Warrior's Playlist 11/24/2008

Not sure how many of you will share my musical tastes, but I thought I'd share with you the last ten songs I've added to my iPod playlist:

• Clay Pigeons, John Prine
• Enough Rope, Chris Knight
• Chasing Pavements, ADELE
• Whiskey Bent and Hell Bound, Hank Williams, Jr.
• A Pirate Looks at Forty, Jack Johnson
• Long Monday, John Prine
• Chicken Fried, Zac Brown Band
• Taking the View, Thad Cockrell
• I Never Did Like Planes, Robbie Fulks
• Good Man, Josh Ritter

TARP: Sometimes the Means Justify the Ends

As a young boy, I loved watching the Indiana Hoosiers play basketball. Under Bob Knight's tutelage, you could always expect the cream and crimson to play tough man-to-man defense, run a nearly flawless motion office, take only high percentage shots, and minimize turnovers. You also knew that their student-athletes were going to class. They were going to graduate. They were going to toe the dramatically conspicuous line that the General drew for their academic, public, and private lives. Otherwise, they had no place at Indiana.

You can't beat the results, either. From 1971-2000, Knight's Hoosiers went 661-240 and won three National Championships.

Here's the thing, though. Even when they didn't win...they played the game the way it was meant to be played. Philosophically, they were as pure as a Steve Alford jump shot. Basketball fans, whether they loved Bob Knight or thought he was the devil incarnate, had no choice but to be drawn to the purest form of basketball since Dr. Naismith's peach baskets became iron rims.

How is the credit union game supposed to be played? If Raiffeisen, Desjardins, Filene, Bergengren, and Maxwell are our Naismith, Wooden, Newell, Smith, and Knight, how would they define a successful season? Is winning the focus? If so, what does "winning" mean? If not, what is the objective? Is the goal to fill the bleachers, the classroom, or the coffers? Is there ever justification to set aside credit union core principles for a specific end result?

I'd argue no.

I'm a cheerleader for the credit union movement because I think, with extremely few exceptions, we're playing the game the right way. I know that the purists among us -- the credit unions that are doing things the right way -- didn't get involved in the risky lending and investment practices that led many banks down the path to ruin. Subsequently, the vast majority of these credit unions are healthy, well capitalized, and continuing to provide the same, top-notch member service and dedication to constant improvement that they always have. Failure by any of these credit unions will only come as a result of uncontrollable environmental factors: loss of a primary SEG, natural disaster, massive staff reductions in partner SEGs, etc. They are playing the game the right way, but are simply losing.

That scenario, while sad, is much easier for me to digest than hearing about a select few credit unions, whose particular environmental factors suggest that the fundamental credit union model should thrive, reaching out their hands for TARP money. It's one thing to display blatant contempt for our founding philosophies. It's quite another to tarnish the good name of all credit unions because of your actions. The 99.9% of us who are doing things the right way deserve better. Your members deserve better. Our credit union founding fathers deserve better. Taxpayers deserve better.

Knight is the winningest coach in NCAA history because he preached discipline, respected the game's history, and held his program to the highest of standards. Thank God most credit unions do the same. I wish our trade associations would take note - and stop lobbying for legislation that would permanently scar the movement's image just to save a few Kelvin Sampsons. Or at a minimum, set up a public forum within which your member credit unions can openly discuss the pros and cons of such moves.

Decisions, Decisions: iPhone, Storm, or G1?

How's this for ruining a Christmas surprise?

My wife and I are going to get each other smart phones for Christmas. The only problem is: we have no idea which one. I've been set on buying an iPhone since the 3G was announced, but we were already locked into a Verizon contract and chose to wait it out to avoid the early termination fees.

A lot has happened since then.

First, the T-Mobile G1 powered by Google was launched. This little device is very cool, boasting wi-fi access, location detection, the Android operating system, 3G network, and the Android Market for add-on applications. It also sports a full QWERTY keyboard that slides out from underneath the screen.

Then, the Blackberry Storm was announced. The Storm does a lot of what the iPhone can, and allows my wife and I to stay with Verizon (and, hopefully, take advantage of further price discounts through the "new every two" program). What I LOVE about this phone is the prospect of a "clickable" touchscreen. I have fat fingers, and the few times I've used an iPhone/iPod Touch I have had quite an annoying time with their "virtual" keypad. There is absolutely no way this phone will attract the types of apps that the iPhone and G1 will, I realize, but Blackberry has a strong reputation for its useful out-of-the-box application package.

So here I am. A little over a month from making quite an expensive decision, and I am more confused than ever. I love the iPhone. I'm a huge music fan, and have become somewhat of an Apple fanboy. But the iPhone keypad may be its Achilles heal for me. The G1's physical keypad and the Storm's "clickable" twist on the touchscreen may be enough to sway me away from a device that otherwise (well, besides its camera) seems to be a very solid choice. The prices attached to these three options are very similar, so really the decision is going to boil down to the above considerations and recommendations from people like you.

So, which one would you choose? This is a very expensive purchase, and I don't want to choose incorrectly. Thanks for your help.

Maybe It's Time to Laugh About the Credit Crisis?

I spent a great amount of time in the past month creating, editing, and publishing the following video about the causes of the current credit crisis. My focus was nearly 100% on subprime mortgage lending.

.

I have always been sure that better explanations and better presentations existed, but I was quite comfortable with my finished project. It wasn't until today that I realized where I goofed. I was too serious. Sometimes, when things get really bad, the best thing you can do is sit back and laugh about it.

William Azaroff linked this video on his blog today that pulled off what I absolutely could not. You see, I tried to make the material digestible by simplifying the subject matter. This presentation makes people listen because it's, well, funny. Though you won't be able to figure out whether to laugh or cry sometimes, one thing is for sure: this video keeps your attention. Thank you, William, for unearthing this!

Why I Support Filene and Obama (not a typo)

Take away his fortune, fame, success, leadership, entrepreneurial achievement, philanthropic accomplishment and charming good looks, and I would consider myself a modern-day Edward Filene. OK...it's obviously a stretch. But let me explain.

Filene was a man who put philosophy into action. So am I. Filene believed in consumerism, capitalism, and the power (good and bad) of marketing. So do I.

He believed that one of the most important obligations that an American has is to his/her job - with hard work, dedication, innovation, and passion for creating satisfied customers being imperative. I believe that too. Filene also believed that in return for these qualities, workers should be taken care of by their employers. I couldn't agree more.

He believed in the power of self-help - that people, at the end of the day, must take responsibility for their own betterment. Amen, brother. He believed in cooperative self-help - that by electing to cooperatively tackle a problem, people had a better chance of allowing each other to help themselves. Preach it, Ed!

He hated usury, and believed that there is nothing more important than delivering the best possible product at the best possible price to consumers. Anything outside of that was inefficient and unsustainable on both macro and micro levels. My philosophy exactly.

He believed in credit unions. He believed that democratically owned and operated, not-for-profit financial cooperatives could play a vital role in providing low-cost access to credit to individuals who, outside of the credit union structure, seemed doomed to inefficient bank usury. You see, Filene knew that a democratically-operated financial institution had no choice but to serve its members. They are the shareholders. Thus, any earnings, profits, gains, etc. directly improved the lives of member-owners. So, what you have is this system in which members dictate the financial services they receive - from pricing, to products offered, to fee structure. Essentially, then, members are receiving the best possible products and services at the best possible prices. How cool is that?

Bad organizational decisions, when made, are made in good faith. At the end of the day, though, all decisions in such democracies are the will of the people: the members. I take comfort in that.

That takes me to my point (finally, I know). Anyone that knows me knows that I am a conservative. I believe in small government, low taxes, and a strong national defense. I believe that in America all people of all walks of life enjoy the promises of our Declaration of Independence: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I believe in the greatness of people - that at the end of the day truly free people are compelled to be good to one another.

I believe in less laws, not more laws. I believe that being successful in America should result in national praise, not punitive actions. I believe that in most cases hard work and a little luck are all it takes to succeed in the land of the free. And I believe that the combination of free markets and democracy, while imperfect, are the secrets to sustained economic and social greatness.

I did not vote for Barack Obama.

I happened to be in San Francisco on election night. What amazed me was the palpable feeling in the air. Aside from the dancing in the streets, horn honking, and pedestrian cheers, you could just see a sense of happiness on people's faces when Obama was announced as the winner. People were downright giddy - like kids on Christmas morning. Granted, this may have totally been a function of being in one of America's most liberal cities. But, the sense that I got was that America had spoken. I take comfort in that.

Democracy doesn't mean your "side" always wins. It means that, collectively, the people win. My political views will likely never allow me to vote for Barack Obama, but my patriotism and belief in American democracy requires that I respect and support the will of the people.

So, my vow to you is this: you will never hear me bash Barack Obama, the President. His election is the will of the people. And even though I know that many Americans did not afford this luxury to President Bush, I pledge my support, despite our dramatic disagreements, to Obama and his remarkable story. I must now trust that he will hold true to his word and be a representative of all of our people - no matter how we voted.

Filene and I could totally support that.

Current Issues in Credit Unions Episode #30

Three lawyers and a Credit Union Warrior log onto a Skype teleconference....

Last week, I was afforded the sincere honor of guest starring on a Current Issues in Credit Unions podcast. Hosted by the amazing Rob Rutkowski, and joined by Hal Scoggins and Katherine Weber, Current Issues in Credit Unions Episode #30 gave me a wonderful opportunity to speak with three of the best minds in credit union law.

What I love about this group is their approach to regulation. While many in their field seem to look for reasons why a new project will NOT work, this crew looks for ways to foster innovation within the confines of regulation. That's ideal for marketers like me who like to come up with wild ideas. Don't tell me why something won't work. Tell me what I need to adjust so the initiative will be both legal and effective.

Check out the podcast here, and make sure you go through their entire library for amazingly detailed discussions on current credit union issues, regulations, and their implications.