon — this is America. Also, as a practical matter, “hiding” it this way could lead them to be outraged when they accidentally clicked on it and discovered what it is. But I appreciate your thoughts, which obviously come from a good place. I just think there’s no way around it. Progress carries with it a certain amount of discomfort — and then it becomes pretty much ho-hum.
What Every Beneficiary Should Know About Her Dad’s IRA And the case for naming a charity the beneficiary, or else converting to a Roth IRA February 4, 2000February 15, 2017 You thought I was kidding when I mentioned, a while back, Canadians massing for an invasion of Maine? Thanks to Eric Jones for steering me to the latest information on Canada’s plans for world domination (“Be afraid,” advises Eric. “Be very afraid!”). Mark Kennet: “I had understood that heirs to an IRA can inherit the IRA as an IRA. In other words, they may rollover the inherited IRA into a new one, thereby avoiding tax until they begin withdrawal from the account. Is this correct?” The rules for IRA distributions are so complicated that any general statement is going to get me in trouble. Briefly, though — and with a huge assist from Less Antman, my Taoist tax-accounting guru — if someone dies before age 70 1/2 (when mandatory distributions are to begin), and the beneficiary is the deceased’s spouse, it can just be rolled to the spouse as their own IRA and continue from there. When the beneficiary is anyone else, however (such as a child, or the lifetime partner of a same-sex couple denied the right to marry), a rollover is not permitted. Instead, the IRA becomes a “beneficiary IRA,” and there are two choices: Start regular distributions over the life expectancy of the beneficiary, or else withdraw everything by the end of the fifth year following the death of the original owner. For example, if the owner of the IRA dies in 2000, the beneficiary must begin annual distributions over his or her life expectancy by December 31, 2001. If not, then he or she must withdraw the entire IRA by December 31, 2005. The life expectancy tables are part of the Internal Revenue Code and easy to download from the IRS Web site at http://www.irs.gov in Publication 590. A 50-year-old beneficiary has a 33.1 year life expectancy, and will divide the value of the IRA by 33.1 to determine the first distribution. In the following year, they divide the value of the IRA by 32.1, next 31.1, etc. If the owner had already begun mandatory distributions (died after reaching 70 1/2), then the beneficiary’s options vary widely depending on the elections made by the decedent — “and I would sooner register to vote as a Democrat,” cracks libertarian Less, “than try to explain them in a single e-mail.” But for those who need help with this, Less generously offers it. Just e-mail me the specifics of your situation and I will forward to Less. And of course it’s not just income tax you have to worry about with a decedent’s IRA. Say you are the beneficiary of a $1 million IRA, and there is no spouse, and thus no spousal exemption. (You are, say, the child, or the lifetime partner, of the deceased.) Worst case? $1 million increases the estate tax by $600,000, and withdrawal results in $396,000 federal income tax. That makes $996,000 in taxes, leaving $4,000 net. Unless there are state taxes — even more horrifying. It may certainly not be this bad. The first $675,000 of a person’s estate is entirely free of federal estate tax, and that exemption is slated to rise gradually to $1 million in 2006. (Separately, there is talk of increasing it to $5 million.) What’s more, the top 55% rate applies only to amounts in excess of $3 million. (Above $10 million, another 5% is added for a while to get even the first $3 million — taxed at rates rising quickly from 18% to 53% — up to the full 55% rate.) So for a $300,000 IRA, say, where the deceased’s other assets are modest, there may well be no estate tax on the IRA, only the income tax on withdrawals. But the bottom line is that IRAs were designed to be spent in retirement, not inherited. What’s left after the taxpayer and spouse die ought to go to charity if the decedents have enough wealth to be subject to estate taxes. For someone not inclined to give it to charity, it is a good idea to convert the IRA to a Roth IRA if possible, paying the income tax on the conversion. Paying that tax shrinks your wealth, and thus the eventual estate tax. And, once converted, withdrawals from the Roth IRA, whether by you or your beneficiaries, will be free of federal income tax. (If you’re not normally in the top tax bracket, consider spreading the conversion over several years to take maximum advantage of those lower-than-top rates.) Thanks, Less.
Mutual Fund Expenses Are a Drag February 3, 2000February 15, 2017 Jon: “Thanks for the pointer to X.com. And go to Gomez.com and click on banks to see all of the free money available. You can get $100 from USABancshares.com, just by opening and keeping at least $100 in an account for 90 days. They also have $50 offers from other banks, with similar balance and time requirements. Kirk Peterson: “As a novice investor just starting to build a portfolio, I have found your mutual fund cost calculator to be an extremely useful tool. However, I am a little puzzled by how much weight to give a more favorable ranking (like Morningstar) versus the higher costs of a mutual fund. For example, if a 104-lb. jockey is racing against a 95-lb. jockey, but the 104-lb jockey is the odds-on favorite (five stars vs. four stars), how should I factor in that information? “I have always been somewhat baffled by sports analogies, so that might have been my problem. But an alternative analogy didn’t resolve it for me either. I decided to think of your cost calculator analogy not in terms of horse racing, but in terms of drag queens racing to the Saks cosmetics counter during the annual end-of-year sale. But while the 98-lb. drag queen may seem to stand a better chance at making it to the good stuff ahead of the one weighing 325-lb., the latter still might be the more favorable contestant. For example, even though she may not be quite as light on her feet, she may be able to use her girth and weight to knock her competition out of the way in order to get to Lancôme first. Or she could get to the counter after the smaller queen but lure sales associates away not only with the potential for a much larger sale but with her much more fabulous appearance. Am I making this more complicated than it should be?” Possibly. As between a mutual fund with annual expenses and various handicaps of 1.04% (a 104-pound jockey) and another at .95% (95 pounds), I’d say — who cares? In this case, the difference is slight. And the same is true of Morningstar “stars,” which even Morningstar suggests are not all that predictive. If you’re looking for mutual funds, I would ordinary make it very simple. Namely, find a family of low-cost index funds and allocate your money over their offerings, both here and abroad, in some way that strikes you as sensible and easy to sleep with. When it comes to investing, weighty expenses and taxes will never improve your chances to get to the Lancôme counter ahead of the pack. Tomorrow: What Every Beneficiary Should Know About Her Dad’s IRA (and the case for naming a charity as the beneficiary, or else converting to a Roth IRA)
Friendly Suggestions February 2, 2000February 15, 2017 To Winbook Corp: When someone sends you a laptop computer December 27 to have its defective LS-120 disk drive replaced, and you say you will have it back by January 4, (a) do not have it back by January 13th instead and, (b) most particularly, do not just go ahead and “remaster the hard drive” — wiping out everything on it — without checking first. (Winbook’s customer service supervisor says it’s their policy is to get permission before wiping out a hard drive, and that, to show how sorry they are, and for any inconvenience, they will extend a $50 credit toward the purchase of a new $3,599 Winbook or, perhaps even better still, provide a free carrying case.) To the Airline Industry: When the bags from one flight don’t make it onto the connecting flight — they are still on the ground in Dallas, let’s say, when their owner is aloft on his connecting flight home — minimize the problem. The way it works now, all the bags from flight 1640 that were meant to get onto flight 1908 show up at flight 1908 only to see that — drat — flight 1908 is already gone. The passenger doesn’t know this, arrives at his destination (three hours late, at midnight), waits 45 minutes for all the bags to come off, finally despairs, and gets in line with the other passengers from flight 1640 whose bags missed getting on flight 1908 to fill out a lost-luggage form. Less than 2 hours after landing, he’s happily on his way, with the knowledge that when the next flight from Dallas arrives with his bag, it will be ferried over to his hotel or wherever he’s staying. The way it could work: When the baggage handler sees he’s missed the flight, he scans the luggage-tag bar codes with his wand and clicks something to indicate “oops, will put on next flight instead.” Through the miracle of computers — which are widely used in the airline industry today — a message gets relayed to the plane with a list of the affected passengers. A flight attendant goes to each with an apology and the “lost luggage form” normally filled out on the ground. The passengers fill them out in the air instead and gives them back to the flight attendant, who hands them all to the waiting gate agent when the flight arrives. You go home or to your hotel, straight from the plane, and the luggage is delivered just as it is now. You’re inconvenienced, but at least you didn’t have to wait for the luggage and then wait in line to fill out the claim form. And it should be easier for the airline, too, requiring less customer service labor rather than more. If there’s a worry that irate passengers will hijack the plane, the forms could be handed out just after landing. (“Welcome to Newark. Will passengers Smith, Wollensky, Abercrombie, and Fitch please grab delayed baggage forms as they exit the aircraft?”) But the best way to do it is on board, so people have plenty of time to fill out the forms and plan their next move. A free phone call would be nice, too. (“Honey? Come half an hour earlier and meet me at the departure ramp, because I won’t be stopping at baggage claim . . . but bring a coat and tie, too, will you?”) This won’t solve the problem of the bag meant for Sydney, Ohio, that gets loaded onto the plane for Sydney, Australia. But for an awful lot of other bags, it would work just fine. And the first airline that does it will get legitimate bragging rights. “Our baggage handling is the best in the business — even when, on rare occasion, something goes wrong.”
Important Things to Know February 1, 2000January 28, 2017 COOKING LIKE A GUY™ Allen Jones: “Just a reminder when it comes to beans or any other food item in a can: The label is flammable, so remove it BEFORE you put it on the stove top. And a lower heat or flame works best.” REGISTERING A WEB SITE Sergei Slobodov: “It looks like you overpaid by 133%, or $20, to reserve cookinglikeaguy.com (per last week’s column). You can register a dot-com domain name for $15 for one year through Dotster until February 15 ($25 thereafter), and it seems to be the lowest price among all registrars certified by ICANN. I guess domain names are a commodity now. Soon there will be a meta-registrar web site that would register your domain at the lowest rate by checking current ongoing prices and specials of all the registrars. And soon after that, domain name registration will finally become free, and you might even get a bonus toaster.” HAVING A PARTY? Try evite.com to handle the invites and RSVPs. By now, anyone without an e-address doesn’t deserve to be e-vited anyway. Oh, OK — invite them by phone or snail mail, but tell them this is the last time. LIVING TO 100 Last week I knocked a stupid site called deathclock.com. Want a much better idea of how long you’ll live? Take this quiz. (Thanks, Dan Goldberg.) INVESTING WELL WHILE YOU DO Yesterday I suggested that Allan S. consider an index fund less giddy, perhaps, than the S&P. Notes Jack Nettleton: “Vanguard has a fund tracking one of these less puffed up indices: its BARRA Value fund.” COOL TOOL OF THE WEEK Last week, according to the folks at traffick.com, it was our very own quickbrowse. In their words: “This useful Web-based tool performs the unusual task of stitching pages together to create Masterpages that allow you to gather all of your favorite sites on one page. To make this process even more efficient, you can bookmark these Masterpages or have them e-mailed to you. This ‘personalized browsing’ experience could very well revolutionize the way we browse the Web.” From Traffick.com’s mouth to Paul Allen’s ears. CORRECTIONS Don: “According to Judith Smrha’s web site, the quote attributed to J. P. Morgan was made by John Maynard Keynes.” Oops. Scott Nicol: “Actually, the PC was introduced in September ’81 [not “1982”], and the standard model had 16k and no disk drives [not two floppy drives]. You could buy a disk drive (and DOS), but without a disk drive you would use the cassette interface and cassette-basic, which was built into ROM. The first disk drive was single-sided, and stored 160k (DOS 1.0) or 180k (DOS 1.1 or higher). Most early PC’s were configured with one floppy and 64k. How do I know this? I was a geek just starting grade 9 when the PC came out, and my best friend got one at home a month later. The machine had 16k and one floppy. Later it was expanded to 704k (it is possible to get 704k on the original PC, you just had to be a geek to figure it out) and two floppies (one single-sided, one double-sided). I’m still a geek today.” Blessed are the geeks, for they have made the world amazing for the rest of us. Friday: What Every Beneficiary Should Know About Her Dad’s IRA (and the case for naming a charity as the beneficiary, or else converting to a Roth IRA)