I eat out a lot, too much really. Given my eating habits, I feel like should be adding something else other than inches to my waistline. Yelp seems like a good community and has effectively leveraged itself as social network and not just a user review site. I also have accounts on Facebook and Linkedin, but I don’t really use them. Yelp seems like a good place for me to make a more active foray into social networking given it’s centered on something I love, food. Of course the beauty of Yelp! is that it’s not just about food like Chowhound. Yelp wants to fry bigger fish.

So what was my first review of? The new Orinoco in Brookline Village. Orinoco is a Venezuelan restaurant and fantastic value. Everything is under $20, and most entrees hover between $13 and $17. It’s hip place, though I hear the South End location is much hipper.

I recently got accepted to a Non ABA certified Law School. Given the nature of the beast. What are your thoughts on such an endeavor, as there are pros and cons to the affair?

I’m certainly no expert on education. I have but one degree, and nary a desire for another. I’m done with school. That said, I believe it’s generally in everyones’ best interest to attend the best school that he or she can. This does not mean the most expensive as there are many affordable public institutions that outclass expensive private schools.  However, all else things being equal, ABA accredited school is by definition superior to a non accredited one.

To practice law, one must pass the bar exam. To take the bar exam, one must attend an ABA accredited school. In that light, it would seem that attending a non-accredited school is not worthwhile. Of course it’s not that simple as different states have their own individual bar associations that may allow graduates of non-accredited schools to take the bar. By passing the Bar in one state, and then practicing law for a few years, it’s often possible to take the Bar in any state. Of course with ABA accredited degree, you can take the Bar anywhere.

The more interesting question is not if you can take the Bar or not, but rather what doors an ABA accredited school would open versus a non accredited school. My initial read into the matter, is “a lot.” The ABA has gotten criticized and justly so for being a elitist institution that is in the business of exclusion. From what little I can gather, this seems to be true. Ironically because this is true, it’s better to member of the club than excluded.

So why would anyone want to attend a non accredited school? They are cheaper, and often easier to get into. The former is a good reason and the latter is a good reason only for those who can’t get into another school.  I don’t believe my reader is such an individual.  He’s clearly a smart guy if he’s reading AskDong.  It’s important to attend the best school that you can get into, and not just the best school that you know is easier to get into. Shoot for the moon, I say. Even when it comes to cost, I think the extra money can be well worth it if more doors are open because of it.
My attitude towards education is biased. I don’t believe that a diploma is a necessary prerequisite of learning. I don’t believe the ultimate value of education is not what’s learned, but what doors that diploma can open. A diploma is a key, and it’s clear from what little I know about the ABA and law jobs a degree from ABA accredited school is a much better key. Is it fair? No, I don’t think it is, but it’s how the world works.

I am finally up for the year. Almost all of that can be attributed to the calls on AAPL that continue to race onward an upward. Last month AAPL shot past $150. The stock is up above $180 now….

Now that I have a few months of data for my historical performance chart, it’s actually beginning to look like something.

While fortunate in those transactions, my losses also highlight the biggest trap of investing/trading - Falling in love with your stocks. I fell in love with AHM and WM when I should have sold much earlier. I only take solace in that in the end I realized the relationship could not work because the love was not returned. As with relationships, it’s better to cut your losses than try to make an untenable relationship work.

So what do I own today that I need to think seriously about selling? Mylan Pharmaceuticals (MYL) and United Health (UNH). MYL is a company I’ve owned at some point another in some account or another for over 12 years. It’s loved me in the past, but it no longer loves me today. Fundamentally, I should own neither MYL or UNH. I don’t know the first thing about the pharmaceutical or health care industry. I’m not much of a consumer or connoisseur of either.

While my jury is still out on the gender difference, I agree on the latter. I believe it’s better regardless of gender to share information amongst your friends. While access to salary information is much better now with websites such as Salary.com, and Payscale. None of these online tool provide the nuance that you can get from a friend. I can find out exactly what my friends do when I ask and how much they earn for doing so. I can know exactly how much responsibility they have. Telling me what Financial Analyst Level IV in 100-400 person company earns is informative but less so than a five minute conversation with good friend who has a real job in a real company.

The salary conversation is most easily had right out of school when everyone is effectively starting at the same level. Envy and boastful pride generally don’t have the opportunity to rear their ugly heads when most people after college start roughly in the same levels. Sure, the Investment Bankers and Consultants make more, but they work those crazy hours. Few people take it personally that their friend might make more, at least not straight of school. The differences are small, and most people at that time acknowledge the trade off that’s often made to do something more personally rewarding.

As we get older, we do become more sensitive rightly and wrongly so. Some of us feel under compensated, and others hate to hear the braggadocio that might accompany salary gossip. I don’t disagree. As we get older the differences in pay become wider, and seemingly more arbitrary. However, we should all check our ego. Talking about money should not be ego or envy, but career advancement. There’s a time and place for sharing the information. Talk amongst coworkers is especially tricky and I have never had an explicit conversation on salary with a coworker. However, plenty of information can still be shared in the most general of terms with a coworker. Nadira Hira at Fortune.com points out the traps that might come with salary discussions at work. However, amongst friends outside of work when the conversation turns to careers, I firmly believe that information should flow freely.  How is someone to know they are underpaid unless they have friends who give them the dish? Networking isn’t about getting the next job through a friend or acquaintances, but knowing the opportunities that are out there.  Salary information is a big part of that.

Mazda has now decided to destroy all the cars to prevent them from making it onto the gray market as new cars. Mazda has originally intended to sell some as new given that many of the cars are likely undamaged. Financially, it doesn’t matter to Mazda. They had insured their cargo, and as result are probably better off destroying the cars rather than risk their reputation if the cars turned out to be faulty. Interestingly enough, casualty and property insurance developed for exactly this type of event.

While I understand Mazda’s intentions, and the Insurance company’s reluctance to enter the car salvage business, it seems like such an awful waste. While I would be weary of Mazda if they had attempted to sell these cars as new, I would think that these cars can be at least salvaged for parts. I can’t imagine there’s much if anything wrong with the body panels. Instead these cars are being shredded. Such a waste.

I’m probably going to pick up a copy of Bottomfeeder: How to Eat Ethically in a World of Vanishing Seafood. Taras Grescoe the author was recently interviewed on Salon.  I like food books even when they’re an attack on the things I love.

I’m never going to be utmost environmentally conscience consumer.  Vegetarianism is probably the way to go, but I like I meat more than quite a bit. Seafood, however, represents a unique ethical problem.  Seafood as the name implies is harvested from the seas. But who sows and tends these crop? Hardly anyone.  The oceans as they rightly should be, belong to everyone and as result nobody actually takes any ownership. The Oceans are the ultimate commons.  Fishing boats from around the world fish the same seafood thousands of miles from home shores.

As with most commonly shared resource, an ethical crisis tends to arise - Tradgedy of Commons.  Simply stated Tragedy of the Commons is that individuals in this particular case the fishing industry from a multitude of nations act logically in their own self  interest to overuse the common resource of the oceans.  All food production has an environmental impact, but oceanic fishing is one of the few that takes place free from national borders.  It’s a difficult industry to regulate, and as result it’s even more critical how we as consumers behave. The burden is upon all of us to collectively demand environmentally sustainable fishing by adjusting what we eat. The Salon interview highlighted a fantastic tool from the Monterey Aquarium on what to buy and eat.  As a result I had mussels instead of the Atlantic Halibut last night.  It was cheaper to boot.

In my haste I missed that penalty rate is actually the short term fed rate plus 3%. The total penalty is 6% according to IRS.. So today I made my first estimated tax payment. Even if the penalty rate was the lower rate that I believed it to be, I think I might have still changed my mind and made a payment.

I’m no tax lawyer, and am confused somewhat exactly on how the penalty is assessed. In my original post about filing taxes, I stated that a safe way to determine what the safest minimum payment required by the IRS is 110% of the previous year’s taxes. That’s what I’ve chosen to do. However, if I choose not to make any estimated tax payments at all, do I have to pay the penalty on the full amount that I owe? For example let’s say my taxes last year were $1000, and this year I’m required to make estimated tax payments. I can make pay $1100 in estimated taxes even though I know I’ll owe $2000 in taxes. I pay the remaining balance of $900 on April 15th, and still avoid paying a penalty because made payments that were 110% of my last year’s taxes during the course of the year. However, had I chosen not make any estimated tax payments do I owe a penalty on the full $2000 or the $1100 that I was suppose to make? Since I know I’ll actually owe more taxes than my required estimated taxes, I’ve decided not to find out.

Last night I was helping my girlfriend shop for a hotel.  She’s going on a trip to Puerto Rico with one of her friends this coming weekend.  I recommended that she stay at the Marriott Hotel and Casino in Coronado.  Last year at my friend’s Bachelor Party, we stayed at the Radisson around the corner, but we actually hung out at the beach at the Marriott.  The Marriott has a nice beach front, pool, and outdoor bar.

My girlfriend looked online to book the hotel, and could only find an average nightly rate of $270/night which was much more than many of the other hotels in the area including the Radisson.  The previous year I had asked at the desk about rate and was quoted a rate in the $170 range.  My first couple Internet searches returned the rate she was seeing. Generally speaking, I expect the different travel portals to return approximately the same rate.  I usually don’t usually bother with the individual portals but go through aggregator kayak.com.  What I expect to vary is the hotel selection, not prices.

Though after a slightly more exhaustive search, I found that Travelocity had the hotel for less than $200/night. Not a great rate, but quite a bit better than what we were finding before. The average rate would’ve been lower had all the nights been in May.  As is there was one night in April.  In my experience May and June are two of the better months to go down to the Caribbean, especially May. Both months are only slightly past peak season, but not in the dead heat of summer. Prices and crowds are both much better.

I was very surprised to find that the major travel portals quoting very different prices for a major hotel chain. I had never encountered this before. I’ve encountered different prices, but usually in some kind of special package promotion. I guess it always pays to make a thorough search.

The real question of stock denominated benefits is are we to treat them like cash or are we to treat them as something more? I think most people treat them as something more. Some of this makes sense given that stock compensation typically have to become vested. Usually it takes at least a year before options or stock grants are vested. If an employee is terminated or leaves before the vesting period is over that employee forfeits his or her claim. That’s one issue - stock options and grants that have a lengthy vesting periods are only claims on compensation rather than outright compensation. For that reason, an employee might not want to count (reinvest) too early the chickens before they’ve hatched.

However, aside from the vesting issue which most employees have a pretty good sense if they will fulfill or not, there aren’t really all that many good reasons to hold onto stock grants or options unless required to by rules even when those grants haven’t vested. An employee can easily sell short company shares, or options without actually owning the shares or options. This might be seen as a vote of no-confidence, but it’s really an act of diversification. Most employees don’t have that much influence on the stock a price. If an employee were promised a cash payment, it would be generally be ridiculous for that employee to go and buy options or shares of the company. Effectively that’s what we do when we do nothing and hold onto shares or the options.

The risk because of the vesting period is that we never receive those grants or options. However, the only situation in which the hedges (i.e. selling short shares or options, or buying put options) would be out of the money is when the company is chugging along nicely, i.e. the stock price has risen. Under these circumstances, the most likely reasons for a employee not to meet shorter term vesting requirements are under the employee’s control. Either the employee chooses to leave or is terminated because of performance issues. The sensible thing for an employee with short term vesting options or shares is to hedge. This action would’ve certainly served the many employees at Bear Stearns well. Of course by hedging, it’s possible to miss out on millions like the ones reaped by employees of MSFT and/or GOOG. However for every Google there are dozens of pets.com. Keep the stock or options only if you think you would actually buy those same options in the open market.