Posts by steelmaker

We could smell the trouble coming way back during that first game against Austria

Thirty seconds left on the clock—we're up by three and we have possession
Ten seconds left—suddenly, we're down by one

It’s the exact same script playing out today... a man advantage, a slim lead, and then just a total, complete meltdown

Honestly, even if we had sat down to design this bracket ourselves, we couldn't have engineered a more ridiculous draw. All this downtime and dodging the heavy hitters... it's an absolute disaster

The usual scene—this forum is just packed with "wise guys" who love to mock everything, yet they never bother offering a single actual solution... or heaven forbid, they actually step up and engage in a public debate with the Department using their real names, since they’re clearly too terrified to show their faces.

Throughout this entire tournament, I can't help but feel a sense of dread whenever we try to break down an opponent's set defense, regardless of whether they’re playing five or six men out there. Our defense seems to be holding steady enough, though, mostly relying on those half-court transitions and fast breaks led by Duvnjak—not Balic, mind you. As for the offense... well, aside from what Laco and Buntic bring to the table, it's been an absolute disaster. The wings aren't doing much besides running the break, and honestly, Strlek has more speed in his pinky finger than all our other wing players combined...

In short, it looks like Keta really dropped the ball on the offensive schemes...

The Polish people absolutely dismantled the Spanish side, which wasn't exactly a shocker given they have the most lethal shooting lineup and such incredible depth... But honestly, seeing them pull that off without Bieleck? That’s a massive signal that they're serious contenders for the championship final itself.

Hooker really crushed it; even Bubka wouldn't be able to ignore a result like that.

The whole day yesterday was just incredible... watching Hooker with the pole vault, then the javelin, followed by that Jamaican men's relay, and honestly, the women's hammer throw was easily the best event since the Olympics—especially with the new world record from Wlodarczyk. If only Heidler had thrown one more time, and if Wlodarczyk hadn't gotten injured during her celebration, we might have seen a whole string of world records back-to-back...

rowdytinker3 said:Way to go, Blanka Vlašić!
Bravo, Usain Bolt! I honestly thought that record held by Michael Johnson was some kind of untouchable myth, but then this guy goes and breaks it in Beijing... and now this... 19.19...🙏
Way to go, Walker!

Oh yes, Walker is truly incredible... if she hadn't been right there on the heels of Usain's records, with Demus just barely keeping pace, she would have absolutely shattered the world record too...

analogowl122 said:Just one right before Blanka Cloete...

Well, that applies to height, I suppose, but Cloete isn't the only one ever looked for overall...

Carol Harris64 said:even the Swedes have seen it;🙂

I'm just trying to find a list of the World Championship female winners from the last few decades, and I can't seem to figure out
how many have won two in a row?

It's going to be pretty tough to find a single consolidated list like that in one spot, but over at http://berlin.iaaf.org/history/index.html
you can dig up just about everything... if you feel like doing some digging, you'll find whatever you're looking for.

It’s unlikely anyone would overlook Bubka... he managed to rack up six of them, and back in the early days, the World Championships were held every four years, whereas now they happen every two...

Huge congrats to Blanka Vlašić! Her legs have clearly got world-class strength in them... she was hitting 195 in training and today she cleared 202, which are her best jumps of the season by far. She’s clearing those bars with room to spare. Honestly, when she goes after the world record, it might be best if she just tricks her brain into thinking she's aiming for 202 instead of 210... then she'll just smash through it effortlessly.

Usain Bolt is easily one of the most dominant athletes to ever live, right up there with Wilt Chamberlain. This year he ran the 200m twice, and despite barely doing any curve training because of that foot injury, he still cruised to a world record even with the wind blowing right in his face. I truly believe he'll pick the perfect moment—you know, whenever the money is right—to pull off the impossible and clock a 9.50 in the 100m and a 19.00 in the 200m.

Matthew Anderson4 said:Every single time I tell myself things will improve, things will get better, but then I just end up disappointed again 🤦
I mean, whoever they put on the mic to cover track and field, it’s just a total joke... I honestly don't know who was calling this today, but it's like they don't even watch the races. They have zero clue what's actually happening or who anyone even is...
Not even five minutes after the finish 6.2 miles regarding the women's race, and despite having a million replays of the finish line, they didn't even know who took the medals 🤦

Hey, let's not be too harsh because they aren't the only ones who lost the plot here. Even the organizers were totally lost, which is why the ceremony got pushed to tomorrow, and the official results didn't even come out until a full hour after the race ended.

That final stretch in the last 100 meters was wild—it shuffled the top five positions several times, which is incredibly rare in a 10,000-meter race. Plus, since all five runners were Black women, it made it naturally harder for us, and the commentators, to tell them apart.

At least they managed to fight for an extra minute or two of coverage so we could actually see how the whole thing played out.

melloworca said:Oh, you can bet they exist. I'm just giving you a heads-up so you don't act too shocked when they show up 🙂

But then why on earth are foreign betting sites advertising at every single sporting event? Half the major sponsors for our sports federations, if not the entire events themselves, are just foreign bookies.
Even something like the Indianapolis tournament is sponsored by a sportsbook, and it’s the same story with our soccer players, the clubs, and pretty much every other sport. Not to mention there are entire TV series where the only sponsors are online gambling sites.
If we followed your logic, we'd have to start by punishing almost all of our national federations, a huge chunk of the clubs, cancel whole events, and penalize nearly every media outlet broadcasting this content or running ads for it... and so on.

By the way, that law you're citing actually runs counter to the EU Charter regarding financial flows. This means the law is practically impossible to enforce and basically invalid, both within EU member states and among those in the pre-accession phase like us.

amberpanther57 said:Hmm, I don't quite get how a card specifically designed for online transactions could be blocked from doing exactly that. Who knows, maybe Chase messed something up on their end...
I read somewhere that support can sometimes take up to a week just to get back to you 🙄

Regarding support, it really depends on what you're looking for, but if it's about the card verification process, everything you need is right here on this forum—just look in a different section (check the PayPal topic over in the finance subforum), or check out

driftingraven53 said:So, I headed down to the Intel branch today to sort out my Chase debit card and got everything verified on PayPal without any issues... it all went smoothly. But I'm wondering about when it comes time to withdraw to my foreign currency account... if they ask for a scan of my ID and card, should I send both sides of the card, just the front, just the back, or both sides but with some numbers blacked out? And there's one more thing... say I deposit into Pinnacle via PayPal, and once it's time to cash out, do I have to move the funds from Pinnacle back to PayPal first and then to my bank, or can I go straight from Pinnacle to my bank account?😁

You really should have posted this in the "deposit-withdrawal" subforum rather than here.

By the way, what's the big deal with sending from Pinnacle to PayPal? Pinnacle pays out to PayPal in like, ten minutes flat.

free said:If his whole livelihood depends on the commission from the advice he's trying to sell me, then we really don't have anything to talk about.

Actually, if that's his sole source of income, it could just as easily mean he's a top-tier professional. For instance, that's been my only way of making a living for about 15 years now...

Gerald Thomas11 said:Respect

I’m glad we see eye to eye on this... 🙂
Every advisor needs a few years under their belt before they can actually do the job right. Everyone has to start somewhere, and let's face it, beginners are going to make mistakes. It's frustrating when someone starts lecturing you about financial planning when they only know two or three basic fee structures and just want to push a specific product because it's the only contract they know how to process...

You're absolutely right there, and I couldn't agree more. It’s honestly a disaster seeing people calling themselves financial advisors after attending a single weekend seminar. My critique regarding "testing an agent" was really aimed at those self-proclaimed geniuses who think they're the smartest person in the room—and unfortunately, there are plenty of them in our industry. I'm not sure if it's surprising or not, but those types who act like they "know everything" are usually the ones with the highest degrees. I have to admit, I occasionally get a little bit of enjoyment out of watching them turn bright red after just a couple of pointed questions. (By the way, I hold an advanced degree myself, but I'm fully aware that I have to keep learning and staying current every single day.)

Jessica Reyes9 said:Thanks, steelmaker. Does this mean an individual or a business holding a license would be restricted to working with just a single insurance provider? What happens to those independent advisors who work with multiple carriers?

There’s definitely some chatter about it, but whether it actually passes remains to be seen...
If a model like that ever goes through, it’s going to be a disaster for both the public and the professionals in the industry.
Just imagine if you walked into a grocery store and they were only allowed to sell you one specific brand of toothpaste.
It's bad for the store, it's bad for the shopper, and honestly, it isn't even good for the product itself.

sapiens said:How are financial advisors actually going to be affected by these upcoming changes to insurance laws? Most of them work for banks, insurance companies, pension funds, investment firms, or savings associations...
Anyone have an idea?

Actually, all these updates are strictly limited to insurance agency and brokerage roles. For those working at banks, savings institutions, or investment funds, nothing is changing at all.

Smiley said:steelmaker, I’m totally on board with the strategy, but how on earth do we handle the legal side of things with the financial firms, given the oversight from the Federal Insurance Office? They’re going to need licenses pretty soon, and those standard independent contractor agreements or service contracts just don't hold up legally in this line of work.

The IRS was giving us a hard time about using contractors, even though honestly, over a hundred thousand people in the US operate under similar external contracts...

What kind of agency structure should be used to represent a firm? Should we follow a model like State Farm or Allstate, or something else entirely? Does anyone here actually have some insight on this?

I suspect the IRS was breathing down your neck because you had more than ten contractors tied to a single licensed representative. Agencies are already struggling with that 1:10 ratio, and once the new regulations kick in, things are going to get even tougher since everyone will eventually be required to hold their own license. Now, those individual service contracts signed directly with an insurance carrier (like a savings & loan, a bank, or a mutual fund) are perfectly valid legally, mainly because the firm itself assumes responsibility for the agent's actions—at least for a certain period. Long story short, if you're running an agency, you really have to build a vetting process to identify which people are worth training for their licenses... otherwise, you'll just end up being ungrateful for them later.

We should probably move past the whole OVB discussion and focus on Charles Schwab style financial advising instead. It’s a field that demands a lot from you, but man, can it pay off—both for the clients and the pros actually doing the work.
I’ve been in this game for over eight years now. I set my own hours, work when the mood strikes, and pick my own partners (whether that's a client or a major firm). I’ve turned away more clients than I can count, even when they were practically shoving cash at me just to close a life insurance premium. Anyone who’s been around the block knows that every client has their price, and sometimes, you just have to be grateful for the right ones. It’s a two-way street: the customer gets to choose their advisor, and the advisor gets to choose their customer.
I’m writing this because some people just don't get it or they totally underestimate the profession. Sure, every job is a grind at first, but like we've said here before, if you invest in yourself—knowledge, drive, and a bit of guts—it all comes back to you. Anyone who has put in a few years in this business knows ten times more than any retail banker ever could. And there's a very good reason for that. A retail banker doesn't care if they sell you something or not. Their salary stays the same (or they get a pathetic little bonus), so frankly, you as a client don't really matter to them. But for a financial advisor who actually lives off these sales, it is in their best interest to find the absolute best solution for the client. (No offense to the retail bankers, but you really don't have a clue, and you won't until you get out from behind that teller window).
For instance, just by giving one specific client the right advice and a solid suite of services, I saved them over $65,000. Financial advising within a broader range of financial services is an incredibly serious business that, when done right, benefits both the client and the advisor. People who look down on this job, or even potential stock market advisory, clearly have a messy relationship with their own wallets. And those who think they can "test" an agent... well, they're my favorite kind of people...