Two attempted burglaries in Moville linked, confirm An Garda Siochana

first_imgGardaí are investigating the attempted burglary of goods from a public house in Malin Road in Moville on Monday morning. The break-in, which occurred at approximately 4:55am on Monday, was captured on CCTV.Three males, who wearing balaclavas and gloves, smashed in the front door of the premises, activating the alarm and they fled. Gardaí have confirmed they have linked another attempted burglary, which took place at 4:30am on Monday.Two males have been captured on CCTV, forcing entry through office windows after security bars were forced open.Both males were wearing gloves and had their face/head covered.Nothing was taken from either premise. Buncrana Garda is continuing their investigations into the incidents.If anyone has any information to offer that may assist with the investigation then please call Buncrana Garda Station on 074-9320540 or the Garda Confidential line on 1800 666 111.Two attempted burglaries in Moville linked, confirm An Garda Siochana was last modified: July 31st, 2019 by Shaun KeenanShare this:Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)last_img read more

This is the life! – A luxury Sunday lunch at Lough Eske Castle

first_imgRachel visited Cedars Restaurant in Lough Eske Castle to see what makes the Sunday dining experience so special.Sunday lunch is always a treat – but dining in the luxury and comfort of a castle is now my new favourite way to indulge.I visited Lough Eske Castle last Sunday to sample the Sunday Lunch menu at Cedars Restaurant. Two things stood out from the afternoon – the scrumptious food and the relaxing feel of the entire meal. What sets Cedars apart is that the Sunday lunch is a sit-down meal, there is no getting up to queue at a carvery counter, no carrying your own tray and no noisy kitchen sounds. Chef Andrew Leonard, Nikki Fuller and Chef Frank McBrearty at Cedars Restaurant in Lough Eske CastleAt Cedars, the three-course lunch is brought to you and the outstanding service meant that no request was a problem and every table received careful attention.So all we had to do was sit back, relax and enjoy the family time.The Sunday Lunch menu is excellent value for families as children under 12 eat free. Adults are €35 per person. The high-standard of menu options and the portion sizes make this pricing such good value. I started with the Gubbeen Chorizo salad – a tasty take on a traditional Caesar. The Lough Eske Seafood Chowder was also perfectly delicious and creamy.Lough Eske Seafood Chowder: Cedars Restaurant Sunday Lunch at Lough Eske CastleGubbeen Chorizo Salad, Lemon Crouton and Pamesan: Cedars Restaurant Sunday Lunch at Lough Eske CastleFor mains, we tried the Slow Roast Sirloin of Beek and the Glin Valley Irish Chicken. The dishes are simple, but neat presentation details and wonderful hints of flavours let you know that they are of 5* quality. The large portion of beef we received was a real hearty feast.Glin Valley Irish Chicken: Cedars Restaurant Sunday Lunch at Lough Eske CastleSlow Road Sirloin of Beef: Cedars Restaurant Sunday Lunch at Lough Eske CastleWith just a little room left for dessert, we tried the Warm Apple and Pecan Crumble, Warm Chocolate Fondant and Blackberry Eton Mess. The desserts were to-die-for delicious and wonderfully seasonal. And the interesting presentation again made them all so unique.Warm Chocolate Fondant at the Cedars Restaurant Sunday Lunch at Lough Eske CastleWarm Apple and Pecan Crumble dessert in the Cedars Restaurant Sunday Lunch at Lough Eske CastleBlackberry Eton Mess in the Cedars Restaurant Sunday Lunch at Lough Eske CastleThis may have been an indulgent and comforting Sunday dinner, but Cedars adds a touch of class to every part of the experience.I also love the layout of the restaurant – it is bright and spacious, with plenty of areas for large family meals or cosy hideaways for smaller groups.  Cedars Restaurant Sunday Lunch at Lough Eske CastleDjoko Basaric at Cedars Restaurant in Lough Eske CastleIf you would like to experience Cedars Sunday Lunch yourself, just call +353749725100 for reservations or email reservations@lougheskecastlehotel.com.Father Browne BarAfterwards, we headed to tour the new Father Browne bar beneath the castle and took a walk around the grounds, which looked fantastic in the autumn sunshine.Father Browne Bar at Lough Eske CastleFather Browne Bar at Lough Eske CastleCARA Organic Beauty Spa I also caught up with Haley O’Neill, Spa Manager at CARA Organic Beauty Spa in Lough Eske. CARA Organic Beauty Spa at Lough Eske CastleThe spa is getting Christmas ready, with preparations already underway for the ESPA Festive Retail Night on 25th November at 7pm. This night will be a great gathering for everyone who would love a little pampering, skincare advice from Jane Lewis, Senior Consultant with ESPA, and some early Christmas shopping opportunities. See the video below for Haley’s introduction to the ESPA special offer of the month and for more details on the festive night out:For bookings at Lough Eske Castle, just call +353749725100 for reservations or email reservations@lougheskecastlehotel.com.This is the life! – A luxury Sunday lunch at Lough Eske Castle was last modified: November 9th, 2019 by Rachel McLaughlinShare this:Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)Tags:cara organic beauty spacedars restaurantdiningDonegal TownLough Eske CastleSunday Lunchlast_img read more

Conte on Vidal, Rodriguez, Spurs, Costa, Alonso and more

first_imgChelsea boss Antonio Conte was asked about a number of issues at his press conference ahead of his side’s game against Tottenham. Here is some of what the Italian had to say. Conte on his hopes for the transfer window“For sure there are some positions where, if we are able to find the right solution, it’s important to take that right solution.“But also I know the market is difficult. Finding the right player won’t be easy, but we are talking about it.”“I answer always in the same way. I don’t like to speak about players that are now playing with other teams. This is respect for players and also for the clubs.”On reports Chelsea want Ricardo Rodriguez and Arturo Vidal“I answer always in the same way. I don’t like to speak about players that are now playing with other teams. This is respect for players and also for the clubs.”On Marcos Alonso, who picked up a knockEmbed from Getty Images“He is available for tomorrow’s game and we do not have any injuries.”On his many attacking options“I like to have these type of problems. I like to have my players in good form and then to make the best choice for the game.“We have Pedro, Willian, Hazard and Costa and they are in good form – good shape.“I have to decide the starting 11 but I think you win the game in 95 minutes and it’s important to have all the players available and everyone playing well.”On facing Tottenham“To win 13 games in a row in this league is not easy – it’s very difficult. We are pleased about this and tomorrow we know we have a really tough game against Tottenham, which is a very strong team.“For this reason it’s very important to pay great attention and to try to continue our run. For sure it will be very tough. For me Tottenham are better than last season.”On Spurs boss Mauricio Pochettino suggesting that neutrals want his team to beat ChelseaEmbed from Getty Images“I think every team wants to stop our run, not only Tottenham. But it you see the table you will see that we are only five points clear. The league is open and we are only just in the second half of the season.”On visiting White Hart Lane“I never played there. I watched a Europa League game against Fiorentina. The atmosphere was very good.” On Diego Costa admitting he wanted to leave in the summer“Diego told me: ‘I stay and I want to fight for this club – I want to fight for my team-mates and for this shirt’. I wasn’t concerned.“He has been showing great passion in the right way and we are happy about this – the club and his team-mates. He is focused on his game and that’s very important.”On adapting to life in England“When you change country and it’s new habits and a new language, you have to bring your philosophy. It’s not easy. It’s important to take time to work with your players.“If you think that you want to change everything, then you make a mistake. It’s important to concentrate on the most important things and then to try to change something and bring your methods.”On the future of John Mikel Obi“For now we haven’t any news.” See also:Tottenham v Chelsea: five key battles  Ads by Revcontent Trending Articles Urologists: Men, Forget the Blue Pill! This “Destroys” ED x ‘Genius Pill’ Used By Rich Americans Now Available In Netherlands! x Men, You Don’t Need the Blue Pill if You Do This x What She Did to Lose Weight Stuns Doctors: Do This Daily Before Bed! x One Cup of This (Before Bed) Burns Belly Fat Like Crazy! x Drink This Before Bed, Watch Your Body Fat Melt Like Crazy x Follow West London Sport on TwitterFind us on Facebooklast_img read more

Photos: How the Warriors celebrated Halloween at Oracle Arena

first_imgThe Golden State Warriors opened up Oracle Arena early for Halloween.To mark the holiday, the team gave away 10,000 Kevin Durant bobbleheads. The Warriors also welcomed in trick-or-treaters with several locations around the venue. Representatives also handed out bags to the first 2,000 youths to help with the collection of candy.The Warriors encouraged fans to wear costumes, but they had to abide by rules, including the removal of masks before entering the arena and the ban on clubs, bats and …last_img

Bumgarner hits two-run shot, gives up grand slam in loss to Dodgers

first_img“Tha … LOS ANGELES–There are details that paint a rosy picture of the way Tuesday’s game unfolded for the Giants.Madison Bumgarner hit a two-run home run and did not allow any earned runs in a six-inning stint against the Dodgers.Then there are the details that tell a much more complete story.In a brutal third inning in the Giants’ 6-5 loss, Bumgarner committed an error, walked the pitcher without throwing a strike and served up a two-out grand slam to Dodgers slugger Cody Bellinger.last_img

How Not to Prove Positive Selection

first_imgErase all that evidence for positive natural selection in the genes you’ve read about.  It’s all misleading confusion based on “certain poorly conceived statistical methods,” argues Austin L. Hughes, an evolutionary biologist at the University of South Carolina.  Writing a commentary in PNAS,1 he accused, “Thousands of papers are published every year claiming evidence of adaptive evolution on the basis of computational analyses alone, with no evidence whatsoever regarding the phenotypic effects of allegedly adaptive mutations.”    Why would Hughes make such a damning statement among colleagues of the National Academy of Sciences, who are overwhelmingly pro-evolution?  The reason: he wanted to praise a new study that does it right.  In the same issue of PNAS,2 a study by Yokoyama is “solidly grounded in biology,” Hughes said.  Instead of presenting “more of the same” evidence of positive selection without tying it to adaptation at the phenotypical level, this paper related changes in visual pigment genes to actual benefits for the organism.    More on that later.  What’s interesting about evolutionary claims in perspective is that Hughes presented this paper as if it were a rarity, a first step in the right direction after decades of error.  “Sequences of DNA provide documentary evidence of the evolutionary past undreamed of by pioneers such as Darwin and Wallace, but their potential as sources of evolutionary information is still far from being realized,” he began.  “A major hindrance to progress has been confusion regarding the role of positive (Darwinian) selection, i.e., natural selection favoring adaptive mutations.”  That’s when he criticized the methods in “thousands of papers” that rely on “certain poorly conceived statistical methods” that fail to show how the genetic changes relate to adaptive benefits to the organism in its ecological niche.    Hughes described how the typical paper uses an “unwarranted generalization” from one classic case in which relative frequencies of synonymous and nonsynonymous mutations3 seemed to be related to selectional pressure.  Since then, evolutionists have recklessly applied instances of dN > dS as evidence of positive selection.  This assumption is “demonstrably false,” Hughes argued, because due to the stochastic nature of mutations, such inequalities are just as likely to occur by chance, without any adaptive value.  “Yet, despite their shaky foundations, numerous publications have used these methods as the basis for claims of positive selection at the molecular level.”  In fact, using the Yokoyama et al paper to test the codon-based methods and Bayesian methods so often used in the literature, Hughes found them to be “100% off-target.”  The mutations putatively showing positive selection, in other words, bore no relation to the ones Yokoyama et al found to be adaptive.  “These results support the theoretical prediction that, because of the faulty logic in their underlying assumptions, codon-based focus mainly on statistical artifacts rather than true cases of positive selection.”  Has he just falsified “thousands of papers … published each year”?    Hughes is not done with his bombshell barrage yet.  Next, he criticized Neo-Darwinism itself – at least some widely-held assumptions about its record in the genes:Contrary to a widespread impression, natural selection does not leave any unambiguous “signature” on the genome, certainly not one that is still detectable after tens or hundreds of millions of years.  To biologists schooled in Neo-Darwinian thought processes, it is virtually axiomatic that any adaptive change must have been fixed as a result of natural selection.  But it is important to remember that reality can be more complicated than simplistic textbook scenarios.Adaptive change can occur by simple genetic drift, for instance.  Hughes suggests that some of the genomic changes for visual pigments occurred by this method.  But then, how is an evolutionary biologist to find genetic evidence for positive selection at all?  Hughes is merciless in his conclusion:In recent years the literature of evolutionary biology has been glutted with extravagant claims of positive selection on the basis of computational analyses alone, including both codon-based methods and other questionable methods such as the McDonald-Kreitman test.  This vast outpouring of pseudo-Darwinian hype has been genuinely harmful to the credibility of evolutionary biology as a science.  It is to be hoped that the work of Yokoyama et al. will help put an end to these distressing tendencies.  By incorporating experimental evidence regarding the phenotypic effects of reconstructed evolutionary changes, this study sets a new standard for studies of adaptive evolution at the molecular level.  In addition, by providing evidence that non-Darwinian and Darwinian processes are likely to be involved in the evolution of adaptive phenotypes, it points the way toward a new, more realistic appreciation of the evolutionary process.Since Hughes put such a high value on the paper by Yokoyama et al,2 treating it as if it were the guiding light among thousands of papers lacking credibility, it bears taking a closer look.  The authors started immediately with assumptions based on evolution that they admitted are difficult to prove:Vertebrate ancestors appeared in a uniform, shallow water environment, but modern species flourish in highly variable niches.  A striking array of phenotypes exhibited by contemporary animals is assumed to have evolved by accumulating a series of selectively advantageous mutations.  However, the experimental test of such adaptive events at the molecular level is remarkably difficult.The authors referred to the evolution of visual pigments as “the deepest body of knowledge linking differences in specific genes to differences in ecology and to the evolution of species.”  This makes their subject matter the best case available for testing evolution with molecular methods.  They extracted rhodopsins from 5 deep-sea fish and compared them to 35 types of animals.  As Hughes had indicated, they showed that the standard codon-based, statistical inferences to positive selection are misleading.  This was a major emphasis in their paper.  In fact, four of their five major conclusions related to how traditional methods of assessing positive selection can be misleading.    Then, using mutagenesis experiments, they purported to show that adaptive sensitivity to particular wavelengths of light in specific environments “evolved on at least 18 separate occasions.  These highly environment-specific adaptations seem to have occurred largely by amino acid replacements at 12 sites, and most of those at the remaining 191 (~94%) sites have undergone neutral evolution.”  In other words, evidence for genetic drift (neutral changes) swamped evidence for positive selection by 94%.  But even then, they started by assuming that the “ancestral” rhodopsin, which they “engineered” using evolutionary assumptions and mutagenesis, started with a maximal sensitivity to 500 nm light.    Clearly, Cambrian-age ancestral rhodopsin is not available for study.  The ancestral rhodopsin on which their conclusions depend, therefore, was manufactured by them in the lab, based on their assumptions of evolutionary ancestry, millions of years, and the positions of animals in a phylogenetic tree, assuming the rhodopsins had diversified by natural selection.  The reasoning seems circular.  Even so, genetic drift was far more evident than positive selection.  And, to fit the data, they had to conclude that genotypes appeared and reappeared multiple times without any particular trend.  They said, “To complicate the matter further, evolutionary changes are not always unidirectional and ancestral phenotypes may reappear during evolution.”    Since no clear evolutionary pattern became evident without evolutionary assumptions,4 therefore, it is difficult to see how this paper could be judged any more objective than the thousands of papers Hughes criticized.1.  Austin L. Hughes, “The origin of adaptive phenotypes,” (Commentary, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, published September 3, 2008, doi:10.1073/pnas.0807440105.2.  Yokoyama, Tada, Zhang and Britt, “Elucidation of phenotypic adaptations: Molecular analyses of dim-light vision proteins in vertebrates,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, published September 3, 2008, doi:10.1073/pnas.0802426105.3.  Nonsynonymous mutations in a gene change the amino acid in the resulting protein.  Synonymous mutations do not, because some some of the 64 possible DNA codons have “synonyms” that code for the same amino acid (there are only 20 amino acids in most proteins).4.  E.g, notice the evolutionary assumptions in this excerpt from the paper: “The ancestors of bony fish most likely used rhodopsins with [lambdamax-s (maximum sensitivity wavelength)] of ~500 nm (Fig. 1).  What types of light environment did these ancestors have?  The origin of many early vertebrate ancestors is controversial [i.e., the Cambrian explosion], but that of bony fish ancestors is clear [referring to a 1988 text on Vertebrate Paleontology and Evolution].  The fossil records from late Cambrian and early Ordovician, ~500 Mya, show that the ancestors of bony fish lived in shallow, near-shore marine environments (30�32).  Therefore, pigment a must have functioned as a surface rhodopsin and its lambda-max would be consistent with that role.  Interpolating from the ancestral and contemporary rhodopsins, it is most likely that pigments b�d and f�h (lambdamax ~ 501�502 nm) were also surface rhodopsins, pigment i (496 nm) was an intermediate rhodopsin, and pigments e, j, and k (480�485 nm) were deep-sea rhodopsins (Fig. 1).  From their predicted lambdamax-s, it is also likely that pigments q, r, s, and v were intermediate rhodospins [sic] and pigment u was a deep-sea rhodopsin (Fig. 1)…. Based on the four types of dim-light vision, vertebrates show six different evolutionary paths (Fig. 1)….”  Later, they gave a Lamarckian description: “When moving into new dim-light environments, vertebrate ancestors adjusted their dim-light vision by modifying their rhodopsins.”Wow.  The damage to evolutionist credibility from these two papers can hardly be overstated.  Hughes just wiped away stacks and stacks of papers that Ken Miller and Eugenie Scott might have piled up in a courtroom to demonstrate the overwhelming evidence for evolution, then he held up a very weak paper as the best example yet.  We looked into that paper and found nothing but evolutionary assumptions buttressing evolutionary assumptions.    Consider how weak their best evidence is.  They were talking about animals that already had eyes, retinas, optic nerves, brains and all the other organs and functions that support vision.  The only parameter that they studied was the wavelengths of light to which particular rhodopsin molecules are maximally sensitive, between 482 and 505 billionths of a meter.  But as we know from many phenomena in biology, compensating mechanisms are often at work.  It would be impossible to prove that a fish with a rhodopsin most sensitive to 489 nm would be any better evolved than one with a rhodopsin most sensitive to 502 nm, because the ganglion cells or optic nerve might compensate for the slight shift in sensitivity.  All we observe is that living fishes today are marvelously adapted to their particular ecological niches.    We’re only talking about virtually indistinguishable shades of green light, folks!  Are you impressed with the creative power of natural selection?  Are you impressed with scientists’ ability to demonstrate evolution at the molecular level?  During the hundreds of millions of years in which animals supposedly evolved from trilobites to philosophers, the best evolutionists can show are slight changes to sensitivity to green light in just 12 positions in one protein molecule out of the thousands of exquisitely-adapted enzymes essential for vision.  Even then, the “evolution” demonstrated is predominantly from mutational drift, with no particular functional trend, and the changes (we are told) appeared, disappeared, and reappeared 18 times.  At the most optimistic, the changes they’re talking about are microevolutionary.  Even staunch young-earth creationists would have no difficulty believing that changes this small might occur in a few thousand years.    Nothing the evolutionists have produced as evidence for natural selection (after the purge of papers by Hughes) is sufficient to distinguish between creation vs evolution models.  Should evolution be the only view sanctified in the schools?  Hughes was right on when he said that the “vast outpouring of pseudo-Darwinian hype has been genuinely harmful to the credibility of evolutionary biology as a science.”  He did nothing to repair the damage, and by pointing to an insipid paper as the best example yet after decades of hype, he actually made it worse.    This effectively undermines everything the evolutionists have told us about divining evolutionary history in the genes (e.g., 06/13/2003, 04/30/2005).  Where else could we see it?  In the fossil record?  Ha! (07/21/2003), 05/21/2004, 05/10/2008).    Undoubtedly the Darwin Party will spin this situation in their favor, by making it an illustration of the progress of triumphalist materialist secularist science.  For 8 years now, CEH has been exposing the charades behind the curtain where Charles the Extravagant, the Wizard of Flaws, and his loyal munchkins dupe people into thinking that evidence for evolution is overwhelming.  This is a prime example.  Now you know.  Get the word out!  Expose the charlatan!  We need to get out of this mythical fantasyland (09/04/2008) and back to the real world!  The Kansas School Board is counting on you!You’re off to shame the Wizard, the Blunderful Wizard of FlawsYou’ll find he is a Wimp of a Wiz if ever a Wiz there wasIf ever, oh ever, a Wimp there was the Wizard of Flaws is one becauseBecause, because, because, because, becauseBecause of the blunderful spins he doesYou’re off to shame the wizard, the Blunderful Wizard of Flaws.Use your brain.  Take courage.  Have a heart.  And bark, Toto, bark!(Visited 13 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0last_img read more

If You Believed Google Duplex Was the Salesperson, You Weren’t Paying Attention

first_img Essential Reading! Get my first book: The Only Sale Guide You’ll Ever Need “The USA Today bestseller by the star sales speaker and author of The Sales Blog that reveals how all salespeople can attain huge sales success through strategies backed by extensive research and experience.” Buy Now Many of those who prognosticate about sales very literally missed the main takeaway. To those who saw salespeople being disintermediated, they were correct in the assessment, but they were focused on the wrong party. If you were paying attention, Duplex did fine, but the person whose job is put in jeopardy is the person who worked for the salon. In a business that is very personal and preference matters a great deal, the call was nothing more than a transaction.The call should have sounded like this:Duplex: Hi, I’m calling to book a women’s haircut for a client. Um.  I’m looking for something on May 3rd.Salesperson: Sure give me one second. Hi, this is Anthony. I can take care of this for you. What’s your name? And what’s your client’s name?(When you answer the phone, you should provide your name, so the other person knows your name. You should also ask them their name, because they are a human being, and that being true, they have a name. Once you know their name, you can address them by name. If the person calling is calling for the client, you should also ask for the client’s name, so you can speak with them about that person using their name, too.)Salesperson: What day and time works best for Lisa?Mm-hmm. (This is allegedly what makes this human, but it isn’t.)Sure. What time are you looking for around?Duplex: At 12PM.Salesperson: We do not have a 12PM available. The closest we have to that is a 1:15. I’m so sorry. Noon time is super popular today. I have a 1:15 PM available, will that work or is that too late for Lisa?(When someone asks for a time and it is unavailable, it is polite to apologize. You are trying to serve that person. You might also offer an explanation that provides more context, so your client knows why you can’t give them what they want. Because you know the person’s name and the time they wanted, you can easily make your communication more personal, more caring. You are collaborating with the person scheduling and you are acknowledging a likely constraint.)Duplex: Do you have anything between 10 am and 12 pm?Depending on what service she would like. What service is she looking for?  Can you share with my what kind of services Lisa is looking for so I can find her the best stylists for her?(Again, using Lisa’s name. Also inquiring about what she wants so that you can tailor the decision as to what stylist works best based on what is best going to provide her the outcome she needs. By doing so, you are also building up the stylist and your business.)Duplex: Just a woman’s haircut for now.Salesperson: Tell me about what Lisa likes? Is this a regular maintenance cut or is she looking for something new?(I am not an expert on women, but I live with three of them, one who has a stylist that she uses exclusively, and two whose high school jobs have them working in a salon. I am not certain any women wants “just a woman’s haircut,” but I beg your pardon, if I am wrong. That said, you create greater value when you ask what Lisa likes. Maybe she wants a regular cut, or maybe she wants to book at your salon because she wants to change things up. Eliciting her preferences shows caring).Salesperson: Okay, we have a 10 o’clock. If Lisa could do 10:00 AM, I can put her with one of our top stylists, Shelley. Shelley is amazing!(Now, the person booking the appointment for her client can report back that her appointment is with Shelley, one of the best stylists at the salon. By the way, they say Shelley is amazing.).Duplex: 10 AM is fine.Salesperson: Okay, what’s her first name? (Way to late to ask. Too many opportunities lost)The first name is Lisa. Can you tell me a little about Lisa? What does she look like and what does she like to drink?(If I know what Lisa looks like, I can keep an eye out for her and greet her by name. That’s not all that difficult, because she’ll be showing up a few minutes before 10AM on Wednesday. If I know she likes Diet Peach Tea Snapple, having one waiting there for her will do a fair bit towards her becoming a client for life.)Salesperson Okay, perfect. So Shelley will see Lisa at 10 o’clock on May 3rd. I’ll make sure we’re looking for her, and we’ll have her Diet Peach Tea Snapple. Is there anything else we can do for you or Lisa while she’s here?(The person scheduling the call is also now your client. Because you worked to make a transaction something about value, trust, and caring, you have improved the experience. You are now differentiated. And you can now say, “Thanks so much. If you have any other clients you need help taking care of, please let me know. We’ll take excellent care of them.”For a little effort, a great attitude, and the cost a Diet Peach Tea Snapple, you have made yourself much more difficult to be disintermediated, and you have probably gained a client and fan for life.For those of you who believed Duplex was the salesperson, you weren’t really paying attention, were you?last_img read more

Lallana starts with Salah & Coutinho missing

first_imgLiverpool Liverpool team news: No Salah or Coutinho as Lallana starts at Burnley Melissa Reddy Liverpool FC Correspondent Last updated 1 year ago 22:00 1/1/18 FacebookTwitterRedditcopy Comments(0) Adam Lallana Liverpool Premier League Burnley v Liverpool Burnley Jurgen Klopp has made seven changes to his starting XI at Turf Moor with the Reds playing 48 hours after their 2-1 victory over Leicester Mohamed Salah and Philippe Coutinho sit out Liverpool’s New Year’s Day test against Burnley with Adam Lallana making his first start of the season.The Egyptian has a minor groin niggle having limped off in the 2-1 win over Leicester City, while the Brazilian playmaker nurses a sore thigh with the England international replacing him in the centre of the park.Jurgen Klopp has made seven changes to the XI with Dominic Solanke leading the line and Roberto Firmino held in reserve. Simon Mignolet replaces Loris Karius in goal, with Trent Alexander-Arnold and Ragnar Klavan added to the rearguard. Article continues below Editors’ Picks Lyon treble & England heartbreak: The full story behind Lucy Bronze’s dramatic 2019 Liverpool v Man City is now the league’s biggest rivalry and the bitterness is growing Megan Rapinoe: Born & brilliant in the U.S.A. A Liverpool legend in the making: Behind Virgil van Dijk’s remarkable rise to world’s best player Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain and Gini Wijnaldum were on the bench in Saturday’s victory, but line up from the off at Turf Moor.Ben Woodburn is named in a Premier League matchday squad for just the second time this season.Liverpool XI GFXBurnley, meanwhile, welcome James Tarkowski back for the first time since before Christmas after the centre-back’s three-match suspension.He replaces Kevin Long in the back four as Sean Dyche’s side look to continue their unlikely push for a place in the top six.Burnley starting XI: Pope, Bardsley, Tarkowski, Mee, Taylor, Arfield, Cork, Hendrick, Defour, Gudmundsson, BarnesBurnley subs: Lindegaard, Lowton, Long, Westwood, Walters, Vokes, WellsLiverpool starting XI: Mignolet, Alexander-Arnold, Lovren, Klavan, Gomez, Can, Wijnaldum, Lallana, Oxlade-Chamberlain, Mane, SolankeLiverpool subs: Karius, Robertson, Matip, Milner, Firmino, Ings, Woodburn Subscribe to Goal’s Liverpool Correspondent Neil Jones’ weekly email bringing you the best Liverpool FC writing from around the weblast_img read more