Sentences with phrase «less points where»

In general, it moves towards more options and less points where combos lead to more combos without decisions between them.

Not exact matches

«Over time, we've been optimizing our clinical lab to bring up tests that are more commonly ordered, and in some cases move resources off the proprietary tests that are less commonly ordered to get to a point where the ordering patterns we are seeing can all be accommodated through our finger - stick technology.»

The four critical factors are: (a) businesses with recurring revenue bases — like a renewable subscription — are far better than ones dependent on constantly securing new customers; renewals are much easier and less expensive to secure than new sales; (b) customer retention is absolutely critical — all customers are very costly to acquire and very easy to lose in a world of almost infinite choices; (c) businesses based on products that require constant replacement or renewal (the «razor blade» model) are much more attractive than durable goods businesses (like selling refrigerators) where the products have very long repurchase or replacement life cycles and where the market could even fairly quickly reach saturation points; and (d) businesses that offer products or services that had a predictably high rate of obsolescence were much more attractive than those where the products had long, useful lives.

Once you get to the point where you own the week, however, you'll find yourself longing a lot less for the weekend.

While we haven't yet got to the point where Canadian oil production is literally stranded — shut down for lack of a place to store, let alone ship it — our product is selling for far less than the North American and world benchmark prices that continue to make filling up your car an expensive proposition.

We've gone from less than 20 % of our appointments being in the private sector to the point now where I believe we're at about 30 %, or maybe even above that.

Since then, the arbitrage strategy has declined in a nearly linear fashion to the point where there were no years where the strategy yielded more than $ 200 between 1959 and 1974 and in 11 of these 16 years an investor either lost money or gained less than $ 100.

«We're at this critical point where if we don't understand where our money goes, we will feel less and less in control of our finances as the years go on,» says Pam Capalad, a certified financial planner (and millennial), who owns Brunch & Budget in New York.

In office less than two months, he commented that we were at «the point where buying stocks is a potentially good deal if you've got a long - term perspective.»

In «swing» counties where the margin of victory for either candidate was less than ten points, 30 % approve of the plan compared with 38 % who disapprove.

Technology and years of brokerage price wars have changed all that, to the point where, for less than fifty bucks, you can buy a fully diversified portfolio of thousands of stocks and pay pennies in expenses.

It will get to a point where the 2 % of the card balance will be less than $ 15.

These concepts are generally used in spammier instances — such as «link wheels» or other less than favorable examples where links can easily be pushed at authoritative domains — with the hope that the benefit passed back to our site is superior to what will have been gained if the link had been pointed direct.

And there are lots of good properties here to the point where you will pay $ 50000 or less for something like this.

The point is to pay attention to where your money goes, and make a conscious effort to spend less whenever possible.

Veteran serial entrepreneurs and investors usually agree that when someone is two - thirds vested, they reach a psychological turning point where the vesting of the balance of their equity is much less meaningful to them.

No less a value conscious investor than Warren Buffett commented on this shift at the most recent Berkshire Hathaway annual meeting, where he pointed to the fact that the largest companies in the S&P 500; Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Facebook, and Google generate far more cash per dollar of earnings than companies of the past.

Our son's family are members of a community church (Southern Baptist, more or less), where, last Sunday, the pastor preached on putting faith into practice, and pointed out that there are about 250 orphans living in our area.

According to some sources, such as Myers, even though meat production in Costa Rica tripled during the period 1960 - 70 internal consumption fell to a point where each person ate «less meat than a domestic cat receives annually in the United States» (Myers 1981, 6).

And then, Lord, at that point where all things are set ablaze, do you act upon me though the united flames of all those internal and external influences which, were I less close to you, would be neutral or ambivalent or hostile, but which when animated by an Energy quae possit sibi omnia subjicere7 become, in the physical depths of your heart, the angels of your triumphant activity.

In each case, as with «They are trying to erase us,» Ginsberg couches a profound point in language that is more or less figurative — and his manner, whether fanatical or strangely calm, makes it unclear whether he himself understands where figuration ends and literal reality begins.

Parents of large families in which older children have already moved on to adult life report a «squash and a squeeze» effect where each child's birth makes the house a little less bearable until breaking point is almost reached... then older children spend the day at school, then they're off to university and adult life, and slowly the house becomes almost unbearably large.

Nobody can even agree on a starting point, much less where to go once a starting point is found.

At one point it swings round the summit of a hill where the traveler delays to gaze far to the west, across a sea of lesser heights, to a thin line of white merging imperceptibly into the deep blue of the Sea, highroad of the imagination to wonders afar.

God is existence itself.More or less... Not counting the universe.What Steven Hawkings does not understand is that the universe expands against infinity which IS God.At one point the only thing to exist was existence itself.This lone existence / infinity has an intelligence.It created the universe and all things within.The universe expands against it.The universe does not expand against nothing as Steven Hawkings suggests.Think about it.It is the only way for God to not have a creator & where God resides.

The discussion of assisted nutrition and hydration in dementia is good too, though it's a bit of a shame that the expert came from the US (where tube feeding is prevalent) and did not come from the UK, where it is almost prohibited, and where there is a real fear that tube feeding may be a burdensome and inappropriate intervention to the point where people may be treated less than they should.

In what follows I will not attempt to answer his arguments in detail, still less to score points against him; the matters we are concerned with are too difficult and too crucial to admit of such treatment; I shall therefore merely try to indicate where and why I still venture to differ from him.

For example, when people say all religions are «more or less the same,» I worry that we're moving to a point where we fail to recognize the unique differences between world religions and the things that distinguish the gospel of Jesus from other belief systems.

Take away those unprovable points of magic and you are left with a mildly entertaining set of stories, where the older the stories, the less credible they are even as a historical record.

In today's intellectual climate, where so many who invoke science in support of Christianity seem to do so in more or less veiled forms of creationism (for example, in the «Intelligent Design» school of thought), and where the prevailing mindset is a complacent presumption that science has disproved religion, it is a matter of pressing urgency to proclaim from the housetops how the magnificent success of modern science points unambiguously to the existence of the supreme Mind of the Creator, and how the trajectory of thought which begins there leads convincingly to Jesus Christ as Lord of the Cosmos.

I believe my original point, that your approach, fishon, was less than loving (and, as Cindy put it, you are «neither listening to [others], nor attempt [ing] to understand where they are coming from nor attempt [ing] to explain to them why you believe the way you do) stands.

don't take your eyes off the pot as while you may be impatient for it to start browning, the period between the time the butter begins to take on color + the point where it burns is often less than a minute.

Having more or less made peace with my horrible but nonetheless beloved kitchen, I have at many points wanted to make this cake, but could not remember the name of the cake or where to find it.

«Now, «natural» and «organic» are overused to the point where they're more or less meaningless terms,» Hess says.

He pointed to no less than five places where four feet tall mountains of the tins were displayed.

And, at a point very, very soon, the billionaire who took less than a decade to build the world's fourth biggest iron ore producer will start eye - balling chief executives of some of Australia's biggest gas users and recommending they put their future supply contracts where their mouths have been.

It is very rare in a week where one team will get the maximum amount of points (15) and then the other team will get just 3 points less as was the case on Monday night with this one.

On paper, our home record was better than our away record — where we gathered 8 points less than Leicester.

I like to point at the Nasri transfer as the transfer Wenger done after Dein had left and before Gazidis is hired, the one where Nasri signed a new deal with Marseille in May amongst transfer rumors which had ended a lot of them then he signs for AFC in July, less than 1 and a half months.

I think the pressures to get points and win trophies in an immensely competitive environment where winning trophies is increasingly shaped by the massive investment in squads in Manchester, Chelsea and even Liverpool - left Wenger and his philosophy in its wake — he tried but with less than half the investment of United and City and hundreds of millions less than Chelsea and Liverpool, it became increasingly difficult for him to play Wengerball.

This is an incredibly difficult question to answer for a variety of reasons, most importantly because over the years our once vaunted «beautiful» style of play has become a shadow of it's former self, only to be replaced by a less than stellar «plug and play» mentality where players play out of position and adjustments / substitutions are rarely forthcoming before the 75th minute... if you look at our current players, very few would make sense in the traditional Wengerian system... at present, we don't have the personnel to move the ball quickly from deep - lying position, efficient one touch midfielders that can make the necessary through balls or the disciplined and pacey forwards to stretch defences into wide positions, without the aid of the backs coming up into the final 3rd, so that we can attack the defensive lanes in the same clinical fashion we did years ago... on this current squad, we have only 1 central defender on staf, Mustafi, who seems to have any prowess in the offensive zone or who can even pass two zones through so that we can advance play quickly out of our own end (I have seen some inklings that suggest Holding might have some offensive qualities but too early to tell)... unfortunately Mustafi has a tendency to get himself in trouble when he gets overly aggressive on the ball... from our backs out wide, we've seen pace from the likes of Bellerin and Gibbs and the spirited albeit offensively stunted play of Monreal, but none of these players possess the skill - set required in the offensive zone for the new Wenger scheme which requires deft touches, timely runs to the baseline and consistent crossing, especially when Giroud was playing and his ratio of scored goals per clear chances was relatively low (better last year though)... obviously I like Bellerin's future prospects, as you can't teach pace, but I do worry that he regressed last season, which was obvious to Wenger because there was no way he would have used Ox as the right side wing - back so often knowing that Barcelona could come calling in the off - season, if he thought otherwise... as for our midfielders, not a single one, minus the more confident Xhaka I watched played for the Swiss national team a couple years ago, who truly makes sense under the traditional Wenger model... Ramsey holds onto the ball too long, gives the ball away cheaply far too often and abandons his defensive responsibilities on a regular basis (doesn't score enough recently to justify): that being said, I've always thought he does possess a little something special, unfortunately he thinks so too... Xhaka is a little too slow to ever boss the midfield and he tends to telegraph his one true strength, his long ball play: although I must admit he did get a bit better during some points in the latter part of last season... it always made me wonder why whenever he played with Coq Wenger always seemed to play Francis in a more advanced role on the pitch... as for Coq, he is way too reckless at the wrong times and has exhibited little offensive prowess yet finds himself in and around the box far too often... let's face it Wenger was ready to throw him in the trash heap when injuries forced him to use Francis and then he had the nerve to act like this was all part of a bigger Wenger constructed plan... he like Ramsey, Xhaka and Elneny don't offer the skills necessary to satisfy the quick transitory nature of our old offensive scheme or the stout defensive mindset needed to protect the defensive zone so that our offensive players can remain aggressive in the final third... on the front end, we have Ozil, a player of immense skill but stunted by his physical demeanor that tends to offend, the fact that he's been played out of position far too many times since arriving and that the players in front of him, minus Sanchez, make little to no sense considering what he has to offer (especially Giroud); just think about the quick counter-attack offence in Real or the space and protection he receives in the German National team's midfield, where teams couldn't afford to focus too heavily on one individual... this player was a passing «specialist» long before he arrived in North London, so only an arrogant or ignorant individual would try to reinvent the wheel and / or not surround such a talent with the necessary components... in regards to Ox, Walcott and Welbeck, although they all possess serious talents I see them in large part as headless chickens who are on the injury table too much, lack the necessary first - touch and / or lack the finishing flair to warrant their inclusion in a regular starting eleven; I would say that, of the 3, Ox showed the most upside once we went to a back 3, but even he became a bit too consumed by his pending contract talks before the season ended and that concerned me a bit... if I had to choose one of those 3 players to stay on it would be Ox due to his potential as a plausible alternative to Bellerin in that wing - back position should we continue to use that formation... in Sanchez, we get one of the most committed skill players we've seen on this squad for some years but that could all change soon, if it hasn't already of course... strangely enough, even he doesn't make sense given the constructs of the original Wenger offensive model because he holds onto the ball too long and he will give the ball up a little too often in the offensive zone... a fact that is largely forgotten due to his infectious energy and the fact that the numbers he has achieved seem to justify the means... finally, and in many ways most crucially, Giroud, there is nothing about this team or the offensive system that Wenger has traditionally employed that would even suggest such a player would make sense as a starter... too slow, too inefficient and way too easily dispossessed... once again, I think he has some special skills and, at times, has showed some world - class qualities but he's lack of mobility is an albatross around the necks of our offence... so when you ask who would be our best starting 11, I don't have a clue because of the 5 or 6 players that truly deserve a place in this side, 1 just arrived, 3 aren't under contract beyond 2018 and the other was just sold to Juve... man, this is theraputic because following this team is like an addiction to heroin without the benefits

just reading around and all if not most rags are saying our net spend is # 46 million how can they tell that when they do nt even know what our real budget is if it was # 100 million then we are in profit by quite a bit i do nt really know what they base there assumptions on this is where you could do with swiss ramble to dissect what really was spent from what i could see most of our 5 transfers were covered by out goings and c / l monies earned debuchy - vela deal, chambers - vermalen deal, ospina - cesc and miquel deals sanchez c / l monies and other monies recovered from wages and old installment based deals this is the same with welbeck i would imagine if not then poldolski will be sold in jan to cover this as i think he was going to be sold and this would have covered welbecks transfer more or less also and people do nt always realize that arsenal have money coming in from more than one source to cover transfers not just puma and emirates deals we have property arm of the club which makes money for transfers also outstanding debts we are owed of old transfers we receive each year on song cesc maybe van persie and all other structured deals in installment payments sales we just flogged miquel as an example and all the monies from released wages and youths sold its a bit to complex to just say we have a net spend of xyz when arsenal do nt even make the budget public so they have no starting point from which to go from i bet you we have broke even or even made a slight profit as we are self sustaining it would make sense that we can break even or at least make the net spend under # 10 million each year at least screw then all we are the arsenal we do thing our way

One of the very few articles where I'd say is more or less spot on, let's not forget the point that wenger always does the opposite of what the fans & media advise lol

Since a +10 dog starts the game covering by 10 points, it's harder for the favorite to overcome and the spread in games where both teams are expected to score a combined 45 points or less.

Over the past decade, there have only been 87 games where a home underdog of at least 10 - points has seen at least a 1 - point reverse line movement while receiving less than 25 % of spread bets.

They are also on top of the middle of the Standings right now but it is fairly jammed 4th on down to 9th where less than 10 points separates all of those Teams..

Each team grabbed 10 big points in the Standings on a night where most of the League's Teams earned much less than that.

In this case however, more goals get scored in the Prem than Serie A where defending is more of a focus - and although you might have a point if you say that there are less strong teams in Serie A than the Prem currently - what Higuain has done this season is so exceptional that it's surely impossible to argue against him improving any team besides Barcelona & Bayern.

I get where you are trying to go with your point, they still got paid without having to fight and potentially suffered less damage but that can not be proven cause they possibly could have ended their fights with the first punch.

Maybe, but I don't think we ever get to a point where JoJo's ISOs cause us to score less points than the hypothetical amount we would have scored without it.