In the years since, my Dad and I have found we have a lot in common. As business owners, we both deal with clients. But I think a lot of people wouldn’t recognize the similarity in our businesses: my Dad, a contractor, deals in “real things”, whereas my wares are purely virtual. When someone pays to have an addition put on their home, they can see the lumber and drywall that they’re paying for; these are physical goods that were clearly manufactured, shipped and assembled. Most people see the direct relationship between the money they pay, and the goods they receive.

When things get virtual, the relationship between money and goods becomes more tenuous. Where my dad makes something from nothing, I, well, make nothing from nothing. Web sites, logo designs, magazine articles and the rest of it are nothing more than bits on a computer. One has only to look at the proliferation of music and software theft on the Internet to appreciate the value that many people place on virtual goods.

But the truth is, my business is incredibly similar to my dad’s. Through the use of labour and materials, we both produce finished products to our customers’ requirements. And — here’s the key point — when changes are required, there’s always a cost.

Change management is a broad topic, and one that’s loaded with pitfalls. Here’s my best rule of thumb regarding change management:

The later in the project you request a change, the more expensive it’ll be to implement.

Simple! Here’s an example from a world most people readily get. Say you have an addition put on your house. You initially decide the fireplace will go on the north wall. But let’s say that later you change your mind and you want it on the west wall. When is it the cheapest to make that decision? Before a single brick is laid, naturally; and clearly, it’ll be most expensive when the job is done, and the whole addition has to be torn apart to change it.

So too with my work. But, while the construction example is laughable in its obviousness, the same isn’t true for me. When the physical result of my work is nothing, then it should be easy to get a new nothing, right?

Some people suggest that change requests are a good thing, since they increase the size of a project; ultimately, they put more money in my pocket. And this is true! Change requests happen for many reasons, many of them legitimate. For example, one client, for whom I was building a loan approval application, landed a huge client in the middle of our development process, and wanted the application changed to suit their needs.

But there are times when whim, misunderstanding or simple indecision become the culprits. When that happens, I sometimes can’t convince the client that a real change is occurring; ultimately I either have to give up a chunk of my compensation for the change request, or damage the good will that I ultimately value more than anything among my clients. Unfortunately, I can’t point to a fireplace and explain how tearing it out of a wall would add a lot of work!

Even so, I actually feel a bit sorry for my dad, because while most people can appreciate the costs involved in changing their mind, he still has clients who freely do so without regard for the cost. In my business, it’s getting easier and easier to accommodate change requests, because the tools for building web applications and designing graphics are getting dramatically better. Meanwhile, it’s always going to cost the same to move a hole five meters to the left.

I’ve done it, believe me.

Share This

But there has always been one corner of the technological universe that has remained hidden from me: application development. I’ve burrowed fairly deeply into web application scripting, but this is a far cry from real, honest-to-goodness programming.

Nowhere is that more true than on the Macintosh. Programming the Mac is nothing like any other environment. The Mac makes use of an object-oriented language called Objective-C. And once you get your head around the rules of that language, you have to figure out the incredibly extensive Cocoa frameworks, which connect your instructions to actual operations on the system. Eyes glazed over yet? Yes, mine too.

But I have spent a lot of time in the past year knuckling down on this topic. I’ve pored through books, attended C4, and now, I’m in the later stages of developing my first actual Mac application. It’s a great time to be alive, isn’t it?

But it’s too early to tell you what it is. Instead, I’ll throw cryptic hints, like these two:

• The application’s code name is Quantum.
• It does stuff to your files.

I’m also working with a fine icon designer, Jordan Langille of One Toad Design, and I’m hoping that we’ll have a finished icon to show off in the near future!

Share This

While those fortunate among us sit in Canada (fortunate, that is, in all respects save for the presence of the iPhone!), we can recognize that lawsuits are the blunt instrument that American corporations and people wield all too easily. But there’s something really smelly about going after the same people that keep you in your sports cars and shmancy suits. Logic dictates that you won’t be in business very long. And while the music market is sufficiently large that many people don’t connect the lawsuits with the music, as it were, there is now enough backlash from the public that some companies are backing down. When those lawsuits first started in 2003, many seemingly innocent people were targeted, according to this Washington Post article.

While one could argue that file sharing of music has decreased as a result of those lawsuits, there are also many people — myself included — who buy a lot less music now than they used to, as a direct result of the music industry’s practices. And now that some music groups are leaving the sticky embrace of their labels altogether to pursue their own fortunes (Radiohead may be the latest, with their latest album), I think the message is getting through: lawsuits may not be the instrument of choice for reducing file sharing.

But then we get this story about how the Business Software Alliance (BSA) is using RIAA-like tactics to strangle its customers for using unregistered software.

The BSA is a collection of companies, including Microsoft, Adobe and Symantec. These are some of the biggest software producers in the world, and they are using some of the shadiest strategies to pursue their agenda. As the linked article reads,

Of the $13 million that the BSA reaped in software violation settlements with North American companies last year, almost 90 percent came from small businesses, the AP found.

Sound familiar? The biggest companies suing the smallest customers. Perfect. But it gets better:

…according to an attorney who represents companies that have drawn BSA attention, it is the offers of huge rewards - upwards of $1 million - that creates an irresistible temptation for IT execs to rat out employers, especially former employers.

Let’s draw a picture: your company has a resident IT guy. He’s responsible for running your systems and tracking your software purchases. Then, for whatever reason, he leaves the company. The next week, the BSA has handed this former IT guy a bag of cash, and they’re delivering a lawsuit to you, based on the fact that this guy either didn’t do his job, or told a good story.

And the BSA’s war chest — used solely to reward disgruntled snitches from companies — is a dirty method indeed. According to the original AP story published today, there are many innocent companies who simply aren’t aware that they are violators.

It pains me to see the name of Apple Inc. in there with the Microsofts and Symantecs of the world. In all other ways they don’t act callously with software licensing (for example, they don’t use complicated and error-prone activation with their operating systems and other software).

So the takeaway here is twofold: if you’re a small business, take some time to track your software licences. But also consider moving to free software, such as Ubuntu Linux for the operating system, and OpenOffice for your office suite. Especially if you’re a Windows user. Any company that makes a business of suing its customers deserves to lose some business too.

Share This

“A widescreen iPod, a mobile phone, a breakthrough Internet device.” Since its US introduction last spring, it has been something of a preoccupation for me, and for countless others in Canada. This thing is for real, and it promises, for the first time, to put a legitimately usable networked experience into my pocket.

And it’s just freakin’ beautiful.

The only problem with the device, per se, is that because it’s a phone, it needs to be tied to a cellular network provider in each country it’s sold. Apple made a deal with AT&T in the US, an exclusive arrangement for an undisclosed number of years.

Just this week, Apple launched the iPhone in the UK and Germany; France is imminent. Meanwhile, those of us in Canada are wondering just when the heck we can expect this thing? After all, given our proximity to the US in geography, economy and love of reality television, how long could they keep us waiting?

Well, it’s pretty clear to me, if not everyone, that Apple’s not the holdout here. It’s clearly in their interest to have the iPhone for sale in as many places as possible, thus to maximize their profits. But their wireless partner in Canada — as yet unannounced — would surely be causing the delay.

It’s no surprise why this unannounced partner would be holding things up. Here’s how a conversation might be between Apple and the unannounced wireless partner (UWP):

Apple: We’d love it if you guys would carry the iPhone in Canada. Given its overwhelming success in the US, we can tell you for sure that it’ll be your best-selling phone. Ever.

UWP: We agree. We also like that we’re the only company in Canada that you can deal with, since Bell and Telus are too stupid to have a network that interoperates with the rest of the world. Their loss, we guess. Anyway, we’re good to go.

Apple: Great! We’d like you to offer the same package rates as AT&T offers in the US. $20 for unlimited data and -

UWP: Woah. HOW much for unlimited data? We don’t think we heard correctly.

Apple: Twenty bucks.

UWP: You’ve gotta be kidding us. Look. We charge $10 a megabyte up here. We’ve got our customers trained to bend over and take it with wireless data. Do you think we could maybe have a 2 megabyte plan for $20 instead? I’m sure iPhone users would be happy with that.

Apple: [making choking noises]

Nonetheless, I’m sure that a deal will be reached. Eventually.

But the issue here is that there is a giant vacuum where some knowledge needs to be living. Into that vacuum has gone everything else: unintentional errors and downright lies. This is just a sampling of the Canadian iPhone action over the past few weeks. The persistence of the so-called “news” about the launch says as much as anything about how expected the iPhone is.

So who is this unannounced wireless provider? There is only one answer. The only carrier in Canada capable of supporting iPhone is Rogers. Owing to the bizarre fact that they run the only GSM network in the country, they’re the only ones Apple can go to. Unlike in other countries, they can’t leverage carriers against each other to ensure a fast and competitively-priced time to market. And it shows: by now it’s certain that there’ll be no iPhone before Christmas, which is to both Apple’s and Rogers’ detriment.

Rogers’ currently policy is a either a terse “no comment”, or worse, a lame “it’s in Apple’s court”, that nobody could possibly believe. So right now, every Canadian who cares is simply feeling validated about Rogers: they’re a bunch of greedy gatekeepers scrabbling to hold onto their monopoly at the expense of their customers.

But just because negotiations between Apple and Rogers are stalling, doesn’t mean we need to have an information vacuum. This is actually a chance for Rogers to do something good for its future customers. The company should start by at least acknowledging the obvious: they are working to bring the iPhone to Canada. And while we’re waiting, they should let us sign up for a notification. When the iPhone is ready to launch, the VERY FIRST PEOPLE to learn it should be the people on that list. That way, no rumours will sully my workdays and get in the way of doing my job.

There’s a movement for companies to be more open. In this, Rogers could be a leader. Keep their customers-to-be in the loop, and they’ll do something more important than soak them in the short term: they’d build long-term brand loyalty.

Share This

The funny thing is, the company actually doesn’t sell many apple slices or salads. In fact, sales of those items are so low that, if they were any other item on the menu, they’d be taken off. It just goes to show you that people like to have the option, but would prefer their food fried, thank you very much.

Or would they? See, it just so happens that I have some personal experience with the apple slices in question. Although my family makes a point of not eating at MacDonalds, we have, owing to their ubiquity, been forced to eat there lest we go hungry. On a recent road trip, my wife ordered a side of apple slices for our daughter. It was only after we’d returned to the car and were on the road that we discovered the truth: instead of apple slices, we had fries! Wife had specifically ordered those slices, but the cashier had either not heard, or had been so accustomed to keying in fries that muscle memory took over.

Sure, one isolated incident. But a couple weeks later, it happened again, this time at a much better hamburger establishment. I ordered onion rings, and got fries. Why? No doubt, because everyone gets fries, and muscle memory kicks in where attention wanders.

It makes me wonder just how many people don’t get the things they ask for. In this business, as in fast food, it happens all the time. About half of my current customers (and you know who you are!) are with me because their last agency did a poor job of listening to their needs. Too many agencies like to tell their clients what they want, and to hell with what the client actually needs.

But far more common — and I’m as guilty of this as anyone — is the old misinterpretation trick. Web site development is particularly troubling here because there are so many ways of doing things. A web page can be editable by giving the client a window where they can edit raw HTML code, or it can be editable to providing a “WYSIWYG” interface, where you edit it like a word processing document. The good news is, I consider the former unacceptable, while several clients have expected only that.

But the opposite side of that equation, where I provide something beneath a client’s expectation, is dangerous ground, and it happens from time to time. One thing is clear though: it’s how a business handles being called out on a problem that determines whether they’re worth working with. MacDonalds would instantly take back those mis-ordered fries, as would Starr Burger. Would your web agency (or insurance agent, or lawyer) refactor their work to meet your higher expectations? The successful businesses strive to do just that.

Of course, most problems of this nature are almost entirely mitigated by simply paying attention from the outset.

Next time: The other great danger of this business: protecting yourself from dangerous clients!

Share This

Music CDs and video DVDs are digitized versions of those media. Books, newspapers and magazines, on the other hand, remain firmly entrenched in the analogue world. They are inherently the stuff of atoms, rather than bits.

If you know anything about the publication of text-based material, then you know that it’s a thoroughly electronic process: writers compose on computers, they approve it on computers, they lay it out on computers, and they send it for printing over the Internet. It’s only at the very last stage that the electronic copy is utterly abandoned, and you get a hunk of old-growth forest.

Lots of people prefer it this way. We are uncommonly attached to the classic book form factor: it’s battery-free, works in most lighting conditions, has very high resolution, and is very portable. Of course, we don’t often consider the down-sides of the book: they are very expensive, they take up a great deal of space, and they tend to go missing when you lend them out.

These facts are especially true when you talk about technical books: the sort of material that remains relevant for perhaps a couple years before becoming irrelevant or obsolete. Ironically, because these books are so technical, they appeal to far fewer people than the average mass-market paperback, and are consequently more expensive. It doesn’t help that many of these books are very big! It’s not uncommon to see an $80 book at the local Chapters. Reminds me of my university days.

It was the technical book challenge that motivated me to purchase an eBook Reader from Sony. I’m currently learning to program the Mac with Objective-C and the Cocoa frameworks, and this monumental task requires the reading of dozens of texts on the subject. The good news is, Apple provides all this documentation for free on their Web site (along with the actual development tools, which is great). The bad news is, it’s very difficult to read all this documentation on a computer screen!

Well, okay. I also think the eBook Reader is a pretty cool gadget. This was my one solid excuse for evaluating something that I feel is going to change the rules for how the written word is distributed and consumed in the future.

The Sony Reader is about the size of a paperback book, but is less than half an inch thick. Its major innovation is its display: it uses a technology called E-Ink, which is dramatically different from traditional computer displays. You can read more at the link there, but quickly: the display contains microscopic beads with ink on only one side. When a charge is applied, the beads rotate, showing black or no colour. The result is a display that actually looks like printed text on paper, and that only uses power when a page is turned! My Sony Reader has a battery charge measured not in hours of use, but in number of pages turned. In this case, I can turn 7000 pages between charges.

The Reader is otherwise a fairly normal, low-powered electronic device. It has a simple interface for navigating through books, contains enough memory to store about 70 books, and it’s readily portable, and light enough to read anywhere.

It’s not a perfect device, however. The display is only six inches in diagonal width, which is fine for text but insufficient for detailed artwork or larger pages. It’s also capable of displaying only 4 levels of grey, so many images that appear in the books are dithered.

There’s also another downside: getting content into the Reader. Right now you can only buy books at the Sony Connect store. And while they offer pretty much every book that’s on the bestseller lists, you’ll be hard-pressed to find EVERY book that you might want to read. And prices are surprising: you’ll save 10-20% off the cost of a hardcover book. To me, that’s crazy, and suggests that publishers are more interested in profit-taking than in propagating this trend.

On the other hand, there are other uses for the Reader, and devices like it that will come in the future. The most exciting possibilities are in the ways an electronic reader could replace the ephemeral texts that surround us: newspapers and magazines. While the current Sony Reader doesn’t have the display quality or size to emulate my weekly issue of Macleans, there’s no doubt in my mind that we’ll see it in the next few years. I’m looking forward to the day where, instead of receiving a 96-page magazine in the mail, I’ll simply download it to my Reader. No trees were harmed in the making of this magazine! The benefits accrue even greater for newspapers, which are a voracious waste of paper.

One can hope that, while the technology for eBooks is coming along nicely, the biggest change — in peoples’ heads — will develop similarly. My wife is the perfect example; while she admires the benefits of my Reader, her love of the book-as-object is too great to let it go.

However, as books become more expensive to produce and purchase, it will likely become inevitable that we’ll all be using electronic Readers. We’ll always have paper books, but I see the day where we’re using eBooks much more often. I’m looking forward to it.

Share This

AZURE’s old site represented the magazine as a product, providing the usual information: the current issue, advertising information, how to subscribe. The site was lightly-trafficked, and the magazine staff kept its innovation within the pages of its growing magazine.

Figure 1: AZURE’s old site.

When AZURE approached FRANK, a Toronto-based design agency, they were met with ideas for promoting the site from a brochure to a powerful new publication in its own right. FRANK understands the Web, and how it has changed from a passive, broadcast experience, into a truly interactive entity. Those companies who embrace the Web, and who harness their readership, provide the most compelling experiences.

 

Figures 2-3. An initial wireframe of the design layout, and an early prototype of the web site design.

FRANK’s plan was to use AZURE’s editorial expertise to build a constantly-updating publication, always complete with the latest news and insight into the magazine’s core competency. The home page features a constant stream of updated news, along with always-impressive photography related to the article. The current issue of the magazine is also prominently featured. Here is where the reader finds real depth: the major content items from the magazine are presented in full on the site. Each issue also provides a viewable set of spreads from the magazine: if you haven’t seen AZURE in person, you’ll be able to experience the award-winning design that has made the magazine so successful.

 

Figures 4-5. AZURE’s live home page (current as of this writing) and a selection from the “View Spreads” feature: a Flash-based component that allows users to flip through the actual magazine.

The site also includes several services for its readers, which leverages the magazine’s authority in the design and architecture communities. A company Showcase features a directory of companies who offer products and services to the readership, while a Source directory offers up their latest products. There’s also an Event Calendar for exhibits, conferences and other events from around the world. And there’s a job board for industry positions.

All told, the AZURE site represents a very large undertaking. It was with great excitement that Innoveghtive accepted the responsibility for turning the vision of the site into reality. Working collaboratively with FRANK, Innoveghtive developed a highly sophisticated back-end content management system, integrating a great deal of front-end user functionality, a unique and innovative navigation structure, user registration and integration of an open source, award-winning banner advertising package. The complete turn-key package breaks the mould of conventional web development projects, offering the client unparallelled control over content and a compelling revenue generation model.

 

Figures 6-7. View of the Content Management System that Innoveghtive built for AZURE (left), and the OpenAds open source banner advertising software, which AZURE uses to post and manage advertising on their site.

The total project is composed of over 1000 files, and over 90,000 lines of code. As web sites go, that’s pretty substantial. The project kicked off in January of 2007, and culminated in a launch event on September 26, 2007, which saw the site’s first public introduction. Reaction was enthusiastic and extremely positive.

As with the magazine, the work of the Web site is never finished. Now that the site is live, FRANK and Innoveghtive will be tasked with continuing to hone the site, both polishing what’s there, and providing new capabilities. The publishers of Azure have the vision and a strong mandate to becoming “the” central resource for the architectural and design communities on the web. Innoveghtive is thrilled to have been a partner in bringing this vision to fruition.

Share This

Amazon’s secret sauce is very often its ability to “cross-sell”: knowing what you’ve been interested in before, it can make recommendations on related books that others have purchased. This technique has been applied in a number of different ways throughout the site. For example, when Amazon notices that some people buy similar books, they can create impromptu packaged deals of those books for others to buy at a discount.

Every five days or so, I receive an email from Amazon. These messages are generated automatically, and are based on books that I’ve either rated or purchased. The goal of these messages is to recommend other books that I’m interested in.

The problem is, their picks are about as accurate as my three-year-old with a colouring book.

That’s not very accurate.

Case in point: I received this today from Amazon:

As someone who has expressed interest in books about graphic design and programming…

Okay, so far, so good. I have, in fact, purchased books with these subjects.

you may be interested to know what leading graphic artists and special effects developers are reading to stay on top of their game.

Woah. I get the relation between graphic design and graphic artists, but it’s a pretty big leap between programming and special effects developers! What follows are some suggestions from the SIGGRAPH conference: a trade show for computer graphic artists. Those titles include seven books, none of which were the least bit interesting.

The emails that come asking about my interest in children’s books (gifts for my daughter), young adult novels (my wife) or pulp action (my dad) are way out!

Think of it this way: have you ever received a gift from someone who doesn’t really know you? With the best of intentions, they hear that you’re into computers, so they give you a random piece of Windows software. Problem being, you are using a Mac, and even if you did run Windows, you have no use for some extravagant upgrade. So while you’re touched at the attempt, you’re secretly disappointed they didn’t go the whole way, and find out what you’re really into.

So too with Amazon. Every five days, it’s Christmas and I’m getting something that doesn’t quite fit. In several ways, their cross-selling technology works very well; in their email messaging, it’s out to lunch.

Solutions? Here’s a crazy thought. Rather than attempting to guess my preferences through such sneaky methods as past purchases (which often include gifts for others), why not just ask? I’d be happy to be invited to go through some possible choices and fine-tune my preferences.

It would sure make a gold-standard buying experience even better.

Share This

In Canada, for the most part these boxes don’t exist. They are a foreign item, completely unused. Perhaps it’s the same in America, where this is a TV-only phenomenon. Who knows? The point is, I’ve always wanted to eat out of one. It would just be cool.

At the last baseball game that I attended this season, I finally had that chance. The diverse restaurants at the SkyDome (and no, I will never, ever, ever call it the !bleep! Center) include a noodle vendor that serves up their wares in this very container (see the picture). With a light in my eyes, I barely registered the $9 cost, and received my cardboard-enclosed meal.

As I worked my chopsticks in the stands, I made a dreadful realization. These Chinese food takeout boxes represent a dreadful user interface! Stuffed full of fried noodles, chicken and veggies, the container made it very difficult to fish out a bunch of noodles, because they were packed and bundled together so tightly. I thought the situation would improve as it got emptier, but the improvement was only marginal. By the time I packed it in, my chopstick hand was sore from maneuvering and pulling hard on the noodle pile.

The conclusion? Canadian Chinese food takeout containers may be entirely unglamorous, but they are a darn sight more usable.

It was delicious, though.

Share This

I’ve been looking at a lot of home sale listings lately. I’m not moving right away, but it’s probably going to happen in the next couple years and I want to get a solid feel for the market.

My dear aunt is a real estate agent, and a fine one at that. I’d have her as my own if she lived nearby. But she’s been kind enough to plug my email address into her system, and I receive a listing every day for every new house that comes on the market in my price range. The reports have become something I look forward to as I open my email each morning.

Everyone is familiar with the language of real estate. Agents are in the business to sell, and it wouldn’t do to mention the blemishes of a particular property. Instead, they paper over them with a collection of well-honed euphemisms: phrases that say one thing and mean another.

Here’s one from today’s listing — and I love this one: “Original owners–clean and well-maintained-Bring your decorator’s touch to this value-priced home”. If you put that sentence together with the notable lack of indoor photos of the house, you get a very clear picture: original shag carpeting throughout, leopard-print furniture, wood panelling on the walls.

Another one I like is “Must be seen”: to me, this suggests a house that looks modest from the outside, but has some charm within to justify its surprisingly high price. Or “excellent investment opportunity”. Ouch: that just screams “here’s a dump on a good piece of land”!

Some listings are good, in the sense that the agent has written a piece that forgoes the editorializing, doling out “just the facts”. In these cases, they praise the positive features, and follow my mom’s advice: if you’ve got nothing good to say, don’t say anything.

There’s a movement afoot in the technical writing community called Plain Language. The term refers to a style of writing that dispenses with euphemism, and gives the reader only what they need. Critics would argue that plain language sucks the life out of writing, but for those whose jobs it is to get a message out, the practice is a godsend.

And for those of us who have to read it, plain language can make the difference between my rolling my eyes, and, well, not.

Here’s an example of a good listing: “Spacious Bungalow Close To Downtown. Hardwood Floors In Upper Level, Marble Floor In Kitchen. Large, Bright Living Room And Dining Room. Walkout To 16′ X 20′ Deck From Master Bedroom. Extra Kitchen, Bedroom And 4 Pc Bath In The Basement. Hepa Air Wash And Cleaning System.”

Sounds good, right? It’s also good because it doesn’t mention the bad stuff: nothing about the roof, for example.

So we’re part-way there: a decent description that doesn’t make me read between the lines. But what is a perfect listing? Clearly, it would be one that would be just as good as seeing the home in person. Much of the information in a home listing is actually a set of form fields: how many bedrooms, type of heating, home age, number of parking spaces, etc. The written description is a necessary accompaniment to those stats, but as we’ve seen, it still doesn’t tell the whole story.

Here’s my perfect listing.

• Standard Data Every facet of a home would be described by a statistic, from the age and type of roof to the plumbing and electrical wiring. You’d be able to consistently compare listings based on any metric, and all the data would be mandatory. Right now, many listings forego the “Age” field. Yikes.
• More Pictures Some postings go up with no pictures at all! That’s insane and pointless. Matters have improved here in recent years, with most listings having multiple shots that can be thumbed through. But there is still room for improvement. For one, some agents could use a tip or two on how to take good home pictures; we’re past the point of thinking that just having any pictures at all is good enough. And like my point above about having complete data, we should have complete pictures too: I want a picture of every room, not just the good ones. And definitely not of the furniture in the rooms.
• Floorplans This would be amazing, and it’s probably not currently possible. But I think having a floor plan would allow potential buyers to quickly get a handle on the size and use of a house. To me, this sounds like a fantastic business opportunity. Ah, I’m not the first to think about it.

Make these standard, and you’ll have a home listing that really tells me about the place I might spend the bank’s money on.

Share This