#newsr

[meret118]

The power was already out in West Maui at 5 a.m. on Aug. 8 and it could have stayed that way had Hawaiian Electric decided not to re-energize its lines.

Instead, the company rebooted a tripped transmission line so that it could provide electricity to some of its customers in Lahaina despite an ongoing windstorm and repeated warnings of extreme fire danger.

The power came back on around 6 a.m. and within the hour a downed power line near the intersection of Lahainaluna Road and Hoohakuna Street sparked a blaze that may have been the origin of the deadly inferno that ripped through much of Lahaina and killed at least 99 people. Four others are still listed as missing by the Maui Police Department.

[toomuchbroadwayquotes]

April and Arizona would make grey's anatomy newsr seasons sooooooo much better

[dullahandyke]

Your newsr post just reminded me I have mocks soon. How dare you /lh

🙏🏻🙏🏻 leaving cert mutuals we are in this TOGETHER

[comeupkid415]

Noicr fuck newsr

[consciousinternetnewsblog]

“I’m Not Naive”: Inside Emma Tucker’s Rocky Wall Street Journal Reboot - Journal Today Internet https://www.merchant-business.com/im-not-naive-inside-emma-tuckers-rocky-wall-street-journal-reboot/?feed_id=79923&_unique_id=6684b308a3c9a A few weeks ago around lunchtime, m... BLOGGER - #GLOBAL A few weeks ago around lunchtime, more than 100 journalists at The Wall Street Journal staged a walkout, an hour-long protest that culminated outside of editor in chief Emma Tucker’s office. Angered by yet another round of layoffs—the latest of which hit a handful of people on the US News team earlier that day—and fed up with stalled contract negotiations, members of the union decorated Tucker’s glass walls with their discontent. Staffers took turns sticking Post-its, scrawled with messages like “EXPLAIN YOURSELVES” and “The cuts are killing morale,” to the exterior of the office, navigating around Tucker’s executive assistant, who was standing guard in front of the door. “Do you think this is helpful? Are you going to stick them on me?” she asked, scolding staffers for being impolite and eventually, as a sea of fluorescent-colored squares amassed, calling security. The episode was over a few minutes later, with nary a sticky note in sight by the time Tucker, who’d been absent for the whole fiasco, returned to her office.When I stopped by the Journal a week later, Tucker seemed unfazed by the turmoil. “I would expect morale to be low because if you’re changing things, that’s normal,” she told me. “But I would also dispute that all morale is low,” she added. “The people we’ve promoted—and there have been very many people that we’ve promoted—I don’t think their morale is low.”Tucker, a personable and somewhat irreverent Brit, took over the Journal in February 2023. In a little over a year, the 57-year-old journalist has brought color, voice, and a renewed metabolism to America’s business newspaper of record. Sure, you’ll still find stories about interest-rate cuts and investment income. But you’ll also find investigations into Elon Musk’s unusual relationships with women at SpaceX and drug use, the succession battle for the luxury empire LVMH, and messages that Hamas military leader Yahya Sinwar sent to compatriots and mediators. (An attorney for Musk told WSJ that he’s never failed a drug test at SpaceX.) Tucker’s goal is to make the paper “audience-first” and “to grow and retain subscribers,” she told me. It might not sound like the most visionary mission. But the Journal today is, well, better—a more compelling product that a wider swath of people might pick up and read.“The problem a lot of people face with the Journal is they don’t think of the Journal as for them—that it’s for a very small subset of people on Wall Street,” one senior Journal editor told me. “She has a broader view of what makes something a Journal story.” Tucker’s approach seems to be working: Dow Jones, the publisher of the Journal, recently announced record-breaking digital subscription numbers, with digital subscriptions for its properties—which also include Barron’s and MarketWatch—achieving the largest rate of sequential growth to date.Upon arriving at the paper, Tucker quickly replaced the old guard with her own people, addressed legitimate editing bottlenecks, and pushed for sharper, more ambitious stories. Staff were generally on board, until she started firing a bunch of their colleagues, with the Washington DC bureau hit especially hard. Some are still Tucker fans, seeing her as the kind of change agent necessary to shake up the Journal, a place mired in vestigial structures and traditions. But she’s lost large pockets of the newsroom in the process of “restructuring,” an effort that, to staff, has largely manifested in pushing out well-regarded editors and esteemed reporters. With no end in sight and little consolation or explanation from Tucker, the newsroom is on edge. “From the outside, it feels like she’s moving incredibly quickly, with sort of summary executions,” an editor from a rival news organization told me.

“But from the inside, this has been going on for so long that everyone is in a panic because they don’t know the next person who’ll be taken out and shot.”It’s a culture shock for a newsroom where people tend to stay 10, 20, 30 years, and whose culture is built upon collegiality and institutional knowledge. It is a place particularly averse to change. Under Tucker, Journal staffers are waking up to something that looks more like the UK’s Fleet Street model: take it or leave it, and fuck you if you don’t like it. Reorganizations are a fact of life in British newsrooms; Tucker, who’s never worked at an American newspaper before now, may have underestimated the culture gap.Over the course of reporting, I spoke with more than two dozen current and former Journal staffers, whose opinions of the paper’s new editor run the gamut from savior to villain. “She’s a bit of a Daenerys Targaryen, where it was all optimistic. She was a hero freeing us from pronouns and attributions. But now we’ve realized she was put here to slash the Journal down to size and turn us into a metrics-obsessed, subscriber-obsessed, churn-reduction factory,” said one current reporter. Said another: “She may be improving the journalism, while seriously hurting the journalists.”“There’s no point in me setting out a vision and then going, ‘But we’re just going to carry on doing everything we’ve done before,’” Tucker said. “Everyone said when I got here, We’ve got to change, we’ve got to change. But I’m not naive. I know that everyone says that until it affects them, and then they don’t like it so much.”Courtesy of IAPE 1096.Staffers in the Journal’s DC bureau had been anticipating cuts for months; in October, bureau chief Paul Beckett was reassigned, allegedly because he refused to implement them. They were not, however, expecting a “red wedding,” as one staffer described the events of February 1, which was when managing editor Liz Harris, Tucker’s No. 2, went down to the nation’s capital to announce a restructuring of the Washington bureau.News of the layoffs—which had leaked to other outlets in the days prior—came at 9 a.m., when Harris sent an email inviting the bureau to a conference room for a meeting set to last only 10 minutes. There, Harris, flanked by three other suits, read the news of the reorganization from a piece of paper, but staffers struggled to hear over the wail of a nearby motorcade. “Speak up!” they shouted. Harris kept talking over the noise, telling staff that those impacted would “receive an invitation to meet with us individually today.” She didn’t take any questions. Later, staff watched colleagues get up one by one to meet with HR. By the end of the day, at least 30 staffers were gone; some were told they could apply for other positions. People were crying in the newsroom. Tucker and her team were seen as oblivious to what damage they’d caused, and clueless about how they could’ve done this better.“Any job loss is bad for the people involved. But at the end of the day, the net total of jobs that we closed in DC was 16, and there were over 90 people in that office,” Tucker said. “We created a bunch of new jobs, as well,” she added. “It wasn’t just slash and burn.”“The British-born editor has injected America’s business paper of record with ambition and verve, while unnerving the newsroom with unapologetic cuts. The restructuring “may look callous,” she says. “But it’s…”Source Link: https://www.vanityfair.com/news/story/wall-street-journal-emma-tucker http://109.70.148.72/~merchant29/6network/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/pexels-photo-7137410.png #GLOBAL - BLOGGER A few weeks ago around lunchtime, more than 100 journalists at The Wall Street Journal staged a walkout, an hour-long protest that culminated outside of editor in chief Emma Tucker’s office. Angered by yet another round of layoffs—the latest of which hit a handful of people on the US News team earlier that day—and fed … Read More

[charmingbusinessinternetblog]

“I’m Not Naive”: Inside Emma Tucker’s Rocky Wall Street Journal Reboot - Journal Today Internet https://www.merchant-business.com/im-not-naive-inside-emma-tuckers-rocky-wall-street-journal-reboot/?feed_id=79898&_unique_id=6684b1d2f3bd0 A few weeks ago around lunchtime, m... BLOGGER - #GLOBAL A few weeks ago around lunchtime, more than 100 journalists at The Wall Street Journal staged a walkout, an hour-long protest that culminated outside of editor in chief Emma Tucker’s office. Angered by yet another round of layoffs—the latest of which hit a handful of people on the US News team earlier that day—and fed up with stalled contract negotiations, members of the union decorated Tucker’s glass walls with their discontent. Staffers took turns sticking Post-its, scrawled with messages like “EXPLAIN YOURSELVES” and “The cuts are killing morale,” to the exterior of the office, navigating around Tucker’s executive assistant, who was standing guard in front of the door. “Do you think this is helpful? Are you going to stick them on me?” she asked, scolding staffers for being impolite and eventually, as a sea of fluorescent-colored squares amassed, calling security. The episode was over a few minutes later, with nary a sticky note in sight by the time Tucker, who’d been absent for the whole fiasco, returned to her office.When I stopped by the Journal a week later, Tucker seemed unfazed by the turmoil. “I would expect morale to be low because if you’re changing things, that’s normal,” she told me. “But I would also dispute that all morale is low,” she added. “The people we’ve promoted—and there have been very many people that we’ve promoted—I don’t think their morale is low.”Tucker, a personable and somewhat irreverent Brit, took over the Journal in February 2023. In a little over a year, the 57-year-old journalist has brought color, voice, and a renewed metabolism to America’s business newspaper of record. Sure, you’ll still find stories about interest-rate cuts and investment income. But you’ll also find investigations into Elon Musk’s unusual relationships with women at SpaceX and drug use, the succession battle for the luxury empire LVMH, and messages that Hamas military leader Yahya Sinwar sent to compatriots and mediators. (An attorney for Musk told WSJ that he’s never failed a drug test at SpaceX.) Tucker’s goal is to make the paper “audience-first” and “to grow and retain subscribers,” she told me. It might not sound like the most visionary mission. But the Journal today is, well, better—a more compelling product that a wider swath of people might pick up and read.“The problem a lot of people face with the Journal is they don’t think of the Journal as for them—that it’s for a very small subset of people on Wall Street,” one senior Journal editor told me. “She has a broader view of what makes something a Journal story.” Tucker’s approach seems to be working: Dow Jones, the publisher of the Journal, recently announced record-breaking digital subscription numbers, with digital subscriptions for its properties—which also include Barron’s and MarketWatch—achieving the largest rate of sequential growth to date.Upon arriving at the paper, Tucker quickly replaced the old guard with her own people, addressed legitimate editing bottlenecks, and pushed for sharper, more ambitious stories. Staff were generally on board, until she started firing a bunch of their colleagues, with the Washington DC bureau hit especially hard. Some are still Tucker fans, seeing her as the kind of change agent necessary to shake up the Journal, a place mired in vestigial structures and traditions. But she’s lost large pockets of the newsroom in the process of “restructuring,” an effort that, to staff, has largely manifested in pushing out well-regarded editors and esteemed reporters. With no end in sight and little consolation or explanation from Tucker, the newsroom is on edge. “From the outside, it feels like she’s moving incredibly quickly, with sort of summary executions,” an editor from a rival news organization told me.

“But from the inside, this has been going on for so long that everyone is in a panic because they don’t know the next person who’ll be taken out and shot.”It’s a culture shock for a newsroom where people tend to stay 10, 20, 30 years, and whose culture is built upon collegiality and institutional knowledge. It is a place particularly averse to change. Under Tucker, Journal staffers are waking up to something that looks more like the UK’s Fleet Street model: take it or leave it, and fuck you if you don’t like it. Reorganizations are a fact of life in British newsrooms; Tucker, who’s never worked at an American newspaper before now, may have underestimated the culture gap.Over the course of reporting, I spoke with more than two dozen current and former Journal staffers, whose opinions of the paper’s new editor run the gamut from savior to villain. “She’s a bit of a Daenerys Targaryen, where it was all optimistic. She was a hero freeing us from pronouns and attributions. But now we’ve realized she was put here to slash the Journal down to size and turn us into a metrics-obsessed, subscriber-obsessed, churn-reduction factory,” said one current reporter. Said another: “She may be improving the journalism, while seriously hurting the journalists.”“There’s no point in me setting out a vision and then going, ‘But we’re just going to carry on doing everything we’ve done before,’” Tucker said. “Everyone said when I got here, We’ve got to change, we’ve got to change. But I’m not naive. I know that everyone says that until it affects them, and then they don’t like it so much.”Courtesy of IAPE 1096.Staffers in the Journal’s DC bureau had been anticipating cuts for months; in October, bureau chief Paul Beckett was reassigned, allegedly because he refused to implement them. They were not, however, expecting a “red wedding,” as one staffer described the events of February 1, which was when managing editor Liz Harris, Tucker’s No. 2, went down to the nation’s capital to announce a restructuring of the Washington bureau.News of the layoffs—which had leaked to other outlets in the days prior—came at 9 a.m., when Harris sent an email inviting the bureau to a conference room for a meeting set to last only 10 minutes. There, Harris, flanked by three other suits, read the news of the reorganization from a piece of paper, but staffers struggled to hear over the wail of a nearby motorcade. “Speak up!” they shouted. Harris kept talking over the noise, telling staff that those impacted would “receive an invitation to meet with us individually today.” She didn’t take any questions. Later, staff watched colleagues get up one by one to meet with HR. By the end of the day, at least 30 staffers were gone; some were told they could apply for other positions. People were crying in the newsroom. Tucker and her team were seen as oblivious to what damage they’d caused, and clueless about how they could’ve done this better.“Any job loss is bad for the people involved. But at the end of the day, the net total of jobs that we closed in DC was 16, and there were over 90 people in that office,” Tucker said. “We created a bunch of new jobs, as well,” she added. “It wasn’t just slash and burn.”“The British-born editor has injected America’s business paper of record with ambition and verve, while unnerving the newsroom with unapologetic cuts. The restructuring “may look callous,” she says. “But it’s…”Source Link: https://www.vanityfair.com/news/story/wall-street-journal-emma-tucker http://109.70.148.72/~merchant29/6network/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/pexels-photo-7137410.png #GLOBAL - BLOGGER A few weeks ago around lunchtime, more than 100 journalists at The Wall Street Journal staged a walkout, an hour-long protest that culminated outside of editor in chief Emma Tucker’s office. Angered by yet another round of layoffs—the latest of which hit a handful of people on the US News team earlier that day—and fed … Read More

[viralnews-fan-blog]

দুই দিক দিয়ে আবারও হা*ম*লা | Read Sea Ship | The News দুই দিক দিয়ে আবারও হা*ম*লা #ReadSeaShip #thenews #Newsদুই দিক দিয়ে আবারও হা*ম*লা | Read Sea Ship | The Newsred sea attacks,houthi attacks red sea,houthis claim red sea attack,houthis claim attack in the red sea,attack,red sea attack,attacks on us ships,houthi attack on ships,attacks on cargo ships,houthi red sea attacks,red sea attack news,houthi rebels attack red sea ships,israeli ships attacked in the red sea,ships,yemen houthis attack israel,uk ship attack red sea,red sea ship attacks,us warship attack,3 ships attacked,the news,দ্য নিউজ,নিউজ

[fiascobaby]

I just read your newsr haddstrsm fanfuc and I gotta say. Maybe it's rge 6 fireballs s d fhr eat the room is spooning, but it's really good!! J hope you write more

it for sure was the 6 fireballs

[evlelo]

Lexus has unveiled a bunch of new concept models for their next-gen BEV car, set to hit the market in 2026, and they've also revealed their BEV flagship model, LF-ZLC, which gives us a sneak peek at what the brand has in store for the future. They're aiming to switch to electric vehicles by 2035 and it'll involve a lot of changes to the way they're built, like a modular structure, new production tech, and a whole new software system. Plus, they've got a BEV concept called LF-ZLC (LF-ZL) that shows us a future where people, mobility, and society all work together seamlessly.

[newsringro]

Newsring

Nu e de mirare că majoritatea oamenilor nu înțeleg economia. Adesea, ceea ce poate părea bun pe de o parte are efecte secundare negative pe de altă parte. De exemplu, bursa urcă – s-ar crede că a fost bine! Dar asta s-a datorat în mare parte creșterii prețului petrolului - știri proaste. Dar, adesea prețul petrolului crește pentru că „experții” cred că economia se îmbunătățește și, prin urmare, va fi nevoie de mai mult petrol în producție - vești bune! Dar această creștere a prețului petrolului face ca costul vieții să crească - vești proaste. Dar asta ajută Produsul Intern Brut (PIB) - o veste bună! Dar asta provoacă inflație – vești proaste. Dar această inflație înseamnă că economia se îmbunătățește - o veste bună! Dar apoi Fed devine îngrijorată de inflație și crește ratele dobânzilor - vești proaste! Ceea ce face ca valoarea dolarului să se îmbunătățească - o veste bună! Dar asta dăunează exporturilor pentru că acum produsele americane costă mai mult peste mări - vești proaste! Dar asta înseamnă că produsele străine costă mai puțin în SUA - o veste bună! Dar asta dăunează competitivității companiilor americane - vești proaste!

Dacă ne gândim că analiza politică și discuțiile politice sunt adesea mai hype decât orice altceva, același lucru se poate spune cu siguranță despre analiza știrilor economice! Puteți vedea cu ușurință de ce știrile economice par adesea confuze. Știrile economice par adesea confuze, deoarece sunt - - ceea ce este bun pentru un consumator, poate fi rău pentru altul - ceea ce este bun pentru o companie, rău pentru alta - ceea ce ar putea fi bun pentru un sector al economiei - rău pentru alții. Newsring

Bursa este adesea cea mai confuză. În zilele în care există „știri proaste”, piața crește adesea, în timp ce în unele zile cu „știri bune”, piața uneori scade! În timp ce Dow, sau S&P, etc., ar putea crește, aceasta nu înseamnă că acțiunile pe care le dețineți vor urma exemplul.

Prea des, de dragul unui sound-byte, mass-media încearcă să simplifice prea mult știrile economice. Cu toate acestea, economia este prin definiție destul de complexă. Singura problemă asupra căreia ar trebui să existe un acord este că șomajul ridicat nu este bine. Cu toate acestea, chiar și în acest caz, „experții” nu pot conveni asupra unei soluții viabile și nici nu pot acționa.

Cel mai bun mod de a gândi la economie este acesta: diferența dintre o recesiune și o depresie este că este o recesiune când se întâmplă altcuiva - este o depresie când ți se întâmplă ție!

Convingerea mea este că o economie sănătoasă necesită ca anumiți factori să fie în vigoare - - șomaj scăzut; încredere ridicată a consumatorilor; un sector de producție puternic; și reducerea deficitelor guvernamentale. Asta trebuie să cerem!

References News https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/News

[newsring3]

Newsring

Așa că vrei să te înscrii într-o nouă sală de sport. Cum ar trebui să alegi dintre numeroasele și variatele săli de sport de acolo? Poate fi confuz să prioritizezi toate considerentele diferite și foarte ușor să fii influențat de un agent de vânzări bun atunci când vizitezi o sală de sport. Înarmați-vă cu această listă de verificare, astfel încât să luați cea mai bună decizie pentru dvs. Și vizitați întotdeauna o serie de săli de sport înainte de a lua decizia finală. Newsring

Locație

Ai nevoie de o sală la care să ajungi convenabil. Dacă durează prea mult până ajunge, este mai puțin probabil să-l folosești cât de des ar trebui (ideal de 3 ori pe săptămână). Așadar, luați în considerare unul la câțiva pași (elimină problemele legate de întârzierile transportului public sau blocajele de trafic), sau dacă conduceți acolo, verificați ușurința (și costul) parcării. Unul lângă casă sau serviciu ar fi ideal, în funcție de zilele și orele în care doriți să vă antrenați.

Atenție, doar pentru că o sală de sport este geografic destul de aproape de tine, nu înseamnă neapărat că este convenabilă. Locuiesc în Londra și o sală la care am intrat se afla la 2 mile de drum, dar transportul public către acea sală a fost atât de lent, încât mi-a luat mai mult timp să ajung decât la următoarea sală la care am intrat, la 3 mile distanță, dar foarte bine conectat cu o călătorie cu trenul din ușă în ușă. Așa că asigură-te că faci călătoria în momentul în care intenționezi să folosești sala de gimnastică, du-te să-ți faci o idee exactă a timpilor de călătorie.

Echipamente

Întrebarea cheie pe care trebuie să ți-o pui este „care sunt obiectivele mele?”. Apoi alege o sală de sport al cărei echipament se potrivește obiectivelor tale. Așadar, dacă doriți să creșteți masa musculară, alegeți o sală de sport cu greutăți libere ample (gantere și haltere, cabluri încrucișate, bănci cu opțiuni atât plate, cât și înclinate, suporturi pentru ghemuit). Și dacă yoga și stretching-ul este treaba ta, ai nevoie de o sală de sport cu un studio de yoga și mult spațiu pentru întindere.

Verificați amenajarea sălii de sport. Ți se pare energizant? Există spațiu pentru a vă deplasa? Echilibrul echipamentului este potrivit pentru tine? Personal nu-mi plac rândurile vaste de benzi de alergare cât se vede cu ochii, cu puține echipamente cardio alternative (cross trainers, biciclete, aparate de vâsle). Și urăsc zonele mici de greutăți libere înghesuite, îmi place ca zonele mele de greutăți libere să fie spațioase și o distanță bună între băncile de greutăți pentru a evita să ciocnesc de persoana de lângă tine. Am fost în unele săli de sport din Australia, unde zonele cu greutăți libere erau minunate. Mai puțin în Marea Britanie.

Un alt lucru de luat în considerare este muzica din sală. Vrei muzică tare sau preferi să te antrenezi într-o atmosferă liniștită? O sală de sport pe care am folosit-o avea 2 etaje cu un mezanin deschis, cu muzică rock tare de la nivelul superior care se ciocnește cu muzica pop tare de la parter, care era enorm de iritant pentru urechi.

Personal

Primii oameni pe care probabil îi veți vedea sunt personalul de la recepție. Sunt primitori, prietenoși, cunoscători? Toate aceste lucruri contează foarte mult dacă ai de gând să interacționezi cu ele de fiecare dată când vii la sală.

Apoi luați în considerare disponibilitatea instructorilor de sală și a antrenorilor personali. Sunt disponibili, atenți și abordabili? Vorbește cu ei și vei vedea.

Un lucru care m-a scos imediat la o sală de sport pe care am vizitat-o a fost personalul de la recepție care mănâncă gogoși, își pictează unghiile (și doar băieții), iar când am plecat, l-am văzut pe unul dintre instructorii de sală care stătea afară fumând o țigară. Uf.

În schimb, sala mea actuală are personal prietenos, plin de viață, vorbăreț și informat. Face o diferență atât de mare pentru experiența ta în sală. Toți antrenorii personali și instructorii de sală au fotografiile lor pe perete, cu o scurtă biografie despre ei. Vorbesc cu ei despre cele mai recente tendințe de antrenament, sfaturi de nutriție și toți sunt cu adevărat cunoscători. Așa că, atunci când vizitați o sală de sport cu scopul de a vă alătura, încercați să discutați cu o parte din personal și vă veți face o idee despre cât de prietenoși și cunoscători sunt.

Dușuri și vestiare

Aici majoritatea sălilor de sport s-au dezamăgit rău. Vestiarele sunt adesea înghesuite, cu dulapuri mici/înguste, în care este o luptă pentru a intra în toate lucrurile. Odată am dus o geantă de sport la o nouă sală doar pentru a descoperi că dulapul era prea mic pentru a încăpea geanta.

Cereți întotdeauna să vedeți zona de vestiare (și dușurile, nu vă sfiați) și aveți grijă la dulapuri sparte, curățenie. O sală de sport din estul Londrei pe care am verificat-o (și nu m-am alăturat!) avea o zonă de schimbare plină de tencuieli, vată, cutii de băuturi goale, ambalaje de ciocolată.

În schimb, când am petrecut un an în Australia, m-am înscris într-o sală de sport cu cea mai curată și mai spațioasă zonă de schimbare imaginabilă. Dulapurile aveau lățime dublă pentru a se potrivi celor mai mari genți de sport și chiar s-a aprins o lumină în interiorul dulapului când l-ai deschis.

Și cereți întotdeauna o sesiune de probă gratuită, astfel încât să experimentați cu adevărat zona de schimbare și dușuri, mai degrabă decât doar o privire rapidă în jur. Încercați înainte de a cumpăra, acest lucru vă oferă o șansă mult mai mare de a observa probleme. O probă gratuită pe care am avut-o a fost grozavă, până când am folosit dușurile la sfârșit. O cabină avea doar apă înghețată, alta avea doar apă opăritoare, iar a treia nu avea gel de duș în dozator.

Alti membri

Cât de ocupată este sala de sport? Vizitați întotdeauna pe a zi și la un moment dat plănuiți să îl utilizați în mod regulat. Dacă este prea aglomerat, nu vei avea un antrenament decent, vei aștepta ca echipamentul să devină disponibil. Sălile de sport ale orașului dintr-un cartier de afaceri pot deveni atât de aglomerate la ora prânzului, încât veți sta chiar la o coadă lungă pentru a face un duș. Nu, mulțumesc.

Și cum sunt membrii? Vrei să fii în preajma genului de oameni care îți plac, sau cel puțin să nu te simți inconfortabil, nu? Așa că, dacă ești femeie și îți place cardio-ul blând, s-ar putea să nu vrei să fii printre culturisti uriași, transpirați, zgomotoși, care se lovesc de greutăți și te privesc în sus. De asemenea, dacă sunteți un tip care iubește antrenamentele cu greutăți grele, s-ar putea să doriți ca oameni similari să se antreneze pentru motivație și energie, mai degrabă decât oameni asemănătoare cu bicicletele de exerciții.

Din nou, puteți vedea cum sunt ceilalți membri doar având o sesiune de probă gratuită, așa că vă recomand cu tărie să faceți acest lucru înainte de a semna pe linia punctată.

Cost și Contract

Aflați la ce vă înscrieți, ce este inclus și ce costă suplimentar (prosoape, saună etc.). Care este politica de anulare, vă puteți îngheța abonamentul dacă sunteți bolnav, care este termenul contractului (unele sunt de până la 2 ani), calitatea de membru vă permite să folosiți alte săli de sport din lanț și ce zile/ore poti folosi sala de sport?

Facilități suplimentare

Luați în considerare ce altceva este important pentru dvs. Ați aprecia un snack bar care să ofere gustări sănătoase, smoothie-uri, shake-uri de proteine după antrenament? Vrei să înoți după antrenament? Și invers, dacă nu vrei să înoți, ar putea fi o pierdere de bani să te înscrii la o sală de sport cu piscină, deoarece acest lucru crește considerabil costul abonamentului. Sau s-ar putea să descoperi că facilitățile pe care le prețuiești sunt atât de bune încât merită să plătești în plus pentru lucruri pe care s-ar putea să nu le folosești. Trebuie să vă cântăriți prioritățile și să decideți în consecință.

O sală la care am intrat avea o piscină și nu mi-am dat seama până când cineva mi-a spus mai târziu, că o piscină crește semnificativ taxele de membru.

Deci, după cum puteți vedea, sunt multe lucruri de luat în considerare. Cel mai bun punct de plecare este să întrebi care sunt obiectivele tale de fitness de top și apoi să alegi o sală de sport care te va ajuta cel mai bine să-ți atingi obiectivele, într-o atmosferă curată, prietenoasă și energizantă și convenabilă pentru a ajunge. Pe scurt, alege o sală de sport potrivită pentru tine.

References News https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/News

[9svb]

Detroit Red Wings improve to 2-0 with a 5-2 win at Devils, but lose Ty..

Detroit Red Wings improve to 2-0 with a 5-2 win at Devils, but lose Ty.. Detroit Red Wings improve to 2-0 with a 5-2 win at Devils, but lose Tyler Bertuzzi (hand)  Detroit Free PressRed Wings @ Devils 10/15 | NHL Highlights 2022  NHLNew faces lead the way as Red Wings top Devils, start season 2-0  Detroit NewsRed Wings vs. Devils - NHL Game .. . . . . . . . .

[kalemakar]

i’m like kinda good at making gifs now 😌😎

[1989nihil]

How to describe Berserk: Gayme of Thrones

with a huge communication problems

[transformers-why]

I would jump in front of a bullet if it meant saving Rottmnt Raphael. What a sweet boy. What an amazing good person that loves his family. I love him.

[romeulusroy]

Imagine Spencer trying to figure you out:

You were. . . complicated. The newsr addition to the BAU team. They knew the least about you. Not just because you kept to yourself or you seemed not to want to get to know any of them beyond a professional relationship, but because you showed up one day with the stamp of approval by someone mich higher on the ladder than any of them. You were good at your job, better than good, and hot along with everyone, something just seemed to be off. Spencer wouldn't have bothered if it was anyone else, he wouldn't have even noticed, but you were different. He wasn't sure why. It bugged him. Like a riddle or puzzle he couldn't solve. It was like you knew this, somehow. Like you knew what made him tick and did it right in front of him. Whatever kind of file the FBI had on you, like they had on all their agents, yours had somehow disappeared. Maybe it never existed at all. Whatever the case, it couldn't feel found. Penelope found nothing on you either. Like you'd appeared out of nowhere, you were a blank slate.