I knew this would happen.  Even as I detailed my personal opinion on the matter, as I tried to be fair and objective, I knew that there would be a lock out.

And I have every intention of staying true to my word.  But I'd like to add a few qualifiers.

Many things have happened in the negotiations since I first posted my demand that the NHL and NHLPA hammer out a deal without a lockout.  I'm not going to blame *all* the owners, but I am blaming the ones fueling Bettman's steamroller.

While I personally believe the players demand for more than half of hockey-related revenue is completely ridiculous, I'm more mad about the owners sticking it to the fans.  It's a bit of math.  It's ±3%.  Even if it was ±10%, I'd say they should be able to solve this without a freaking lockout.  Sign the Collective Bargaining Agreement for all the other terms and leave this one to be discussed WITHOUT HAVING A LOCKOUT!  This is money.  It's ONLY money.  It's not a change in the rules of the game.  So that means the games can be played.  The terms of this revenue sharing crap can get signed in November or even March and it shouldn't affect the season.

Source: http://www.caglecartoons.com/viewimage.asp?ID={D0046C9B-A402-4C77-9E4A-0A2EC6C57AC0}

But no.  Bettman insisted on a lockout.  He didn't even TRY to negotiate up until the 11th hour so that the season could start on-time.  In fact, he flatly refused to talk the full 24 hours before the deadline.  This is bullshit.  THEY ARE ALL MULTI-MILLIONAIRES!! IN SOME CASES, BILLIONAIRES!!  They're not blue collar automotive workers.  If the CAW can negotiate up to the very last second...SO CAN THE NHL!  They can even afford premium coffee.  So WTF!?

At present, I side with the players, even though mathematically and economically, I think they're demanding more than is fair.  I'm siding with them because the NHL could've continued their negotiations with the NHLPA without fucking over the start of the season. 

So Gary, you will never see another cent of my money because you messed with my game one too many times...with CANADA'S GAME!!!  I don't take shit from ANYONE.  I sure as hell am not going to start taking shit from you.  I told you to go fuck yourself last time.  After 6 years, I let Canada's Olympic gold and Halak coax me into coming back.  However, this time it's different.  There are no principles to this lockout.  So...long as you're at the helm, it's doubtful that another Olympic gold+star goalie combo will bring me back.  I don't think even a Habs Stanley Cup will bring me back.  You shot yourself in both feet.  I hope you and the league suffer greatly as a result of this.  It's all that you deserve.

It's easy to vilify Gary Bettman because...well...simply...he's a villain. And it’s easy to side with the players, because, quite frankly, we like them better.  But if we all close our hearts and hold our passion for a just a second, and look at this objectively, maybe you’ll be able to understand why I don't side with either of them.

I’ve been called a “casual” fan, even by people I like, because I decided to boycott the NHL after the last lockout. I’m not a “casual” fan. I was NEVER a casual fan. I’m not obsessive with the stats, but I’m as passionate about the game as the stereotypes of Canadians say we are. But when you grow up in a poor Canadian family, and you know how hard it is for your parents to come up with a dollar to make ends meet, how can you not be disgusted by this “labour” dispute?

The players are not miners, sent into life threatening situations to scratch out a living penny by penny. They are athletes receiving MORE than a comfortable compensation TO PLAY A GAME.  I’m not saying hockey isn’t dangerous or rough, but they’re receiving PLENTY of highly specialized medical attention and LOTS of money. Even the young’uns are earning six figure salaries. HOW MANY OF *YOU* EARN THAT?!!? And how long do you think it’s going to take for you to get there if you’re not making that kind of coin now?

Granted, there are things to consider…like the fact that they can’t keep play pro hockey until they reach the legal retirement age of 65. So their timeframe is compressed and you could argue that a six figure salary for ~20 years is on par with an average salary paid out for 45 years. But many players are making more than a 6 figure salary.  Many (I'd say most but I didn't check) of them are making 7. And unlike the days of old-time hockey, the players can easily establish a very lucrative career AFTER they retire from hockey. You’ve got sportscasters, analysts, product spokespeople, and Battle of the Blades, etc.  Look at P.J. Stock. He was a mediocre player at best, and he's endorsing Depends in addition to sportscasting! I’m sure both gigs pay well.  But even without any post-retirement career prospects, the players are earning more than enough money.  Labour unions were intended to protect their members from exploitation.  You seriously think the players are being exploited?  Can someone exploit *me* like this?

However, I’m not blaming the players for everything. It’s very common to want more money. I mean, hey, if someone is willing to pay $2-3 M/year for Komisarek, then that’s what he’s worth (strictly from a business perspective). It doesn’t even matter if he sat on the ice and threw pucks at the net with his hands. If they’re willing to pay him that much, then he deserves it. Let me remind all the Habs fans that are siding with the players…you whine and scream about Gomez, but it’s THIS environment that enabled his agent to score such a kickass contract. I would trade spots with Gomez in a second…and I wouldn’t care if the entire fanbase hated me.

You can go ahead and insert the standard arguments of the evils of Bettman and his merry band of oppressive owners. You can say that they players deserve more money than them. But you know what…you’re wrong. There would be no league without the owners. They players only have teams to play on because the owners put out the money up front. The owners bear ALL the risk of an unsuccessful season. Players are paid as per their contract regardless of how the business side of the team performs. When there’s a media firestorm because of insane fans (I’m looking at you, Montreal), who bears the cost? It’s not the players. You can say the owners can’t survive without the players, but that’s bullshit and you know it. They simply would not be in the business of HOCKEY, but you can be damned sure they’d be in the business of something else. However, if your passion is to play pro-hockey, and if there is no league and no one is willing to bear all the costs and risks of creating and maintaining a league, you would probably only be playing passionately as a gym teacher. So all that is to say, “No…the players do not deserve more money than the owners.” The players bear none of the business risks that the owners bear. Even the occupational risks of injuries is financially borne by the owners (and their insurance companies).

Which brings me to my views. Despite all the arguments for or against, I do not support any one party more than the other. In fact, I don’t support either of them. And this is why.

This is essentially an argument between multi-millionaires. This is not a problem of being unable to find common ground, putting each party at risk of some kind of financial disaster. The dollar amounts being negotiated clearly show that no one is at risk of going bankrupt or starving. But both parties are staunchly refusing to be reasonable. And it’s only the people who have no direct say, the people that give them this money and this power, that will be most affected. Yes, the fans.

After the last lockout, I boycotted the NHL. I’d had enough. Not because I’m a “casual” fan, but because I will not tolerated being treated this way. There are people who do backbreaking work for many hours each day, that then go and spend it on these selfish, spoiled, uncaring corporations and divas. While I’m not exactly a labourer, I work harder per dollar that I earn than any athlete and any team owner. So, if with all that money they can’t settle it without taking it out on the fans, then they don’t deserve fans. They don’t deserve my love or my money.

Six years I boycotted the game. And were it not for the Habs’ Cinderella run, led by Halak, following the high of our two 2010 Olympic gold medals in hockey, I can guarantee you, I would still be boycotting right now.

You can rush to side with the players if you want. Or side with the owners. Do whatever you wish. But siding with either of these parties will only lead to more heartbreak because regardless of the outcome, as the fan, you will get hosed. Until the fans firmly show that this kind of behaviour is unacceptable…until we tell them that they don’t deserve our money, they will only continue to disregard us. Because, if it isn’t yet obvious to you, the group with the most say (the owners) only care about the money. If you’re still willing to give it to them after a lockout, then they have no reason to fear using a lockout.

I don’t particularly care who backs down. I don’t care who “wins” the negotiations. As long as they settle everything before the deadline and this doesn’t go to lockout, then I’ll stay in the game. If these people can't sort it out because they’re too busy frolicking in their money to give two shits about the fans (the people who gave them that money), well, then they can go fuck themselves. I’m out.

Maybe I just don't do this as often as I used to.  I seem to have fewer of these stories these days.  Anyways...I know you all love reading these, so let's just get on with it.

* * *

I don't usually doll myself up.  I especially do not usually wear a summery baby doll dress (if I do, it's under a suit jacket for work...and even then, I try to look corporate).  And I most certainly do not do full eye make-up if I'm going to be roaming around in the heat all day long -- you know, for fear of the "sad panda" effect (translation: smudging).

But on this day, I did all of these things because there was a remote chance that I might get to meet one of my favourite actors of all time.  Now, don't get excited.  This isn't a stalker/groupie kind of thing.  I just don't want him to see me looking like a train wreck.  Plus, when I look pretty, I feel more confident and am less likely to make a fool of myself.  I know everyone generally prefers the stories where I make a fool of myself, but I don't want to spoil people by giving them too much of what they want.

Anyways, I had purchased a single ticket to the Broadway performance.  I didn't wrangle any friends/family to go with me, because quite honestly, I wanted this moment to myself.  Plus, I don't like making others pay for a premium/high-priced seat if they don't love the actor/production as much as I do.  And I wasn't about to get cheap ass seats.  As it happens, three people came in and sat next to me...one single guy and a couple.

Now, this isn't Toronto.  This is New York City.  What do you think happens, when a guy (similar in age), sits down next to an unaccompanied, pretty girl in a theatre?  Yup...he tried to chat me up between each act (there were 3 acts).  I don't want to be mean so I'll leave out the exact details of the conversation, but safe to say, he wasn't the smoothest.  He zoomed in on awkward subjects, like stereotypes about Canadians, South Park, and Mormons.  Yeah...it wasn't pretty.  But he definitely gets an A for effort.  Just kept trying and never gave up.

Anyone who has seen me in action knows that I'm quite difficult when I'm not interested in conversing.  I wasn't rude.  In fact, quite the contrary, I was extremely cordial and friendly.  However, I didn't do anything to sustain the conversation, and I was very closed and offered up minimal (if any) personal information that might encourage his attention.

After several awkward starts and stops to conversations, he blurted out an invitation to have drinks after the show.  This does not normally happen when I'm cordially stonewalling a guy.  He doesn't ASK for more conversation time.  I was caught off guard and accidentally accepted.  I hate it when that happens.  But at least I had the entire 3rd act to think of a way out of it.

During the standing ovation, he leaned over and told me that if his party doesn't leave the theatre right away (which I interpreted as him saying they were going to check out the stage door), then he'd meet me at the front of the theatre.  I said ok.  Once the last curtain call was done, I immediately rushed into the crowd.  He noticed that I had gone with the flow and called after me, so I gestured that I had to keep walking.  That's when he did the unexpected.  He broke from his companions to join the crush of bodies flowing out of the theatre to try to catch up with me.

DANGER DANGER!! IMMINENT DISASTER APPROACHING!!!

So I pushed through the crowd.  I contemplated for a second going downstairs to the washroom, but then I'd be trapped with only one possible exit.  So I continued to try to exit the theatre.  When we poured out onto the street, I quickly walked (almost ran) across the street to blend in with the crowd coming out of another theatre.  I could hear him calling my name so I weaved in an out of the crowd until I got to Times Square.  There, without ever looking backwards, I briskly walked towards the metro station.  I'm telling you, I've never been so grateful for such a massive crowd in my life.  Once I got into the metro station, I knew I was safe.

Disaster averted.

To be honest, I'm not normally opposed to having a drink after the show because I don't mind forming new acquaintances.  However, when he semi-leered and said that we could have a drink at his hotel which is "conveniently nearby", I resolved to retrack my commitment.  Dude, I'm not that kind of girl.

You know...this would not have happened in Toronto.  Everyone would have politely ignored each other's existence. 

Twitter can be dangerous.  It can be worse than drunk texting - mostly because it's equally easy and is under the guise of being somewhat anonymous.  I should just blog it and save it as a draft.  Because then I might arrive at today's decision more often.

I've resolved not to post the blog that I wrote in a heat of anger, not because I don't stand behind what was written, but because it's not palatable to the people involved general public.

It's not the repercussions that I fear.  What I wrote was just and true.  I don't want the hassle of having to explain to those who are not truly open to listen -- who would rather not have the truth brutally thrust in front of them.  I will admit, I can opt to share my opinion more diplomatically.  It is not beyond my capability.  But maybe I'm tired of always having to be the one who is considerate of other people's feelings, worrying about how they feel.  Because obviously, in wronging me, they didn't consider how *I* would feel...but that doesn't matter...because what I said was "more" mean.

But enough of that.  I don't want to get into it.  It's not worth it, so I'm not going to post it.

I will just close with this.

While I don't believe the world revolves around me, I am most definitely sick of being expected to coddle those who believe the world revolves around them.

Become aware of your own insignificance and let's just move on.

What a fabulous combination for a manager.  I'm so glad we have people like this.

There is a process, by which everyone is expected to follow when posting job rotations for their group.  The process is quite simple. 

• Hiring Manager
1. Prepare a business case
2. Get it approved by your boss
3. Send it to my boss & cc me
4. I prepare your job posting based on the position's job code, my boss ensures that union reps (if applicable) are all aware that it's coming
5. You review the posting I send you and make revisions (if necessary)
6. I post it
7. On closing day, I attach all the applications and I send them to you.  I will have checked that all applicants are permanent, full-time employees and that everyone CC'd their supervisor.
• Applicant
1. Discuss with your boss to determine if you can be released
2. Prepare your application (resume & cover letter)
3. Email it to the Job Rotation mailbox & cc your boss

Simple, right?!

Well, Overzealous Petty & Stupid (OPS) didn't seem to think so.  Someone in his group applied for a rotation.  When she got an interview (i.e. has not been hired yet) he sent me a job posting that he created for her position, sent it to me and said get it ready to fire in the event that she is hired.  He wanted it to go out the same day.  A little overzealous, no?

Anyways...not going to happen.

First of all, OPS should've sent it to my boss.  Not me.  Second, I cannot issue a job posting unless directed to do so by my boss.  Third, you cannot write up a brand new job description for a represented position.  Otherwise the unions get VERY upset.  You can only make small minor changes to the EXISITNG one.  Fourth...where is your business case?

So, I kicked it over to my boss and let him kick it back.  Cuz dealing with OPS is one of my least favourite activities.

But that wasn't enough.

He called to find out if there was a way to circumvent the process and just get it approved by the big boss.  Uhm...dude, no.  I'm not going to say that others haven't broken the rules like that, but it's not exactly something we encourage.

So, after a few back and forths, I eventually sent him a draft posting and said, "Let me know if this is approved and I will issue it."  He emailed it back the next day.  5 minutes after he emailed it to me, he called my desk.  I was in a meeting with my boss but I could hear my phone ringing at my desk (we were really close by).  5 minutes after that, OPS showed up at my office.  As he walked by my boss' office, he saw me so he pedalled back and asked me if I had gotten his email and voicemail.  So, I already told you the story about this.  Honestly, wtf.

The next day, I issued his one-week job posting.  The second day into this posting, he called to ask me who applied.  I told him that to try to ensure some level of fairness, the hiring manager does not receive any postings until the day the posting closes.  I then pointed out that there was already one applicant that foolishly cc'd him.  Oh well.  After some more nagging, I told him that was the only person that applied and that he should just relax because there were still 3 more days.

The day the posting was set to close, he called me and emailed me a few times to say that he wanted to be sure that he would get everything at 3pm because he wanted to review it over the weekend.  Dude...I already have one micromanaging boss.  I don't need more micromanagers who think they can tell me what to do.  Fuck off.

Lucky for him, I'm very on the ball, so the email had already been scheduled to go with all the attachments at exactly 3:06 pm.

Meanwhile, there was a rotation posted to which *he* wanted to apply.  So he sent me an email saying he was going to apply and that he had asked his boss to review his resume and cover letter.  Seriously...I don't care.

On the last day, he applied to the position and did not cc his boss.  So, I kicked his email back.  Actually...I was going to just let it go because he had said he discussed it which his boss.  *My boss* said to kick it back.  So OPS leaves me this snide voicemail saying, "I don't know what your process is, or why it keeps changing or how it's enforced...blah blah blah."  Again, fuck off.  It flat out says in EVERY job posting that goes out, "cc your supervisor".

He did resend it.  And in resending it, he cc'd his boss and wrote, "As requested by *insert cokeaddict's full name here*."

Dude.  You trying to start a war here?!  I didn't not REQUEST that you resend your application.  I reiterated the rules and gave you the opportunity to do this correctly.  I could've just NOT INCLUDED your application in the package to the hiring manager.

So...I emailed him and reiterated that these are the rules.  I know I missed that his employee had not cc'd him when she applied to another job but that it does not generally happen.  And since I didn't want to talk to him about this bullshit anymore (and I don't have to put up with his snide implications), I told him to direct all his concerns/questions to my boss (who is more than happy to stonewall him).  That's not enough, obviously.  So OPS emails my boss and cc's me to say he wasn't expecting a response (so you want me to ignore you?!) and that he wasn't referring to that employee as she had informed him of her intent to imply.  It was for the clerk who applied to her position.  This clerk reports to him.  He's upset that she didn't cc him and I didn't kick her application back??  I didn't kick her application back because she's applying for a position that is in her current group.  OPS is the hiring manager AND her supervisor.  Seriously...maybe she didn't talk to you about it, but she's IN YOUR FUCKING GROUP!!!  Applying to a job that is also IN YOUR FUCKING GROUP!!!

Honestly...I don't have the energy to put up with this shit.  Administering this program wasn't even a part of my job.  We had a clerk for this.  But as a result of cutbacks, we got rid of the clerk and now *I* administer the program.  But I have REAL work to do.  Just follow the damned rules and everything will run smoothly.  No one else has had any issues getting a job posting out!

Whatever, I'm hoping this idiotic issue dies once these two job postings close.  Then, I hopefully won't have to talk to him again...if possible, ever.

You want to know when you're doing it wrong?  Here...let me enlighten you.

I promise you, if you show up at my desk, there is absolutely NO WAY I'm going to move your file today. 

Sure, the fact that the guy who did this is a pompous ass who thinks he's all that did make me less inclined to work on his file.  But that's not the point.  I was not deliberately ignoring his email.  I was busy putting out a fire for my SVP. 

Your crisis is lower on the totem pole, dipshit.
Now GTFO of my office.
I have real work to do.

I like to think that I'm generally a tough cookie.  And for the most part, I've convinced most people that I am.  But even tough cookies like me occassionally have weak moments.  We also have soft spots that we try to keep hidden -- especially from ourselves.

Yesterday, I had one of those less than stellar moments.  Nothing embarrasing happened, but now I'm feeling emo.  I had a fatty breakfast sandwich, some rice chips, and a cookie (but the cookie was the trainee's fault...his gf baked them so I *had* to take one ).  And it's not even 11am yet!

You know...it'd be a lot easier for me to be a tough cookie if he wasn't so damned sweet...and if he wasn't just so freaking my type.

Gawd...weak, girly emotions.

Where the hell is my purge button?

I hate that phrase.  I only ever use it when I am being sarcastic.

When you are actually part of one big happy family, you don't repeat that phrase.  Just like no sane person ever walks around repeating, "I'm so smart.  I'm so normal.  I'm so cute."  Seriously...who are you trying to convince?  Others or yourself?

There are times when I see this phrase used to try and get everyone to march in step.  Or to restrict the expression of diverse ideas.  I don't like it because it's so...cult-ish.  There.  I said it.

I ask questions.  I think for myself.  I have my own opinions.  That's the way I am.  You can ask my *actual* family.  And they will tell you, for better or for worse, I don't adopt anyone's view "just because" we are one big happy family.  At best, to keep the peace, I may stay silent.  But don't ask me to agree or openly support your view.  That just ain't fucking happening.

*end rant*

I had one of these moments today.

There was an engineer who had an exceptional gift for fixing all things mechanical. After serving his company loyally for over 30 years, he happily retired. Several years later the company contacted him regarding a seemingly impossible problem they were having with one of their multi-million dollar machines. They had tried everything and everyone else to get the machine to work but to no avail.

In desperation, they called on the retired engineer who had solved so many of their problems in the past. The engineer reluctantly took the challenge. He spent a day studying the huge machine. Finally, at the end of the day, he marked a small "x" in chalk on a particular component of the machine and said, "This is where your problem is." The part was replaced and the machine worked perfectly again. The company received a bill for $50,000 from the engineer for his service. They demanded an itemized accounting of his charges.

The engineer responded briefly: One chalk mark $1; Knowing where to put it $49,999.

It was paid in full and the engineer retired again in peace.

I emailed the VP my "invoice" (as a joke).

TOTAL $50,004.
4 keystrokes at $1 each.
$50,000 for knowing which keys to use.

Looks like all I'm getting is an after work beer, though.

In January, I found out that Joshua Bell would be performing with the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra on March 24.  I cannot express how excited I was to hear the news that he would be playing the Beethoven Violin Concerto so close to Toronto.  My friend an I quickly bought tickets and planned our Buffalo day trip.

Now I have attended many classical music concerts in my time.  I've gone to many cities around the world and enjoyed the glorious offerings that they have had to share by ways of classical music.  But never have I attended a concert and left feeling so elated and sad at the same time.

The Music

Let me talk about the music.  

The concert opened with Wagner's Overture to Rienzi.  I was concerned about this since I'm not a huge Wagner fan (re: I strongly dislike most of his work).  I can't express just how happily surprised I was to find it extremely enjoyable.  There were parts of it that I didn't like, but for the most part, it was so reminiscent of a cheery, happy, Strauss that I found myself enjoying it immensely!

Maximiano Valdes, former conductor for the BPO, was the guest conductor at this performance.  And whatever magic he was working at the podium was the good sort of magic.  The orchestra shone.  Schumann's Symphony No. 4 was filled with emotion.  It's the kind of lyrical piece that makes you feel as though a single voice is singing.  I usually prefer the more structured symphonies of the Classical period, but this Romantic period piece is making think I should perhaps not be so quick in the future to strike them off my list of concerts to attend.

So what happens when you take a great orchestra, an incredible conductor, an indescribably, amazing virtuoso violinist and ask them to perform their interpretation of the greatest violin concerto ever written?  Well, if you wanted to know then you should have come to yesterday's concert.    I have always loved Beethoven's one and only violin concerto.  I was always partial to the third movement.  It's the sound of the Beethoven that I love.  But, after yesterday, I think Joshua Bell has converted me to a lover of the first movement.  Or, maybe it was just the cadenza he wrote for it.  More on that later.

This piece, I love it because it is so wholly the embodiment of Beethoven.  It's strong music.  It's rich and deep -- even more than the most luscious piece of chocolate cake you've ever had.  Bell performed cadenzas that he composed himself.  And they were GORGEOUS!! What I loved about them is that they didn't feel like they were written by someone else.  Not only did they fit into the concerto, they somehow made the concerto bigger, brighter, and more beautiful.  I know, it's hard to believe that it's possible to make Beethoven better, but that's what Joshua did.  What I loved about it was that the in the cadenzas I could see everything that I love about Beethoven, but I could also hear the voice of Joshua and his Gibson ex-Huberman - the voice I hear in every piece he plays.  There wasn't a point where you could separate Beethoven and Bell in this piece.  But this is just my random rambling.  All you really need to take away from this is that it was a gloriously beautiful concert and I just don't have enough positive words to express the pleasure I received from this performance.

If you want to read a review by an official music reviewer, this was posted earlier today:  A superb Bell caps an unforgettable evening.

The Venue

Kleinhans has excellent acoustics.  And it's got a lot of character.  But that's where the positives stop.  Sadly, the place is very dingy.  It pains me to speak ill of a classical music concert hall, but it's true.  When I walked into the lobby, I couldn't help but feel an overwhelming sadness - the sadness one feels when they enter a place that greatest has deserted.  And this feeling only grew as the evening wore on.  The greater my esteem in the orchestra's performance grew, the sadder I felt.  How could an orchestra that sounds this good be left to play in a venue that has become so unloved?  Kleinhans has great bones.  As I said, the acoustics are beautiful.  But that's it.  The carpet in the main aisle of the hall was cream coloured but is so stained and dirty.  The upholstered seats are a teal, burlap-esque material that also have stains and rips in them.

I am used to enjoying classical music in fancy clothes, and opulent venues.  This orchestra is more than worthy of such a venue.  Kleinhans sounds like such a venue.  Unfortunately, due to lack of funds, Kleinhans has been left unloved for so long that it no longer *looks* like such a venue.  A fresh coat of paint, new light fixtures, new upholstery and a new carpet would go a long way...although it really does deserve a revamp to update it.

This is grand music by a truly gifted orchestra.  The players deserve a grand venue.  Kleinhans needs to look as well as (if not better than) it photographs.

Source: http://www.buffalonews.com/incoming/article258286.ece/BINARY/w620/KLEINHAN'S+MUSIC+HALL.jpg

I am a strong supporter of Toronto Symphony Orchestra, but I am also a strong supporter of the arts - specifically music - everywhere in the world.  I think those administering the $1 B New York Works Infrastructure Fund would do well to carve out a small portion of money to update Kleinhans.  Their players deserve it.  The arts are an important part of society.  And every great city has a great orchestra.  If Governor Andrew Cuomo is serious about revitalizing Buffalo, then he should make sure the great orchestra that is the Buffalo Philharmonic has a great venue that matches the calibre of their performance.