Skein (coil of yarn) is really apt, I think. TV shows tell yarns but ones that just go on and on and on. Personally I kind of like rustic-type neologisms like this. They certainly beat jargony word-contructions, like ‘high net worth individuals’.

I don’t know if Variety came up with ‘helming’, with its nautical connotations. If you’ve got a crew someone’s got to be at the helm. ‘Thesp’ is another word Variety may or may not have popularized. I don’t know how actors feel about being called thesps, to me it sounds a tad condecending (but in a good-natured way). It’s like implying that actors take themselves and their Art much too seriously.

Skipping the definite article certainly makes for prose that’s more — I don’t know what to call it — direct or agressive. But I like the simplicity. Who needs detached definite articles anyway? English may just evolve in this directon over the next 100 years or so.

Personally I rather like the Variety style, I even find it funny. But it’s a bit like Gaudi. Gaudi’s buildings are really spectacular but fortunately there are relatively few of them in existence. It’d truly be awful if they were all over the place.

From a pure business perspective I think this term came around because rich just isn’t specific enough. High Net Worth is generally accepted to mean individuals with assets of more than $1 million dollars. Most financial institutions would also have a market segment for Ultra-High Net Worth Individuals, this is usually people with asset greater than $30 million. It’s not unlike most industries that divide their client base up into small market, middle market, etc. My thought is that the reason we use the euphemism isn’t because rich people don’t want to be called rich, but because all people want to be thought of as rich. What bank in their right minds would tell a client depositing their life savings with them that they were anything but rich? PS – We call the Ultra-High Net Worth segment “Wealth.”

I know, it’s way too technical. I always call movie stars, music stars, and athletes “rich”, while I call CEOs and savvy businessmen “wealthy”. Rich people spend all of their money on stuff that loses value. Wealthy people spend a lot of their money on things that make them even MORE money.

The first thing that really bit me was their seeming dislike for the word “the” in certain places.

“After a fierce bidding war with Fox, (the?) Alphabet has won the rights to the 20th Century Fox TV-produced laffer by stepping up with a six-episode commitment.”

“…Joel Surnow, Bob Cochran and Howard Gordon. (the?) Project is targeted for a fall 2007 debut.”

“Tentatively dubbed “The Call,” (the?) half-hour is a cross between “Emergency!” and “MASH,” with a dose of “Seinfeld” thrown in for good measure.”

“(The?!?!) Concept for “The Call” began with the Real Time production trio, Hemingson said, adding that 20th Century Fox TV toppers Dana Walden and Gary Newman “brokered the marriage” to bring him onboard.”

I’m no expert on English but that last example has become super-common for Variety, often starting paragraphs with “Studio has not reported earnings…” or “Network blah blah”.

Second was calling CEO’s and Presidents prexies. Third is calling television shows skeins. I am not the brightest person in the world but I’m not stupid either, and I had to look this crap up to find out what the hell a skein was, and there is no way that word fits.

Dude, I think microlending is awesome on multiple levels. I think it’s a model for socio-economic revolution. But I don’t think it’s what American banks are thinking when they ask, “Hmm, how should we make money?”

Kevin Kelly has a big post about it today on his kk.org blog:

http://www.kk.org/cooltools/archives/001484.php

Joe P. –

Yup, I’m ref-ing my favorite gold-hearted yokels.

I had a similar realization while at USC Film School. There was a homeless person collecting change at a freeway on-ramp, and I thought: mathematically, he has more money than I do, because I have thousands of dollars of debt.

Not that I’d trade places with him. The reality of money is that it’s not just what’s in your wallet, but your ability to get more when needed.

Is that so bad?