1. 8 Tips for Building a Better Spreadsheet

    Being a financial dork of the highest order, it should go without saying that I love spreadsheets. And I particularly enjoy the process of building good, useful ones.

    Having been a spreadsheet aficionado for many years now, I thought it might be fun to scribble down a few of the “rules of thumb” for spreadsheet creation which I’ve learned over this time.

    (Not only do I make free and for-pay financial spreadsheets for web surfers at large, but my Day Job involves lots of spreadsheet use, too. And many of these spreadsheets get distributed throughout the company, for use by everyone from fresh-faced newbies to blurry-eyed Excel veterans.)

    That said, here are a few of my personal “Rules for Creating Spreadsheets That Don’t Suck.”

    Tip #1: Spreadsheets For You ≠ Spreadsheets You Distribute

    You might be able to get away with leaving cells unlocked (and the worksheet unprotected) in a spreadsheet you make for your own use, since you as Spreadsheet Creator presumably know what goes where. But that won’t fly with spreadsheets that you distribute for use by others.

    There’s just no telling what someone else will type, nor where they’ll type it. Let’s face it: Stray key-punches are a fact of life. Get a homeless [SPACEBAR] entered into a vital, formula-holding cell, and an entire spreadsheet can detonate.

    And that ain’t good.

    So be sure to unlock ONLY those cells where users are expected to enter data…

    … and then PROTECT that worksheet!

    Tip #2: Appearance freakin’ matters.

    We’ve all seen them: Spreadsheets emailed to us by coworkers with NO idea of how to arrange and design data in a way that makes sense. Cell text overruns gridlines like snakes dumped on a chessboard; instructions are vague at best; you couldn’t make the page suitable for printing if you taped three sheets of legal paper end to end. What goes where? What’s that army of “#####” symbols in Column G supposed to signify? Should I enter new data in Cell R3, or not? Good luck figuring all this out without going thru every cell by hand … and taking notes.

    Yeah. So, without any sort of cell formatting (read: background colors, borders, and so on) and coherent design to guide us, the actual usability of Coworker’s Latest Creation plummets so fast that it takes an act of God to keep this Excel disaster from being clicked ‘n’ dragged to a Recycle Bin demise.

    In other words, appearance matters. A little cell formatting — often as simple as some understated background colors in those cells where data should be user-entered, with white for everything else — goes a long, long way. The latest versions of Excel provide a metric crap-load of tools to make your spreadsheets look decent. CELL → FORMAT is nothing to be afraid of, you know.

    In other words, the best spreadsheets are a joy to look at, and work with. And the BEST best ones don’t look like spreadsheets at all.

    Tip #3: Gridlines Are Bad. White space is good.

    Plus, it’s easy on your printer. So use it liberally.

    (This includes getting rid of gridlines, and instead manually creating cell borders when necessary. Unused oceans of gridlines are the devil.)

    Tip #4: Color is most effective when used sparingly.

    Remember what I said about using color above? Well, don’t go overboard with that. Personally, I like to color (and unlock!) only those cells where users will need to enter data. All other cells are left white. (And locked!)

    Tip #5: Provide Detailed Labels and Notes…

    Thinking a field is “self-explanatory” courts disaster. You pretty much have to get inside the user’s mind and consider this stuff; you ponder what they’ll be thinking and seeing and deciding. Any guidance you can give that helps get the user’s Datapoint A into the correct cell will pay off big.

    Tip #6: …But Remember That Most People Don’t Read.

    Nobody reads a darn thing anymore. I’m fairly confident that 99% of users start hammering numbers into most spreadsheets without throwing so much as a glance as the “Instructions & Notes” worksheets I almost always provide. But that’s the world we live in.

    Build with the 99% in mind, but put some time into decent worksheet notes, too. Appreciate the 1%.

    Tip #7: Gonna distribute? Use version numbers!

    This is most applicable if you’re building spreadsheets for business use, where more than one person will be using the program. But it can also be helpful if you’re distributing your Excel creations on the internet.

    By applying version numbers to your spreadsheets, you make it easier for users to know which iteration they’re working with. It also makes it a snap to determine if the spreadsheet version that Ron, your nosey coworker in Cubicle B3, is working on is newer and better than yours.

    Tip #8: When possible, place column SUM formulas at the top of the data they tabulate.

    This is kind of a little thing, but man, has it made my spreadsheeting life easier.

    One of the great features of spreadsheets is their ability to analyze ever-changing amounts of data. However, when you build a spreadsheet to account for, say, a column with 100 rows of data which need to be totaled up, you might as well plan on that spreadsheet someday needing to total up 200 rows instead. So to make such a change easier, put your SUM formulas ABOVE the column’s uppermost data cell.

    I know that for myself, it’s almost instinctive to want to total up columns (when that’s what is required) at the bottom of the current data. (Thanks, every math teacher I ever had!)

    Here’s an example:

    However, placing the TOTALS (or whatever formula you need) at the top of each column’s data makes it much easier to expand your data “downward” later:

    With formulas at the column tops, you won’t have to go to the trouble of inserting rows (and possibly hosing your formulas) later on, when the need for more data becomes official … as it seemingly always does.




     

     

  2. Minimum Wage vs Inflation

    Back in 2007, I wrote a post comparing what minimum wage would buy in 2007 versus 1973. Now here comes an article at MSN that’s along those same lines:

    MSN: What Minimum Wage Buys, Then and Now

    The author traces minimum-wage purchasing power (of things like rent and gas) across the decades, starting in 1950. Interesting stuff, if you’re so inclined.




     

     

  3. Too Broke for Bankruptcy

    Whaddya mean, they made bankruptcy too expensive to pursue? Say whaaaa?

    Yahoo Finance: Too Broke to Go Bankrupt

    Apparently, calling “Bankrupt!” and getting a do-over ain’t as cheap as it used to be. But then, what is?

    My favorite quote from the article reads thusly:

    Billy Brewer, president of the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys, said bankruptcy attorneys have no choice but to charge such high fees.

    “When clients come in and I tell them the fee, they look at me like I have two heads, and say: What part of ‘I’m filing for bankruptcy don’t you understand?’ But we can’t afford to do it for free,” said Brewer, who charges an average fee of $1,500. “Congress decided to make the process much more difficult and there’s much more paperwork involved, so attorneys are spending double the time they used to just to help someone file.”

    Well, I’m sure this was a completely unintended consequence of the 2005 bankruptcy legislation.

    Not.




     

     

  4. Paradox of Thrift

    Don’t know how I managed to miss this treat, but I did:

    National Post: 93-Year-Old Threatens American Capitalism

    I remember reading something about Ms. Veitch and her still-chugging-along 1964 Mercury Comet recently. But whatever it was that I read, I certainly don’t remember her being presented as all that’s wrong with the American economy. Because that is, you know, the tongue-in-cheek gist of the article above.

    I feel quite confident that my beloved America is in zero danger of becoming a nation of Veitchian monsters. Holy crap, no. We love our plasma TVs, McMansions, and our lane-cramming SUVs. We thrive on $10, triple-decker, bacon-and-bleu-cheese-cheeseburgers. (Dangit. What’s for lunch, anyway?)

    And debt? Oh, we loves our debt. In fact, debt is a lot like The Force. It surrounds us, binds us. Debt is the ever-increasing glue which holds us all together. Even when we don’t have any money, we can keep spending money, because we can always get debt. Always. Well, except for 2007 and 2008 and part of 2009. Then we couldn’t get debt. And you saw how that went, didn’t you?

    Oh, but Dark Siders, like Veitch, who save money and make full use of all their assets and take advantage of the deals and guarantee presented to them — well, these people are Communists and apparently don’t believe in the almighty goodness of Debt, Debt, and More Debt.

    So our greatest economic enemy drives a ’64 Mercury Comet. Who knew?




     

     

  5. Pro Athletes Going Broke

    Well, if you were wondering just how great professional athletes are at managing their money, Sports Illustrated has the ticket:

    SI: How And Why Athletes Go Broke

    As far as the article goes, here’s your two-minute drill:

    In a less public way, other athletes from the nation’s three biggest and most profitable leagues—the NBA, NFL and Major League Baseball—are suffering from a financial pandemic. Although salaries have risen steadily during the last three decades, reports from a host of sources (athletes, players’ associations, agents and financial advisers) indicate that:

    • By the time they have been retired for two years, 78% of former NFL players have gone bankrupt or are under financial stress because of joblessness or divorce.

    • Within five years of retirement, an estimated 60% of former NBA players are broke.

    I mean, those figures are just plain brutal. But not surprising.

    It’s a very long article, as these things go, but well worth a read if you follow pro sports and athletes (and their foibles).




     

     

  6. ING Direct Adds Remote Check Deposit

    NOTE: In 2012, Capital One purchased ING Direct and its assets. At that time, all ING Direct “Electric Orange” checking accounts became part of Capital One 360. Please see my Capital One 360 Checking review for more details, and, of course, my updated review.

    The account formerly known as “ING Direct Electric Orange Checking” is now “Capital One 360 Checking.”

    Well, sometime in April, ING Direct went and added the ability for us Orange-heads to deposit paper checks by scanning and uploading check images via smartphone or PC.

    Hmph. And here I was, wondering whether I even wanted to keep our ING Direct accounts open. Kinda tells you how much attention I’ve been giving them lately, doesn’t it?

    Scan a Paper Check; Deposit a Paper Check

    I’ve been waiting a long while for this feature, honestly. ING Direct will be the first bank or credit union with which I’m associated to offer this service. (No surprise there, I guess.)

    Locally, I’ve seen billboards from other banks offering this sort of thing. Being a guy who tries to avoid bank tellers and ATMs as much as I can, I was pretty intrigued at the idea of depositing paper checks simply by snapping a pic of the check (front and back) and sending it to the bank. Well, that day is here. And I, for one, am pretty darn excited about it.

    Less trips to the ATM for me! Yay! (And less need for me to have to transfer money from any of our other banks into our Electric Orange checking, too.)

    First Check Deposit Is a Go!

    I don’t know what you guys were doing this past Sunday night, but *I* was giving ING’s new feature a try. (You can tell I’m a full-fledged money-and-tech dork, because things like this actually make me giddy.)

    With a new $100 paper check — fresh from one of our rewards credit cards — in my hands, I quickly read through ING’s online tips for successfully depositing paper checks, and then fired up our home PC and scanner. I put the check face-down on the tray, placed a piece of dark construction paper behind it (ING says this creates contrast and allows their system to more easily identify the check information) and made a 300dpi JPEG scan. I then did the same with the signed back of the check.

    A quick upload of both images to ING, and that was it.

    Within minutes, my email inbox held a message from ING Direct, telling me that I’d successfully submitted the check. The next morning (Monday), another email informed me that the check had been successfully deposited into my account, and that I was now free to void the check.

    Wow. That was easy.

    Color me orange-ly happy. Once again, ING Direct has made me remember why I like them so much — and why I’m praying that leadership at Capital One doesn’t screw up the great, great thing that ING has going.




     

     

  7. Amazon To Collect Sales Tax in Two More States

    According to a post at Don’t Mess With Taxes, Amazon has reached deals with two more states to start collecting sales taxes on purchases from those states.

    Nevada and Texas can now add themselves to the list of states for whom Amazon collects and submits sales-tax revenues. My state of Oklahoma isn’t one of them — yet — but I know the day is coming. Actually, since I pay my use taxes annually anyway, it’d actually be easier for me if Amazon started collecting OK sales taxes on their own. But hey — it’ll happen when it happens.

    For those of you who still play the “I buy online because then I save on sales taxes!” game, well, Kay lays it out best in her post above when she says:

    Eventually, though, shoppers had better start preparing to pay sales tax on all their purchases, regardless of how they buy them.

    Yup. It’s just a matter of time before the presumed-sales-tax-free internet goes bye-bye.

    The Tax Man will not be denied.




     

     

  8. Amazon Prime, I Heart You

    I’m not much of a stock-watcher these days, but I’ve seen a great deal of chatter on the internet regarding Amazon’s latest quarterly report. Their stock (ticker: AMZN) blew out the roof upon announcement of Amazon’s apparently-fabulous earnings, and rose about 15 percent on Friday. Yay for AMZN longs, I guess, and “ouch” for AMZN shorts. (I am not a knowing holder of AMZN, though the funds my family owns may or may not own AMZN.)

    This gives me an opportunity to talk about not AMZN, the stock, but Amazon, the company. And it’s something Amazon-related which I think I’ve overlooked to this point:

    My household hearts Amazon Prime.

    I love Amazon Prime. My wife loves Amazon Prime. I would contend that the $79/year which Prime costs us is possibly the best $79 I spend each year, when looked at from a “No, really, I’m happy to spend it!” angle.

    It isn’t the availability of streaming movies which delights us, as we’re not big movie-watchers. And we haven’t taken advantage of the Kindle e-book borrowing services which Amazon recently unleashed. Yes, both of those services are fine and dandy. But for us, it’s all about the unlimited two-day shipping.

    Put simply: Short of groceries and clothing, there’s very little that I can’t find a better-than-anywhere-else price on when it’s on Amazon. And as long as it’s something we don’t need right now, you can bet Amazon will get our money.

    But But But Local and B&M Businesses Are Suffering!

    Does my buying of PC components, Elixir electric-guitar strings, and damn near all books on Amazon mean that my local, bricks-and-mortar retailers lose business and/or “suffer?”

    Absolutely it does.

    Do I really care?

    Most of the time, no.

    The way I see it, the local and bricks/mortar retailers could’ve targeted the internet shopper the way Amazon did, back in the day. But they elected not to do so. Amazon did what it did, and bricks/mortar did what it did. One team won, and one team lost.

    Take, for instance, Best Buy. Lisa and I used to really enjoy visiting Best Buy. And we bought a fair amount of stuff from them over the years. But these days, it’s my opinion that Best Buy is nothing more than Amazon’s showroom, and a sparse, poorly-employed one at that. Something tells me that I’m not alone in this view.

    Could I get strings and such for my Gibson Les Paul at a local music store? Sure I could. Would I pay roughly 40 percent more for them if I did this, rather than buy through Amazon? Yes. Yes I would. If I needed new strings right the heck now, then spending locally is what I’d do. Otherwise, no. Amazon gets our cash. And we get our stuff in a couple of days, tops.

    Amazon Prime: Our Selling Points

    Amazon Prime, how I love thee? Let me count the ways. Amazon Prime …

    1. Saves us gas money, as we don’t make special trips to buy this stuff. Nor do we have to drive around OKC or Dallas trying to find a retailer who has what we want in stock.
    2. Saves time, for same reasons as above.
    3. Saves headaches, as we don’t have to wait in line to buy what we need. (As a grumpy parent, I now officially hate standing in line to spend money.)
    4. Means no more worrying about holding small-dollar purchases in Amazon’s cart to eventually qualify for Super Saver shipping. If I want to order a $14 cable on Monday and have it Wednesday, with no extra shipping fees, Amazon Prime makes it happen.
    5. Means quicker access to Amazon’s vast product selection. And their buying/checkout/account-monitoring processes were already the best I’ve ever seen.
    6. Is only helped by Amazon’s great customer service, which, the few times I’ve needed it, has been stellar. This, plus Prime benefits, means I have no problem giving them even more of our business.
    7. Allows us to get next-day shipping for an additional $4 or $5 per item, when necessary. (Which isn’t often.)

    I could probably come up with a few more positives, but I think these pretty much cover it. As mentioned earlier, the moderate selection of free Amazon Instant Videos available to Prime members isn’t a big deal to us; rather, it’s just icing on the cake. (Though, I’ll admit, it is more appealing now that Amazon Instant Video is available to PS3 owners, which we are.)

    Anybody out there still “on the fence” with Amazon Prime?




     

     

  9. U.S. Standard of Living Tailspin

    So the U.S. standard of living is getting crushed, and the trend shows no sign of abating. That, at least, is the case according to this article:

    TheStreet.com: US Standard of Living Down 50%+ Since 1970

    As I wasn’t even around in 1970, I certainly can’t make any sort of personal-experience comparisons to the average standard of living (SOL) then and now.

    (Though I can pretty much state, unequivocally, that rock ‘n’ roll music was far better then. In that regard, I’m pretty confident that we’ve seen a decline in quality FAR greater than 57 percent. But I digress.)

    The article’s an opinion piece, and clearly marked as such, but right here’s where the elephant steps on your toe:

    Using the year 2000 as the numerical base from which to “zero” all of the numbers, real wages peaked in 1970 at around $20/hour. Today the average worker makes $8.50/hour — more than 57% less than in 1970. And since the average wage directly determines the standard of living of our society, we can see that the average standard of living in the U.S. has plummeted by over 57% over a span of 40 years.

    Hmmm. Reminds me a lot of what I read in The Two-Income Trap back in 2003, except that this guy uses words like “rape” and “parasites” to describe the treatment of “average” families today by Big Business and the government. (Not that I necessarily disagree in all cases. ‘Cause I don’t.)

    But here’s the part that totally lost me, where our esteemed author is discussing structural unemployment:

    Technology always eliminates jobs faster than it creates new opportunities. This means that our economies are permanently reducing jobs (and creating structural unemployment) every day, every week, every month, every year. For more than 200 years, our governments have dealt with this permanent structural unemployment problem by shortening the work week every few decades…until now. The refusal of our governments to shorten the work week (while we have the worst structural unemployment in history) is a deliberate attempt to maintain massive unemployment — which is the strongest downward driver of average wages.

    Uhhh … say what? I mean, I know the PC revolution was pretty hard on typewriter makers and all, but … say what? And how does shortening the work week help increase average wages? (For most folks I know, if you’re not working, you’re not getting paid — politicians and welfare fraudsters excluded, of course.)

    Oh well. It’s late, and I’m probably just missing something.

    Like how much better the beer probably was in 1970. There’s your pinnacle in standard-of-living, right there.




     

     

  10. Minimum Wage Again

    Those unstable folks who, like me, are fixated on all things economic, will get a boost from this quaint Bloomberg piece:

    Bloomberg: Today’s Minimum Wage Lower Than LBJ Era

    I dunno. No matter what Congress and our state legislatures say, I’m pretty confident that the true minimum wage is and will always be zero. But what do I know. I don’t work for any kind of economic or policy think-tank.

    Here’s the one passage I adored:

    The studies find minimum-wage increases even provide an economic boost, albeit a small one, as strapped workers immediately spend their raises. A 2011 paper by economists at the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago found that a $1 minimum-wage increase lifts household income by about $250 and increases spending by about $700 a quarter in the following year. The spending increase is driven by a small number of households that primarily buy vehicles.

    So a wage boost lifted income by $250, but spending went up $700 for the same period? You mean the wage increase encouraged people to go out and spend STILL MORE money than they have? Why, that’s great news!

    (If you’re a proponent of debt slavery, that is.)