# TQ: major revision

From the reviewer:
" I enjoyed reading this paper, and find its topic interesting. I also appreciate the approach taken by the authors, which combines an empirical study, a modelling effort and corresponding analysis, and finally managerial recommendations which are of real practical interest. I do have a few comments on the interpretation of the results in the empirical section of the paper, some assumptions in the modelling framework, and the results of the numerical section. However, if these comments could be addressed, then I believe that this paper would make a nice, comprehensive, contribution to the literature."

# WORK PLAN

I HAVE TWO FOCUSES. THE FIRST IS TO SHARPEN MY ANALYTICAL ABILITY, ESPECIALLY IN MATH, ECONOMICS REASONING, AND WRITING. FOR THIS SUMMER, I NEED TO FINISH THE BOOK INFINITE DIMENSIONAL ANALYSIS (240HRS, 60 DAYS), THEN MOVE TO THE FOLLOWINGS:
PROBABILITY THEORY: A COMPREHENSIVE COURSE, BY KLENKE
ECONOMIC DYNAMICS IN DISCRETE TIME, BY JIANJUN MIAO

THE SECOND IS TO WORK ON THE DYNAMIC MODELS. I HAVE ONE REVISION. IT WILL TAKE TWO WEEKS. THEN I SHOULD MOVE ON TO THE NEW PROJECT ON SALESFORCE. FOR THIS ONE, I WILL USE THE CONTINUOUS METHOD. AFTER FINISHING THESE TWO PROJECTS, I SHOULD BE QUITE COMFORTABLE WITH DESCRIBING DYNAMIC INTEGRATIONS.

NOW I ALSO HAVE THREE TRIVIAL PAPERS TO CLOSE UP. THE FIRST IS THE TRANSPORTATION ONE. I WILL DO A QUICK REVISION AND SEND OUT. IF IT DOES NOT MAKE IT, SO BE IT. I WILL NOT WASTE MORE TIME. THE SECOND IS AO: AGAIN, THIS IS A CUTE BUT TRIVIAL PROJECT. I SPENT ONE MONTH ON IT. BUT I DON’T SEE IT AS SIGNIFICANT. SO CLOSE IT IN A WEEK AND MOVE ON. THE THIRD ONE IS WITH MH AND JS. THIS IS A MEDIOCRE ONE. THE ONLY REASON I AM DOING IT IS BECAUSE MH NEEDS THE PAPER. AND I FEEL OBLIGATED TO RETURN HIS KINDNESS IN SUPPORT MY CASE. NOW JS HAS PROVED THE RESULTS; MH SHOULD WRITE IT UP. EMAIL HIM THE SOFTWARE AND SCHEDULE THE MEETING.

AGAIN, FOCUS ON YOUR TRUE ASPIRATION. THE REST IS SECONDARY.

# WRITING 164: COMMITMENT, GAMES WE PLAY, 7

Yesterday we got R&R on BAR paper, a good news. But BE is unlikely to work on it. To motivate him,  I must draw the line, committing not to work it. Otherwise, BE will never work on it. Hopefully, the fear of letting me down can motivate him. If not, I will cut BAR as a sunk cost.

Either way,  I won’t waste time on BAR any more.

——————————————

Dear B,

This email is between you and me.

My gut feeling is that we hit the same guy as AE. The reports are written in the same style.

I believe DE liked the idea. Also, he has good impression of us, from our efforts in the last two rounds of the Markov chain paper.  But he cannot go against all the naysayers. So we must do more to prove our worth.

At this point, you and me have two papers at MS; they are promising but time consuming. The choice is clear: if you want it, you must put in effort, do what it takes, and go beyond what’s required.

I have time for only one such commitment. I will focus on the revision of the last paper (Markov chain). I will NOT spend time on this one: I believe in you and PA.

You have my word—I will deliver my revision in two months. And I expect the same commitment from your side.

Best,

ACTION415

# WRITING 162: WORK PLAN FOR MARCH, MONTH 5, 262

MONTH 5, 262:

MORTALITY IS ENLIGHTENING. IT IS NOT DPRESSING, BUT THRILLING.

“IT INFUSES COURAGE INTO YOUR BONES.”

———————————–

HERE ARE A LIST OF THINGS YOU MUST ACT, IN YOUR OWN INTEREST.

FOR SCHOOL,

1) FOLLOW UP THE WORKLOAD POLICY ON MONDAY; IF NO, FILE THE CHARGE.

2) LIMIT YOUR AVAILABILITY FOR TWO DAYS PER WEEK. FOR THIS QUARTER, MONDAY AND FRIDAY. YOU ARE OFF FOR THE REST.

———————————–
FOR WORK,

YOU MUST LIVE UP TO YOUR TRUE POTENTIAL. TO DO SO, YOU MUST SET UP SHARP EDGED BOUNDARY. RESET OTHERS’ EXPECTATIONS. YOU NEED TIME FOR YOURSELF.

GET ALL THE TRIVIAL STUFF DONE. INVEST A WEEK FOR EACH. NO MORE. IF YOU CANNOT FINISH IT, CUT IT AND MOVE ON. AS THEY ARE SUNK COSTS, YOU CANNOT AFFORD WASTE MORE TIME ON THEM IN THE FUTURE.

1) TQ2: GET IT DONE IN A WEEK. SINCE YOU PROMISED KK, THIS ONE MUST COME OUT. DO WHAT YOU CAN. WRITE, WRITE, AND WRITE. DELIVER NEXT THURSDAY. NO MORE. 1 WEEK.

2) TYM2: PUSH BACK MG. BUT YOU OWES JS. SO SPEND A WEEK TO WRITE IT UP. 1 WEEK.

3) AO: LIMIT THE MEETING TIME TO 30MIN; WRAP UP AT 25MIN; ASK WHAT IS THE NEXT ACTION; ASK AO TO FOLLOW MY IDEA; GET IT MOVE; DON’T WASTE TIME ON THE TRIVIAL STUFF. ALSO, ASK HIM ABOUT IAD2—IN OR OUT. AGAIN, DON’T WASTE MY TIME. I HAD ENOUGH.

4) PLD: PUSH PL. EITHER SUBMIT OR ABANDON IT. DON’T WASTE MY TIME.

5) MHS: ASK M.E. TO WORK WITH J.S. IF M.E. WANTS IT, THEN DO THE WORK. I WILL NOT WASTE MORE TIME.

NOW EVERYTHING IS CLEAR. HERE IS MY WORK SCHEDULE FOR MARCH:
1) TQ2, 1 WEEK;
2) TYM2, 1 WEEK;
3) MRF: REVISION, FOR THE REST OF MARCH;
MAYBE: BAR, BUT ASK B.M. FIRST.

[WALL OF NINE DRAGONS, BEIJING,  CHINA, SUMMER, 2013]

# WRITING 140: THE MAIN IDEAS OF AO

[7:15pm-7.35pm, 20min]

AO is an interesting game with following features. M produces a product. He can sells either through R or directly to the end market. The market price is linear in the total quantity supplied. M is less efficient in selling; he incurs additional selling cost. The selling cost can be high or low, which is M’s private information. R only knows its prior distribution $\mu$. Finally, both M and R are risk-neutral profit-maximizing.

The game plays out as follows. M first observes his selling cost, and then he decides the wholesale price. Afterwards, R places the order, followed by R deciding his direct selling quantity. Finally, M produces, delivers, and sells the product through both channels.

Three forces are in play: DM in the retail channel, signaling because of IA, and the ENC competition between the two channels. Without IA, channel competition may reduce DM, i.e., competition is beneficial. However, when IA is in place, the outcome is less conclusive. In particular, if IA is on the R’s side, it actually exacerbates DM, reducing the benefit from channel competition.

AO argues that, however, when IA arises from M’s side, it works to further reduce DM, and hence a beneficial factor. As a result, the answer to whether IA is beneficial or harmful is more nuanced: it depends critically on the nature of IA, i.e., on the M or R’s side. It also depends on the relative selling costs. By spelling out these intricacies, our paper brings a step closer to the better understanding of pros and cons of IA and ENC competition in channel management.

[SUNSET, NEWPORT BEACH, JUNE, 2015]

# WRITING 137: WORK PLAN FOR FEBRUARY

For a long time I’ve been quite cynical even hostile to my area. I believe most of the papers in my area are garbage. They at best make epsilon improvement. Only 5-10 percent are truly original.

Yet people still devote tremendous amount time in this meaningless game. For juniors I understand: this game is the path to power and security. But I have little respect to the tenured ones who still keep producing garbage, the garbage even themselves do not believe in

But unless the academic tenure system collapses, not much will change. The logic is quite simple: if you don’t want to play this game, just quite; there are hundred part-time, adjuncts dying for a permanent, tenure-track spot.

Complaints aside, the tenured are still required to produce to justify their unreasonable pay (yes, i believe most of US academics are overpaid), which never make sense if only justified by teaching alone.

Another justification for playing this useless game is to help students and juniors, a more sensible course. Currently I am involved in four projects with four juniors. Among them, AO is most mature and motivated one. He initiates and takes the responsibility. I only need to discuss and do the final write up. The workload is about a week.

KK needs more guidance. For TQ2, he will email me the computation part. Then I need to finalize it. There are 3 papers to read for the literature review part.

The most troubling one is PL. He wants the result but does not want to work. Instead, he recruit another guy from his previous school. I haven’t heard from him since mid-December. But I am in no hurry: after all, it is him, not me, who needs the paper out so badly. He is working on the extension now. Once that is done, he needs to rework the numerical part two. The writing will be a pain. Expect 1-2 weeks’ work.