Podcast appearances and mentions of Brian Potter

Owen Blackhurst is with Seb White and Tommy Stewart to chat being Merk'd, Rio Ferdinand, Seb's steamy glasses, Bruno Fernandes, John Stones, Northern grit, Tinder, Jack Grealish, Bukayo Saka, splinter groups, coups, Nicolas Anelka, Thierry Henry, Arsenal, Real Madrid, Juventus, France's Olympic football team, Wenger's double, Gary Neville, Peter Schmeichel, Robbie Fowler, Woody from Toy Story, Davor Šuker at Arsenal, Maradona at Sevilla, Guardians of the Galaxy, Marvel, Harry Potter, the 1966 World Cup final, Saving Private Ryan, Winston Churchill, Nobby Styles, George Best, Jason Mamoa, Aquamon, Indonesia, the River Severn, Rockports, Barack Obama, Ángel Di María, Louis van Gaal, Pablo Bastianini, Fernando Morientes, Steven Caulker, Yeovil, Andros Townsend, Harry Redknapp, Terry Skiverton, Seby's Special Soldier Award, scoring on your England debut, Rio Ferdinand, Jürgen Klopp, Liverpool, defenders as strikers, the sickening gambling industry, Sierra Leone, Malaga, Curtis Davies, Rangers, Amad Diallo, football spreadsheets, Brian Potter, mates on mountains, Luis Díaz, Godzilla, random 7-a-side teams, midfield enforcers, Fabrizio Romano, tabloid gossip, the sack race, Erik ten Hag, Ramona's Jalapeño hummus, @backyardcricketengland, the shoebill stork, Chris Pratt, Norfolk, little turns, seals, flight prices, Hamburg airport, treading on bollocks, the window seat, and somehow so much more.Get the latest issue of MUNDIAL Mag hereFollow MUNDIAL on Twitter - @mundialmagFollow MUNDIAL on Instagram - @mundialmag Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

I denne uges udsendelse har vi iført os røde næser, og det har vi gjort i anledning af at det er 15. marts, og det er i dag, at briterne fejrer humoren ved deres Red Nose Day. Et koncept som udsprang af velgørenhedsorganisationen Comic Relief som blev stiftet af forfatter Richard Curtis (Fire Bryllupper og En Begravelse/Den Sorte Snog) og standupkomikeren Sir Lenny Henry i midten af 80'erne. Red Nose Day har igennem årene indsamlet mere en 1 mia. britiske pund, og det er sket, ikke mindst, igennem en række charity singles som forener komikken med den engelske sangskat. Vi kommer til at kigge på flere af dem fra så forskellige kunstnere som Cliff Richard, The Proclaimers, Spice Girls, Tony Christie, Boyzone og Bananarama. Derudover møder vi selvfølgelig også en lang række fantastiske britiske komikere som f.eks. Rowan Atikinson, Peter Kay, French & Saunders og David Walliams og Matt Lucas. Andy leder efter sin komiske timing, og så prøver vi at definere hvad der er så fantastisk ved netop den britiske humor. Cliff Richard & The Young Ones feat. Hank Marvin - Living doll Bananarama & Lananeeneenoonoo - Help! Hale & Pace and the Stonkers - The Stonk Mr. Bean and Smear Campaign feat. Bruce Dickinson - I want to be (Elected) Right Said Fred and Friends - Stick it out Absolutely Fabulous - Absolutely Fabulous Cher, Chrissie Hynde and Neneh Cherry with Eric Clapton - Love can build a bridge Spice Girls - Who do you think you are? Boyzone - When the going gets tough Westlife - Uptown girl Tony Christie feat. Peter Kay - (Is this the way to) Amarillo The Proclaimers feat. Brian Potter and Andy Pipkin - I'm gonna be (500 miles) Paloma Faith - Enjoy yourself

We're in the midst of a great affordability crisis. It's not just the inflation crisis. It's a greater cost crisis of the last few decades. Everything that matters most in life—health care, housing, education—is getting more and more expensive. Why? One way to investigate this question is to look at the cost and speed of building physical things in America. We build urban transit more slowly than we used to, we build highways more slowly than we used to, we build energy infrastructure more slowly than we used to, we build skyscrapers more slowly than we used to, and we build housing more slowly than we used to. Brian Potter, the author of the newsletter 'Construction Physics,' explains the forces behind the great slowdown, why it matters, and how to turn things around. If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com.  Host: Derek Thompson Guest: Brian Potter Producer: Devon Manze Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Brain Drain Episode Four with Forde Brookfield and Toby Batchelor

Ich habe vor drei Jahren einige Episoden (16 und 18) aufgenommen, bei denen ich die Frage stelle, ob wir tatsächlich in einer Zeit bahnbrechender Innovationen oder eher in einer der Stagnation leben. Ich möchte jetzt das Thema nach dieser Zeit nochmals aufgreifen, hinterfragen und vielleicht mit neuem Kontext versehen. Bin ich richtig gelegen?  Ich werde dies mit einer Geschichte beginnen, mit der Geschichte zweier Brüder, Paul (1894 – 1981) und Attila Hörbiger (1896 – 1987). Beide sind in der Mitte der 1890er Jahre geboren und in den 1980er Jahren verstorben. Sie haben also einen großen Teil des 20. Jahrhunderts erlebt und sind Zeugen des Umbruchs der Jahrhundertwende vom 19. zum 20. Jahrhundert. Attila Hörbiger als bei den Salzburger Festspielen 1947 (Wikimedia Commons) Ich erzähle eine kurze Geschichte ihres Lebens, wobei nicht im Detail ihr Lebensweg im Zentrum steht, sondern vielmehr am Beispiel ihres Lebens, in welcher Welt sie aufgewachsen sind, gearbeitet, ihre Familien gegründet und ihre letzten Lebensjahre verbracht haben. Ihre Geschichte dient als greifbares Beispiel, welche Veränderungen wir als Gesellschaft erlebt haben, und als Anregung darüber nachzudenken, was vor und nach dem Tod der Brüder passiert ist. Was also bedeutet Fortschritt im Rahmen eines Lebens? Und, vor allem im Rahmen eines Lebens, das sich von der Jahrhundertwende vom 19. zum 20. Jahrhundert bis in die 1980er Jahre gezogen hat im Vergleich etwa zu meiner bisherigen Lebenszeit die von den 1970er bis heute reicht? Erleben wir, wie ich in den älteren Episoden diskutiert habe, seit den 1970er Jahren eine Stagnation oder tatsächlich — wie so häufig behauptet — enorme Beschleunigung technischer und gesellschaftlicher Fortschritte? Sind alle Bereiche von Wissenschaft und Technik gleich zu betrachten? Wie ist die Situation in unterschiedlichen Regionen der Welt? »Von Anwälten und Ökonomen über Programmierer und Finanz-Manager gilt, deren unproportionaler Gewinn ist für Arbeit, die völlig von den materiellen Realitäten der Welt entkoppelt sind. […] sie laufen herum mit der neuen Tech—Typen, die in deren Naivität jeden technischen Wandel mit kürzlichen Entwicklungen in Elektronik und vor allem Mobiltelefonen vergleichen«, Vaclav Smil Was könnte die nähere und mittlere Zukunft bringen? Weitere Stagnation? Ein Durchstarten, weil wir die letzten Jahrzehnte genutzt haben, Know-How aufzubauen, das jetzt erst Anwendung findet? Ein Steampunk-Szenario, wo Versagen in verschiedenen Bereichen und Regionen (die sogar vor die 1960er Jahre zurückfallen) einem enormen Wandel in anderen gegenüberstehen? Wer wird diese Entwicklungen treiben? Die bisher bekannten oder eher atypische Akteure? Was sind Gründe für die aktuelle Situation, was können und sollten wir ändern um die Entwicklungen im Griff zu halten? »Der Spalt zwischen Wunschdenken und Realität ist enorm.«, Vaclav Smil Referenzen andere Episoden Episode 65: Getting Nothing Done — Teil 2 Episode 64: Getting Nothing Done — Teil 1 Episode 44: Was ist Fortschritt? Ein Gespräch mit Philipp Blom Episode 18: Gespräch mit Andreas Windisch: Physik, Fortschritt oder Stagnation Episode 16: Innovation und Fortschritt oder Stagnation? Episode 15: Innovation oder Fortschritt? fachliche Referenzen Vaclav Smil, How the World Really Works, Penguin (2022) Elon Musk Zitat: Alex Epstein, Fossil Future,Portfolio (2022)  Kevin Esvelt, Delay, Detect, Defend: Preparing for a Future in which Thousands Can Release New Pandemics (2022) USAID Announces New $125 Million Project To Detect Unknown Viruses With Pandemic Potential Sam Harris, Recipes for Future Plagues, Conversation with Rob Reid and Kevin Esvelt »Heiße Dusche«, Tim Urban with Lex Fridman (2023) Brian Potter, When did New York start building slowly? (2023)

Episode 159 of A History of Rock Music in Five Hundred Songs looks at “Itchycoo Park” by the Small Faces, and their transition from Mod to psychedelia. Click the full post to read liner notes, links to more information, and a transcript of the episode. Patreon backers also have a twenty-five-minute bonus episode available, on "The First Cut is the Deepest" by P.P. Arnold. Tilt Araiza has assisted invaluably by doing a first-pass edit, and will hopefully be doing so from now on. Check out Tilt's irregular podcasts at http://www.podnose.com/jaffa-cakes-for-proust and http://sitcomclub.com/ Resources As so many of the episodes recently have had no Mixcloud due to the number of songs by one artist, I've decided to start splitting the mixes of the recordings excerpted in the podcasts into two parts. Here's part one and part two. I've used quite a few books in this episode. The Small Faces & Other Stories by Uli Twelker and Roland Schmit is definitely a fan-work with all that that implies, but has some useful quotes. Two books claim to be the authorised biography of Steve Marriott, and I've referred to both -- All Too Beautiful by Paolo Hewitt and John Hellier, and All Or Nothing by Simon Spence. Spence also wrote an excellent book on Immediate Records, which I referred to. Kenney Jones and Ian McLagan both wrote very readable autobiographies. I've also used Andrew Loog Oldham's autobiography Stoned, co-written by Spence, though be warned that it casually uses slurs. P.P. Arnold's autobiography is a sometimes distressing read covering her whole life, including her time at Immediate. There are many, many, collections of the Small Faces' work, ranging from cheap budget CDs full of outtakes to hundred-pound-plus box sets, also full of outtakes. This three-CD budget collection contains all the essential tracks, and is endorsed by Kenney Jones, the band's one surviving member. And if you're intrigued by the section on Immediate Records, this two-CD set contains a good selection of their releases. ERRATUM-ISH: I say Jimmy Winston was “a couple” of years older than the rest of the band. This does not mean exactly two, but is used in the vague vernacular sense equivalent to “a few”. Different sources I've seen put Winston as either two or four years older than his bandmates, though two seems to be the most commonly cited figure. Transcript For once there is little to warn about in this episode, but it does contain some mild discussions of organised crime, arson, and mental illness, and a quoted joke about capital punishment in questionable taste which may upset some. One name that came up time and again when we looked at the very early years of British rock and roll was Lionel Bart. If you don't remember the name, he was a left-wing Bohemian songwriter who lived in a communal house-share which at various times was also inhabited by people like Shirley Eaton, the woman who is painted gold at the beginning of Goldfinger, Mike Pratt, the star of Randall and Hopkirk (Deceased), and Davey Graham, the most influential and innovative British guitarist of the fifties and early sixties. Bart and Pratt had co-written most of the hits of Britain's first real rock and roll star, Tommy Steele: [Excerpt: Tommy Steele, "Rock with the Caveman"] and then Bart had gone solo as a writer, and written hits like "Living Doll" for Britain's *biggest* rock and roll star, Cliff Richard: [Excerpt: Cliff Richard, "Living Doll"] But Bart's biggest contribution to rock music turned out not to be the songs he wrote for rock and roll stars, and not even his talent-spotting -- it was Bart who got Steele signed by Larry Parnes, and he also pointed Parnes in the direction of another of his biggest stars, Marty Wilde -- but the opportunity he gave to a lot of child stars in a very non-rock context. Bart's musical Oliver!, inspired by the novel Oliver Twist, was the biggest sensation on the West End stage in the early 1960s, breaking records for the longest-running musical, and also transferred to Broadway and later became an extremely successful film. As it happened, while Oliver! was extraordinarily lucrative, Bart didn't see much of the money from it -- he sold the rights to it, and his other musicals, to the comedian Max Bygraves in the mid-sixties for a tiny sum in order to finance a couple of other musicals, which then flopped horribly and bankrupted him. But by that time Oliver! had already been the first big break for three people who went on to major careers in music -- all of them playing the same role. Because many of the major roles in Oliver! were for young boys, the cast had to change frequently -- child labour laws meant that multiple kids had to play the same role in different performances, and people quickly grew out of the roles as teenagerhood hit. We've already heard about the career of one of the people who played the Artful Dodger in the original West End production -- Davy Jones, who transferred in the role to Broadway in 1963, and who we'll be seeing again in a few episodes' time -- and it's very likely that another of the people who played the Artful Dodger in that production, a young lad called Philip Collins, will be coming into the story in a few years' time. But the first of the artists to use the Artful Dodger as a springboard to a music career was the one who appeared in the role on the original cast album of 1960, though there's very little in that recording to suggest the sound of his later records: [Excerpt: Steve Marriott, "Consider Yourself"] Steve Marriott is the second little Stevie we've looked at in recent episodes to have been born prematurely. In his case, he was born a month premature, and jaundiced, and had to spend the first month of his life in hospital, the first few days of which were spent unsure if he was going to survive. Thankfully he did, but he was a bit of a sickly child as a result, and remained stick-thin and short into adulthood -- he never grew to be taller than five foot five. Young Steve loved music, and especially the music of Buddy Holly. He also loved skiffle, and managed to find out where Lonnie Donegan lived. He went round and knocked on Donegan's door, but was very disappointed to discover that his idol was just a normal man, with his hair uncombed and a shirt stained with egg yolk. He started playing the ukulele when he was ten, and graduated to guitar when he was twelve, forming a band which performed under a variety of different names. When on stage with them, he would go by the stage name Buddy Marriott, and would wear a pair of horn-rimmed glasses to look more like Buddy Holly. When he was twelve, his mother took him to an audition for Oliver! The show had been running for three months at the time, and was likely to run longer, and child labour laws meant that they had to have replacements for some of the cast -- every three months, any performing child had to have at least ten days off. At his audition, Steve played his guitar and sang "Who's Sorry Now?", the recent Connie Francis hit: [Excerpt: Connie Francis, "Who's Sorry Now?"] And then, ignoring the rule that performers could only do one song, immediately launched into Buddy Holly's "Oh Boy!" [Excerpt: Buddy Holly, "Oh Boy!"] His musical ability and attitude impressed the show's producers, and he was given a job which suited him perfectly -- rather than being cast in a single role, he would be swapped around, playing different small parts, in the chorus, and occasionally taking the larger role of the Artful Dodger. Steve Marriott was never able to do the same thing over and over, and got bored very quickly, but because he was moving between roles, he was able to keep interested in his performances for almost a year, and he was good enough that it was him chosen to sing the Dodger's role on the cast album when that was recorded: [Excerpt: Steve Marriott and Joyce Blair, "I'd Do Anything"] And he enjoyed performance enough that his parents pushed him to become an actor -- though there were other reasons for that, too. He was never the best-behaved child in the world, nor the most attentive student, and things came to a head when, shortly after leaving the Oliver! cast, he got so bored of his art classes he devised a plan to get out of them forever. Every art class, for several weeks, he'd sit in a different desk at the back of the classroom and stuff torn-up bits of paper under the floorboards. After a couple of months of this he then dropped a lit match in, which set fire to the paper and ended up burning down half the school. His schoolfriend Ken Hawes talked about it many decades later, saying "I suppose in a way I was impressed about how he had meticulously planned the whole thing months in advance, the sheer dogged determination to see it through. He could quite easily have been caught and would have had to face the consequences. There was no danger in anybody getting hurt because we were at the back of the room. We had to be at the back otherwise somebody would have noticed what he was doing. There was no malice against other pupils, he just wanted to burn the damn school down." Nobody could prove it was him who had done it, though his parents at least had a pretty good idea who it was, but it was clear that even when the school was rebuilt it wasn't a good idea to send him back there, so they sent him to the Italia Conti Drama School; the same school that Anthony Newley and Petula Clark, among many others, had attended. Marriott's parents couldn't afford the school's fees, but Marriott was so talented that the school waived the fees -- they said they'd get him work, and take a cut of his wages in lieu of the fees. And over the next few years they did get him a lot of work. Much of that work was for TV shows, which like almost all TV of the time no longer exist -- he was in an episode of the Sid James sitcom Citizen James, an episode of Mr. Pastry's Progress, an episode of the police drama Dixon of Dock Green, and an episode of a series based on the Just William books, none of which survive. He also did a voiceover for a carpet cleaner ad, appeared on the radio soap opera Mrs Dale's Diary playing a pop star, and had a regular spot reading listeners' letters out for the agony aunt Marje Proops on her radio show. Almost all of this early acting work wa s utterly ephemeral, but there are a handful of his performances that do survive, mostly in films. He has a small role in the comedy film Heavens Above!, a mistaken-identity comedy in which a radical left-wing priest played by Peter Sellers is given a parish intended for a more conservative priest of the same name, and upsets the well-off people of the parish by taking in a large family of travellers and appointing a Black man as his churchwarden. The film has some dated attitudes, in the way that things that were trying to be progressive and antiracist sixty years ago invariably do, but has a sparkling cast, with Sellers, Eric Sykes, William Hartnell, Brock Peters, Roy Kinnear, Irene Handl, and many more extremely recognisable faces from the period: [Excerpt: Heavens Above!] Marriott apparently enjoyed working on the film immensely, as he was a fan of the Goon Show, which Sellers had starred in and which Sykes had co-written several episodes of. There are reports of Marriott and Sellers jamming together on banjos during breaks in filming, though these are probably *slightly* inaccurate -- Sellers played the banjolele, a banjo-style instrument which is played like a ukulele. As Marriott had started on ukulele before switching to guitar, it was probably these they were playing, rather than banjoes. He also appeared in a more substantial role in a film called Live It Up!, a pop exploitation film starring David Hemmings in which he appears as a member of a pop group. Oddly, Marriott plays a drummer, even though he wasn't a drummer, while two people who *would* find fame as drummers, Mitch Mitchell and Dave Clark, appear in smaller, non-drumming, roles. He doesn't perform on the soundtrack, which is produced by Joe Meek and features Sounds Incorporated, The Outlaws, and Gene Vincent, but he does mime playing behind Heinz Burt, the former bass player of the Tornadoes who was then trying for solo stardom at Meek's instigation: [Excerpt: Heinz Burt, "Don't You Understand"] That film was successful enough that two years later, in 1965 Marriott came back for a sequel, Be My Guest, with The Niteshades, the Nashville Teens, and Jerry Lee Lewis, this time with music produced by Shel Talmy rather than Meek. But that was something of a one-off. After making Live It Up!, Marriott had largely retired from acting, because he was trying to become a pop star. The break finally came when he got an audition at the National Theatre, for a job touring with Laurence Olivier for a year. He came home and told his parents he hadn't got the job, but then a week later they were bemused by a phone call asking why Steve hadn't turned up for rehearsals. He *had* got the job, but he'd decided he couldn't face a year of doing the same thing over and over, and had pretended he hadn't. By this time he'd already released his first record. The work on Oliver! had got him a contract with Decca Records, and he'd recorded a Buddy Holly knock-off, "Give Her My Regards", written for him by Kenny Lynch, the actor, pop star, and all-round entertainer: [Excerpt: Steve Marriott, "Give Her My Regards"] That record wasn't a hit, but Marriott wasn't put off. He formed a band who were at first called the Moonlights, and then the Frantiks, and they got a management deal with Tony Calder, Andrew Oldham's junior partner in his management company. Calder got former Shadow Tony Meehan to produce a demo for the group, a version of Cliff Richard's hit "Move It", which was shopped round the record labels with no success (and which sadly appears no longer to survive). The group also did some recordings with Joe Meek, which also don't circulate, but which may exist in the famous "Teachest Tapes" which are slowly being prepared for archival releases. The group changed their name to the Moments, and added in the guitarist John Weider, who was one of those people who seem to have been in every band ever either just before or just after they became famous -- at various times he was in Johnny Kidd and the Pirates, John Mayall's Bluesbreakers, Family, Eric Burdon and the Animals, and the band that became Crabby Appleton, but never in their most successful lineups. They continued recording unsuccessful demos, of which a small number have turned up: [Excerpt: Steve Marriott and the Moments, "Good Morning Blues"] One of their demo sessions was produced by Andrew Oldham, and while that session didn't lead to a release, it did lead to Oldham booking Marriott as a session harmonica player for one of his "Andrew Oldham Orchestra" sessions, to play on a track titled "365 Rolling Stones (One For Every Day of the Year)": [Excerpt: The Andrew Oldham Orchestra, "365 Rolling Stones (One For Every Day of the Year)"] Oldham also produced a session for what was meant to be Marriott's second solo single on Decca, a cover version of the Rolling Stones' "Tell Me", which was actually scheduled for release but pulled at the last minute. Like many of Marriott's recordings from this period, if it exists, it doesn't seem to circulate publicly. But despite their lack of recording success, the Moments did manage to have a surprising level of success on the live circuit. Because they were signed to Calder and Oldham's management company, they got a contract with the Arthur Howes booking agency, which got them support slots on package tours with Billy J Kramer, Freddie and the Dreamers, the Kinks, and other major acts, and the band members were earning about thirty pounds a week each -- a very, very good living for the time. They even had a fanzine devoted to them, written by a fan named Stuart Tuck. But as they weren't making records, the band's lineup started changing, with members coming and going. They did manage to get one record released -- a soundalike version of the Kinks' "You Really Got Me", recorded for a budget label who rushed it out, hoping to get it picked up in the US and for it to be the hit version there: [Excerpt: The Moments, "You Really Got Me"] But the month after that was released, Marriott was sacked from the band, apparently in part because the band were starting to get billed as Steve Marriott and the Moments rather than just The Moments, and the rest of them didn't want to be anyone's backing band. He got a job at a music shop while looking around for other bands to perform with. At one point around this time he was going to form a duo with a friend of his, Davy Jones -- not the one who had also appeared in Oliver!, but another singer of the same name. This one sang with a blues band called the Mannish Boys, and both men were well known on the Mod scene in London. Marriott's idea was that they call themselves David and Goliath, with Jones being David, and Marriott being Goliath because he was only five foot five. That could have been a great band, but it never got past the idea stage. Marriott had become friendly with another part-time musician and shop worker called Ronnie Lane, who was in a band called the Outcasts who played the same circuit as the Moments: [Excerpt: The Outcasts, "Before You Accuse Me"] Lane worked in a sound equipment shop and Marriott in a musical instrument shop, and both were customers of the other as well as friends -- at least until Marriott came into the shop where Lane worked and tried to persuade him to let Marriott have a free PA system. Lane pretended to go along with it as a joke, and got sacked. Lane had then gone to the shop where Marriott worked in the hope that Marriott would give him a good deal on a guitar because he'd been sacked because of Marriott. Instead, Marriott persuaded him that he should switch to bass, on the grounds that everyone was playing guitar since the Beatles had come along, but a bass player would always be able to find work. Lane bought the bass. Shortly after that, Marriott came to an Outcasts gig in a pub, and was asked to sit in. He enjoyed playing with Lane and the group's drummer Kenney Jones, but got so drunk he smashed up the pub's piano while playing a Jerry Lee Lewis song. The resulting fallout led to the group being barred from the pub and splitting up, so Marriott, Lane, and Jones decided to form their own group. They got in another guitarist Marriott knew, a man named Jimmy Winston who was a couple of years older than them, and who had two advantages -- he was a known Face on the mod scene, with a higher status than any of the other three, and his brother owned a van and would drive the group and their equipment for ten percent of their earnings. There was a slight problem in that Winston was also as good on guitar as Marriott and looked like he might want to be the star, but Marriott neutralised that threat -- he moved Winston over to keyboards. The fact that Winston couldn't play keyboards didn't matter -- he could be taught a couple of riffs and licks, and he was sure to pick up the rest. And this way the group had the same lineup as one of Marriott's current favourites, Booker T and the MGs. While he was still a Buddy Holly fan, he was now, like the rest of the Mods, an R&B obsessive. Marriott wasn't entirely sure that this new group would be the one that would make him a star though, and was still looking for other alternatives in case it didn't play out. He auditioned for another band, the Lower Third, which counted Stuart Tuck, the writer of the Moments fanzine, among its members. But he was unsuccessful in the audition -- instead his friend Davy Jones, the one who he'd been thinking of forming a duo with, got the job: [Excerpt: Davy Jones and the Lower Third, "You've Got a Habit of Leaving"] A few months after that, Davy Jones and the Lower Third changed their name to David Bowie and the Lower Third, and we'll be picking up that story in a little over a year from now... Marriott, Lane, Jones, and Winston kept rehearsing and pulled together a five-song set, which was just about long enough to play a few shows, if they extended the songs with long jamming instrumental sections. The opening song for these early sets was one which, when they recorded it, would be credited to Marriott and Lane -- the two had struck up a writing partnership and agreed to a Lennon/McCartney style credit split, though in these early days Marriott was doing far more of the writing than Lane was. But "You Need Loving" was... heavily inspired... by "You Need Love", a song Willie Dixon had written for Muddy Waters: [Excerpt: Muddy Waters, "You Need Love"] It's not precisely the same song, but you can definitely hear the influence in the Marriott/Lane song: [Excerpt: The Small Faces, "You Need Loving"] They did make some changes though, notably to the end of the song: [Excerpt: The Small Faces, "You Need Loving"] You will be unsurprised to learn that Robert Plant was a fan of Steve Marriott. The new group were initially without a name, until after one of their first gigs, Winston's girlfriend, who hadn't met the other three before, said "You've all got such small faces!" The name stuck, because it had a double meaning -- as we've seen in the episode on "My Generation", "Face" was Mod slang for someone who was cool and respected on the Mod scene, but also, with the exception of Winston, who was average size, the other three members of the group were very short -- the tallest of the three was Ronnie Lane, who was five foot six. One thing I should note about the group's name, by the way -- on all the labels of their records in the UK while they were together, they were credited as "Small Faces", with no "The" in front, but all the band members referred to the group in interviews as "The Small Faces", and they've been credited that way on some reissues and foreign-market records. The group's official website is thesmallfaces.com but all the posts on the website refer to them as "Small Faces" with no "the". The use  of the word "the" or not at the start of a group's name at this time was something of a shibboleth -- for example both The Buffalo Springfield and The Pink Floyd dropped theirs after their early records -- and its status in this case is a strange one. I'll be referring to the group throughout as "The Small Faces" rather than "Small Faces" because the former is easier to say, but both seem accurate. After a few pub gigs in London, they got some bookings in the North of England, where they got a mixed reception -- they went down well at Peter Stringfellow's Mojo Club in Sheffield, where Joe Cocker was a regular performer, less well at a working-man's club, and reports differ about their performance at the Twisted Wheel in Manchester, though one thing everyone is agreed on is that while they were performing, some Mancunians borrowed their van and used it to rob a clothing warehouse, and gave the band members some very nice leather coats as a reward for their loan of the van. It was only on the group's return to London that they really started to gel as a unit. In particular, Kenney Jones had up to that point been a very stiff, precise, drummer, but he suddenly loosened up and, in Steve Marriott's tasteless phrase, "Every number swung like Hanratty" (James Hanratty was one of the last people in Britain to be executed by hanging). Shortly after that, Don Arden's secretary -- whose name I haven't been able to find in any of the sources I've used for this episode, sadly, came into the club where they were rehearsing, the Starlight Rooms, to pass a message from Arden to an associate of his who owned the club. The secretary had seen Marriott perform before -- he would occasionally get up on stage at the Starlight Rooms to duet with Elkie Brooks, who was a regular performer there, and she'd seen him do that -- but was newly impressed by his group, and passed word on to her boss that this was a group he should investigate. Arden is someone who we'll be looking at a lot in future episodes, but the important thing to note right now is that he was a failed entertainer who had moved into management and promotion, first with American acts like Gene Vincent, and then with British acts like the Nashville Teens, who had had hits with tracks like "Tobacco Road": [Excerpt: The Nashville Teens, "Tobacco Road"] Arden was also something of a gangster -- as many people in the music industry were at the time, but he was worse than most of his contemporaries, and delighted in his nickname "the Al Capone of pop". The group had a few managers looking to sign them, but Arden convinced them with his offer. They would get a percentage of their earnings -- though they never actually received that percentage -- twenty pounds a week in wages, and, the most tempting part of it all, they would get expense accounts at all the Carnaby St boutiques and could go there whenever they wanted and get whatever they wanted. They signed with Arden, which all of them except Marriott would later regret, because Arden's financial exploitation meant that it would be decades before they saw any money from their hits, and indeed both Marriott and Lane would be dead before they started getting royalties from their old records. Marriott, on the other hand, had enough experience of the industry to credit Arden with the group getting anywhere at all, and said later "Look, you go into it with your eyes open and as far as I was concerned it was better than living on brown sauce rolls. At least we had twenty quid a week guaranteed." Arden got the group signed to Decca, with Dick Rowe signing them to the same kind of production deal that Andrew Oldham had pioneered with the Stones, so that Arden would own the rights to their recordings. At this point the group still only knew a handful of songs, but Rowe was signing almost everyone with a guitar at this point, putting out a record or two and letting them sink or swim. He had already been firmly labelled as "the man who turned down the Beatles", and was now of the opinion that it was better to give everyone a chance than to make that kind of expensive mistake again. By this point Marriott and Lane were starting to write songs together -- though at this point it was still mostly Marriott writing, and people would ask him why he was giving Lane half the credit, and he'd reply "Without Ronnie's help keeping me awake and being there I wouldn't do half of it. He keeps me going." -- but for their first single Arden was unsure that they were up to the task of writing a hit. The group had been performing a version of Solomon Burke's "Everybody Needs Somebody to Love", a song which Burke always claimed to have written alone, but which is credited to him, Jerry Wexler, and Bert Berns (and has Bern's fingerprints, at least, on it to my ears): [Excerpt: Solomon Burke, "Everybody Needs Somebody to Love"] Arden got some professional writers to write new lyrics and vocal melody to their arrangement of the song -- the people he hired were Brian Potter, who would later go on to co-write "Rhinestone Cowboy", and Ian Samwell, the former member of Cliff Richard's Drifters who had written many of Richard's early hits, including "Move It", and was now working for Arden. The group went into the studio and recorded the song, titled "Whatcha Gonna Do About It?": [Excerpt: The Small Faces, "Whatcha Gonna Do About It?"] That version, though was deemed too raucous, and they had to go back into the studio to cut a new version, which came out as their first single: [Excerpt: The Small Faces, "Whatcha Gonna Do About It?"] At first the single didn't do much on the charts, but then Arden got to work with teams of people buying copies from chart return shops, bribing DJs on pirate radio stations to play it, and bribing the person who compiled the charts for the NME. Eventually it made number fourteen, at which point it became a genuinely popular hit. But with that popularity came problems. In particular, Steve Marriott was starting to get seriously annoyed by Jimmy Winston. As the group started to get TV appearances, Winston started to act like he should be the centre of attention. Every time Marriott took a solo in front of TV cameras, Winston would start making stupid gestures, pulling faces, anything to make sure the cameras focussed on him rather than on Marriott. Which wouldn't have been too bad had Winston been a great musician, but he was still not very good on the keyboards, and unlike the others didn't seem particularly interested in trying. He seemed to want to be a star, rather than a musician. The group's next planned single was a Marriott and Lane song, "I've Got Mine". To promote it, the group mimed to it in a film, Dateline Diamonds, a combination pop film and crime caper not a million miles away from the ones that Marriott had appeared in a few years earlier. They also contributed three other songs to the film's soundtrack. Unfortunately, the film's release was delayed, and the film had been the big promotional push that Arden had planned for the single, and without that it didn't chart at all. By the time the single came out, though, Winston was no longer in the group. There are many, many different stories as to why he was kicked out. Depending on who you ask, it was because he was trying to take the spotlight away from Marriott, because he wasn't a good enough keyboard player, because he was taller than the others and looked out of place, or because he asked Don Arden where the money was. It was probably a combination of all of these, but fundamentally what it came to was that Winston just didn't fit into the group. Winston would, in later years, say that him confronting Arden was the only reason for his dismissal, saying that Arden had manipulated the others to get him out of the way, but that seems unlikely on the face of it. When Arden sacked him, he kept Winston on as a client and built another band around him, Jimmy Winston and the Reflections, and got them signed to Decca too, releasing a Kenny Lynch song, "Sorry She's Mine", to no success: [Excerpt: Jimmy Winston and the Reflections, "Sorry She's Mine"] Another version of that song would later be included on the first Small Faces album. Winston would then form another band, Winston's Fumbs, who would also release one single, before he went into acting instead. His most notable credit was as a rebel in the 1972 Doctor Who story Day of the Daleks, and he later retired from showbusiness to run a business renting out sound equipment, and died in 2020. The group hired his replacement without ever having met him or heard him play. Ian McLagan had started out as the rhythm guitarist in a Shadows soundalike band called the Cherokees, but the group had become R&B fans and renamed themselves the Muleskinners, and then after hearing "Green Onions", McLagan had switched to playing Hammond organ. The Muleskinners had played the same R&B circuit as dozens of other bands we've looked at, and had similar experiences, including backing visiting blues stars like Sonny Boy Williamson, Little Walter, and Howlin' Wolf. Their one single had been a cover version of "Back Door Man", a song Willie Dixon had written for Wolf: [Excerpt: The Muleskinners, "Back Door Man"] The Muleskinners had split up as most of the group had day jobs, and McLagan had gone on to join a group called Boz and the Boz People, who were becoming popular on the live circuit, and who also toured backing Kenny Lynch while McLagan was in the band. Boz and the Boz People would release several singles in 1966, like their version of the theme for the film "Carry on Screaming", released just as by "Boz": [Excerpt: Boz, "Carry on Screaming"] By that time, McLagan had left the group -- Boz Burrell later went on to join King Crimson and Bad Company. McLagan left the Boz People in something of a strop, and was complaining to a friend the night he left the group that he didn't have any work lined up. The friend joked that he should join the Small Faces, because he looked like them, and McLagan got annoyed that his friend wasn't taking him seriously -- he'd love to be in the Small Faces, but they *had* a keyboard player. The next day he got a phone call from Don Arden asking him to come to his office. He was being hired to join a hit pop group who needed a new keyboard player. McLagan at first wasn't allowed to tell anyone what band he was joining -- in part because Arden's secretary was dating Winston, and Winston hadn't yet been informed he was fired, and Arden didn't want word leaking out until it had been sorted. But he'd been chosen purely on the basis of an article in a music magazine which had praised his playing with the Boz People, and without the band knowing him or his playing. As soon as they met, though, he immediately fit in in a way Winston never had. He looked the part, right down to his height -- he said later "Ronnie Lane and I were the giants in the band at 5 ft 6 ins, and Kenney Jones and Steve Marriott were the really teeny tiny chaps at 5 ft 5 1/2 ins" -- and he was a great player, and shared a sense of humour with them. McLagan had told Arden he'd been earning twenty pounds a week with the Boz People -- he'd actually been on five -- and so Arden agreed to give him thirty pounds a week during his probationary month, which was more than the twenty the rest of the band were getting. As soon as his probationary period was over, McLagan insisted on getting a pay cut so he'd be on the same wages as the rest of the group. Soon Marriott, Lane, and McLagan were all living in a house rented for them by Arden -- Jones decided to stay living with his parents -- and were in the studio recording their next single. Arden was convinced that the mistake with "I've Got Mine" had been allowing the group to record an original, and again called in a team of professional songwriters. Arden brought in Mort Shuman, who had recently ended his writing partnership with Doc Pomus and struck out on his own, after co-writing songs like "Save the Last Dance for Me", "Sweets For My Sweet", and "Viva Las Vegas" together, and Kenny Lynch, and the two of them wrote "Sha-La-La-La-Lee", and Lynch added backing vocals to the record: [Excerpt: The Small Faces, "Sha-La-La-La-Lee"] None of the group were happy with the record, but it became a big hit, reaching number three in the charts. Suddenly the group had a huge fanbase of screaming teenage girls, which embarrassed them terribly, as they thought of themselves as serious heavy R&B musicians, and the rest of their career would largely be spent vacillating between trying to appeal to their teenybopper fanbase and trying to escape from it to fit their own self-image. They followed "Sha-La-La-La-Lee" with "Hey Girl", a Marriott/Lane song, but one written to order -- they were under strict instructions from Arden that if they wanted to have the A-side of a single, they had to write something as commercial as "Sha-La-La-La-Lee" had been, and they managed to come up with a second top-ten hit. Two hit singles in a row was enough to make an album viable, and the group went into the studio and quickly cut an album, which had their first two hits on it -- "Hey Girl" wasn't included, and nor was the flop "I've Got Mine" -- plus a bunch of semi-originals like "You Need Loving", a couple of Kenny Lynch songs, and a cover version of Sam Cooke's "Shake". The album went to number three on the album charts, with the Beatles and the Rolling Stones in the number one and two spots, and it was at this point that Arden's rivals really started taking interest. But that interest was quelled for the moment when, after Robert Stigwood enquired about managing the band, Arden went round to Stigwood's office with four goons and held him upside down over a balcony, threatening to drop him off if he ever messed with any of Arden's acts again. But the group were still being influenced by other managers. In particular, Brian Epstein came round to the group's shared house, with Graeme Edge of the Moody Blues, and brought them some slices of orange -- which they discovered, after eating them, had been dosed with LSD. By all accounts, Marriott's first trip was a bad one, but the group soon became regular consumers of the drug, and it influenced the heavier direction they took on their next single, "All or Nothing". "All or Nothing" was inspired both by Marriott's breakup with his girlfriend of the time, and his delight at the fact that Jenny Rylance, a woman he was attracted to, had split up with her then-boyfriend Rod Stewart. Rylance and Stewart later reconciled, but would break up again and Rylance would become Marriott's first wife in 1968: [Excerpt: The Small Faces, "All or Nothing"] "All or Nothing" became the group's first and only number one record -- and according to the version of the charts used on Top of the Pops, it was a joint number one with the Beatles' double A-side of "Yellow Submarine" and "Eleanor Rigby", both selling exactly as well as each other. But this success caused the group's parents to start to wonder why their kids -- none of whom were yet twenty-one, the legal age of majority at the time -- were not rich. While the group were on tour, their parents came as a group to visit Arden and ask him where the money was, and why their kids were only getting paid twenty pounds a week when their group was getting a thousand pounds a night. Arden tried to convince the parents that he had been paying the group properly, but that they had spent their money on heroin -- which was very far from the truth, the band were only using soft drugs at the time. This put a huge strain on the group's relationship with Arden, and it wasn't the only thing Arden did that upset them. They had been spending a lot of time in the studio working on new material, and Arden was convinced that they were spending too much time recording, and that they were just faffing around and not producing anything of substance. They dropped off a tape to show him that they had been working -- and the next thing they knew, Arden had put out one of the tracks from that tape, "My Mind's Eye", which had only been intended as a demo, as a single: [Excerpt: The Small Faces, "My Mind's Eye"] That it went to number four on the charts didn't make up for the fact that the first the band heard of the record coming out at all was when they heard it on the radio. They needed rid of Arden. Luckily for them, Arden wasn't keen on continuing to work with them either. They were unreliable and flakey, and he also needed cash quick to fund his other ventures, and he agreed to sell on their management and recording contracts. Depending on which version of the story you believe, he may have sold them on to an agent called Harold Davison, who then sold them on to Andrew Oldham and Tony Calder, but according to Oldham what happened is that in December 1966 Arden demanded the highest advance in British history -- twenty-five thousand pounds -- directly from Oldham. In cash. In a brown paper bag. The reason Oldham and Calder were interested was that in July 1965 they'd started up their own record label, Immediate Records, which had been announced by Oldham in his column in Disc and Music Echo, in which he'd said "On many occasions I have run down the large record companies over issues such as pirate stations, their promotion, and their tastes. And many readers have written in and said that if I was so disturbed by the state of the existing record companies why didn't I do something about it.  I have! On the twentieth of this month the first of three records released by my own company, Immediate Records, is to be launched." That first batch of three records contained one big hit, "Hang on Sloopy" by the McCoys, which Immediate licensed from Bert Berns' new record label BANG in the US: [Excerpt: The McCoys, "Hang on Sloopy"] The two other initial singles featured the talents of Immediate's new in-house producer, a session player who had previously been known as "Little Jimmy" to distinguish him from "Big" Jim Sullivan, the other most in-demand session guitarist, but who was now just known as Jimmy Page. The first was a version of Pete Seeger's "The Bells of Rhymney", which Page produced and played guitar on, for a group called The Fifth Avenue: [Excerpt: The Fifth Avenue, "The Bells of Rhymney"] And the second was a Gordon Lightfoot song performed by a girlfriend of Brian Jones', Nico. The details as to who was involved in the track have varied -- at different times the production has been credited to Jones, Page, and Oldham -- but it seems to be the case that both Jones and Page play on the track, as did session bass player John Paul Jones: [Excerpt: Nico, "I'm Not Sayin'"] While "Hang on Sloopy" was a big hit, the other two singles were flops, and The Fifth Avenue split up, while Nico used the publicity she'd got as an entree into Andy Warhol's Factory, and we'll be hearing more about how that went in a future episode. Oldham and Calder were trying to follow the model of the Brill Building, of Phil Spector, and of big US independents like Motown and Stax. They wanted to be a one-stop shop where they'd produce the records, manage the artists, and own the publishing -- and they also licensed the publishing for the Beach Boys' songs for a couple of years, and started publicising their records over here in a big way, to exploit the publishing royalties, and that was a major factor in turning the Beach Boys from minor novelties to major stars in the UK. Most of Immediate's records were produced by Jimmy Page, but other people got to have a go as well. Giorgio Gomelsky and Shel Talmy both produced tracks for the label, as did a teenage singer then known as Paul Raven, who would later become notorious under his later stage-name Gary Glitter. But while many of these records were excellent -- and Immediate deserves to be talked about in the same terms as Motown or Stax when it comes to the quality of the singles it released, though not in terms of commercial success -- the only ones to do well on the charts in the first few months of the label's existence were "Hang on Sloopy" and an EP by Chris Farlowe. It was Farlowe who provided Immediate Records with its first home-grown number one, a version of the Rolling Stones' "Out of Time" produced by Mick Jagger, though according to Arthur Greenslade, the arranger on that and many other Immediate tracks, Jagger had given up on getting a decent performance out of Farlowe and Oldham ended up producing the vocals. Greenslade later said "Andrew must have worked hard in there, Chris Farlowe couldn't sing his way out of a paper bag. I'm sure Andrew must have done it, where you get an artist singing and you can do a sentence at a time, stitching it all together. He must have done it in pieces." But however hard it was to make, "Out of Time" was a success: [Excerpt: Chris Farlowe, "Out of Time"] Or at least, it was a success in the UK. It did also make the top forty in the US for a week, but then it hit a snag -- it had charted without having been released in the US at all, or even being sent as a promo to DJs. Oldham's new business manager Allen Klein had been asked to work his magic on the US charts, but the people he'd bribed to hype the record into the charts had got the release date wrong and done it too early. When the record *did* come out over there, no radio station would play it in case it looked like they were complicit in the scam. But still, a UK number one wasn't too shabby, and so Immediate Records was back on track, and Oldham wanted to shore things up by bringing in some more proven hit-makers. Immediate signed the Small Faces, and even started paying them royalties -- though that wouldn't last long, as Immediate went bankrupt in 1970 and its successors in interest stopped paying out. The first work the group did for the label was actually for a Chris Farlowe single. Lane and Marriott gave him their song "My Way of Giving", and played on the session along with Farlowe's backing band the Thunderbirds. Mick Jagger is the credited producer, but by all accounts Marriott and Lane did most of the work: [Excerpt: Chris Farlowe, "My Way of Giving"] Sadly, that didn't make the top forty. After working on that, they started on their first single recorded at Immediate. But because of contractual entanglements, "I Can't Make It" was recorded at Immediate but released by Decca. Because the band weren't particularly keen on promoting something on their old label, and the record was briefly banned by the BBC for being too sexual, it only made number twenty-six on the charts. Around this time, Marriott had become friendly with another band, who had named themselves The Little People in homage to the Small Faces, and particularly with their drummer Jerry Shirley. Marriott got them signed to Immediate, and produced and played on their first single, a version of his song "(Tell Me) Have You Ever Seen Me?": [Excerpt: The Apostolic Intervention, "(Tell Me) Have You Ever Seen Me?"] When they signed to Immediate, The Little People had to change their name, and Marriott suggested they call themselves The Nice, a phrase he liked. Oldham thought that was a stupid name, and gave the group the much more sensible name The Apostolic Intervention. And then a few weeks later he signed another group and changed *their* name to The Nice. "The Nice" was also a phrase used in the Small Faces' first single for Immediate proper. "Here Come the Nice" was inspired by a routine by the hipster comedian Lord Buckley, "The Nazz", which also gave a name to Todd Rundgren's band and inspired a line in David Bowie's "Ziggy Stardust": [Excerpt: Lord Buckley, "The Nazz"] "Here Come the Nice" was very blatantly about a drug dealer, and somehow managed to reach number twelve despite that: [Excerpt: The Small Faces, "Here Come the Nice"] It also had another obstacle that stopped it doing as well as it might. A week before it came out, Decca released a single, "Patterns", from material they had in the vault. And in June 1967, two Small Faces albums came out. One of them was a collection from Decca of outtakes and demos, plus their non-album hit singles, titled From The Beginning, while the other was their first album on Immediate, which was titled Small Faces -- just like their first Decca album had been. To make matters worse, From The Beginning contained the group's demos of "My Way of Giving" and "(Tell Me) Have You Ever Seen Me?", while the group's first Immediate album contained a new recording of  "(Tell Me) Have You Ever Seen Me?", and a version of "My Way of Giving" with the same backing track but a different vocal take from the one on the Decca collection. From this point on, the group's catalogue would be a complete mess, with an endless stream of compilations coming out, both from Decca and, after the group split, from Immediate, mixing tracks intended for release with demos and jam sessions with no regard for either their artistic intent or for what fans might want. Both albums charted, with Small Faces reaching number twelve and From The Beginning reaching number sixteen, neither doing as well as their first album had, despite the Immediate album, especially, being a much better record. This was partly because the Marriott/Lane partnership was becoming far more equal. Kenney Jones later said "During the Decca period most of the self-penned stuff was 99% Steve. It wasn't until Immediate that Ronnie became more involved. The first Immediate album is made up of 50% Steve's songs and 50% of Ronnie's. They didn't collaborate as much as people thought. In fact, when they did, they often ended up arguing and fighting." It's hard to know who did what on each song credited to the pair, but if we assume that each song's principal writer also sang lead -- we know that's not always the case, but it's a reasonable working assumption -- then Jones' fifty-fifty estimate seems about right. Of the fourteen songs on the album, McLagan sings one, which is also his own composition, "Up the Wooden Hills to Bedfordshire". There's one instrumental, six with Marriott on solo lead vocals, four with Lane on solo lead vocals, and two duets, one with Lane as the main vocalist and one with Marriott. The fact that there was now a second songwriter taking an equal role in the band meant that they could now do an entire album of originals. It also meant that their next Marriott/Lane single was mostly a Lane song. "Itchycoo Park" started with a verse lyric from Lane -- "Over bridge of sighs/To rest my eyes in shades of green/Under dreaming spires/To Itchycoo Park, that's where I've been". The inspiration apparently came from Lane reading about the dreaming spires of Oxford, and contrasting it with the places he used to play as a child, full of stinging nettles. For a verse melody, they repeated a trick they'd used before -- the melody of "My Mind's Eye" had been borrowed in part from the Christmas carol "Gloria in Excelsis Deo", and here they took inspiration from the old hymn "God Be in My Head": [Excerpt: The Choir of King's College Cambridge, "God Be in My Head"] As Marriott told the story: "We were in Ireland and speeding our brains out writing this song. Ronnie had the first verse already written down but he had no melody line, so what we did was stick the verse to the melody line of 'God Be In My Head' with a few chord variations. We were going towards Dublin airport and I thought of the middle eight... We wrote the second verse collectively, and the chorus speaks for itself." [Excerpt: The Small Faces, "Itchycoo Park"] Marriott took the lead vocal, even though it was mostly Lane's song, but Marriott did contribute to the writing, coming up with the middle eight. Lane didn't seem hugely impressed with Marriott's contribution, and later said "It wasn't me that came up with 'I feel inclined to blow my mind, get hung up, feed the ducks with a bun/They all come out to groove about, be nice and have fun in the sun'. That wasn't me, but the more poetic stuff was." But that part became the most memorable part of the record, not so much because of the writing or performance but because of the production. It was one of the first singles released using a phasing effect, developed by George Chkiantz (and I apologise if I'm pronouncing that name wrong), who was the assistant engineer for Glyn Johns on the album. I say it was one of the first, because at the time there was not a clear distinction between the techniques now known as phasing, flanging, and artificial double tracking, all of which have now diverged, but all of which initially came from the idea of shifting two copies of a recording slightly out of synch with each other. The phasing on "Itchycoo Park" , though, was far more extreme and used to far different effect than that on, say, Revolver: [Excerpt: The Small Faces, "Itchycoo Park"] It was effective enough that Jimi Hendrix, who was at the time working on Axis: Bold as Love, requested that Chkiantz come in and show his engineer how to get the same effect, which was then used on huge chunks of Hendrix's album. The BBC banned the record, because even the organisation which had missed that the Nice who "is always there when I need some speed" was a drug dealer was a little suspicious about whether "we'll get high" and "we'll touch the sky" might be drug references. The band claimed to be horrified at the thought, and explained that they were talking about swings. It's a song about a park, so if you play on the swings, you go high. What else could it mean? [Excerpt: The Small Faces, “Itchycoo Park”] No drug references there, I'm sure you'll agree. The song made number three, but the group ran into more difficulties with the BBC after an appearance on Top of the Pops. Marriott disliked the show's producer, and the way that he would go up to every act and pretend to think they had done a very good job, no matter what he actually thought, which Marriott thought of as hypocrisy rather than as politeness and professionalism. Marriott discovered that the producer was leaving the show, and so in the bar afterwards told him exactly what he thought of him, calling him a "two-faced", and then a four-letter word beginning with c which is generally considered the most offensive swear word there is. Unfortunately for Marriott, he'd been misinformed, the producer wasn't leaving the show, and the group were barred from it for a while. "Itchycoo Park" also made the top twenty in the US, thanks to a new distribution deal Immediate had, and plans were made for the group to tour America, but those plans had to be scrapped when Ian McLagan was arrested for possession of hashish, and instead the group toured France, with support from a group called the Herd: [Excerpt: The Herd, "From the Underworld"] Marriott became very friendly with the Herd's guitarist, Peter Frampton, and sympathised with Frampton's predicament when in the next year he was voted "face of '68" and developed a similar teenage following to the one the Small Faces had. The group's last single of 1967 was one of their best. "Tin Soldier" was inspired by the Hans Andersen story “The Steadfast Tin Soldier”, and was originally written for the singer P.P. Arnold, who Marriott was briefly dating around this time. But Arnold was *so* impressed with the song that Marriott decided to keep it for his own group, and Arnold was left just doing backing vocals on the track: [Excerpt: The Small Faces, "Tin Soldier"] It's hard to show the appeal of "Tin Soldier" in a short clip like those I use on this show, because so much of it is based on the use of dynamics, and the way the track rises and falls, but it's an extremely powerful track, and made the top ten. But it was after that that the band started falling apart, and also after that that they made the work generally considered their greatest album. As "Itchycoo Park" had made number one in Australia, the group were sent over there on tour to promote it, as support act for the Who. But the group hadn't been playing live much recently, and found it difficult to replicate their records on stage, as they were now so reliant on studio effects like phasing. The Australian audiences were uniformly hostile, and the contrast with the Who, who were at their peak as a live act at this point, couldn't have been greater. Marriott decided he had a solution. The band needed to get better live, so why not get Peter Frampton in as a fifth member? He was great on guitar and had stage presence, obviously that would fix their problems. But the other band members absolutely refused to get Frampton in. Marriott's confidence as a stage performer took a knock from which it never really recovered, and increasingly the band became a studio-only one. But the tour also put strain on the most important partnership in the band. Marriott and Lane had been the closest of friends and collaborators, but on the tour, both found a very different member of the Who to pal around with. Marriott became close to Keith Moon, and the two would get drunk and trash hotel rooms together. Lane, meanwhile, became very friendly with Pete Townshend, who introduced him to the work of the guru Meher Baba, who Townshend followed. Lane, too, became a follower, and the two would talk about religion and spirituality while their bandmates were destroying things. An attempt was made to heal the growing rifts though. Marriott, Lane, and McLagan all moved in together again like old times, but this time in a cottage -- something that became so common for bands around this time that the phrase "getting our heads together in the country" became a cliche in the music press. They started working on material for their new album. One of the tracks that they were working on was written by Marriott, and was inspired by how, before moving in to the country cottage, his neighbours had constantly complained about the volume of his music -- he'd been particularly annoyed that the pop singer Cilla Black, who lived in the same building and who he'd assumed would understand the pop star lifestyle, had complained more than anyone. It had started as as fairly serious blues song, but then Marriott had been confronted by the members of the group The Hollies, who wanted to know why Marriott always sang in a pseudo-American accent. Wasn't his own accent good enough? Was there something wrong with being from the East End of London? Well, no, Marriott decided, there wasn't, and so he decided to sing it in a Cockney accent. And so the song started to change, going from being an R&B song to being the kind of thing Cockneys could sing round a piano in a pub: [Excerpt: The Small Faces, "Lazy Sunday"] Marriott intended the song just as an album track for the album they were working on, but Andrew Oldham insisted on releasing it as a single, much to the band's disgust, and it went to number two on the charts, and along with "Itchycoo Park" meant that the group were now typecast as making playful, light-hearted music. The album they were working on, Ogden's Nut-Gone Flake, was eventually as known for its marketing as its music. In the Small Faces' long tradition of twisted religious references, like their songs based on hymns and their song "Here Come the Nice", which had taken inspiration from a routine about Jesus and made it about a drug dealer, the print ads for the album read: Small Faces Which were in the studios Hallowed be thy name Thy music come Thy songs be sung On this album as they came from your heads We give you this day our daily bread Give us thy album in a round cover as we give thee 37/9d Lead us into the record stores And deliver us Ogdens' Nut Gone Flake For nice is the music The sleeve and the story For ever and ever, Immediate The reason the ad mentioned a round cover is that the original pressings of the album were released in a circular cover, made to look like a tobacco tin, with the name of the brand of tobacco changed from Ogden's Nut-Brown Flake to Ogden's Nut-Gone Flake, a reference to how after smoking enough dope your nut, or head, would be gone. This made more sense to British listeners than to Americans, because not only was the slang on the label British, and not only was it a reference to a British tobacco brand, but American and British dope-smoking habits are very different. In America a joint is generally made by taking the dried leaves and flowers of the cannabis plant -- or "weed" -- and rolling them in a cigarette paper and smoking them. In the UK and much of Europe, though, the preferred form of cannabis is the resin, hashish, which is crumbled onto tobacco in a cigarette paper and smoked that way, so having rolling or pipe tobacco was a necessity for dope smokers in the UK in a way it wasn't in the US. Side one of Ogden's was made up of normal songs, but the second side mixed songs and narrative. Originally the group wanted to get Spike Milligan to do the narration, but when Milligan backed out they chose Professor Stanley Unwin, a comedian who was known for speaking in his own almost-English language, Unwinese: [Excerpt: Stanley Unwin, "The Populode of the Musicolly"] They gave Unwin a script, telling the story that linked side two of the album, in which Happiness Stan is shocked to discover that half the moon has disappeared and goes on a quest to find the missing half, aided by a giant fly who lets him sit on his back after Stan shares his shepherd's pie with the hungry fly. After a long quest they end up at the cave of Mad John the Hermit, who points out to them that nobody had stolen half the moon at all -- they'd been travelling so long that it was a full moon again, and everything was OK. Unwin took that script, and reworked it into Unwinese, and also added in a lot of the slang he heard the group use, like "cool it" and "what's been your hang-up?": [Excerpt: The Small Faces and Professor Stanley Unwin, "Mad John"] The album went to number one, and the group were justifiably proud, but it only exacerbated the problems with their live show. Other than an appearance on the TV show Colour Me Pop, where they were joined by Stanley Unwin to perform the whole of side two of the album with live vocals but miming to instrumental backing tracks, they only performed two songs from the album live, "Rollin' Over" and "Song of a Baker", otherwise sticking to the same live show Marriott was already embarrassed by. Marriott later said "We had spent an entire year in the studios, which was why our stage presentation had not been improved since the previous year. Meanwhile our recording experience had developed in leaps and bounds. We were all keenly interested in the technical possibilities, in the art of recording. We let down a lot of people who wanted to hear Ogden's played live. We were still sort of rough and ready, and in the end the audience became uninterested as far as our stage show was concerned. It was our own fault, because we would have sussed it all out if we had only used our brains. We could have taken Stanley Unwin on tour with us, maybe a string section as well, and it would have been okay. But we didn't do it, we stuck to the concept that had been successful for a long time, which is always the kiss of death." The group's next single would be the last released while they were together. Marriott regarded "The Universal" as possibly the best thing he'd written, and recorded it quickly when inspiration struck. The finished single is actually a home recording of Marriott in his garden, including the sounds of a dog barking and his wife coming home with the shopping, onto which the band later overdubbed percussion, horns, and electric guitars: [Excerpt: The Small Faces, "The Universal"] Incidentally, it seems that the dog barking on that track may also be the dog barking on “Seamus” by Pink Floyd. "The Universal" confused listeners, and only made number sixteen on the charts, crushing Marriott, who thought it was the best thing he'd done. But the band were starting to splinter. McLagan isn't on "The Universal", having quit the band before it was recorded after a falling-out with Marriott. He rejoined, but discovered that in the meantime Marriott had brought in session player Nicky Hopkins to work on some tracks, which devastated him. Marriott became increasingly unconfident in his own writing, and the writing dried up. The group did start work on some new material, some of which, like "The Autumn Stone", is genuinely lovely: [Excerpt: The Small Faces, "The Autumn Stone"] But by the time that was released, the group had already split up. The last recording they did together was as a backing group for Johnny Hallyday, the French rock star. A year earlier Hallyday had recorded a version of "My Way of Giving", under the title "Je N'Ai Jamais Rien Demandé": [Excerpt: Johnny Hallyday, "Je N'Ai Jamais Rien Demandé"] Now he got in touch with Glyn Johns to see if the Small Faces had any other material for him, and if they'd maybe back him on a few tracks on a new album. Johns and the Small Faces flew to France... as did Peter Frampton, who Marriott was still pushing to get into the band. They recorded three tracks for the album, with Frampton on extra guitar: [Excerpt: Johnny Hallyday, "Reclamation"] These tracks left Marriott more certain than ever that Frampton should be in the band, and the other three members even more certain that he shouldn't. Frampton joined the band on stage at a few shows on their next few gigs, but he was putting together his own band with Jerry Shirley from Apostolic Intervention. On New Year's Eve 1968, Marriott finally had enough. He stormed off stage mid-set, and quit the group. He phoned up Peter Frampton, who was hanging out with Glyn Johns listening to an album Johns had just produced by some of the session players who'd worked for Immediate. Side one had just finished when Marriott phoned. Could he join Frampton's new band? Frampton said of course he could, then put the phone down and listened to side two of Led Zeppelin's first record. The band Marriott and Frampton formed was called Humble Pie, and they were soon releasing stuff on Immediate. According to Oldham, "Tony Calder said to me one day 'Pick a straw'. Then he explained we had a choice. We could either go with the three Faces -- Kenney, Ronnie, and Mac -- wherever they were going to go with their lives, or we could follow Stevie. I didn't regard it as a choice. Neither did Tony. Marriott was our man". Marriott certainly seemed to agree that he was the real talent in the group. He and Lane had fairly recently bought some property together -- two houses on the same piece of land -- and with the group splitting up, Lane moved away and wanted to sell his share in the property to Marriott. Marriott wrote to him saying "You'll get nothing. This was bought with money from hits that I wrote, not that we wrote," and enclosing a PRS statement showing how much each Marriott/Lane

Brian Potter is the author of the excellent Construction Physics blog, where he discusses why the construction industry has been slow to industrialize and innovate.He explains why:* Construction isn't getting cheaper and faster,* We should have mile-high buildings and multi-layer non-intersecting roads,* “Ugly” modern buildings are simply the result of better architecture,* China is so great at building things,* Saudi Arabia's Line is a waste of resources,* Environmental review makes new construction expensive and delayed,* and much much more!Watch on YouTube. Listen on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or any other podcast platform. Read the full transcript here.Follow me on Twitter for updates on future episodes.More really cool guests coming up; subscribe to find out about future episodes!You may also enjoy my interviews with Tyler Cowen (about talent, collapse, & pessimism of sex). Charles Mann (about the Americas before Columbus & scientific wizardry), and Austin Vernon about (Energy Superabundance, Starship Missiles, & Finding Alpha).If you end up enjoying this episode, I would be super grateful if you share it, post it on Twitter, send it to your friends & group chats, and throw it up wherever else people might find it. Can't exaggerate how much it helps a small podcast like mine.A huge thanks to Graham Bessellieu for editing this podcast and Mia Aiyana for producing its transcript.Timestamps(0:00) - Why Saudi Arabia's Line is Insane, Unrealistic, and Never going to Exist (06:54) - Designer Clothes & eBay Arbitrage Adventures (10:10) - Unique Woes of The Construction Industry  (19:28) - The Problems of Prefabrication (26:27) - If Building Regulations didn't exist… (32:20) - China's Real Estate Bubble, Unbound Technocrats, & Japan(44:45) - Automation and Revolutionary Future Technologies (1:00:51) - 3D Printer Pessimism & The Rising Cost of Labour(1:08:02) - AI's Impact on Construction Productivity(1:17:53) - Brian Dreams of Building a Mile High Skyscraper(1:23:43) - Deep Dive into Environmentalism and NEPA(1:42:04) - Software is Stealing Talent from Physical Engineering(1:47:13) - Gaps in the Blog Marketplace of Ideas(1:50:56) - Why is Modern Architecture So Ugly?(2:19:58) - Advice for Aspiring Architects and Young Construction PhysicistsTranscriptWhy Saudi Arabia's Line is Insane, Unrealistic, and Never going to Exist Dwarkesh Patel Today, I have the pleasure of speaking with Brian Potter, who is an engineer and the author of the excellent Construction Physics blog, where he writes about how the construction industry works and why it has been slow to industrialize and innovate. It's one of my favorite blogs on the internet, and I highly, highly recommend that people check it out. Brian, my first question is about The Line project in Saudi Arabia. What are your opinions? Brian Potter It's interesting how Saudi Arabia and countries in the Middle East, in general, are willing to do these big, crazy, ambitious building projects and pour huge amounts of money into constructing this infrastructure in a way that you don't see a huge amount in the modern world. China obviously does this too in huge amounts, some other minor places do as well, but in general, you don't see a whole lot of countries building these big, massive, incredibly ambitious projects. So on that level, it's interesting, and it's like, “Yes, I'm glad to see that you're doing this,” but the actual project is clearly insane and makes no sense. Look at the physical arrangement layout–– there's a reason cities grow in two dimensions. A one-dimensional city is the worst possible arrangement for transportation. It's the maximum amount of distance between any two points. So just from that perspective, it's clearly crazy, and there's no real benefit to it other than perhaps some weird hypothetical transportation situation where you had really fast point-to-point transportation. It would probably be some weird bullet train setup; maybe that would make sense. But in general, there's no reason to build a city like that. Even if you wanted to build an entirely enclosed thing (which again doesn't make a huge amount of sense), you would save so much material and effort if you just made it a cube. I would be more interested in the cube than the line. [laughs] But yeah, those are my initial thoughts on it. I will be surprised if it ever gets built. Dwarkesh Patel Are you talking about the cube from the meme about how you can put all the humans in the world in a cube the size of Manhattan? Brian Potter Something like that. If you're just going to build this big, giant megastructure, at least take advantage of what that gets you, which is minimum surface area to volume ratio.Dwarkesh Patel Why is that important? Would it be important for temperature or perhaps other features? Brian Potter This is actually interesting because I'm actually not sure how sure it would work with a giant single city. In general, a lot of economies of scale come from geometric effects. When something gets bigger, your volume increases a lot faster than your surface area does. So for something enclosed, like a tank or a pipe, the cost goes down per thing of unit you're transporting because you can carry a larger amount or a smaller amount of material. It applies to some extent with buildings and construction because the exterior wall assembly is a really burdensome, complicated, and expensive assembly. A building with a really big floor plate, for instance, can get more area per unit, per amount of exterior wall. I'm not sure how that actually works with a single giant enclosed structure because, theoretically, on a small level, it would apply the same way. Your climate control is a function of your exterior surface, at some level, and you get more efficient climate control if you have a larger volume and less area that it can escape from. But for a giant city, I actually don't know if that works, and it may be worse because you're generating so much heat that it's now harder to pump out. For examples like the urban heat island effect, where these cities generate massive amounts of waste heat, I don't know if that would work if it didn't apply the same way. I'm trying to reach back to my physics classes in college, so I'm not sure about the actual mechanics of that. Generally though, that's why you'd want to perhaps build something of this size and shape. Dwarkesh Patel What was the thought process behind designing this thing? Because Scott Alexander had a good blog post about The Line where he said, presumably, that The Line is designed to take up less space and to use less fuel because you can just use the same transportation across. But the only thing that Saudi Arabia has is space and fuel. So what is the thought process behind this construction project? Brian PotterI get the sense that a lot of committees have some amount of success in building big, impressive, physical construction projects that are an attraction just by virtue of their size and impressiveness. A huge amount of stuff in Dubai is something in this category, and they have that giant clock tower in Jeddah, the biggest giant clock building and one of the biggest buildings in the world, or something like that. I think, on some level, they're expecting that you would just see a return from building something that's really impressive or “the biggest thing on some particular axis”. So to some extent, I think they're just optimizing for big and impressive and maybe not diving into it more than that. There's this theory that I think about every so often. It's called the garbage can theory of organizational decision-making, which basically talks about how the choices that organizations make are not the result of any particular recent process. They are the result of how, whenever a problem comes up, people reach into the garbage can of potential solutions. Then whatever they pull out of the garbage can, that's the decision that they end up going with, regardless of how much sense it makes. It was a theory that was invented by academics to describe decision-making in academia. I think about that a lot, especially with reference to big bureaucracies and governments. You can just imagine the draining process of how these decisions evolve. Any random decision can be made, especially when there's such a disconnect between the decision-makers and technical knowledge.Designer Clothes & eBay Arbitrage Adventures Dwarkesh PatelTell me about your eBay arbitrage with designer clothes. Brian Potter Oh man, you really did dive deep. Yeah, so this was a small business that I ran seven or eight years ago at this point. A hobby of mine was high-end men's fashion for a while, which is a very strange hobby for an engineer to have, but there you go. That hobby centers around finding cheap designer stuff, because buying new can be overwhelmingly expensive. However, a lot of times, you can get clothes for a very cheap price if you're even a little bit motivated. Either it shows up on eBay, or it shows up in thrift stores if you know what to look for. A lot of these clothes can last because they're well-made. They last a super, super, super long time–– even if somebody wore it for 10 years or something, it could be fine. So a lot of this hobby centered around finding ways to get really nice clothes cheaply. Majority of it was based around eBay, but it was really tedious to find really nice stuff on eBay. You had to manually search for a bunch of different brands, filter out the obviously bad ones, search for typos in brands, put in titles, and stuff like that. I was in the process of doing this, and I thought, “Oh, this is really annoying. I should figure out a way to automate this process.” So I made a very simple web app where when you searched for shoes or something, it would automatically search the very nice brands of shoes and all the typos of the brand name. Then it would just filter out all the junk and let you search through the good stuff. I set up an affiliate system, basically. So anybody else that used it, I would get a kick of the sales. While I was interested in that hobby, I ran this website for a few years, and it was reasonably successful. It was one of the first things I did that got any real traction on the internet, but it was never successful in proportion to how much effort it took to maintain and update it. So as I moved away from the hobby, I eventually stopped putting time and effort into maintaining the website. I'm curious as to how you even dug that up. Dwarkesh Patel I have a friend who was with you at the Oxford Refugees Conference, Connor Tabarrok. I don't know if you remember him. Brian Potter Nice. Dwarkesh Patel Yeah. Finding other information about you on the internet was quite difficult actually. You've somehow managed to maintain your anonymity. If you're willing to reveal, what was the P&L of this project? Brian Potter Oh, it made maybe a few hundred dollars a month for a few years, but I only ever ran it as a side hobby business, basically. So in terms of time per my effort or whatever, I'm sure it was very low. Pennies to an hour or something like that. Unique Woes of The Construction Industry   Dwarkesh Patel A broad theme that I've gotten from your post is that the construction industry is plagued with these lossy feedback loops, a lack of strong economies of scale, regulation, and mistakes being very costly. Do you think that this is a general characteristic of many industries in our world today, or is there something unique about construction? Brian Potter Interesting question. One thing you think of is that there are a lot of individual factors that are not unique at all. Construction is highly regulated, but it's not necessarily more regulated than medical devices or jet travel, or even probably cars, to some extent, which have a whole vat of performance criteria they need to hit. With a couple of things like land use, for example, people say, “Oh, the land requirements, could you build it on-site,” explaining how those kinds of things make it difficult. But there is a lot that falls into this category that doesn't really share the same structure of how the construction industry works.I think it's the interaction of all those effects. One thing that I think is perhaps underappreciated is that the systems of a building are really highly coupled in a way that a lot of other things are. If you're manufacturing a computer, the hard drive is somewhat independent from the display and somewhat independent from the power supply. These things are coupled, but they can be built by independent people who don't necessarily even talk to each other before being assembled into one structured thing. A building is not really like that at all. Every single part affects every single other part. In some ways, it's like biology. So it's very hard to change something that doesn't end up disrupting something else. Part of that is because a job's building is to create a controlled interior environment, meaning, every single system has to run through and around the surfaces that are creating that controlled interior. Everything is touching each other. Again, that's not unique. Anything really highly engineered, like a plane or an iPhone, share those characteristics to some extent. In terms of the size of it and the relatively small amount you're paying in terms of unit size or unit mass, however, it's quite low. Dwarkesh Patel Is transportation cost the fundamental reason you can't have as much specialization and modularity?Brian Potter Yeah, I think it's really more about just the way a building is. An example of this would be how for the electrical system of your house, you can't have a separate box where if you needed to replace the electrical system, you could take the whole box out and put the new box in. The electrical system runs through the entire house. Same with plumbing. Same with the insulation. Same with the interior finishes and stuff like that. There's not a lot of modularity in a physical sense. Dwarkesh Patel Gotcha. Ben Kuhn  had this interesting comment on your article where he pointed out that many of the reasons you give for why it's hard to innovate in construction, like sequential dependencies and the highly variable delivery timelines are also common in software where Ben Koon works. So why do you think that the same sort of stagnation has not hit other industries that have superficially similar characteristics, like software? Brian Potter How I think about that is that you kind of see a similar structure in anything that's project-based or anything where there's an element of figuring out what you're doing while you're doing it. Compared to a large-scale manufacturing option where you spend a lot of time figuring out what exactly it is that you're building. You spend a lot of time designing it to be built and do your first number of runs through it, then you tweak your process to make it more efficient. There's always an element of tweaking it to make it better, but to some extent, the process of figuring out what you're doing is largely separate from the actual doing of it yourself. For a project-based industry, it's not quite like that. You have to build your process on the fly. Of course, there are best practices that shape it, right? For somebody writing a new software project or anything project-based, like making a movie, they have a rough idea for how it's going to go together. But there's going to be a lot of unforeseen things that kind of come up like that. The biggest difference is that either those things can often scale in a way that you can't with a building. Once you're done with the software project, you can deploy it to 1,000 or 100,000, or 1 million people, right? Once you finish making a movie, 100 million people can watch it or whatever. It doesn't quite look the same with a building. You don't really have the ability to spend a lot of time upfront figuring out how this thing needs to go. You kind of need to figure out a way to get this thing together without spending a huge amount of time that would be justified by the sheer size of it. I was able to dig up a few references for software projects and how often they just have these big, long tails. Sometimes they just go massively, massively over budget. A lot of times, they just don't get completed at all, which is shocking, but because of how many people it can then be deployed to after it's done, the economics of it are slightly different. Dwarkesh Patel I see, yeah. There's a famous law in software that says that a project will take longer than you expect even after you recount for the fact that it will take longer than you expect. Brian Potter Yeah. Hofstadter's law or something like that is what I think it is. Dwarkesh Patel Yeah. I'm curious about what the lack of skill in construction implies for startups. Famously, in software, the fact that there's zero marginal cost to scaling to the next customer is a huge boon to a startup, right? The entire point of which is scaling exponentially. Does that fundamentally constrain the size and quantity of startups you can have in construction if the same scaling is not available?Brian Potter Yeah, that's a really good question. The obvious first part of the answer is that for software, obviously, if you have a construction software company, you can scale it just like any other software business. For physical things, it is a lot more difficult. This lack of zero marginal cost has tended to fight a lot of startups, not just construction ones. But yeah, it's definitely a thing. Construction is particularly brutal because the margins are so low. The empirical fact is that trying what would be a more efficient method of building doesn't actually allow you to do it cheaper and get better margins. The startup that I used to work at, Katerra, their whole business model was basically predicated on that. “Oh, we'll just build all our buildings in these big factories, get huge economies of scale, reduce our costs, and then recoup the billions of dollars that we're pumping into this industry or business.” The math just does not work out. You can't build. In general, you can't build cheap enough to kind of recoup those giant upfront costs. A lot of businesses have been burned that way. The most success you see in prefabrication type of stuff is on the higher end of things where you can get higher margins. A lot of these prefab companies and stuff like that tend to target the higher end of the market, and you see a few different premiums for that. Obviously, if you're targeting the higher end, you're more likely to have higher margins. If you're building to a higher level of quality, that's easier to do in a factory environment. So the delta is a lot different, less enormous than it would be. Building a high level of quality is easier to do in a factory than it is in the field, so a lot of buildings or houses that are built to a really high level of energy performance, for instance, need a really, really high level of air sealing to minimize how much energy this house uses. You tend to see a lot more houses like that built out of prefab construction and other factory-built methods because it's just physically more difficult to achieve that on-site. The Problems of Prefabrication Dwarkesh Patel Can you say more about why you can't use prefabrication in a factory to get economies of scale? Is it just that the transportation costs will eat away any gains you get? What is going on? Brian PotterThere's a combination of effects. I haven't worked through all this, we'll have to save this for the next time. I'll figure it out more by then. At a high level, it's that basically the savings that you get from like using less labor or whatever is not quite enough to offset your increased transportation costs. One thing about construction, especially single-family home construction, is that a huge percentage of your costs are just the materials that you're using, right? A single-family home is roughly 50% labor and 50% materials for the construction costs. Then you have development costs, land costs, and things like that. So a big chunk of that, you just can't move to the factory at all, right?  You can't really build a foundation in a factory. You could prefab the foundation, but it doesn't gain you anything. Your excavation still has to be done on-site, obviously. So a big chunk can't move to the factory at all. For ones that can, you still basically have to pay the same amount for materials. Theoretically, if you're building truly huge volume, you could get material volume discounts, but even then, it's probably not looking at things like asset savings. So you can cut out a big chunk of your labor costs, and you do see that in factory-built construction, right? These prefab companies are like mobile home companies. They have a small fraction of labor as their costs, which is typical of a factory in general, but then they take out all that labor cost while they still have their high material costs, and then they have overhead costs of whatever the factory has cost them. Then you have your additional overhead cost of just transporting it to site, which is pretty limited. The math does not really work out in favor of prefab, in terms of being able to make the cost of building dramatically cheaper. You can obviously build a building in a prefab using prefab-free methods and build a successful construction business, right? Many people do. But in terms of dramatically lowering your costs, you don't really see that. Dwarkesh Patel Yeah, yeah. Austin Vernon has an interesting blog post about why there's not more prefabricated homes. The two things he points out were transportation costs, and the other one was that people prefer to have homes that have unique designs or unique features. When I was reading it, it actually occurred to me that maybe they're actually both the result of the same phenomenon. I don't know if I'm pronouncing it correctly, but have you heard of the Alchian-Allen theorem in economics? Brian Potter Maybe, but I don't think so. Dwarkesh Patel Basically, it's the idea that if you increase the cost of some category of goods in a fixed way––let's say you tax oranges and added a $1 tax to all oranges, or transportation for oranges gets $1 more expensive for all oranges––people will shift consumption towards the higher grade variety because now, the ratio of the cost between the higher, the more expensive orange and the less expensive orange has decreased because of the increase in fixed costs. It seems like you could use that argument to also explain why people have strong preferences for uniqueness and all kinds of design in manufactured houses. Since transportation costs are so high, that's basically a fixed cost, and that fixed cost has the effect of making people shift consumption towards higher-grade options. I definitely think that's true. Brian PotterI would maybe phrase this as, “The construction industry makes it relatively comparatively cheap to deliver a highly customized option compared to a really repetitive option.” So yeah, the ratio between a highly customized one and just a commodity one is relatively small. So you see a kind of industry built around delivering somewhat more customized options. I do think that this is a pretty broad intuition that people just desire too much customization from their homes. That really prevents you from having a mass-produced offering. I do think that is true to some extent. One example is the Levittown houses, which were originally built in huge numbers–– exactly the same model over and over again. Eventually, they had to change their business model to be able to deliver more customized options because the market shipped it. I do think that the effect of that is basically pretty overstated. Empirically, you see that in practice, home builders and developers will deliver fairly repetitive housing. They don't seem to have a really hard time doing that. As an example, I'm living in a new housing development that is just like three or four different houses copy-pasted over and over again in a group of 50. The developer is building a whole bunch of other developments that are very similar in this area. My in-laws live in a very similar development in a whole different state. If you just look like multi-family or apartment housing, it's identical apartments, you know, copy-pasted over and over again in the same building or a bunch of different buildings in the same development. You're not seeing huge amounts of uniqueness in these things. People are clearly willing to just live in these basically copy-pasted apartments. It's also quite possible to get a pretty high amount of product variety using a relatively small number of factors that you vary, right? I mean, the car industry is like this, where there are enough customization options. I was reading this book a while ago that was basically pushing back against the idea that the car industry pre-fifties and sixties we just offering a very uniform product. They basically did the math, and the number of customization options on their car was more than the atoms in the universe. Basically just, there are so many different options. All the permutations, you know, leather seats and this type of stereo and this type of engine, if you add it all up, there's just a huge, massive number of different combinations. Yeah, you can obviously customize the house a huge amount, just by the appliances that you have and the finishes that are in there and the paint colors that you choose and the fixtures and stuff like that. It would not really theoretically change the underlying way the building comes together. So regarding the idea that the fundamental demand for variety is a major obstruction, I don't think there's a whole lot of evidence for that in the construction industry. If Construction Regulation Vanished… Dwarkesh Patel I asked Twitter about what I should ask you, and usually, I don't get interesting responses but the quality of the people and the audience that knows who you are was so high that actually, all the questions I got were fascinating. So I'm going to ask you some questions from Twitter. Brian Potter Okay. Dwarkesh Patel 0:26:45Connor Tabarrok asks, “What is the most unique thing that would or should get built in the absence of construction regulation?”Brian Potter Unique is an interesting qualifier. There are a lot of things that just like should get built, right? Massive amounts of additional housing and creating more lands in these really dense urban environments where we need it, in places like San Francisco–– just fill in a big chunk of that bay. It's basically just mud flat and we should put more housing on it. “Unique thing” is more tricky. One idea that I really like (I read this in the book, The Book Where's My Flying Car),  is that it's basically crazy that our cities are designed with roads that all intersect with each other. That's an insane way to structure a material flow problem. Any sane city would be built with multiple layers of like transportation where each one went in a different direction so your flows would just be massively, massively improved. That just seems like a very obvious one.If you're building your cities from scratch and had your druthers, you would clearly want to build them and know how big they were gonna get, right? So you could plan very long-term in a way that so these transportation systems didn't intersect with each other, which, again, almost no cities did. You'd have the space to scale them or run as much throughput through them as you need without bringing the whole system to a halt. There's a lot of evidence saying that cities tend to scale based on how much you can move from point A to point B through them. I do wonder whether if you changed the way they went together, you could unlock massively different cities. Even if you didn't unlock massive ones, you could perhaps change the agglomeration effects that you see in cities if people could move from point A to point B much quicker than they currently can. Dwarkesh Patel Yeah, I did an episode about the book, where's my flying car with Rohit Krishnan. I don't know if we discussed this, but an interesting part of the book is where he talks about transistor design. If you design transistors this way, can you imagine how slow they would be? [laughs] Okay, so Simon Grimm asks, “What countries are the best at building things?”Brian Potter This is a good question. I'm going to sort of cheat a little bit and do it in terms of space and time, because I think most countries that are doing a good job at building massive amounts of stuff are not ones that are basically doing it currently.The current answer is like China, where they just keep building–– more concrete was used in the last 20 years or so than the entire world used in the time before that, right? They've accomplished massive amounts of urbanization, and built a lot of really interesting buildings and construction. In terms of like raw output, I would also put Japan in the late 20th century on there. At the peak of the concern and wonder of “Is Japan gonna take over the world?”, they were really interested in building stuff quite quickly. They spent a lot of time and effort trying to use their robotics expertise to try to figure out how to build buildings a lot more quickly. They had these like really interesting factories that were designed to basically extrude an entire skyscraper just going up vertically.All these big giant companies and many different factories were trying to develop and trying to do this with robotics. It was a really interesting system that did not end up ever making economic sense, but it is very cool. I think big industrial policy organs of the government basically encouraged a lot of these industrial companies to basically develop prefabricated housing systems. So you see a lot of really interesting systems developed from these sort of industrial companies in a way that you don't see in a lot of other places. From 1850 to maybe 1970 (like a hundred years or something), the US was building huge massive amounts of stuff in a way that lifted up huge parts of the economy, right? I don't know how many thousands of miles of railroad track the US built between like 1850 and 1900, but it was many, many, many thousands of miles of it. Ofcourse, needing to lay all this track and build all these locomotives really sort of forced the development of the machine tool industry, which then led to the development of like better manufacturing methods and interchangeable parts, which of course then led to the development of the automotive industry. Then ofcourse, that explosion just led to even more big giant construction projects. So you really see that this ability to build just big massive amounts of stuff in this virtuous cycle with the US really advanced a lot of technology to raise the standard of development for a super long period of time. So those are my three answers. China's Real Estate Bubble, Unbound Technocrats, and JapanDwarkesh Patel Those three bring up three additional questions, one for each of them! That's really interesting. Have you read The Power Broker, the book about Robert Moses? Brian Potter I think I got a 10th of the way through it. Dwarkesh Patel That's basically a whole book in itself, a 10th of the way. [laughs] I'm a half of the way through, and so far it's basically about the story of how this one guy built a startup within the New York state government that was just so much more effective at building things, didn't have the same corruption and clientelism incompetence. Maybe it turns into tragedy in the second half, but so far it's it seems like we need this guy. Where do we get a second Robert Moses? Do you think that if you had more people like that in government or in construction industries, public works would be more effectively built or is the stagnation there just a result of like other bigger factors? Brian Potter That's an interesting question. I remember reading this article a while ago that was complaining about how horrible Penn Station is in New York. They're basically saying, “Yeah, it would be nice to return to the era of like the sort of unbound technocrat” when these technical experts in high positions of power in government could essentially do whatever they wanted to some extent. If they thought something should be built somewhere, they basically had the power to do it. It's a facet of this problem of how it's really, really hard to get stuff built in the US currently. I'm sure that a part of it is that you don't see these really talented technocrats occupy high positions of government where they can get stuff done. But it's not super obvious to me whether that's the limiting factor. I kind of get the sense that they would end up being bottlenecked by some other part of the process. The whole sort of interlocking set of institutions has just become so risk averse that they would end up just being blocked in a way that they wouldn't when they were operating in the 1950s or 1960s.Dwarkesh Patel Yeah, yeah, that's interesting. All right, so speaking of Japan, I just recently learned about the construction there and how they just keep tearing stuff down every 30 to 40 years and rebuilding it. So you have an interesting series of posts on how you would go about building a house or a building that lasts for a thousand years. But I'm curious, how would you build a house or a building that only lasts for 30 or 40 years? If you're building in Japan and you know they're gonna tear it down soon, what changes about the construction process? Brian Potter Yeah, that's interesting. I mean, I'm not an expert on Japanese construction, but I think like a lot of their interior walls are basically just paper and stuff like that. I actually think it's kind of surprising that last time I looked, for a lot of their homes, they use a surprising post and beam construction method, which is actually somewhat labor-intensive to do. The US in the early 1800s used a pretty similar method. Then once we started mass producing conventional lumber, we stopped doing that because it was much cheaper to build out of two-by-fours than it was to build big heavy posts. I think the boring answer to that question is that we'd build like how we build mobile homes–– essentially just using pretty thin walls, pretty low-end materials that are put together in a minimal way. This ends up not being that different from the actual construction method that single-family homes use. It just even further economizes and tightens the use of materials–– where a single-family home might use a half inch plywood, they might try to use three-sixteenths or even an eighth inch plywood or something like that. So we'd probably build a pretty similar way to the way most single-family homes and multi-family homes are built currently, but just with even tighter use of materials which perhaps is something that's not super nice about the way that you guys build your homes. But... [laughs]Dwarkesh Patel Okay, so China is the third one here. There's been a lot of talk about a potential real estate bubble in China because they're building housing in places where people don't really need it. Of course, maybe the demographics aren't there to support the demand. What do you think of all this talk? I don't know if you're familiar with it, but is there a real estate bubble that's created by all this competence in building? Brian PotterOh, gosh, yeah, I have no idea. Like you, I've definitely heard talk of it and I've seen the little YouTube clips of them knocking down all these towers that it turns out they didn't need or the developer couldn't, finish or whatever. I don't know a huge amount about that. In general, I wish I knew a lot more about how things are built in China, but the information is in general, so opaque. I generally kind of assume that any particular piece of data that comes out of China has giant error bars on it as to whether it's true or not or what the context surrounding it is. So in general, I do not have a hard opinion about that. Dwarkesh Patel This is the second part of Simon's question, does greater competence and being able to build stuff translate into other good outcomes for these countries like higher GDP or lower rents or other kinds of foreign outcomes? Brian Potter That's a good question. Japan is an interesting place where basically people point to it as an example of, “Here's a country that builds huge amounts of housing and they don't have housing cost increases.” In general, we should expect that dynamic to be true. Right? There's no reason to not think that housing costs are essentially a supply-demand problem where if you built as much as people wanted, the cost would drop. I have no reason to not think that's true. There is a little bit of evidence that sort of suggests that it's impossible to build housing enough to overcome this sort of mechanical obstacle where the cost of it tends to match and rise to whatever people's income level are. The peak and the sort of flattening of housing costs in Japan also parallel when people basically stopped getting raises and income stopped rising in Japan. So I don't have a good sense of, if it ends up being just more driven by some sort of other factors. Generally though I expect the very basic answer of “If you build a lot more houses, the housing will become cheaper.”Dwarkesh PatelRight. Speaking of how the land keeps gaining value as people's income go up, what is your opinion on Georgism? Does that kind of try and make you think that housing is a special asset that needs to be more heavily taxed because you're not inherently doing something productive just by owning land the way you would be if you like built a company or something similar?Brian Potter I don't have any special deep knowledge of Georgism. It's on my list of topics to read more deeply about. I do think in general, taxing encourages you to produce less of something for something that you can't produce less of. It's a good avenue for something to tax more heavily. And yeah, obviously if you had a really high land value tax in these places that have a lot of single-family homes in dense urban areas, like Seattle or San Francisco, that would probably encourage people to use the land a lot more efficiently. So it makes sense to me, but I don't have a ton of special knowledge about it. Dwarkesh Patel All right, Ben Kuhn asked on Twitter, “What construction-related advice would you give to somebody building a new charter city?”Brian Potter That is interesting. I mean, just off the top of my head, I would be interested in whether you could really figure out a way to build using a method that had really high upfront costs. I think it could otherwise be justified, but if you're gonna build 10,000 buildings or whatever all at once, you could really take advantage of that. One kind of thing that you see in the sort of post-World War II era is that we're building huge massive amounts of housing, and a lot of times we're building them all in one place, right? A lot of town builders were building thousands and thousands of houses in one big development all at once. In California, it's the same thing, you just built like 6 or 10 or 15,000 houses in one big massive development. You end up seeing something like that where they basically build this like little factory on their construction site, and then use that to like fabricate all these things. Then you have something that's almost like a reverse assembly line where a crew will go to one house and install the walls or whatever, and then go to the next house and do the same thing. Following right behind them would be the guys doing the electrical system, plumbing, and stuff like that. So this reverse assembly line system would allow you to sort of get these things up really, really fast, in 30 days or something like that. Then you could have a whole house or just thousands and thousands of houses at once. You would want to be able to do something similar where you could just not do the instruction the way that the normal construction is done, but that's hard, right? Centrally planned cities or top-down planned cities never seem to do particularly well, right? For example, the city of Brasilia, the one that was supposed to be a planned city— the age it goes back to the unfettered technocrat who can sort of build whatever he wants. A lot of times, what you want is something that will respond at a low level and organically sort out the factories as they develop. You don't want something that's totally planned from the top-down, that's disconnected from all the sorts of cases on the ground. A lot of the opposition to Robert Moses ended up being that in a certain form, right? He's bulldozing through these cities that are these buildings and neighborhoods that he's not paying attention to at all. So I think, just to go back to the question, trying to plan your city from the top down doesn't have a super, super great track record. In general, you want your city to develop a little bit more organically. I guess I would think to have a good sort of land-use rules that are really thought through well and encourage the things that you want to encourage and not discourage the things that you don't want to discourage. Don't have equity in zoning and allow a lot of mixed-use construction and stuff like that. I guess that's a somewhat boring answer, but I'd probably do something along those lines. Dwarkesh Patel Interesting, interesting. I guess that implies that there would be high upfront costs to building a city because if you need to build 10,000 homes at once to achieve these economies of scale, then you would need to raise like tens of billions of dollars before you could build a charter city. Brian Potter Yeah, if you were trying to lower your costs of construction, but again, if you have the setup to do that, you wouldn't necessarily need to raise it. These other big developments were built by developers that essentially saw an opportunity. They didn't require public funding to do it. They did in the form of loan guarantees for veterans and things like that, but they didn't have the government go and buy the land. Automation and Revolutionary Future Technologies Dwarkesh Patel Right, okay, so the next question is from Austin Vernon. To be honest, I don't understand the question, you two are too smart for me, but hopefully, you'll be able to explain the question and then also answer it. What are your power rankings for technologies that can tighten construction tolerances? Then he gives examples like ARVR, CNC cutting, and synthetic wood products. Brian Potter Yeah, so this is a very interesting question. Basically, because buildings are built manually on site by hand, there's just a lot of variation in what ends up being built, right? There's only so accurately that a person can put something in place if they don't have any sort of age or stuff like that. Just the placement itself of materials tends to have a lot of variation in it and the materials themselves also have a lot of variation in them. The obvious example is wood, right? Where one two by four is not gonna be exactly the same as another two by four. It may be warped, it may have knots in it, it may be split or something like that. Then also because these materials are sitting just outside in the elements, they sort of end up getting a lot of distortion, they either absorb moisture and sort of expand and contract, or they grow and shrink because of the heat. So there's just a lot of variation that goes into putting a building up.To some extent, it probably constrains what you are able to build and how effectively you're able to build it. I kind of gave an example before of really energy efficient buildings and they're really hard to build on-site using conventional methods because the air ceiling is quite difficult to do. You have to build it in a much more precise way than what is typically done and is really easily achieved on-site. So I guess in terms of examples of things that would make that easier, he gives some good ones like engineered lumber, which is where you take lumber and then grind it up into strands or chips or whatever and basically glue them back together–– which does a couple of things. It spreads all the knots and the defects out so they are concentrated and everything tends to be a lot more uniform when it's made like that. So that's a very obvious one that's already in widespread use. I don't really see that making a substantial change.I guess the one exception to that would be this engineered lumber product called mass timber elements, CLT, which is like a super plywood. Plywood is made from tiny little sheet thin strips of wood, right? But CLT is made from two-by-four-dimensional lumber glued across laminated layers. So instead of a 4 by 9 sheet of plywood, you have a 12 by 40 sheet of dimensional lumber glued together. You end up with a lot of the properties of engineered material where it's really dimensionally stable. It can be produced very, very accurately. It's actually funny that a lot of times, the CLT is the most accurate part of the building. So if you're building a building with it, you tend to run into problems where the rest of the building is not accurate enough for it. So even with something like steel, if you're building a steel building, the steel is not gonna be like dead-on accurate, it's gonna be an inch or so off in terms of where any given component is. The CLT, which is built much more accurately, actually tends to show all these errors that have to be corrected. So in some sense, accuracy or precision is a little bit of like a tricky thing because you can't just make one part of the process more precise. In some ways that actually makes things more difficult because if one part is really precise, then a lot of the time, it means that you can't make adjustments to it easily. So if you have this one really precise thing, it usually means you have to go and compensate for something else that is not built quite as precisely. It actually makes advancing precision quite a bit more complicated. AR VR, is something I'm very bullish on. A big caveat of that is assuming that they can just get the basic technology working. The basic intuition there is that right now the way that pieces are, when a building is put together on site, somebody is looking at a set of paper plans, or an iPad or something that tells them where everything needs to go. So they figure that out and then they take a tape measure or use some other method and go figure out where that's marked on the ground. There's all this set-up time that is really quite time consuming and error prone. Again, there's only so much accuracy that a guy dragging a tape 40 feet across site being held by another guy can attain, there's a limit to how accurate that process can be. It's very easy for me to imagine that AR would just project exactly where the components of your building need to go. That would A, allow you a much higher level of accuracy that you can easily get using manual methods. And then B, just reduce all that time it takes to manually measure things. I can imagine it being much, much, much faster as well, so I'm quite bullish on that. At a high level and a slightly lower level, it's not obvious to me if they will be able to get to the level where it just projects it with perfect accuracy right in front of you. It may be the case that a person moving their head around and constantly changing their point of view wont ever be able to project these things with millimeter precision––it's always gonna be a little bit jumpy or you're gonna end up with some sort of hard limit in terms of like how precisely you can project it. My sense is that locator technology will get good enough, but I don't have any principle reason believing that. The other thing is that being able to take advantage of that technology would require you to have a really, really accurate model of your building that locates where every single element is precisely and exactly what its tolerances are. Right now, buildings aren't designed like that, they are built using a comparatively sparse set of drawings that leaves a lot to sort of be interpreted by the people on site doing the work and efforts that have tried to make these models really, really, really precise, have not really paid off a lot of times. You can get returns on it if you're building something really, really complex where there's a much higher premium to being able to make sure you don't make any error, but for like a simple building like a house, the returns just aren't there. So you see really comparatively sparse drawings. Whether it's gonna be able to work worth this upfront cost of developing this really complex, very precise model of where exactly every component is still has to be determined. There's some interesting companies that are trying to move in this direction where they're making it a lot easier to draw these things really, really precisely and whave every single component exactly where it is. So I'm optimistic about that as well, but it's a little bit TBD. Dwarkesh Patel This raises a question that I actually wanted to ask you, which is in your post about why there aren't automatic brick layers. It was a really interesting post. Somebody left in an interesting comment saying that bricks were designed to be handled and assembled by humans. Then you left a response to that, which I thought was really interesting. You said, “The example I always reach for is with steam power and electricity, where replacing a steam engine with an electric motor in your factory didn't do much for productivity. Improving factory output required totally redesigning the factory around the capabilities of electric motors.” So I was kind of curious about if you apply that analogy to construction, then what does that look like for construction? What is a house building process or building building process that takes automation and these other kinds of tools into account? How would that change how buildings are built and how they end up looking in the end? Brian Potter I think that's a good question. One big component of the lack of construction productivity is everything was designed and has evolved over 100 years or 200 years to be easy for a guy or person on the site to manipulate by hand. Bricks are roughly the size and shape and weight that a person can move it easily around. Dimensional lumber is the same. It's the size and shape and weight that a person can move around easily. And all construction materials are like this and the way that they attach together and stuff is the same. It's all designed so that a person on site can sort of put it all together with as comparatively little effort as possible. But what is easy for a person to do is usually not what is easy for a machine or a robot to do, right? You typically need to redesign and think about what your end goal is and then redesign the mechanism for accomplishing that in terms of what is easy to get to make a machine to do. The obvious example here is how it's way easier to build a wagon or a cart that pulls than it is to build a mechanical set of legs that mimics a human's movement. That's just way, way, way easier. I do think that a big part of advancing construction productivity is to basically figure out how to redesign these building elements in a way that is really easy for a machine to produce and a machine to put together. One reason that we haven't seen it is that a lot of the mechanization you see is people trying to mechanize exactly what a person does. You'd need a really expensive industrial robot that can move exactly the way that a human moves more or less. What that might look like is basically something that can be really easily extruded by a machine in a continuous process that wouldn't require a lot of finicky mechanical movements. A good example of this technology is technology that's called insulated metal panels, which is perhaps one of the cheapest and easiest ways to build an exterior wall. What it is, is it's just like a thin layer of steel. Then on top of that is a layer of insulation. Then on top of that is another layer of steel. Then at the end, the steel is extruded in such a way that it can like these inner panels can like lock together as they go. It's basically the simplest possible method of constructing a wall that you can imagine. But that has the structural system and the water barrier, air barrier, and insulation all in this one really simple assembly. Then when you put it together on site, it just locks together. Of course there are a lot of limitations to this. Like if you want to do anything on top of like add windows, all of a sudden it starts to look quite a bit less good. I think things that are really easy for a machine to do can be put together without a lot of persistent measurement or stuff like that in-field. They can just kind of snap together and actually want to fit together. I think that's kind of what it looks like. 3D Printer Pessimism & The Rising Cost of LabourDwarkesh Patel What would the houses or the buildings that are built using this physically look like? Maybe in 50 to 100 years, we'll look back on the houses we have today and say, “Oh, look at that artisanal creation made by humans.” What is a machine that is like designed for robots first or for automation first? In more interesting ways, would it differ from today's buildings? Brian Potter That's a good question. I'm not especially bullish on 3D building printing in general, but this is another example of a building using an extrusion process that is relatively easy to mechanize. What's interesting there is that when you start doing that, a lot of these other bottlenecks become unlocked a little bit. It's very difficult to build a building using a lot of curved exterior surfaces using conventional methods. You can do it, it's quite expensive to do, but there's a relatively straightforward way for a 3D-printed building to do that. They can build that as easily as if it was a straight wall. So you see a lot of interesting curved architecture on these creations and in a few other areas. There's a company that can build this cool undulating facade that people kind of like. So yeah, it unlocks a lot of options. Machines are more constrained in some things that they can do, but they don't have a lot of the other constraints that you would otherwise see. So I think you'll kind of see a larger variety of aesthetic things like that. That said, at the end of the day, I think a lot of the ways a house goes together is pretty well shaped to just the way that a person living inside it would like to use. I think Stewart Brand makes this point in––Dwarkesh Patel Oh, How Buildings Learn. Brian Potter There we go. He basically makes the point that a lot of people try to use dome-shaped houses or octagon-shaped houses, which are good because, again, going back to surface area volume, they include lots of space using the least amount of material possible. So in some theoretical sense, they're quite efficient, but it's actually quite inconvenient to live inside of a building with a really curved wall, right? Furniture doesn't fit up against it nicely, and pictures are hard to hang on a really curved wall. So I think you would see less variation than maybe you might expect. Dwarkesh Patel Interesting. So why are you pessimistic about 3D printers? For construction, I mean. Brian Potter Yeah, for construction. Oh God, so many reasons. Not pessimistic, but just there's a lot of other interesting questions. I mean, so the big obvious one is like right now a 3D printer can basically print the walls of a building. That is a pretty small amount of the value in a building, right? It's maybe 7% or 8%, something like that. Probably not more than 10% of the value in a building. Because you're not printing the foundation, you're not printing like the overhead vertical, or the overhead spanning structure of the building. You're basically just printing the walls. You're not even really printing the second story walls that you have in multiple stories. I don't think they've quite figured that out yet. So it's a pretty small amount of value added to the building. It's frankly a task that is relatively easy to do by manual labor. It's really pretty easy for a crew to basically put up the structure of a house. This is kind of a recurring theme in mechanization or it goes back to what I was talking about to our previous lead. Where it takes a lot of mechanization and a lot of expensive equipment to replace what basically like two or three guys can do in a day or something like that. The economics of it are pretty brutal. So right now it produces a pretty small value. I think that the value of 3D printing is basically entirely predicated on how successful they are at figuring out how to like deliver more components of the building using their system. There are companies that are trying to do this. There's one that got funded not too long ago called Black Diamond, where they have this crazy system that is like a series of 3D printers that would act simultaneously, like each one building a separate house. Then as you progress, you switch out the print head for like a robot arm. Cause a 3D printer is basically like a robot arm with just a particular manipulator at the end, right?So they switch out their print head for like a robot arm, and the robot arm goes and installs different other systems like the windows or the mechanical systems. So you can figure out how to do that reliably where your print head or your printing system is installing a large fraction of the value of the building. It's not clear to me that it's gonna be economic, but it obviously needs to reach that point. It's not obvious to me that they have gotten there yet. It's really quite hard to get a robot to do a lot of these tasks. For a lot of these players, it seems like they're actually moving away from that. I think in ICON is the biggest construction 3D printer company in the US, as far as I know. And as far as I know, they've moved away from trying to install lots of systems in their walls as they get printed. They've kind of moved on to having that installed separately, which I think has made their job a little bit easier, but again, not quite, it's hard to see how the 3D printer can fulfill its promises if it can't do anything just beyond the vertical elements, whichare really, for most construction, quite cheap and simple to build. Dwarkesh Patel Now, if you take a step back and talk how expensive construction is overall, how much of it can just be explained by the Baumol cost effect? As in labor costs are increasing because labor is more productive than other industries and therefore construction is getting more expensive. Brian Potter I think that's a huge, huge chunk of it. The labor fraction hasn't changed appreciably enough. I haven't actually verified that and I need to, but I remember somebody that said that they used to be much different. You sent me some literature related to it. So let's add a slight asterisk on that. But in general the labor cost has remained a huge fraction of the overall cost of the building. Reliably seeing their costs continue to rise, I think there's no reason to believe that that's not a big part of it. Dwarkesh Patel Now, I know this sounds like a question with an obvious answer, but in your post comparing the prices of construction in different countries, you mentioned how the cost of labor and the cost of materials is not as big a determiner of how expensive it is to construct in different places. But what does matter? Is it the amount of government involvement and administrative overhead? I'm curious why those things (government involvement and administrative overhead) have such a high consequence on the cost of construction. Brian Potter Yeah, that's a good question. I don't actually know if I have a unified theory for that. I mean, basically with any heavily regulated thing, any particular task that you're doing takes longer and is less reliable than it would be if it was not done right. You can't just do it as fast as on your own schedule, right? You end up being bottlenecked by government processes and it reduces and narrows your options. So yeah, in general, I would expect that to kind of be the case, but I actually don't know if I have a unified theory of how that works beyond just, it's a bunch of additional steps at any given part of the process, each of which adds cost. Dwarkesh Patel Yeah. Now, one interesting trend we have in the United States with construction is that a lot of it is done by Latino workers and especially by undocumented Latino workers. What is the effect of this on the price and the quality of construction? If you have a bunch of hardworking undocumented workers who are working for below-market rates in the US, will this dampen the cost of construction over time? What do you think is going to happen? Brian Potter I suspect that's probably one of the reasons why the US has comparatively low construction costs compared to other parts of the world. Well, I'll caveat that. Residential construction, which is single-family homes and multi-family apartment buildings all built in the US and have light framed wood and are put together, like you said, by a lot of like immigrant workers. Because of that, it would not surprise me if those wages are a lot lower than the equivalent wage for like a carpenter in Germany or something like that. I suspect that's a factor in why our cost of residential construction are quite low. AI's Impact on Construction ProductivityDwarkesh Patel Overall, it seems from your blog post that you're kind of pessimistic, or you don't think that different improvements in industrialization have transferred over to construction yet. But what do you think is a prospect of future advances in AI having a big impact on construction? With computer vision and with advances in robotics, do you think we'll finally see some carry-over into construction productivity or is it gonna be more of the same? Brian Potter Yeah, I think there's definitely gonna be progress on that axis. If you can wire up your computer vision systems, robotic systems, and your AI in such a way that your capabilities for a robot system are more expanded, then I kind of foresee robotics being able to take a larger and larger fraction of the tasks done on a typical construction site. I kind of see it being kind of done in narrow avenues that gradually expand outward. You're starting to see a lot of companies that have some robotic system that can do one particular task, but do that task quite well. There's a couple of different robot companies that have these little robots for like drawing wall layouts on like concrete slabs or whatever. So you know exactly where to build your walls, which you would think would not be like a difficult problem in construction, but it turns out that a lot of times people put the walls in the wrong spot and then you have to go back and move them later or just basically deal with it. So yeah, it's basically a little Roomba type device that just draws the wall layout to the concrete slab and all the other systems as well–– for example, where the lines need to run through the slab and things like that. I suspect that you're just gonna start to see robotics and systems like that take a larger and larger share of the tasks on the construction site over time. Dwarkesh Patel Yeah, it's still very far away. It's still very far away. What do you think of Flow? That's Adam Neumann's newest startup and backed with $350 million from Andreeseen Horowitz.Brian Potter I do not have any strong opinions about that other than, “Wow, they've really given him another 350M”. I do not have any particularly strong opinions about this. They made a lot they make a lot of investments that don't make sense to me, but I'm out of venture capital. So there's no reason that my judgment would be any good in this situation–– so I'm just presuming they know something I do not. Dwarkesh Patel I'm going to be interviewing Andreeseen later this month, and I'm hoping I can ask him about that.Brian Potter You know, it may be as simple as he “sees all” about really high variance bets. There's nobody higher variance in the engine than Adam Neumann so, maybe just on those terms, it makes sense. Dwarkesh Patel You had an interesting post about like how a bunch of a lot of the knowledge in the construction industry is informal and contained within best practices or between relationships and expectations that are not articulated all the time. It seems to me that this is also true of software in many cases but software seems much more legible and open source than these other physical disciplines like construction despite having a lot of th

Joined by a legend in the industry tonight, Mr. Brian Potter! Rob and I are so stoked to be chatting with Brian for this episode! I think we'll hear some fun Pete Kahl and Kevin McCurley stories along the way too! Don't miss it!! FIND NARBC AND CHICAGO REPTILE HOUSE ONLINE https://www.narbc.com/m/ https://chicagoreptile.net/m/https://www.facebook.com/NARBCReptile... https://www.facebook.com/Chicagoreptile/ https://instagram.com/narbc?igshid=Ym... The Leadership Conversations PodcastLeaders from around the world share leadership stories and how they got where they are.Listen on: Apple Podcasts Spotify How to Build a Successful Membership BusinessInterviews with business owners about how to build and scale a sustainable membership.Listen on: Apple Podcasts Spotify Become a Media MavenIf you're tired of seeing your competition in places you would love to be mentioned or...Listen on: Apple Podcasts Spotify

In this episode of the Sales Secrets podcast, Brandon talks to Brian Potter about the importance of knowing your customer, particularly the personas that you're trying to sell to. Be curious about the persona, know their pain points, and discover what they really care about. The more you know, the more you'll be able to customize your messaging, and you're off to the races. SUBSCRIBE TO SALES SECRETS PODCASTITUNES ► https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/s...​SPOTIFY ► https://open.spotify.com/show/1BKYsQo...​YOUTUBE ► https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVUh...​THIS EPISODE IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY SEAMLESS.AI - THE WORLD'S BEST SALES LEADSWEBSITE ► https://www.seamless.ai/LINKEDIN ► https://www.linkedin.com/company/seamlessai/JOIN FOR FREE TODAY ► https://login.seamless.ai/invite/podcastSHOW DESCRIPTIONBrandon Bornancin is a serial salesperson, entrepreneur, and founder of Seamless.AI. Twice a week, Brandon interviews the world's top sales experts like Jill Konrath, Aaron Ross, John Barrows, Trish Bertuzzi, Mark Hunter, Anthony Iannarino, and many more -- to uncover actionable strategies, playbooks, tips, and insights you can use to generate more revenue and close more business. If you want to learn the most powerful sales secrets from the top sales experts in the world, Sales Secrets From The Top 1% is the place to find them.SALES SECRET FROM THE TOP 1%WEBSITE ► https://www.secretsalesbook.com/LINKEDIN ► https://www.linkedin.com/company/sales-secret-book/ABOUT BRANDONBrandon Bornancin is a serial salesperson (over $100M in sales deals), multi-million dollar sales tech entrepreneur, motivational sales speaker, international sales DJ (DJ NoQ5), and sales author who is obsessed with helping you maximize your sales success.Mr. Bornancin is currently the CEO & Founder at Seamless.AI delivering the world's best sales leads. Over 10,000+ companies use Seamless.ai to generate millions in sales at companies like Google, Amazon, Facebook, Slack, Dell, Oracle & many others.Mr. Bornancin is also the author of "Sales Secrets From The Top 1%" where the world's best sales experts share their secrets to sales success and author of “The Ultimate Guide To Overcoming Sales Objections.”FOLLOW BRANDONLINKEDIN ► https://www.linkedin.com/in/brandonbornancin/INSTAGRAM ► https://www.instagram.com/brandonbornancinofficial/FACEBOOK ► https://www.facebook.com/SeamlessAITWITTER ► https://twitter.com/BBornancin

India Policy Watch #1: Love For PutinInsights on burning policy issues in India- RSJYou must have noticed a distinct anti-west, pro-Putin tone in the media outlets that toe the government’s line in India. The intellectual right has been busy with columns equivocating on who has to shoulder the blame for the war. What could be the reasons for this? There’s of course the strategic autonomy argument. We are dependent on Russia for our defence and oil requirements. It has been a reliable friend of ours in the past. And we cannot trust the US anyway. There’s also the added hypocrisy of western Europe which continues to trade gas with Russia while lecturing us on our purchase of oil. Everyone is looking out for their interests and so should we. It is best to keep equidistant from any particular formation and act as a ‘swing power’. Pranay has written in the past few editions on why strategic autonomy as a policy isn’t suited for the likely emerging world order. But that aside, you can somewhat understand the anti-west stance if its origins lie in the traditional suspicion of the west and reflexive desire to be non-aligned in the policy circle in India. But there’s more here. The anti-west stance is also about fighting the favourite imaginary global nexus of liberals and wokes. So, you will notice almost every television debate on Ukraine will devolve into some kind of liberal and Biden bashing. If you are so concerned about Ukraine, why don’t you put your troops on the ground instead of hectoring India - is the usual line taken by anchors. Implicit in it is some kind of ‘Putin envy’ that I have noticed among the right-wing intellectuals in India. The idea that a strong man like Putin has revived national pride among Russians and brought it back into the superpower league from where it was languishing in the aftermath of the Soviet meltdown. This is obviously rubbish if you bother to look at the data. Russia is a small power whose economy has gone from bad to worse under Putin. It has a huge nuclear stockpile from its past that gives the rest of the world the only reason to pause before dismissing it as a nobody. But there’s a fascination among the right intellectuals to make the case for a Putin-like revival of India. I remember just before the 2014 elections, Swapan Dasgupta made this argument in the Sunday Times of India (Mar 9, 2014):“However, to a people exasperated with prolonged uncertainty and decline, Putin is the antidote to the unending sadness and deprivation that defined 20th century Russia. He has created the conditions for the average Russian to feel good, get rich and, for a change, indulge. This exuberance is unlikely to last indefinitely but, for the moment, the Russian context favours a Putin-like robustness......To the west, Putin’s reclamation of Crimea (and, earlier, a slice of Georgia) and his assertion of Russia’s stakes in Ukraine may seem ominous. For Russia, it is, however, symbolic of the bid to reverse the historic defeat in the Cold War. But Putin’s bid to reclaim Russia’s status as a Great Power was only possible because the economic and political foundations for an enhanced role have been firmed up over the past decade. In India, on the other hand, the fierce desire of the past 25 years to transcend mediocrity, shoddiness and look the world powers in the eye has floundered. It is not that the UPA government has no achievements to its credit. India has progressed but it has seriously under-performed in terms of its potential... Whether faith in Modi encapsulates the anger at a dismal present and a brighter future will be tested in a free election. If Modi prevails on May 16, we shouldn’t be surprised if his detractors paint him to the world as India’s Putin. If he lives up to the liberal demonology, those with a stake in India’s future should be elated. Just as Russia is with Putin.”I remember this column distinctly for two reasons. It was already so wrong back then in thinking that Russia was becoming a Great Power under Putin. But, importantly, it gave me an early indicator of what kind of aspiration the right has from its political dominance in India. Some kind of muddled civilisational nationalism with akhand Bharat fantasies whose best example for them was an expansionist Russia of 2014. Putin was their best answer to western liberalism and the wokeism that accompanied it. It worried me then and it has only gotten worse.The right intellectual ecosystem has continued in the same vein in the last two months. Here’s R. Jagannathan writing in the Swarajya on how NATO is past its sell-by date:“The reality is that Europe is the most fractious of continents, and just as France and Germany decided after the two world wars that enemies must be part of the same economic union to avoid future wars, Russia needs to become a part of both the mutual defence pact and the European Union. This way Europe’s security needs will be buttressed with a mutual economic zone where Russia’s energy can power Europe, and Europe’s markets Russia’s economic revival.America can at best be an observer in this alliance. The world cannot allow its over-grown military-industrial complex to decide who should go to war against who just so that this complex can protect its commercial interests.India’s own security architecture would be better protected by aligning with this expanded Europe, and especially with France and Germany, with Russia and Japan being other big partners. A Franco-German-Russo-Indo-Japanese QUINT (rather than an America-led QUAD) could lead to a less threatening relationship with China.”It is quite an intellectual leap to first contemplate some kind of QUINT with those powers coming together. What specific long-term interests bind them? None, except for the author’s fantasy to somehow shoehorn Russia as a legitimate and peaceful power under Putin. At its heart lies the same revivalist admiration and fantasy that Swapan Dasgupta spoke of in 2014. There’s, however, a different reason I can think of about the stance taken by these pro-government media channels on Russia and the war in Ukraine. And this credits the government with a lot more intelligence in managing its position on Ukraine. It is about the government playing the two-level game really well here. As we know, all negotiations in international relations are a two-level game as Putnam put it. At any time, a state is negotiating with other states (intergovernmental) while simultaneously managing its domestic constituency and its concerns on the issues. A clever negotiator will look to use his position on one ‘table’ to influence the outcome on the other in a way that gets him a ‘win’ that’s part of his ‘win-set’. Maybe, just maybe, the government is playing a clever two-level game. It is using its phalanx of friendly editors and journalists to talk up India’s dependence on Russia, its historical special ties with it and how dumping Russia at this moment will be perceived negatively by the people of India. This seems like a good tactic to follow because it allows the ministry of external affairs to sit at the international table and show the constraints India has to give its unqualified support to the west. “See, this is the domestic mood on Russia. What do you want us to do beyond a point” - that’s what India might be telling the west. This seems like a good way to continue sitting on the fence on the issue and hoping for the war to end to have things sort themselves out. I would like to believe this is what the government has been doing to keep itself away from western sanctions while it continues to engage with Russia. Is it working? Well, it seemed to have worked for a while. However, the US patience seems to be wearing thin as this warning from Brian Deese, the White House National Economic Council Director, suggests:"Our message to the Indian government is that the costs and consequences for them of moving into a more explicit strategic alignment with Russia will be significant and long-term. There are certainly areas where we have been disappointed by both China and India's decisions, in the context of the invasion."Hmm. So, what changed? One of the going-in assumptions in Putnam’s two-level game theory is about the credibility of the constraints and options each state might have in its hands. If you have to show you have a domestic compulsion because of which you will need some flexibility on the international table, it must appear credible to the other state at the table. India might be emphasising its domestic compulsions in supporting Russia by showing what’s appearing in the media as the mood of the nation. But for the US to consider it credible, it must be convinced that this domestic ‘view’ is emerging independently. Beyond a point that must be difficult to swallow for the US considering how a large section of our media has turned into government mouthpieces in the past few years.  Of course, a fair and independent media is necessary for the domestic polity. But it is good for international negotiations too.India Policy Watch #2: RBI’s Tough Act Insights on burning policy issues in India- RSJThe Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) of RBI met earlier this week and based on its assessment decided to change its policy stance from remaining accommodative “as long as necessary to revive and sustain growth on a durable basis” to remaining accommodative “while focusing on withdrawal of accommodation to ensure that inflation remains within the target going forward, while supporting growth”.I hope you were able to spot the change. Essentially, RBI has prepared the ground for an increase in policy rates in the second half of this year. One of my predictions for the year was that we will have a total of three policy rate hikes cumulating to 75 bps. The stage is set for that prediction to come true. Broadly, there were three messages from the MPC meeting:The input cost pressures will continue to impact the economy buffeted by global supply chain disruptions, commodity price increases and continuing uncertainty because of the war in Ukraine. RBI sharply revised its own estimate of inflation for FY 23 from 4.5 per cent to 5.7 per cent. This 120 bps increase was a belated recognition of the inflation risk in the economy with the likelihood of it breaching the 4 (+/- 2) per cent range. Once it goes beyond 6 per cent, the RBI has to explain it to the parliament. Though I don’t see why it should be such a concern if it is in lock-step with the Finance ministry and the government enjoys a brute majority in the house. But it seems like that 6 percent mark is some kind of Rubicon. That apart it made it clear that inflation control is now its chief priority over growth for the year. And that’s a big shift. My view is CPI inflation will go over 6 per cent during the year unless we see normalisation in Ukraine sooner.On growth, the RBI lowered its forecast from 7.8 per cent to 7.2 per cent for FY 23 citing a broad range of risks to it - a surge in commodity prices, hawkish policy stances in developed economies, supply-side disruptions, weakening global demand and geopolitical risks. The huge government capex cycle that was promised in the Budget isn’t going to happen in a hurry. The disinvestment proceeds have also been delayed because of the choppiness of the equity market and the big LIC IPO might happen at a more realistic and muted valuation than earlier projections. These are all weighing down the growth outlook. The good news on tax collection buoyancy, robust rural demand and a steady urban consumption trend have meant the RBI still expects the growth to come in above 7 per cent. That will be tested going forward.The liquidity in the banking system continues to be quite high (Rs. 8.5 lakh crores) and RBI was extremely careful about how it will suck this liquidity out in the future. RBI will follow a “gradual and calibrated withdrawal of this liquidity over a multi-year time frame in a non-disruptive manner”. In other words, they will stretch out this excess liquidity scenario as long as they can. RBI has been holding variable rate reverse repo (VRRR) auctions to absorb liquidity on a periodic basis while continuing with variable repo rate (VRR) auctions simultaneously to meet liquidity shortages. This ‘Operation Twist’ will continue. It has also increased the held to maturity (HTM) limit for banks from 22 per cent to 23 per cent and allowed them to have G-secs under this category. The RBI also introduced the standing deposit facility (SDF) as an uncollateralised form of reverse repo or liquidity absorption tool. What this means is that banks can now park overnight liquidity at RBI at the SDF rate of 3.75 per cent without RBI having to put G-secs as collateral into Bank accounts. In effect, the liquidity adjustment facility (LAF) corridor which is the difference of rates at which RBI takes in and infuses liquidity into the banking system, is back at the pre-pandemic level of 50 bps without RBI specifically increasing the reverse repo rates. Among the numerous RBI has already adopted, these are another set of ways to support the government borrowing programme for this fiscal. In summary, for the number of economic and global variables it has to juggle while keeping the government happy that it is doing everything to support growth, the RBI has the toughest job in the country. And I will say it makes a fair fist of it.   A Framework a Week: The Three Binding Constraints on Technological ProgressTools for thinking public policy— Pranay KotasthaneIn an excellent essay for Works in Progress, Brian Potter has an interesting insight on technology governance. He writes:There’s a pattern that we frequently see in the development of a new technology. Initially, the practical functionality is limited by the technology itself – what’s built and used is close to the limit of what the technology is physically capable of doing. As the technology develops and its capabilities improve, there’s a divergence between what a technology can physically do and what it can economically do, and you begin to see commercialized versions that have lower performance but are more affordable. Then, as people begin to build within this envelope of economic possibility, capability tends to get further constrained by legal restrictions, especially if the new technology has any (real or perceived) negative externalities.A framework from microeconomics can be used to visualise this insight rather well—production possibility frontiers (PPF). A PPF curve results from trade-offs. Given finite resources, producing more goods of one kind leaves less resources on the table for another. Thus, given a fixed budget constraint, a PPF curve shows the production options available for a society. All points below a PPF curve are the available options (like points A,B, C & D in the figure), and the ones above it (like X) are unavailable due to resource constraints. What Potter’s insight adds is that we can probably imagine three distinct production possibility frontiers in technological development—economic, policy, and technological, as shown in the chart below.In the first stage of technology developlent, the technological PPF is itself a binding constraint as newly intriduced products have several bugs. In Stage 2, however, the technological PPF is no longer the binding constraint. At this point, it’s the economic PPF that sets the limits for what is producible. In the final stage, the limiting constraint is policy rather than economic or technological. Development of cryptocurrency technology is a relevant example. In the first stage, the total currency that could be churned out was limited by the technology itself. Soon enough, those constraints were overcome and a number of different currencies proliferated. The binding constraint then became economic, as mining new currencies became tougher. With more energy-efficient mechanisms such as proof-of-stake on the horizon, the binding constraint is no longer economic. Instead, it’s the policy and legal constraints that limit production.The closer the policy and economic PPFs move towards the technological PPF, the faster the technological development. At the same time, the policy PFF can be used to avoid production at the technological limits. Broadly, two approaches are available. Start with a tight policy PPF and then expand it slowly. Or start with a really loose PPF and reduce it depending on the observed negative effects. In low policy capacity situations, the latter approach offers more opportunities for growth. Easier said than done. PolicyWTF: Bihar Prohibition SagaThis section looks at egregious public policies. Policies that make you go: WTF, Did that really happen?— Pranay KotasthaneProhibition is a gift that keeps giving. Six years ago, the Bihar government criminalised the manufacturing, bottling, distribution, transportation, collection, storage, possession, purchase, sale, or consumption of alcohol. You very well know how that would’ve turned out. First, deaths due to consumption of spurious alochol became a regular occurence. Second, prohibition cases and ‘convicts’ overwhelmed the state’s already anaemic law and order machinery. Eventually, the Supreme Court issued an order in February this year, stating that:We find a number of cases coming to this Court arising from proceedings initiated under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2018. The trial Court and the High Court are both being crowded by bail applications to an extent that at some stage 16 judges of the High Court are listening to bail matters and prosecutions under the Act concerned forms a large part of it. Denial of bail would also result in crowding of the prisons.In response, the Bihar government now proposes to amend the Prohibition Act of 2016. Instead of getting rid of prohibition, the amendment focuses narrowly on the Supreme Court’s objections. For instance, being caught the first time for drinking now attracts a penalty of Rs 2000-5000 instead of imprisonment. And to reduce the burden of cases, the bill proposes that consumption offences will be heard by executive magistrates who will be appointed by the state government especially for such offences. It seems that the Bihar government is also recruiting ‘prohibition constables’ for better enforcement.Anticipating the unintended consequences is easy. With different punishments for the first and subsequent offences, these rules will boost the Police’s rent-seeking powers. The Police will treat everyone as repeat offenders by default. On payment of an amount sufficiently greater than Rs 5000, the offence will be magically converted into a first offence, settled with a fine. Instead of focusing on Bihar’s terrible law and order situation, the Police and Executive Magistrates will take special interest in catching people for drinking alcohol. The Supreme Court’s immediate problem might well reduce but the lives of Biharis will become worse. Bihar government would do well to heed to Ambedkar’s vehement rejection of prohibition:“From the point of equity, there is no justification for prohibition. The cost of prohibition is borne by the general public. Why should the general public be made to pay the cost of reforming a lakh or two of habitual drunkards who could never be reformed ? Why should the general public be made to pay the cost of prohibition when the other wants of the public such as eduction, housing and health are crying for remedy? Why not use the money for development plans? Who has greater priority, the Drunkard or the Hungry? There are pertinent questions to which there is no answer except arrogance and obstinacy. Whatever happens, the policy of prohibition must be reversed and this colossal waste of public money should be put a stop to and the resources utilised for advancing general welfare.”Advertisement: If you enjoy the themes we discuss in this newsletter, consider taking up the Graduate Certificate in Public Policy course. Intake for the next cohort is open. 12-weeks, fully online, designed with working professionals in mind, and most importantly, guaranteed fun and learning.HomeWorkReading and listening recommendations on public policy matters[Magazine] Works in Progress is emerging as an exceptional storehouse of exceptional ideas. There are few other online spaces where the signal to noise ratio is as high.[Blog post] Yiqin Fu’s post on the unintended consequences of a mobile-first walled-garden internet on knowledge creation is an eye-opener. [Forecasting Tournament] We have written earlier about the educational value of making precise predictions. Check out the Metaculus forecasting tournament on the Ukraine conflict, and force yourself out of what Philip Tetlock calls “outcome-irrelevant learning”. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit publicpolicy.substack.com

Brian Potter is the author of https://constructionphysics.substack.com/ (Construction Physics), the best blog on construction news and innovation that I've found. "https://constructionphysics.substack.com/p/why-its-hard-to-innovate-in-construction?utm_source=url (Why It's Hard to Innovate in Construction)" is one of my favorite and a central theme in today's discussion. Brian is a structural engineer by training. He is currently a Senior Fellow at the Institute for Progress and previously led an engineering team at Katerra. Enjoy the episode! Have any topics you want me to discuss, guests to interview, or feedback about the show? DM me on Instagram https://www.instagram.com/buildingoptimal/ (@buildingoptimal) or send me an email at jared@gossettco.com. And thank you to Lowe's for sponsoring today's episode! Learn more about Lowe's for Pros https://www.lowes.com/l/Pro/pro-benefits.html?cm_mmc=inf-_-b-_-prd-_-tol-_-gpr-_-jgos-_-wb-_-smp-_-rev-_-spy081221 (HERE) Want more good stuff? Sign up for the Building Optimal email http://buildingoptimal.com/email (HERE).

On this episode, we'll be speaking with Gary Klein, managing director at Gary Klein and Associates, in our policy segment; Brian Potter, structural department manager at DEVITA Inc. in our news segment, and Jed Scheuermann, IAPMO Region 2 field manager and North American program director for IWSH, in our good vibe segment. Contact Gary Klein by email at  gary@garykleinassociates.com.Check out Brian Potter's Substack newsletter at https://constructionphysics.substack.com, which has links to his email and LinkedIn account.Contact Jed Scheuermann by email at jed.scheuermann@iapmo.org. 

Conversation on the lessons from the rise and fall of Katerra with Brian Potter Katerra former employee. Prof Jennifer Whyte Head of the School of Project Management University of Sydney. Daryl Patterson Chief Product Officer Head of Design Lendlease Digital.

Contrary to the popular belief the construction industry is an innovative and forward thinking industry.   However, there are some risks inherent in construction that can slow the pace of innovation.    Brian Potter — a structural engineer, returns to Construction Genius to discuss why it's seemingly hard to innovate in construction and how construction companies can do it more effectively.   We also discuss: • What construction companies should focus on to make innovation happen, • The difference between the United States, Europe, and Asia in terms of innovation.   We also touch on some opportunities for innovation in terms of 3D printing, and the future of innovation in the construction industry for the next 4-5 years. Press that play button and let's get started!   Discussion Points:   • 0:00 Introduction   • 3:02 The construction industry is quite advanced than outsiders actually think it is   • 4:53 Why it's hard to innovate in the construction industry   • 7:25 Micro approach vs macro approach to innovation?   • 8:20 Who should be initiating innovation in a construction company?   • 10:50 The role of project owners in terms of driving innovation   • 12:21 Characteristics of a General Contractor or Subcontractor who are effective at innovation   • 13:37 Maintaining profitability while promoting innovativeness   • 16:02 How construction companies manage risk without taking so much of a toll on the financial aspect   • 17:26 Understanding that failure is a part of innovation   • 19:54 Key innovation trends in the next five to seven years   • 21:06 The future of 3D printing in the construction industry   • 23:32 Adopting innovation: The difference between the United States, Europe, and Asia   • 25:34 The effect of the American business system towards innovation in construction industries in the United States   • 27:20 The characteristics of a highly effective company when it comes to innovation   About Our Guest:   Brian Potter is a structural engineer and formerly worked at the construction startup Katerra. He is the author of the "Construction Physics" newsletter.   Resources: • Episode 131: Katerra: The Rise and Fall of a Billion Dollar Construction Start Up: https://www.constructiongenius.com/podcast/katerra-the-rise-and-fall-of-a-billion-dollar-construction-start-up/   • Subscribe to Brian's blog: https://constructionphysics.substack.com/   • Another Day In Katerradise https://constructionphysics.substack.com/p/another-day-in-katerradise   • Follow Brian on Linkedin https://www.linkedin.com/in/brian-potter-6a082150/   Do Your Project Executives Need to Become Better Leaders? • Book a 10-minute call with Eric Anderton to see if/how he can help (https://10minutes.youcanbook.me/)   Connect with me on LinkedIn. For more podcast episodes, you may also visit my website. Tune in and subscribe to the Construction Genius: A Leadership Master-Class Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and Stitcher.   Thank you for tuning in!

Welcome to Episode 3 of The Sync Report Podcast with this week's guest Steve Binder. 2 Sense  Music presents The Sync Report, where weekly you will meet industry experts and top level songwriters as we pull the curtain back on music placement and scores. Building vital relationships and providing real opportunities to our listeners. Listen to indie filmmakers present their latest productions and describe specific scenes as they consider music submitted by our audience.  Hosted by music supervisor and former Sony Epic executive Jason P. Rothberg along with his co host, the Godmother of Indie Films, Rose Ganguzza. Legendary TV director/producer Steve Binder has been behind some of the biggest musical specials on TV, including Olivia Newton John, Abba, Andy Gibb, Barry Manilow, Patti LaBelle, Liza Minnelli, John Denver, Steve Allen and more. He directed the T.A.M.I. Show feature film that featured James Brown & the Flames, The Rolling Stones, Marvin Gaye, Chuck Berry, Smokey Robinson and the Miracles and The Beach Boys.  He created Elvis Presley's 1968 NBC Comeback Special, The Petula Clarke's Special, Rolling Stone Magazine's CBS 10th Anniversary Special and multiple Diana Ross specials.  Steve was the CEO and President of TA (Talent Associates) Records that discovered and produced the first 2-albums with Seals & Crofts. Steve signed Dennis Lambert and Brian Potter to their first producer/songwriter contracts and went on to partner with Australian, Robie Porter in Wizard Records (1973). Together they brought Rick Springfield to the U.S. from Australia when he was 19 yrs. old, and produced acts like Daddy Cool, Air Supply and many more. Steve has been honored at the Rock n' Roll Hall of Fame and the Grammy Museum and served as Governor at the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences, representing the director's peer group. His hardcover book: “The Story Behind the Special '', about the Elvis Presley Comeback is available for pre-order on Amazon (here) and will be released in April 2022. The Sync Report is proud to support independent artists. Check out their songs this episode, in the track listing below.  Please check out their other music and support them on their socials.  Make sure to follow and like The Sync Report pages so we can keep you informed of all the opportunities and exciting things to come! Music from our featured artists for this episode:  “Yagayo" (Instrumental) by: Milfredo 7  "Cherry Baby" (Instrumental) by: Milfredo 7  "Come and Get Some" (Instrumental)  "It's You' (Instrumental) by: Milfredo 7  "No Mas" (Instrumental) by: Milfredo 7  "Sing A Long" (Instrumental) by: Milfredo 7  "Reggae Re Rub" (Instrumental) by: Milfredo 7  "Feeling Good" (Instrumental) by: Jasmine Smith “Glutton" (Instrumental) by: Lisa Danaë “Retronic" (Instrumental) by: Milfredo 7  "Don't Worry" (Instrumental) by: Milfredo 7  "Keep It Cool" (Instrumental) by: Tye Ellen "Take You Down" (Instrumental) by: Cortnie Graham "Eyes For You" (Instrumental) by: Dunn Wilder  "Running Blades" (Instrumental) by: Bob Ballard  Music is the difference between a good film and a great one.  Please tell you friends about us, and remember to rate, comment, &  subscribe to us on Apple Podcasts and across all platforms.   And find us here  at The Sync Report here TSR Website  Facebook  Instagram Twitter Youtube Linkedin Tik Tok 

Brian speaks on the future of the NARBC Breeders Conference. Support the show (https://www.patreon.com/RudeDoggReptiles)

#narbc #reptileshows #coolestreptilepodcastintheworld JOIN TRAP PATREON FAM: https://bit.ly/311x4gxSUBSCRIBE: https://bit.ly/39kZBkZSUPPORT USARK: https://usark.org/memberships/TRAP TALK HERP MERCH HERE: https://bit.ly/3mvC4EB Follow Me On Instagram: Trap Talk Podcast https://bit.ly/2WLXL7w MJExoticsCartal https://bit.ly/3hthAZuUnfiltered Reptiles Podcast https://bit.ly/3eSqAFMSubscribe to Unfiltered Reptiles Podcast: https://bit.ly/2WM11jsListen On Apple:Trap Talk With MJ https://bit.ly/2CVW9Bd Unfiltered Reptiles Podcast https://bit.ly/3jySnhV Listen On Spotify:Trap Talk With MJ https://bit.ly/2WMcKOO Unfiltered Reptiles Podcast https://bit.ly/2ZQ2JCbBROUGHT TO YOU BY:www.coldbloodedcafe.comwww.simcontainer.comTRAP TALK PODCAST WEAR: mjexoticscartal@gmail.comALL COLLAB INQUIRIES PLEASE EMAIL: thesnaketrapsessions@gmail.com WELCOME TO THE SNAKE TRAP SESSIONS HOME OF THE TRAP TALK WITH MJ PODCAST. THIS ISN'T YOUR TYPICAL REPTILE PODCAST. THERE WILL BE SMOKING, DRINKING, CUSSING & MAD DISCUSSION ON ANYTHING REPTILE RELATED. WE'LL ALSO HAVE DISCUSSION OF EVERYDAY LIFE WITH THE OCCASION GIVE AWAY HERE AND THERE. I APPRECIATE ALL THE LOVE AND SUPPORT & LOOKING FORWARD TO BRINGING SOME REAL ONES TO THE TABLE.

Special guest Brian Potter of Construction Physics joins the podcast to talk about his newsletter. We discuss why he's writing it, who it's for, and what parallels exist between his observations on the complex nature of the construction industry and the architectural profession.LinksBrian on LinkedInBrian's recent blog posts on his Construction Physics Substack:Building Complexity and the Construction Community of PracticeWhy It's Hard to Innovate in ConstructionMore TRXL Podcast episodesCheck out my other podcast too: ArchispeakMy YouTube channelSponsorThanks to our sponsor for helping make this episode possible:TwinmotionTwinmotion is a real-time rendering solution used by architecture, engineering, and construction professionals to create high-quality imagery, client presentations, and interactive experiences that help communicate your BIM data and design ideas, fast. Visit twinmotion.link/trxl and try Twinmotion for free.

We hear all the time that the Construction Industry is broken. People then try to innovate to fix it. But what kind of innovations have the most impact? What happens when an organization wants to take on the challenge of shifting the entire construction industry? Is there a chance for it to thrive, or will it collapse?  This is the core of my discussion with Brian Potter in this week's Construction Genius podcast episode. Brian worked for Katerra, a billion-dollar construction startup which recently filed bankruptcy. We explore what Katerra did right and where they've gone wrong, ultimately leading to its fall. Brian also shares why it's challenging to integrate the construction industry from top to bottom and how things could have been done differently.  This is an interesting episode that you can learn from. Tune in to this episode today!  Discussion Points: 0:00 Introduction 2:21 Brian shares his experience with Katerra  3:02 What Brian thought of the different thoughts towards Katerra  6:04 The car analogy and how Katerra envisioned their company to be  7:36 Brian's time in Katerra and why he describes it as bittersweet  8:55 Fatal flaws from its birth that haunted Katerra  10:43 Brian's perspective of the ‘construction industry is broken'  12:36 Does everything need to be changed all at once?  13:59 Did the CEO's lack of construction experience contribute to Katerra's failure? 15:09 Conflicts between construction insiders and the outsiders 18:02 What did Katerra get right? 19:17 Brian's approach to those who want to start something like Katerra  20:38 Who should be the driving force behind changes in the construction industry? 21:38 One product Brian would choose to go after  22:42 Why Katerra was successful in attracting talented people 23:35 Brian shares his favorite part in working with Katerra  24:04 Scaling too quickly  About the Guest:  Brian Potter is a structural engineer and formerly worked at the construction startup Katerra. He is the author of the "Construction Physics" newsletter. Resources:  Subscribe to Brian's blog: https://constructionphysics.substack.com/ Another Day In Katerradise https://constructionphysics.substack.com/p/another-day-in-katerradise Follow Brian on Linkedin https://www.linkedin.com/in/brian-potter-6a082150/ Brian's restaurant recommendation: Fox Brothers BBQ: http://foxbrosbbq.com/ Do Your Project Executives Need to Become Better Leaders?  Book a 10-minute call with Eric Anderton to see if/how he can help (https://10minutes.youcanbook.me/)  Connect with me on LinkedIn. For more podcast episodes, visit my website. Tune in and subscribe to the Construction Genius: A Leadership Master-Class Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and Stitcher. Thank you for tuning in! 

Brian Potter presented, “Discipleship: A Love Relationship,” during which he talked about the importance of discipling with other men and sharing each other’s burdens and trials. Brian gave examples of personal experiences in his family life, whereby instead of choosing to be bitter and angry at God, Brian and his...

The Phoenix has a grand re-opening. Jerry is the new club licensee, but discovers every decision he makes is dismissed by Brian Potter, Meanwhile Max and Paddy travel to France to buy cheap booze, but return home with more than just beer.----------------------------------------Original Airdate - 15th August 2002----------------------------------------Don't forget to check us out on Social media:Lost Art of Podcasting:Facebook: www.facebook.com/LostArtofPodcastingTwitter: www.twitter.com/lostartpodcastInstagram: www.instagram.com/lostartofpodcastingLost Art of Wrestling:Facebook: www.facebook.com/lostartofwrestlingTwitter: www.twitter.com/laowpodcastCheck out our friends:RAD Live:Facebook: www.facebook.com/ukradpodcastTwitter: www.twitter.com/ukradpodcastGunpowder, Treason, No Plot :-Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/GTNPP/Twitter: https://twitter.com/TreasonNoSpreaker: https://www.spreaker.com/show/gunpowder-treason-no-plotYou can also follow our personal Twitter accounts:AXC - @coxythelegendSSF - @UKRADpodcastThe Stowaway - @Loggers109The RAD: Live Podcast & Lost Art of Podcasting are proud to be part of the #BritPodScene

The burnt out husk of a club is all that is left, but Brian has a dream: everything under one roof, and Jerry is the only one that can make it happen. With no licence, brewery or money, however, how will Brian Potter succeed?----------------------------------------Original Airdate - 8th August 2002----------------------------------------Don't forget to check us out on Social media:Lost Art of Podcasting:Facebook: www.facebook.com/LostArtofPodcastingTwitter: www.twitter.com/lostartpodcastInstagram: www.instagram.com/lostartofpodcastingLost Art of Wrestling:Facebook: www.facebook.com/lostartofwrestlingTwitter: www.twitter.com/laowpodcastCheck out our friends:RAD Live:Facebook: www.facebook.com/ukradpodcastTwitter: www.twitter.com/ukradpodcastGunpowder, Treason, No Plot :-Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/GTNPP/Twitter: https://twitter.com/TreasonNoSpreaker: https://www.spreaker.com/show/gunpowder-treason-no-plotYou can also follow our personal Twitter accounts:AXC - @coxythelegendSSF - @UKRADpodcastThe Stowaway - @Loggers109The RAD: Live Podcast & Lost Art of Podcasting are proud to be part of the #BritPodScene

★ FOLLOW US ON SOCIAL MEDIA ★SUBSCRIBE TO BRIAN'S VLOG CHANNEL ▶ http://bit.ly/2ybSYNZSUBSCRIBE TO NOAH'S CHANNEL ▶https://bit.ly/3b2parkBrian's Instagram ▶ https://www.instagram.com/snakebytestv/Noah's Instagram ▶ https://www.instagram.com/barczyknoah/?hl=enLori's Instagram ▶ https://www.instagram.com/loribarczyk/?hl=enBrian's Facebook ▶ https://www.facebook.com/BrianBarczyk/Brian's Twitter ▶ https://bit.ly/2tYemtZ★ FOLLOW THE REPTARIUM ON SOCIAL MEDIA ★ Website ▶ https://thereptarium.com/Book A Private Tour With Me, Noah, Eric, Jessica or Bruce ▶ https://thereptarium.com/products/private-toursSpecial Events ▶ https://bit.ly/2Cz7MKWFacebook ▶ https://www.facebook.com/thereptarium/ Instagram ▶ https://www.instagram.com/thereptarium

Set in the Neptune Club, a working men's establishment. It follows the grand final of the annual Talent Trek competition. Characters include the club's social secretary Brian Potter, the club's compère Jerry St. Clair, the bouncers Max and Paddy and the house band Les Alanos.Original airdate - 12th January 2000Don't forget to check us out on Social media:Lost Art of Podcasting:Facebook: www.facebook.com/LostArtofPodcastingTwitter: www.twitter.com/lostartpodcastInstagram: www.instagram.com/lostartofpodcastingLost Art of Wrestling:Facebook: www.facebook.com/lostartofwrestlingTwitter: www.twitter.com/laowpodcastCheck out our friends:RAD Live:Facebook: www.facebook.com/ukradpodcastTwitter: www.twitter.com/ukradpodcastGunpowder, Treason, No Plot :-Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/GTNPP/Twitter: https://twitter.com/TreasonNoSpreaker: https://www.spreaker.com/show/gunpowder-treason-no-plotYou can also follow our personal Twitter accounts:Coxy - @coxythelegendTDM - @RhogarGTNPTFG - @UKRADpodcastThe RAD: Live Podcast & Lost Art of Podcasting are proud to be part of the #BritPodScene

Navigating the sales cycle during a crisis What does qualifying for President's Club The Good and bad of working for a global organization Do I stay an IC or move into management? Performance, Impact, and Exposure What to ask those senior executives when you have those moments Shifting from a big company to a startup Shifting from a startup from a startup

"Be curious. Know who you're selling in to" On this episode of Sales Secrets From The Top 1%, Brian explains his top secrets to sales success and how to start implementing them in your career immediately!

In the second topic of our current series, ‘The Rock As My Guide’, Brian Potter, in ‘Jesus: My Leader’, takes us through the steps we need to make Jesus our leader. He encourages us to trust in God and to be encouraged by what God has done in our lives....

Join us for something a bit different this time around, for our pilot episode of the Phoenix Pod! AXC & SSF are big fans of the show and wanted to discuss their love of it, as well as discuss the show itself.Original airdate: 14th January 2001The first series begins with the opening day of Brian Potter's new club, the Phoenix. With "TV's own Roy Walker" opening the club that night, Brian wants everything to be perfect. But a power cut that leaves the club in the dark, the theft of the bingo machine, a Nazi fruit machine, Max the doorman injuring himself and a racist folk band soon ruin everything.-----Don't forget to check us out on Social media:Lost Art of Podcasting:Facebook: www.facebook.com/LostArtofPodcastingTwitter: www.twitter.com/lostartpodcastInstagram: www.instagram.com/lostartofpodcastingLost Art of Wrestling:Facebook: www.facebook.com/lostartofwrestlingTwitter: www.twitter.com/laowpodcastCheck out our friends:RAD Live:Facebook: www.facebook.com/ukradpodcastTwitter: www.twitter.com/ukradpodcastGunpowder, Treason, No Plot :-Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/GTNPP/Twitter: https://twitter.com/TreasonNoSpreaker: https://www.spreaker.com/show/gunpowder-treason-no-plotYou can also follow our personal Twitter accounts:Coxy - @coxythelegendTDM - @RhogarGTNPSSF - @UKRADpodcastThe RAD: Live Podcast & Lost Art of Podcasting are proud to be part of the #BritPodScene

Entrevue avec Dr Brian Potter, cardiologue, hémodynamicien et chercheur au CHUM : Les femmes atteintes de boulimie ont près de 7 fois plus de de risque de développer certains problèmes cardiovasculaires.

L’actualité vue par Geneviève Pettersen. Entrevue avec Dr Brian Potter, cardiologue, hémodynamicien et chercheur au CHUM : Les femmes atteintes de boulimie ont près de 7 fois plus de de risque de développer certains problèmes cardiovasculaires. Entrevue avec Marc-André Sabourin, journaliste à l’Actualité et pour le documentaire « Bitch! - une incursion dans la manosphère » : Le monde méconnu de la masculinité en crise. Entrevue avec Steve E. Fortin, chroniqueur et blogueur au Journal de Montréal et au Journal de Québec : Il revient sur le 16 octobre 1970, date où le gouvernement de Pierre Elliott Trudeau a promulgué la Loi sur les mesures de guerre. Entrevue avec Émile Bilodeau, auteur-compositeur-interprète : Il a fait paraître son deuxième album, Grandeur mature, le 4 octobre dernier. Entrevue avec Isabelle Huot, docteure en nutrition : C’est la Journée mondiale de l'alimentation et un sondage révèle que le manque d’accès à une nourriture saine est un problème important pour les Canadiens. Entrevue avec Élise Jetté, productrice de contenus pour jdem.com, En 5 minutes et Tabloïd : On peut se procurer des médicaments pour traiter l’anxiété en moins de 3 minutes dans certaines cliniques sans rendez-vous à Montréal. Chronique de Emilie Ouellette, humoriste : Comment survivre quand les enfants sont malades et que tu dois travailler tout en prenant soin d'eux ? Une production QUB radio Octobre 2019

Lani Colhouer came in to talk about this weekends Inspired Home Expo... and she brought Brian Potter along from AM Sun Solar.

Local historian Brian Potter serves up a spoonful of Birkenhead's transition from quiet backwater to the bustling home of Chelsea's Sugar Factory.

Interview with Dr. Nathalie Auger, principal scientist at the University of Montreal Hospital Research Centre (CHUM) and associate clinical professor in the School of Public Health at the University of Montreal and with Dr. Brian Potter, clinical investigator and interventional cardiologist at the University of Montreal Hospital Research Centre, and assistant clinical professor with the department of medicine at the University of Montreal. Dr. Auger, Dr. Potter and their co-authors investigated the association of quantity and duration of snowfall with hospital admission or death due to myocardial infarction. Full research article (open access): www.cmaj.ca/lookup/doi/10.1503/cmaj.161064 ----------------------------------- Subscribe to CMAJ Podcasts on iTunes, Stitcher, Overcast, Instacast, or your favourite aggregator. You can also follow us directly on our SoundCloud page. Our podcasts are also released on www.cmaj.ca and on www.cmajblogs.com.

Join your host Sean Bradley he discusses many ASPECTS of BALL PYTHONS with some amazing guests!   This weeks guest - Brian Potter - Owner of The Chicago Reptile Househttp://www.chicagoreptile.net Co-owner/co-founder of the N.A.R.B.C. Expos http://www.narbc.com   Join Sean and Brian and they discuss Brian’s career in the retail pet industry!  This guy is incredible, has a huge store!  One unit is Exotic Birds of all kinds, the next unit is the Aquarium & Coral shop (regularly seen on Discovery’s TANKED show) and then finally the part that has been open the longest, THE REPTILE HOUSE   In this episode we also unveil the BAD ASS NEW COUPON CODE from PerfectPrey.com (linked below with more info) gives the user 5% off the total order before shipping.  “Ballsh!t5”   Finally I will mention the AWESOME NEW GIVEAWAY from C-Serpents and The Ballsh!t podcast…   A BRAND SPANKING NEW 10 container high V-70 (Cb-70 same size)   **EVERY 500 LIKES we will be giving away a T-Shirt AND (new bonus) we will feature YOUR REPTILE BUSINESS on TWO BALLSH!T full length episodes with a little about who you are and what you do!!!   More details can be found on http://www.ballsht.com or on our Facebook page http://www.facebook.com/ballshtpodcast     SHOW SPONSORS :   Exotics by Nature Company http://www.exoticsbynature.com http://www.facebook.com/ebncompany   C-Serpents Reptile & Rack Systems and Hot Box Incubators - Great source for ALL of your assembled rack system needs!!  Hot box incubators are INCREDIBLE and come complete, ready to use!  We use these products at EbN and we proudly endorse them! - http://www.cserpents.com   Perfect Prey - Top quality feeder rodents and insects! Great source for ALL of your prey animal needs!!  Perfect Prey is owned and operated by a fellow Ball Python (ALL SPECIES really lol) professional Jim Galloway who also owns Loxahatchee Herp Hatchery.  Jim knows not only what the discerning hobbyist/professional wants but is sure to EXCEED their expectations!  New flat rate shipping makes supplying your collection with the proper food more cost effective!  Check out the site and if you can tell them you found out on BALLSH!T!! - http://www.perfectprey.com   Other great product sources:   JPM Reptilia - Need those awesome show displays to MARKET and SELL YOUR PRODUCTION?? Look no further!  Jason at JPM Reptilia will offer you a newer version of the ORIGINAL 3 TIER SYSTEM that has been copied countless times but NEVER duplicated! JPM also offers a full line of assembled caging made from polystyrene, a bright white, lightweight but VERY strong plastic, these make excellent cages. - http://www.jpmreptilia.com   We are getting better with our editing and content so PLEASE CONTINUE YOUR FEEDBACK...   Want to participate in the show?!?  Head over to our website http://www.ballsht.com and click the Speakpipe widget on the left side of the screen!  This app will allow you to record a voicemail from your computer or mobile device for us to possibly feature on the show!  Please be sure to tell us YOUR NAME and YOUR BUSINESS NAME, leave a comment or question!  Listen in to EVERY EPISODE and maybe you'll be ON!!     One of the best things about our reptile industry is that we are all family and friends!  We travel around the country to several reptile shows and we would LOVE TO MEET YOU!!    Please stop by the Exotics by Nature Co. booth and SAY HI!!   Check this listing for some of our appearances coming up SOON...   2015 Expo Schedule (subject to change) :   H.E.R.P.S - Conroe January 23-24, 2016 - Conroe, TX Affiliate Link: https://www.facebook.com/HERPShow Affiliate Link: http://www.herpshow.net/conroe-tx/   N.A.R.B.C. - Arlington, TX February 13-14, 2016 - Arlington, TX Affiliate Link: http://narbc.com/Tinley/tinley_park.html   H.E.R.P.S - New Orleans February 27-28, 2016 - Westwego, LA Affiliate Link: https://www.facebook.com/HERPShow Affiliate Link: http://www.herpshow.net/new-orleans-la/   MORE BEING ADDED SOON!!!   

BALLSH!T PodCast presents BREEDER BUSINESS #9What is Breeder Business?!? Join Sean for a SHORT episode of advice, Q&A… just basically the BASICS and the TRICKS of the TRADE!!Back for ANOTHER breeder business… DAYTONA! now feels like d-a-ytonaaahhhZZzzz…Sean is back from the “BIG SHOW” with some info to share!  Also in this episode, Sean calls Brian Potter of N.A.R.B.C. for an update on the upcoming SHOW…North American Reptile Breeders Conference - ArlingtonAugust 29-30, 2015 - Arlington, TXAffiliate Link: http://narbc.com/Arlington/arlington.htmlScaleless Ball Python SEEN!!  Sean talks a bit about the Scaleless Ball Python that was displayed in Daytona. What about the FEMALE?!?  Finally Sean touches on the subject of INSURANCE for your collection.  What can YOU do at home/work to make sure you have a back-up!  We will see you in Arlington!!!***BALLSH!T FAN PRIZE GIVEAWAY!!!***In conjunction with our MAIN SPONSOR, C-Serpents Rack Systems/HotBox Incubators, we will be GIVING AWAY A 48” Hot Box Incubator!!  When our BallSh!t Podcast Facebook page receives 5000 likes OR we hit October 5th 2015 we will pick ONE GRAND PRIZE WINNER from our list of Facebook fans!  You will receive the 48” Hot Box Incubator valued at $1000.00 (winner must cover/arrange the shipping or delivery)EVERY 500 LIKES we will be giving away a T-Shirt AND (new bonus) we will feature YOUR REPTILE BUSINESS on TWO BALLSH!T full length episodes with a little about who you are and what you do!!! FIRST WINNER of the 500 LIKE Contest : Luis Diaz of Juggler Bpshttp://www.jugglerbp.comhttp://www.facebook.com/jugglerBPMore details can be found on http://www.ballsht.com or on our Facebook page http://www.facebook.com/ballshtpodcastLink to the HOT BOX INCUBATORhttp://www.cserpents.com/C_Serpents_Hot_Box/INCUBATORS.htmlSHOW SPONSORS :Exotics by Nature Companyhttp://www.exoticsbynature.comhttp://www.facebook.com/ebncompanyC-Serpents Reptile & Rack Systems and Hot Box Incubators - Great source for ALL of your assembled rack system needs!!  Hot box incubators are INCREDIBLE and come complete, ready to use!  We use these products at EbN and we proudly endorse them! - http://www.cserpents.comPerfect Prey - Top quality feeder rodents and insects! Great source for ALL of your prey animal needs!!  Perfect Prey is owned and operated by a fellow Ball Python (ALL SPECIES really lol) professional Jim Galloway who also owns Loxahatchee Herp Hatchery.  Jim knows not only what the discerning hobbyist/professional wants but is sure to EXCEED their expectations!  New flat rate shipping makes supplying your collection with the proper food more cost effective!  Check out the site and if you can tell them you found out on BALLSH!T!! - http://www.perfectprey.comOther great product sources:JPM Reptilia - Need those awesome show displays to MARKET and SELL YOUR PRODUCTION?? Look no further!  Jason at JPM Reptilia will offer you a newer version of the ORIGINAL 3 TIER SYSTEM that has been copied countless times but NEVER duplicated! JPM also offers a full line of assembled caging made from polystyrene, a bright white, lightweight but VERY strong plastic, these make excellent cages. - http://www.jpmreptilia.comReptileTubs.com - CALLING ALL DIY GUYS!!  This is your source for a great selection of plastic tubs!  Replace some broken ones or buy a whole set to build a rack, Eric Erb has it all.  Looking for rodent cage supplies like auto water nozzles?  Reptile Tubs.com has what YOU need! - http://www.reptiletubs.comWe are getting better with our editing and content so PLEASE CONTINUE YOUR FEEDBACK...Want to participate in the show?!?  Head over to our website http://www.ballsht.com and click the Speakpipe widget on the left side of the screen!  This app will allow you to record a voicemail from your computer or mobile device for us to possibly feature on the show!  Please be sure to tell us YOUR NAME and YOUR BUSINESS NAME, leave a comment or question!  Listen in to EVERY EPISODE and maybe you'll be ON!!One of the best things about our reptile industry is that we are all family and friends!  We travel around the country to several reptile shows and we would LOVE TO MEET YOU!!  Please stop by the Exotics by Nature Co. booth and SAY HI!! Check this listing for some of our appearances coming up SOON...2015 Expo Schedule (subject to change) : North American Reptile Breeders Conference - ArlingtonAugust 29-30, 2015 - Arlington, TXAffiliate Link: http://narbc.com/Arlington/arlington.htmlRepticon - Baton RougeSeptember 12-13, 2015 - Gonzales, LAAffiliate Link: http://repticon.com/batonrouge.htmlHouston Exotic Reptile & Pet Show - ConroeOctober 3-4, 2015 - Conroe, TX Affiliate Link: https://www.facebook.com/HERPShowNorth American Reptile Breeders Conference - TinleyOctober 10-11, 2015 - Tinley Park, ILAffiliate Link: http://narbc.com/Tinley/tinley_park.htmlMORE BEING ADDED SOON!!! 

Welcome to 2013 and the New UrbanJunglesRadio! Join us tonight as we reveal the newly updated UJR studios and bring you the lowdown on the new UJR Show which will be airing on Youtube soon! Once the dust settles we'll catch up with Kevin McCurly, the Evil Morph God of New Engladn Reptile Distributors who'll talk to us about a disturbing afflication affecting NE Timber Rattlesnake Populations.  As if Rattlesnakes aren't under enough pressure from Roundups!  Kevin will likely stick around as we welcome Brian Potter from the Chicago Reptile House to talk about recent events Surrounding USARK and the resignation of its CEO. We'll also have a quick chat with Mike Canning, CEO of PIJAC (the Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council) to better understand their stance on working with reptile hobbysts and so much more. As usual, expect a no holds barred episode shedding light all that's important in the Conservation and biological world! For more info and to watch our live clips, visit www.UrbanJunglesRadio.com

Join us for yet another momentous episode as we kick of the celebration and countdown for the NARBC Tinley Park Breeder's Expo in the Chicago area March 16-17th.  This show will feature a special Summit meeting for USARk & PIJAC which represent hobbyists nationwide.  Tune in live or listen on the podcast as Brian Potter from NARBC & The Chicago Reptile House joins us tonight & tells us what to expect from the show and Summit meeting as during what is easily the country's best reptile show!  He'll also tell us about his experience fighting local legislation this week and before it's done we'll have a special guest drop by... But you know how we do it at UJR so our special guest will be none other than rock legend and avid Morelia Breeder Kerry King, of SLAYER! This will be our last show before hitting the road for a few weeks to deliver the next level of awesomeness for my Herp Loving Nation so be sure to catch us live and call in with your questions as well as interact in the chat room live Friday night at 10pm EST. Be sure to visit UrbanJungesRadio.com for more information and extras!  www.UrbanJunglesRadio.com Just, Friggin', Awesome.

Brian Potter of the North American Reptile Breeders Conference takes us through what its like to put on a conference and also shares his thoughts on the industry as a whole. The views on the industry expressed here represent his personal views.

Join us this SATURDAY night as we welcome Brian Potter on to the show. Some of you may remember he stood us up a couple of weeks ago when he was supposed to call us live from the Anaheim show. Taking no chances for this week, we'll call Brian on his cell phone the week before NARBC Chicago and see what surprises abound! As usual Danny & Andy will keep you thoroughly entertained!