Phil Donahue Passes at 88

[hookyIU1990]

Phil Donahue, Daytime TV Titan and Steadfast Voice Against War, Dies at 88

Oprah Winfrey once called Donahue, who is survived by wife, Marlo Thomas, a “trailblazer who used the power of television to transform a nation.”

www.vanityfair.com

I always respected him for having a lot of differing viewpoints and keeping it from being a free-for-all. My favorite was discussions with Milton Friedman. I can't think of anywhere today that someone would be so cordial with someone in the other camp.

 

[Ohio Guy]

Phil Donahue, Daytime TV Titan and Steadfast Voice Against War, Dies at 88

Oprah Winfrey once called Donahue, who is survived by wife, Marlo Thomas, a “trailblazer who used the power of television to transform a nation.”

www.vanityfair.com

I always respected him for having a lot of differing viewpoints and keeping it from being a free-for-all. My favorite was discussions with Milton Friedman. I can't think of anywhere today that someone would be so cordial with someone in the other camp.

I saw that. I always remember my mom having his show on when I was a kid. He was also another Ohio Guy - from my relative neck of the woods in Dayton.

Re: the Friedman interviews, I've seen those floated around from time to time and they're good and thought-provoking. I think it'd be hard to have something like that now because audiences are too fragmented into their own echo chambers. I suppose some podcasts do that, but even those are looked at with a more cynical eye than anything was back in Phil's day.

 

[Noodle]

He was one of a kind. Watched his show all the time growing up.

 

[BradStevens]

Phil Donahue, Daytime TV Titan and Steadfast Voice Against War, Dies at 88

Oprah Winfrey once called Donahue, who is survived by wife, Marlo Thomas, a “trailblazer who used the power of television to transform a nation.”

www.vanityfair.com

I always respected him for having a lot of differing viewpoints and keeping it from being a free-for-all. My favorite was discussions with Milton Friedman. I can't think of anywhere today that someone would be so cordial with someone in the other camp.

Now look at those time slots. Woof. The dumbing down of America.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

Re: the Friedman interviews, I've seen those floated around from time to time and they're good and thought-provoking. I think it'd be hard to have something like that now because audiences are too fragmented into their own echo chambers. I suppose some podcasts do that, but even those are looked at with a more cynical eye than anything was back in Phil's day.

When he wants to be, Joe Rogan can be a (surprisingly?) good interviewer. Like Donahue, he comes across as being genuinely interested in what his guests have to say and can be adversarial without being hostile. I also think this of Bill Maher -- although he's more argumentative (which is fine).

The Friedman/Donahue interviews are great. I say that not just because I'm such a fan of Friedman's, but because of how Phil Donahue facilitated them. He had clearly become at least somewhat familiar with Friedman's work and ideas. He posed some really good challenging questions. He gave Friedman the chance to fully respond. He got the audience engaged well -- and they, too, asked some really good questions.

Donahue was really, really good at what he did. Thoughtful man and a terrific interviewer.

 

[hookyIU1990]

I think it'd be hard to have something like that now because audiences are too fragmented into their own echo chambers. I suppose some podcasts do that, but even those are looked at with a more cynical eye than anything was back in Phil's day.

Now look at those time slots. Woof. The dumbing down of America.

You're both in my camp or vice versa.

Everything was still a debate instead of a rush to get out your side's talking points before your 6-minute hit was up. You were actually exposed to intelligent conversations and ideas from those involved.

Here's the episode with Friedman. We need more Donahue's today (just not the 1 minute intros).

 

[BradStevens]

You're both in my camp or vice versa.

Everything was still a debate instead of a rush to get out your side's talking points before your 6-minute hit was up. You were actually exposed to intelligent conversations and ideas from those involved.

Here's the episode with Friedman. We need more Donahue's today (just not the 1 minute intros).

View embedded media

Wouldn’t it be nice if our future President would sit down for a long form interview where an intelligent interviewer could question her about what she would do in that role?

 

[hookyIU1990]

Wouldn’t it be nice if our future President would sit down for a long form interview where an intelligent interviewer could question her about what she would do in that role?

That would also require a candidate capable of holding his/her own with an intelligent interviewer though....

 

[Bowlmania]

Phil Donahue, Daytime TV Titan and Steadfast Voice Against War, Dies at 88

Oprah Winfrey once called Donahue, who is survived by wife, Marlo Thomas, a “trailblazer who used the power of television to transform a nation.”

www.vanityfair.com

I always respected him for having a lot of differing viewpoints and keeping it from being a free-for-all. My favorite was discussions with Milton Friedman. I can't think of anywhere today that someone would be so cordial with someone in the other camp.

Donahue and Marlo did amazing work growing St. Jude Children's Research Hospital and continuing her father's legacy. The family is asking for donations to the hospital in Donahue's memory. Can't think of a better cause.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

You're both in my camp or vice versa.

Everything was still a debate instead of a rush to get out your side's talking points before your 6-minute hit was up. You were actually exposed to intelligent conversations and ideas from those involved.

Here's the episode with Friedman. We need more Donahue's today (just not the 1 minute intros).

I've always loved the way Milton began the one interview by pointing out that there's a difference between offering advice and having that advice be taken.

Alas, his advice was rarely taken by policymakers -- with perhaps one notable exception in the case of tax withholding (he was among a group at the Treasury Dept. that devised it during WWII). He always says it was his greatest regret.

 

[hookyIU1990]

I've always loved the way Milton began the one interview by pointing out that there's a difference between offering advice and having that advice be taken.

Alas, his advice was rarely taken by policymakers -- with perhaps one notable exception in the case of tax withholding (he was among a group at the Treasury Dept. that devised it during WWII). He always says it was his greatest regret.

If everyone had to stroke a check for all the taxes they owed at the end of the year, we would have had a real insurrection by now.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

If everyone had to stroke a check for all the taxes they owed at the end of the year, we would have had a real insurrection by now.

I agree. As an employer, I long ago concluded that most people pay almost no attention to their gross earnings. They're vigilant about their net earnings -- and have just come to bounce right over withholdings and deductions.....until and unless there's an increase of some kind resulting in lower net pay.

I remember when there was a temporary pause in the employee's share of the FICA tax back in the Obama era. Nobody said a word when the pause went into effect. But, man, when those first paychecks went out after it was reinstituted...our payroll folks' phones were ringing.

Interestingly, the feds also did a form of withholding during the Civil War. In both cases, officials felt it necessary to fund the expensive war efforts as much as possible with current tax receipts -- so it seemed like an efficient way of getting these quickly. The big difference: after the Civil War was completed, they ceased withholding. After WWII ended, it's been a permanent fixture.

 

[hookyIU1990]

I agree. As an employer, I long ago concluded that most people pay almost no attention to their gross earnings. They're vigilant about their net earnings -- and have just come to bounce right over withholdings and deductions.....until and unless there's an increase of some kind resulting in lower net pay.

I remember when there was a temporary pause in the employee's share of the FICA tax back in the Obama era. Nobody said a word when the pause went into effect. But, man, when those first paychecks went out after it was reinstituted...our payroll folks' phones were ringing.

I don't understand, and I have never understood, how people can be so happy when they proudly exclaim they got a big tax refund. Would you put money in a savings account that paid 0% interest? Are you so flush with cash that you have nothing you could have used that money for during the year? The kicker is those who use their refund to pay off a credit card balance every year.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

I don't understand, and I have never understood, how people can be so happy when they proudly exclaim they got a big tax refund.

It's easy to understand -- given what I'm saying about people effectively ignoring the withholdings and deductions in their paycheck.

I'm sure that most people have a cognitive awareness that they're there. It's not as if they're surprised when you tell them that taxes or other legal deductions are taken out. But they don't "feel" them in a visceral way. They only do that with money they have (or once had) in their own hands.

And people like to get windfalls -- even if it's with their own money. It's like Christmas morning.

 

[hoot1]

I agree. As an employer, I long ago concluded that most people pay almost no attention to their gross earnings. They're vigilant about their net earnings -- and have just come to bounce right over withholdings and deductions.....until and unless there's an increase of some kind resulting in lower net pay.

I remember when there was a temporary pause in the employee's share of the FICA tax back in the Obama era. Nobody said a word when the pause went into effect. But, man, when those first paychecks went out after it was reinstituted...our payroll folks' phones were ringing.

Interestingly, the feds also did a form of withholding during the Civil War. In both cases, officials felt it necessary to fund the expensive war efforts as much as possible with current tax receipts -- so it seemed like an efficient way of getting these quickly. The big difference: after the Civil War was completed, they ceased withholding. After WWII ended, it's been a permanent fixture.

Craze, what would you think of a business which had a terrific yearly growth in sales while keeping costs low but saw accounts receivable increase faster than sales?

Watched this happen with my father's business while taking a job with a major corporation doing the same thing.

 

[hookyIU1990]

Craze, what would you think of a business which had a terrific yearly growth in sales while keeping costs low but saw accounts receivable increase faster than sales?

Watched this happen with my father's business while taking a job with a major corporation doing the same thing.

I'm not craze, but there's an accounting process or two that needs to be improved.

• Delay in creating/approving/sending invoices?
• Invoice submission not going directly to AP and any approvers?
• Lack of focus on dunning clients outside of terms?
• Poor negotiation by sales of payment terms from the start?

 

[UncleMark]

I'm not craze, but there's an accounting process or two that needs to be improved.

• Delay in creating/approving/sending invoices?
• Invoice submission not going directly to AP and any approvers?
• Lack of focus on dunning clients outside of terms?
• Poor negotiation by sales of payment terms from the start?

The majority of our customers are on net 7 day terms, including our biggest ones. Every Friday us drivers are picking up fat checks. Yes, I understand that wouldn't work for a lot of businesses.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

Craze, what would you think of a business which had a terrific yearly growth in sales while keeping costs low but saw accounts receivable increase faster than sales?

Watched this happen with my father's business while taking a job with a major corporation doing the same thing.

Interesting question. Your father must’ve had some of the same customers I do - especially since rates have risen.

To me, this is going to depend a lot on the business’s capital situation. If they’ve done a good job managing that and have plenty of access to capital, then this isn’t a horrible problem to have. It’s still a problem - because any cash or debt used to float slow-paying customers will erode margins and/or limit opportunities.

Everybody wants customers who pay promptly without any need for, er, enhanced encouragement. But if you ever come across a place where this exists in great supply, let me know. In the world I’m familiar with, dragging out suppliers and subs is a time-honored tradition.

So the question becomes…would I try to restrict sales growth in the name of more fluid cashflow?

Not unless I absolutely have to.

And this is one of the reasons that we have always retained as much earnings as possible. Cash, or something nearly as liquid, is an absolute necessity for growth - if, anyway, growth is a goal. And I’m from the school of thought that a business is either growing or dying.

That said, as you grow, it’s always a good idea to be more diligent in assessing creditworthiness of potential new customers (and, really, existing ones too…things change) and to also get more aggressive with collections strategies.

Great question!

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

The majority of our customers are on net 7 day terms, including our biggest ones. Every Friday us drivers are picking up fat checks. Yes, I understand that wouldn't work for a lot of businesses.

I’m in construction. We don’t dictate payment terms, they are dictated to us….especially from large corporations - many of which, these days, are Net 90.

We can live with that, it’s built into our pricing. And I don’t really have any concern that they’re going to pay their bills.

What I have a problem with is customers on Net 30 terms who seem to confuse us for a bank. Unsurprisingly, this has become more common with higher rates. Our DPO is as bad as it’s been in a long, long time right now.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

I'm not craze, but there's an accounting process or two that needs to be improved.

• Delay in creating/approving/sending invoices?
• Invoice submission not going directly to AP and any approvers?
• Lack of focus on dunning clients outside of terms?
• Poor negotiation by sales of payment terms from the start?

I guess I kind of assumed this wasn’t so much an internal process problem as it was a problem of degraded turnaround due to a broader customer base and bigger numbers.

I doubt this is an uncommon problem with fast-growing businesses. But you could certainly be right that they’re just getting out over their skis operationally.

 

[UncleMark]

I’m in construction. We don’t dictate payment terms, they are dictated to us….especially from large corporations - many of which, these days, are Net 90.

We can live with that, it’s built into our pricing. And I don’t really have any concern that they’re going to pay their bills.

What I have a problem with is customers on Net 30 terms who seem to confuse us for a bank. Unsurprisingly, this has become more common with higher rates. Our DPO is as bad as it’s been in a long, long time right now.

I understand completely. In my last real job (a small manufacturer), we paid good but we paid slow. Why? Because that's how our customers treated us. And since our customers were distributors/middlemen, they in turn were in the same boat with the end consumers. Fortunately, we had a open line of credit to use when we got caught short on occasion. Everyone always got paid.

I would also add that the owner always paid himself last, and even in the good times was never one to enrich himself noticeably. He drove Fords and lived in a nice but nondescript home, and was always there when I got there and was still there when I left.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

I understand completely. In my last real job (a small manufacturer), we paid good but we paid slow. Why? Because that's how our customers treated us. And since our customers were distributors/middlemen, they in turn were in the same boat with the end consumers. Fortunately, we had a open line of credit to use when we got caught short on occasion. Everyone always got paid.

I would also add that the owner always paid himself last, and even in the good times was never one to enrich himself noticeably. He drove Fords and lived in a nice but nondescript home, and was always there when I got there and was still there when I left.

That’s the kind of owner anybody should want to work for, any bank should want to finance, and any vendor should want to sell to.

If the business was successful and he was still doing this, it means he was leaving its earnings in the company - which, to me, is just sound practice. Taking some out is fine if it’s on a solid enough footing. But, in that situation, I’m probably looking to diversify more than just consume.

I have a friend who recently became a billionaire. Nobody would ever guess it, unless they already knew it.

 

[UncleMark]

That’s the kind of owner anybody should want to work for, any bank should want to finance, and any vendor should want to sell to.

He is/was one of the good guys, for sure.

In my entire working life I was always looking for two things from my situation: 1) I wanted to like (and be good at) the actual work I was doing, and 2) feel like the people I worked for were honorable people who treated their customers, employees, and the community well. Finding both in the same job always eluded me... until, ironically, I retired and picked up this lame delivery gig. I like the job, enjoy seeing and clowning with all our customers and my coworkers day in and day out, and the owner is a great guy and easy to fvck around with.

 

[DrHoops]

RIP Phil

Another Phil, Phil Hartman did the best impression of him ever on SNL:

 

[hoot1]

Interesting question. Your father must’ve had some of the same customers I do - especially since rates have risen.

To me, this is going to depend a lot on the business’s capital situation. If they’ve done a good job managing that and have plenty of access to capital, then this isn’t a horrible problem to have. It’s still a problem - because any cash or debt used to float slow-paying customers will erode margins and/or limit opportunities.

Everybody wants customers who pay promptly without any need for, er, enhanced encouragement. But if you ever come across a place where this exists in great supply, let me know. In the world I’m familiar with, dragging out suppliers and subs is a time-honored tradition.

So the question becomes…would I try to restrict sales growth in the name of more fluid cashflow?

Not unless I absolutely have to.

And this is one of the reasons that we have always retained as much earnings as possible. Cash, or something nearly as liquid, is an absolute necessity for growth - if, anyway, growth is a goal. And I’m from the school of thought that a business is either growing or dying.

That said, as you grow, it’s always a good idea to be more diligent in assessing creditworthiness of potential new customers (and, really, existing ones too…things change) and to also get more aggressive with collections strategies.

Great question!

I understand completely. In my last real job (a small manufacturer), we paid good but we paid slow. Why? Because that's how our customers treated us. And since our customers were distributors/middlemen, they in turn were in the same boat with the end consumers. Fortunately, we had a open line of credit to use when we got caught short on occasion. Everyone always got paid.

I would also add that the owner always paid himself last, and even in the good times was never one to enrich himself noticeably. He drove Fords and lived in a nice but nondescript home, and was always there when I got there and was still there when I left.

Mark and Craze, greatly appreciate your input regarding my question.

Have questioned my Father's business practices all these years. Thanks to you guys, I now find out his approach is both common and even has an upside.

Just want to add a comment. During the Great Depression he carried a good many customers with his lenient collection practices and had the capital to do so. As times grew better they all met their obligations. The goodwill established helped maintain a competitive advantage for decades.

Dad, good going afterall.

 

[BradStevens]

That’s the kind of owner anybody should want to work for, any bank should want to finance, and any vendor should want to sell to.

If the business was successful and he was still doing this, it means he was leaving its earnings in the company - which, to me, is just sound practice. Taking some out is fine if it’s on a solid enough footing. But, in that situation, I’m probably looking to diversify more than just consume.

I have a friend who recently became a billionaire. Nobody would ever guess it, unless they already knew it.

Can we get that billionaire to start posting on here?

 

[Bloom.]

Wouldn’t it be nice if our future President would sit down for a long form interview where an intelligent interviewer could question her about what she would do in that role?

Pick a name of someone you don't align with philosophically.

(You won't answer.)

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

Can we get that billionaire to start posting on here?

Well...he is going to be having more time on his hands these days. But, somehow, I doubt it.

 

[mcmurtry66]

The majority of our customers are on net 7 day terms, including our biggest ones. Every Friday us drivers are picking up fat checks. Yes, I understand that wouldn't work for a lot of businesses.

Wow!! School districts were a decent customer of ours. But we finally had to move away from them bc they were such slow pay and we couldn’t afford to float them.

Many years ago my uncle got all the Walgreens in the region as a customer. He figured that he got his ticket punched. Easy street. They would take as long as 18 months. Took him almost ten years to be rid of them. Went back to driveways and paving small business lots and a check before he left

 

[UncleMark]

Wow!! School districts were a decent customer of ours. But we finally had to move away from them bc they were such slow pay and we couldn’t afford to float them.

Many years ago my uncle got all the Walgreens in the region as a customer. He figured that he got his ticket punched. Easy street. They would take as long as 18 months. Took him almost ten years to be rid of them. Went back to driveways and paving small business lots and a check before he left

For years and years the IU motor pool charged all their purchases to a credit card that was only used with us. Recently they farmed out their AP accounting to some third party service out east. They don't pay worth a shit. We haven't cut them off-- yet-- but it's getting to be a major problem.

 

[mcmurtry66]

For years and years the IU motor pool charged all their purchases to a credit card that was only used with us. Recently they farmed out their AP accounting to some third party service out east. They don't pay worth a shit. We haven't cut them off-- yet-- but it's getting to be a major problem.

Yeah we can’t really do that delay. We basically operate more or less on demand

 

[MyTeamIsOnTheFloor]

Phil Donahue, Daytime TV Titan and Steadfast Voice Against War, Dies at 88

Oprah Winfrey once called Donahue, who is survived by wife, Marlo Thomas, a “trailblazer who used the power of television to transform a nation.”

www.vanityfair.com

I always respected him for having a lot of differing viewpoints and keeping it from being a free-for-all. My favorite was discussions with Milton Friedman. I can't think of anywhere today that someone would be so cordial with someone in the other camp.

I gotta admit I thought he was already gone

 

[UncleMark]

I gotta admit I thought he was already gone

I either didn't know or had forgotten he was married to Marlo.

 

[VanPastorMan]

Phil Donahue, Daytime TV Titan and Steadfast Voice Against War, Dies at 88

Oprah Winfrey once called Donahue, who is survived by wife, Marlo Thomas, a “trailblazer who used the power of television to transform a nation.”

www.vanityfair.com

I always respected him for having a lot of differing viewpoints and keeping it from being a free-for-all. My favorite was discussions with Milton Friedman. I can't think of anywhere today that someone would be so cordial with someone in the other camp.

I liked Phil. Now I didn't agree with him much, but I did like him. He seemed to adore his wife and that is something I always appreciate. Here is a video from a few years ago.

 

[hookyIU1990]

I gotta admit I thought he was already gone

I either didn't know or had forgotten he was married to Marlo.

#metoo