Rants....

noreply@blogger.com (Ryan Digicrest) — Fri, 01 Jun 2012 22:18:00 +0000

via Co.Exist:

Managing water resources in a rapidly-growing city can be problematic. Floods give much-needed water, but too much rain at one time can overwhelm a system. Meanwhile, droughts leave people with no water at all, and keeping water clean is always an issue. In Mexico City, poor management threatens to leave 22 million people without water in the near future. Leaky pipes alone account for a 40% loss of water that is pumped from nearby mountains. Already, more than a third of households lack adequate access to water.

Isla Urbana is trying to change this with inexpensive, sustainable rainwater harvesting systems. The project was conceived while two Mexican-American students, Enrique Lomnitz and Renata Fenton, were studying industrial design at the Rhode Island School of Design. “We repeatedly encountered the subject of water scarcity and became inspired to design rainwater harvesting systems for these communities,” says Lomnitz.

They began physically installing systems in 2009, in the Ajusco Medio region of Mexico City, “because we met people there who were very interested in the system, and because the region combines extraordinary rainfall with chronic and widespread water shortages, making it ideal for rainwater harvesting,” says Lomnitz. Rainwater harvesting is pretty simple: the system captures water off the roof of a building. Then the water passes through a bypass that diverts the first rains of the season through a large first flush that separates the first 100 to 200 liters of rain from each storm. Only the later, cleaner waters of a rain event go into the cistern, says Lomnitz. The water generally gets stored in the building’s existing cistern, though sometimes a plastic tank is installed when a cistern is not available. The water is chlorinated, and goes through a sediments filter and an active carbon filter.

Isla Urbana uses materials from local stores and trains local personnel to construct and install the systems--giving work as well as a way to gather and store water. The cost for each system is only about $350. Isla Urbana is a joint project between an NGO, theInternational Renewable Resources Institute and a small business called Solución Pluvial. Development and sale of rainwater harvesting systems is done by the business, and education, training, and subsidy models are done by the NGO. Isla Urbana’s rainwater harvesting is meant to complement the conventional water supply, not replace it “The water is then clean enough for all domestic uses, though we generally do not recommend it for direct drinking, unless additional filters are installed,” says Lomnitz.

In a drought, families can rely more on the conventional system, while during a wet year, the rain will displace more conventional water, he says. If rainwater harvesting were properly implemented throughout the city, Isla Urbana says that it could provide 50% of the city’s water supply. So far, the organization has harvested 29,300,000 liters of rainwater and installed 725 systems. In the future it hopes to develop better and more accessible systems that provide increasingly high quality and low maintenance water, something that will help everyone have a better life.

Amazing Brace for Rooney On The Weekend

noreply@blogger.com (Ryan Digicrest) — Mon, 12 Mar 2012 18:20:00 +0000

In a game where Manchester United never looked unsettled, Wayne Rooney had a typical striker's game with a poacher's finish and an un-saveable penalty against West Bromwich Albion: <a href='http://msn.foxsports.com/video?videoid=b14d7b9b-e03a-4b1e-8448-128d7739fe79&src=v5:embed::uuids' target='_new' title='Rooney does it again' >Video: Rooney does it again</a>

'Kony 2012' by Invisible Children

noreply@blogger.com (Ryan Digicrest) — Wed, 07 Mar 2012 22:21:00 +0000

Easily the most important 30 minutes of content you'll watch all year.

KONY 2012 is a film and campaign by Invisible Children that aims to make Joseph Kony famous, not to celebrate him, but to raise support for his arrest and set a precedent for international justice.

HOW TO HELP:
Donate to Invisible Children: causes.com/donatekony2012
Purchase KONY 2012 products: invisiblechildrenstore.myshopify.com/
Sign the Pledge: causes.com/konypledge

KONY 2012 from INVISIBLE CHILDREN on Vimeo.

Mario Balotelli Went To A Strip Club Because He Can

noreply@blogger.com (Ryan Digicrest) — Tue, 06 Mar 2012 17:51:00 +0000

Mario Balotelli was caught at a Liverpool strip club early last Friday morning ahead of Man City's home match against Bolton on Saturday. And though Balotelli started and scored a goal in the 2-0 win for his side, he was still reportedly fined £250,000 for breaking the club's curfew policy.

Mario now realizes that he made a mistake that night, but more because he would've been angry if his girlfriend went to a strip club than because he violated curfew.

From the Players Association:
"I didn't do anything wrong at the [strip] club," he told Gazzetta dello Sport. "But I understand that if she [his girlfriend Raffaella Fico] had gone with her friends to a strip club, I would have been very angry. "If you love a woman, you can avoid causing that pain. That was my first mistake. The second was to go two days before a game." On whether he has received a £250,000 fine by City for breaking the curfew, Balotelli said: "I still don't know. I must talk with [the manager Roberto] Mancini."

So, to clarify, the fact that Raffaella Fico was one of former Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi's "bunga bunga girls" and that she reportedly tried to auction off her virginity for €1 million doesn't seem all that upsetting to Balotelli (or Fico for that matter), but going to a strip club with friends is something to get very angry about.

Full story:
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/soccer-dirty-tackle/mario-balotelli-sorry-breaking-man-city-curfew-mostly-170144843.html

Greatest Day Ever - 'Game of Thrones' Season Two Teaser

noreply@blogger.com (Ryan Digicrest) — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 00:21:00 +0000

Apple looking to launch Siri-powered TV by 2013

noreply@blogger.com (Ryan Digicrest) — Mon, 31 Oct 2011 20:50:00 +0000

We knew this was coming. Via GigaOm:

The Apple television is the latest, hottest subject of the rumor mill that surrounds the company. On Thursday, the New York Times‘ Nick Bilton published a lengthy report related to the still-unconfirmed product, revealing many details sourced from Apple employees and others close to the company who spoke to him on the condition of anonymity. Bilton says Siri is the key to Jobs’ feeling that he finally “cracked it,” as Walter Isaacson’s biography quotes him saying. What he cracked was a streamlining of the interface so that control is intuitive and simple. Thanks to Siri, Bilton says, you could now just talk to your TV set, and it would respond to your commands. Other new details include plans dating back as early as 2007, after Apple had released the original Apple TV, to make a complete set. The product has since been definitely in the works at Apple, its development spurred on by the fact that “Steve thinks to the industry is totally broken,” according to one of Bilton’s source. In the Isaacson biography, it’s revealed that many other successful Apple products, including the iPod and the iPhone, were created based on the same sense on the part of Jobs that what was already out there was sub-par. As to when this might arrive, Bilton says it is “close enough” now that it might be announced as early as late 2012, with a 2013 release date in terms of actually getting the product in the hands of consumers. The hold-up is mainly about waiting until the cost of large display components falls far enough to make it possible for Apple to offer the TV at a competitive price point. Making the product thin and light is also another development hurdle facing its release, according to the report. Many pundits have proclaimed an Apple television a bad idea, but it’s a chorus we’ve heard many times before; the iPod, iPhone and iPad all had very vocal detractors, with plenty ofnegative reaction even after the product was actually unveiled. Also, as John Gruber points out, commenting on the release of the Bloomberg TV 24-hour live video app, “Apps are the new channels.” If Apple can get more content providers to produce similar content-delivery solutions for its iOS devices, it’ll have much bait with which to lure potential Apple television customers whenever that product does make it to market.

Nike Ad: 'Basketball Never Stops'

noreply@blogger.com (Ryan Digicrest) — Mon, 31 Oct 2011 19:27:00 +0000

Nike has told the NBA lockout to suck it, via an awesome ad they've put together combining hoop heroes at both the professional and collegiate level [Ed's note: no money was paid to any college athletes. Just covering my ass here]. Just because the millionaires aren't getting their Maserati insurance covered right now, the game doesn't stop:

YouTube Announces Channel Strategy

noreply@blogger.com (Ryan Digicrest) — Mon, 31 Oct 2011 19:15:00 +0000

Yes this is days old, but it was Halloween weekend, so simmer down. As expected, YouTube finally announced a series of category focused channels, making it look even more like a MSO. What's interesting is that they sold off the individual channels to different content providers, and a close source to me from Digital Broadcasting Group (owner of the 'Spaces' channel), told me that it was insanely competitive to get a slot.

Here's what AdWeek said about it all:

After months of speculation with almost no official confirmation, YouTube has finally announced its long-awaited channel strategy in a post to the company’s blog late Friday evening. The announcement falls in line with what had previously been reported in the press: namely that YouTube will be expanding its lineup of channels to include new offerings from a variety of partners, including well-known personalities and brands in the Hollywood, music, news, and sports worlds. “These channels will have something for everyone, whether you’re a mom, a comedy fan, a sports nut, a music lover or a pop-culture maven,” YouTube’s global head of content partnershipsRobert Kyncl said in the post. Under the new system, content creators—like Vice Media or the video game lifestyle network Machinima, for example—will have a dedicated channel on the site that they will control, continually updating it with video content. YouTube, for its part, will sell ads against that video inventory. YouTube is seeking to organize its site much in the way a cable provider organizes linear TV channels—a fact that Kyncl acknowledged in his post today. “Cable television expanded our viewing possibilities from just a handful of channels to hundreds, and brought us some of the most defining media experiences of the last few decades—think MTV, ESPN, and HBO,” Kyncl wrote. “Today, the Web is bringing us entertainment from an even wider range of talented producers, and many of the defining channels of the next are being born, and watched, on YouTube. “ The channel announcement comes on the heels of a number of other content initiatives from YouTube in recent months, such as its Partner Grant program—announced in July—which sets aside a total of $5 million in creative grants for qualifying video makers to improve their video content. The efforts are aimed at coaxing viewers into engaging with YouTube as they engage with television, spending much more time watching a wider, more compelling array of video content. As YouTube chief Salar Kamangar wrote last May in a blog post entitled "Welcome to the future of video. Please stay a while," "You’re spending just 15 minutes a day on YouTube, and spending five hours a day watching TV. As the lines between online and offline continue to blur, we think that’s going to change."

I Finally Played Angry Birds

noreply@blogger.com (Ryan Digicrest) — Fri, 28 Oct 2011 22:46:00 +0000

After all the chaos and cult like activity around Angry Birds, I finally get it. It's outrageously stupid and simple, but addicting as hell. I'm playing it on the Chrome App, amazing.

The Rumors Are True; MC Hammer Is a Start-Up Guy

noreply@blogger.com (Ryan Digicrest) — Mon, 24 Oct 2011 19:05:00 +0000

I had heard this before when a close friend from a targeting company said, "Hammer was at our launch party for our app." I of course thought he meant they were playing "Ice Ice Baby" on repeat. Little did I realize that the parachute pants man himself was at their PingMe launch party.

So then I read last week that Hammer is launching a search engine, that oddly enough cannot be found in Google search (check that metadata Hammer). [EDS note I finally just found it after days of searching] Hammer, born Stanley Kirk Burrell, is challenging the Mountain View Googlers with his new project Wiredoo. Currently in beta and accepting private users, Wiredoo will act as a “deep search” or “relationship” engine. Rather than just return “the 10 blue links” of keyword-based results, he explained in an interview with Web 2.0 summit co-producer O’Reilly Media, WireDoo will also display more tangential data culled from Web indices, public data, and social media. A Zip Code search might net local school statistics and home prices, for example.

As per the question with any search related offering, do we care? Don't the leaders in the space have it down pretty good? If anyone can tell me the last time a general search query turned up really blank and useless, you get a small token from the Rants laire.

hopefully they are ready by the time Hammer's series C runs out

Virality Done Right by EVB

noreply@blogger.com (Ryan Digicrest) — Mon, 17 Oct 2011 01:05:00 +0000

Evolution Bureau in San Francisco has set the bar high again with a hilarious series of one minute videos for "Pet's Add Life," a campaign for the American Pet Products Association.

Calling The Digital Ad Industry; Let's Start Taking Banners Off Web Pages

noreply@blogger.com (Ryan Digicrest) — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 18:49:00 +0000

Now, before everyone who works for an ad exchange, banner ad network, RTB or yield optimization firm flips their shit and calls me susie, just hear me out. I want to make a case for removing advertising from our sites, and I'm a seller, so in theory I want that space.

First, for this entire rant, let's immediate remove the following ad products from the conversation because they are separate; pull downs, peel backs, expandable home page units, page skins, takeovers, etc. What I'm talking about is your everyday standard IAB banners.

Let's just say we wanted to start driving up the value of ad inventory again (gasp, why would we want that). I don't think anyone would argue that there is more banner space available than the market is demanding. Fair to say, you can go to any major website, navigate 15 pages in and there are still leaderboards and skyscrapers everywhere. Now, those useless placements are selling for pennies on ad exchanges and optimizers are crunching every penny in real time bidding environments to very slightly outbid someone else's minute spend threshold. I'm making the case that if we move back to a model where we minimalized overall ad frequency and touch points in banners, we on the publishing side would maintain higher quality of advertiser and higher pricepoint. Adversely, advertisers now avoid ad clutter and actually get their message across. Lastly, consumers don't suffer from advertising overload and they actually respond to messaging like they did in the good old days. Keep the level of targeting up but reduce ad clutter, I think you see better performance.

My focus is in video, and I have strong concerns about the commodization of long tail video. There is no doubt that premium video inventory (I'm talking pre-roll only) will always command a high pricepoint. It's a unique one on one interaction. But the price is being driven down by exchanges drudging up video inventory and shipping it off for pennies, yet the value of the placement remains high. Yes there was another subtle point in there; price and value are two different things.

On an aside, can someone tell me if ad exchanges are actually making money? How many ways can you slice up a penny?

Nike Soccer Commercial's Are Like Michael Bay Movies

noreply@blogger.com (Ryan Digicrest) — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 18:38:00 +0000

Slow motion camera work, bumping bass, Wayne Rooney voice over. Wow. Production value is high.

The Antelope Who Crushed The Biker

noreply@blogger.com (Ryan Digicrest) — Tue, 11 Oct 2011 15:44:00 +0000

We've all seen it, but let's see it again.

Looks Like The iPhone 5 Is Officially Coming

noreply@blogger.com (Ryan Digicrest) — Tue, 27 Sep 2011 23:59:00 +0000

Apple is hosting its next iPhone event at its Cupertino, California headquarters on Oct. 4. Press invites landed in media inboxes first thing this morning, with a very enticing tag line: “Let’s Talk iPhone.”

Tim Cook is expected to be master of ceremonies at the event now that he is Apple’s CEO. The media event is taking place at Apple’s 1 Infinite Loop HQ, out of the norm from past iPhone events held in the city of San Francisco.

At the event, we’ll find out once and for all if we’re getting an iPhone 5 or an additional budget iPhone 4S. The iPhone 5 is reported to have a larger, possibly edge-to-edge display, a thinner silhouette and an elongated home button. It’s also expected to house an A5 processor, like that of the iPad 2.

'GazeHawk: Eye Tracking For Everyone'

noreply@blogger.com (Ryan Digicrest) — Thu, 22 Sep 2011 15:18:00 +0000

Came across this little gem at AdAge west. Going on their second year in existence, GazeHawk is an eye tracking technology company that provides consultative research and reports to publishers and advertisers to improve ad effectiveness. Their technology accesses a users webcam, asks for permission to track their visual patterns, and then runs that user through a quick calibration test. After that, it's open season. GazeHawk can determine which ad units on a page are most effective aka get the most exposure to the eye, and then passes back that info to the pub/advertiser.

For a publisher, you can see this being a HUGE asset when it comes to valuing their ad space, charging premiums for the units with more attention, and vice versa. For an advertiser, you can better determine what you should be paying for those same units.

On the macro level, this is in fact a big step away from using click throughs as a measurement of success. As a player in the video space this is music to my ears. My only drawback is that they ask for permission from the user. This absolutely needs to be an opt-in system, however as soon as the user knows what you are studying, their behavior changes. There is no way around that.

Detractors from The Hawk (are they not using that nickname yet?) will press on the creepyness factor here, which is in no way helped by their aggressive company name. But if you talk to the fat cats in Washington, opt-in makes it a free zone, so Gaze on my friends.

AdAge Digital West: a Semi-Diary

noreply@blogger.com (Ryan Digicrest) — Tue, 20 Sep 2011 17:14:00 +0000

Well, another conference on the books for today. Checking out AdAge's first digital focused conference on the West Coast. The morning started strong with the Global CMO and Digital Director for Levi's giving us their perspective on the world and intro'ing the Go Forth campaign. Here's a crappy cell phone pic of them for you to decipher:

What a Gem!! Qwikster Twitter Feed Owned By Some Hoodlum

noreply@blogger.com (Ryan Digicrest) — Tue, 20 Sep 2011 00:03:00 +0000

So, on the day that Netflix announces that their DVD service is now named Qwikster, and that they are launching a new business with separate P&Ls, the online community was quick to seek out places where the handle "Qwikster" was already in play.

Well let's heap the praise to the crew at Gizmodo for their find of the @Qwikster Twitter handle. As they put it, "Netflix Doesn’t Own Qwikster Twitter Feed. This Foulmouthed Pothead Does." Enjoy:
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2011/09/netflix-qwikster-elmo-pothead/?pid=2457

An Exciting Weekend in LA No Doubt

noreply@blogger.com (Ryan Digicrest) — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 00:57:00 +0000

the homestead quatro

4.1 miles / 6.5983104 km
Created 09.15.11 by abergman21

An Actual Apple TV In 2012?

noreply@blogger.com (Ryan Digicrest) — Thu, 15 Sep 2011 22:48:00 +0000

We've all known this was coming, but Bloomberg seems to have dug up the real evidence proving that Apple is investing in an actual television.

There's a $14 billion rationale for this prediction but first, let's explore the rumors. This summer Piper Jaffray (NYSE: PJC - News) analyst Gene Munster dug through component suppliers and found evidence that Apple is gearing up to produce a real TV set by late 2012. Venture capitalist Stewart Alsop, a former board member at TiVo (Nasdaq: TIVO - News), has published rumors that Apple has a television coming. And Steve Jobs himself hinted last year that Apple might build a real television unit.

"The television industry ... pretty much undermines innovation in the sector," Jobs said at the All Things Digital Conference in July 2010. "The only way this is going to change is if you start from scratch, tear up the box, redesign, and get it to the consumer in a way that they want to buy it."

Jobs's quote is good advice for his successor as chief executive officer, Tim Cook, who needs a hit. The TV industry is changing more than at any time in the past 50 years, and billions of dollars are going into play for the winners. As Apple crests in the phone and tablet markets, its investors will want a new frontier.

TV is the future because it remains king of all media. While handsets get hyped, the typical U.S. consumer watches 5 hours and 9 minutes of TV a day, according to Nielsen (NYSE: NLSN - News), and even younger adults 18 to 24 years old—the supposed digital generation—view 3 hours and 30 minutes on televisions daily, vs. only 49 minutes on the Web and 20 minutes on mobile. We all love to lean back. With so much of the consumer's time, TV has become bloated with waste. The average U.S. home receives 130 cable channels but "tunes to"—or punches in the exact channel number on the remote—just 18 channels a year. Channel surfing has died. A whopping 86% of available channels are never used by an individual viewer.

Lots of Disenchanted TV Subscribers

Consumers pay a lot for all this video waste and they don't like it. The average cable bill is $75 per month, which means that each year 83 million households pay $74 billion to the top eight TV-subscription services. This is why so-called "cord cutting," by which consumers drop cable to watch videos on Roku, Hulu, or the Xbox 360 from Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT - News) is accelerating; Comcast (Nasdaq: CMCSA - News), the leading U.S. cable system, lost 238,000 subscribers in the second quarter. If Apple were to offer a better service, people might pay up for it.

A second lure for Apple is TV advertising. Unlike U.S. mobile-ad spending, which EMarketer says will barely break $1 billion in 2010 despite years of hype, the TV ad spend in the U.S. totaled $70 billion in 2010 and is forecast by Forrester Research (Nasdaq: FORR - News) to reach $84 billion by 2015. If Apple could gain just 10% of the $74 billion in current video subscription fees and $70 billion in television ad media, it would take in more than $14 billion in additional annual, recurring revenue.

Apple faces plenty of hurdles. For one thing, TV sets are an infrequent purchase. Apple likes to sell products with built-in obsolescence that you "need" to replace every 18 months—iPhone 5, anyone?—and a flashy TV set doesn't call for an aluminum upgrade next year. Apple also has struggled to get content providers to embrace its current Apple TV box. In August, Apple stopped renting TV shows for 99¢ on the gadget, claiming that consumers overwhelmingly prefer to buy TV shows. But it could be that Apple's media partners considered 99¢ far too cheap. With billions of dollars at stake, media producers and cable giants will fiercely defend their video-distribution modes.

Apple noted this risk in its 2010 annual report, in which it said it "relies on third party digital content, which may not be available to the Company on commercially reasonable terms or at all." Bear in mind that the record labels were losing to digital pirates when Apple's iTunes came along to save them; the video giants have no similar motive to play along now.

TV as Bold as the IPhone

That's not an insurmountable obstacle. Apple has some $76 billion in cash and a history of entering unexpected partnerships. AT&T (NYSE: T - News) and Verizon helping to sell iPhones? Who'd have thought? The biggest fight may be with new video competitors that are emerging everywhere. Netflix has embedded itself in scores of hardware devices, including TV sets and the Wii from Nintendo (Nasdaq: GOOG - News) also has a TV service and its acquisition of Motorola shows that it also wants to own related hardware devices. To win the living room, Apple will need an innovation comparable to that of its iPhone—something that changes TV sets in a fundamental way.

What about 3D? In 2010, Apple won a patent for a revolutionary new 3D screen system that would not require glasses and could be viewed by multiple people at the same time. The patent went so far as to slam current 3D systems, noting that most people dislike goggles and dismissing current non-glasses systems as "essentially unworkable for projecting a 3D image ... to an entire audience."

What solution did Apple propose? An "unobstructed 3D viewing device" that would give each viewer a different line of sight for both left and right eye, perfecting a stereoscopic image for a group of viewers watching one giant screen. The Apple patent even had a cool name for the result: a hologram. Could Apple put holograms in every home, break the stranglehold of cable companies, and unlock a $14 billion TV revenue stream? It's an audacious and perhaps crazy idea.

Tim Cook, I like the way you think.

___

Are We Surprised People Are Pissed at Netflix?

noreply@blogger.com (Ryan Digicrest) — Thu, 15 Sep 2011 17:46:00 +0000

via AllThingsD

Turns out Netflix customers took the service's recent price hike harder than expected. As a result, the multiplatform video rental company has had to cut third -quarter U.S. subscriber projections by 4% from 25 million to 24 million. "The majority of the shrinkage, Netflix says, will come from its DVD-only customers," reports All Things D.

Still, "Netflix now sees 9.8 million streaming-only customers, down from 10 million previously, and 2.2 million DVD-only customers, down from 3 million expected previously," Barron's Tech Trader Daily reports. "Total streaming said it expected a bump in third-quarter revenues as a result of the price hike (for DVD and streaming video joint subscribers).

Despite the new subscriber growth projections, "Netflix said that its financial outlook hasn't changed," ZDNet writes. "In other words, the financials add up for Netflix."

Netflix also originally said it expected its growth trajectory to resume by the end of the year, but the chances of that are now looking less likely. Regarding to change, GigaOm writes: "That appears to have had an effect on the number of people subscribing to the service."

Netflix CEO Reed Hastings said he saw all this coming. "We knew what we were getting into," he said, according to All Things D. "We tried to be as straightforward as we could, and that has worked out very well for us."

Said Netflix in a statement: "We know our decision to split our services has upset many of our subscribers, which we don't take lightly, but we believe this split will help us make our services better for subscribers and shareholders for years to come."

Microsoft, Yahoo, and AOL Merge; The Blind Leading The Blind

noreply@blogger.com (Ryan Digicrest) — Thu, 15 Sep 2011 03:21:00 +0000

I've said it once, I've said it a million times...there is more banner inventory than the market demands. Period. Now the Three Stooges are grumbling in a dark room somewhere trying to steal back ad dollars from networks because Google is kicking their ass and they can't figure out up from down. So they are pooling together all their remnant crap that they can't sell, but they figure whatever fill rate they can pool together collectively, at least they'll split the revenue as opposed to paying off the big display networks. Why does this seem like a skit in a bad movie where three high school jocks with zero sense of things team up to dump spaghetti down the pants of our heroic nerd who is going to bang the hot chick at the end? Here's the one interesting twist. Yahoo is a disaster organizationally. No CEO, no back up plan. Maybe a fire sale of assets coming. But does the public and more importantly, the media buying community care? Yahoo.com is still the homepage of champions, and dominates the world over. That's off topic, but I was thinking about it no less.

RORY MCILROY SHOWS OFF HIS CHIPPING SKILLS DURING A 1999 TV APPEARANCE

noreply@blogger.com (Ryan Digicrest) — Wed, 22 Jun 2011 04:25:00 +0000

Too damn good...

Testing For Ads

noreply@blogger.com (Ryan Digicrest) — Tue, 07 Jun 2011 16:55:00 +0000

'Chrysler: Imported From Detroit' Featuring Eminem

noreply@blogger.com (Ryan Digicrest) — Mon, 07 Feb 2011 19:24:00 +0000

Definitely my favorite spot of the Superbowl. Gritty and tough...