My blogstats put me on to the fact that I am (not surprisingly) not the only person blogging at/from my university. I recommend to you that of a (possibly one of my?) student(s): TRASH”E” AND TALK.

I haven’t been able to decide whether I will sound more out of touch pretending to understand what that might be a reference to, or admitting that I have no idea (not true: I have no idea).

She (or so I am led to believe) writes, however, quite well. Although she should understand that, with the appropriate quantitative skills (far moreso than a mere Finance major) there is, in fact, little difference between fashion forecasting and predicting how much steel you need for a Boeing aeroplane. She is right that accounting is shit, though (two semesters, my first year as an undergrad, and I’d learned to avoid it like the plague). I hope I gave her an A.


8 comments so far

  1. Anonymous on

    haha, I just couldn’t resist commenting on a post specifically directed towards me.

    Even though I’m still in college, I do honestly believe that there is a difference between fashion and everything else. Maybe it’s the fashion elitist in me but there’s so many trends (I’m not sure if that’s the correct word) to be considerate of in fashion, ie: colors/styles/fabric/a particular “fashion element” (the cardigan in particular for this fall season) or that, “it bag of the year.”

    I agree that “fashion” inherently reoccurs every few couple of years, but fashion life dies so quickly and has a quicker cycle of reintroducing/dispersing itself. Whereas, if you where to spend billions of money on R&D for new aerospace technology, the chances that the investment (their equivalent to the “it bag of the moment”) will go to waste and be inferior seems rare; thus a smaller turnover rate.

    Whether the jargon I just wrote makes sense or not (in a strictly logical standpoint) I think there are elements that one learns through attending class at Lehigh that will obviously do more help for a future Boeing employee. Yet, I’m also arguing that if I went to a fashion school like Parsons in NYC, the education I would get there would be bs for the most part.

    You can teach Finance/SCM definitions, but not style.
    Fashion is more based on pure-guts and instincts (again please forgive my bias).

    With that said, why I am paying $45 grand/year to attend a school in Bethlehem, PA is beyond me.

  2. zooeygoethe on


    (a) fashion obeys the rules of basic economics (of monopolistically-competitive firms)

    (b) the econometrics/statistics of predicting that which is required, according to the uncertainty of fashion, really isn’t far from determining the composition of materials for an aeroplane, given the uncertainties of weather, wear, metal fatigue (same goes for the market – you still need a handle on your macroeconomic indicators, international economic trends, etc.).

    I’m referring, of course (as I said) to the quantitative analysis – not the marketing, industry-specific aspects of fashion (I’m an econometrician – I think at such levels).

    Getting back to point (a), though, fashion is not the same as the fashion industry: you can break into fashion reasonably easily (monopolistically competitive markets are characterised by neglible barriers to entry) – moreso than you can into the fashion industry. The latter will require some manner of networked skills, like anything else.

    Lehigh does have a fairly good track record of entrepeneurialship…

    I could teach Finance/SCM definitions, I’m sure, but I’d probably shoot myself before I made it halfway through them – and Australians have a style all to themselves (for some reason nobody else wants it).

  3. opit on

    Ha ( lurker in the hallway ) – I’m not at all sure that Aussie “fashion” wisecrack is accurate. ( This from North America ).

  4. zooeygoethe on

    I consider myself representative of Australians. Except the politicians, of course. Which is silly, given the country has voted in a government and policies I despise for over ten years, now.

    Our style is still the best, though. And all our own.

  5. Anonymous on

    Well, I’ve been to Melbourne a couple of times and the style there is applaud-able, but going with the whole “originality is trendy” concept, you could so find the same stuff in LA or even in Bethlehem, PA.

  6. zooeygoethe on

    Well, going to Melbourne was half your problem, right there (that joke kind of only works if you’re from Australia. Specifically Melbourne or Sydney).

    I was referring beyond the mere constraints of fashion, though (with which I have never participated all that strongly – or well): Regurgitator and Tim Rogers. Gough Whitlam and Paul Keating. John Clarke and Bryan Dawe. Barry Humphries and Germaine Greer! Peter Carey and 30 Days In Sydney. Peter Allen and a million of us pissing off to every other country on Earth.

  7. opit on

    Actually, if I gave my first impressions from a quick vacation in NSW a few years ago, it would be that tucker and sports are much higher priorities than in North America, to your benefit.
    Style I know nothing about : although I noticed regional change living in opposite ends of Canada due to dictates of climate.

  8. opit on

    Coming to think about the car article.
    Vehicle median mass in North America was much higher than I saw down your way. I don’t think I was fooled too much by chasing around the mountains in the Nowra area.
    North American vehicles evolved to last devouring great distances in varied climate. Europeans have a different set of specifications and priorites by and large. Their power ratings by volume are much higher.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: