Dear Audi, Why?

As a far too occasional bike commuter, I feel I should be offended by this ad for the Audi diesel. Audi seems intent on lumping bike commuters, strap hangers, and Segway owners into a larger category of nerds and losers. Of course, only the kick-scooter commuters belong there.

Oddly, I'm not offended. Instead, I'm thinking the S5 is pretty hot looking. Damn you Audi!





Comments

Anonymous said…
Larry -

Why waste your time showing an Audi ad? I sincerely doubt that they are paying you.
Sep 20, 2009, 10:04:00 PM
Anonymous said…
@Anonymous 10:04:

Because it's funny. Why waste your time writing a pointless (unfunny) comment?
Sep 21, 2009, 9:36:00 AM
Anonymous said…
I would like to reply in Spanish, but I am told there is not enough time.
Sep 25, 2009, 2:44:00 PM
Anonymous said…
I found that ad pretty despicable, no matter how nice the car is.
Sep 27, 2009, 8:32:00 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Notes on Use and Classification

I did not read The Da Vinci Code . I may be the only literate American who can say that. I did read The Historian , which is an apparently similar tale of following literary and historical clues to unravel an ancient mystery. In the case of The Historian, the mystery is the whether Vlad Tepes (better known as Dracula) still lives. It's an entertaining and engaging book that covers a lot of ground from the Cold War to East-West tensions. Why is this relevant to customs law? Because tariff classification is really a matter of following the literary trail of rules through the Tariff Schedule along with the gloss applied by the Explanatory Notes, CBP rulings, and court decisions. In many ways, it is not all that complicated. The trick is finding all the applicable rules and applying them properly. One question that has come up recently is the meaning of "use" in a tariff term. Here, again, the answer comes from finding the right rule. Additional U.S. Rule of Interpretation 1...
Read more

Cyber Power Decision Keeps the Lights On Origin

The Court of International Trade has issued the much anticipated (at least by me) decision on the merits in Cyber Power Systems (USA) Inc. v. United States . It's a bit of a roller coaster ride. The plaintiff clearly hits some bumps along the way, but there is a thrilling conclusion. So, buckle up. The case is about the country of origin of five models of uninterruptible power suppliers ("UPS") and one surge protector. The UPS is essentially a glorified backup battery for computers and other devices. In the event of a power failure, the UPS kicks in to power the device and may assist in a "graceful shutdown." Modern UPS include printed circuit board assemblies that monitor the battery to ensure it is fully charged, monitor the available supply of electricity, switch to the battery when needed, provide status reports and other functions. All of that takes some firmware stored in chips on the boards. The surge protector is a simpler, but still electronic device, t...
Read more

Mitigating 232 Penalties - I'm Back

Image
I realize I have been gone for a while. The first Trump Administration generated enough compliance work, litigation, and general chaos to keep me too busy and too stressed to do many things. One such thing was writing this blog. I did it mainly because I enjoy the process, and it forced me to stay on top of cases from the Court of International Trade and Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Explaining those decisions in what I intend to be an approachable style helped me understand them. Over the past year, I have at times considered restarting the blog and never found the time or inspiration. Apparently, that has changed.  You may have noticed that the second Trump administration is off to a fast start in the trade space. We have new 10% tariffs on goods from China and 25% tariffs on an expanded list of steel and aluminum products. The 232 exclusion process has been shuttered. Reciprocal tariffs are being floated, as are potential tariffs on cars, pharmaceuticals, and chips....
Read more