Burgermania

I read "Fat Profits" [February] with shock and disbelief. What's the reason for this food obsession? Do we hate ourselves? Do we have so much disposable income that we don't know what to do with it? Does gluttony have no bounds? It's not that we should have "food police" watching and assessing every spoonful we put in our mouth, but where's our sense of self-worth, self-esteem, and healthy restraint? I can't help thinking how much and how often my medical-insurance premiums are increasing. Report after report links all sorts of health-related issues to obesity. Perhaps mega-eaters could think about saving a few bucks a day to pay for their health-insurance premiums or send those extra dollars to support malnourished or starving people elsewhere in the world.

—Paula Cipolla, Seattle, Washington

D.C.'s Handgun Ban

I appreciate the stance that Matthew Cooper has taken in his fairly written piece ["Requiem for a Friend," February]—with the exception of keeping the gun ban in place. Note that the criminal (or criminals) who killed Tim Spicer carried a weapon in spite of the prohibition. Spicer, no doubt a law-abiding fellow, was respecting the ban. (I assume he wasn't carrying a concealed weapon.) If he'd had the the right to carry a firearm or had simply been able to defend himself by brandishing one, he might still be alive. Supporters of gun bans overlook one essential fact: Only the good guys play by the rules. Simple as that.

—David Diekmann, Hawthorne, California

It is truly an affront to all of us when a young man like Tim Spicer, so full of life and aspiration, is struck down. I moved to Washington to work on Capitol Hill and lived in the city from 2000 to 2005. I enjoyed eating at Ben's Chili Bowl and liked the ambience of the U Street-Cardozo area. I didn't always feel safe walking there at night, but fortunately, nothing bad ever happened to me. I know I would have felt much safer if I had been allowed to carry a concealed weapon.

I grew up in Oklahoma, where guns are a part of everyday life. They are regarded as a tool like any other, but one that must be handled responsibly, with great care and respect. One of the things that struck me during my time in D.C. was how much people fear guns. This fear was foreign to me, and I often wondered what caused it. I finally decided, after talking to some of my East Coast friends, that the fear resulted from an unfamiliarity with guns and not being exposed to them in a safe setting.

Right now, the D.C. ban only serves to prevent law-abiding citizens from having handguns. As your article points out, it does not prevent criminals from possessing them. As we say back home, "The cow is already out of the barn" when it comes to preventing handgun violence, especially when criminals can so easily obtain these weapons.

I must respectfully disagree with Cooper's contention that the D.C. gun ban should be allowed to stand. I earnestly believe that if the residents of Washington understood the merits of owning handguns and were allowed to make informed decisions after becoming familiar with their operation and safety features, they would favor lifting the ban.

—Kelly Clark, Paris, Texas

Sears Saga

I read the article by Jesse Eisinger about Eddie Lampert's Sears-Kmart experiment ["The Marriage From Hell," February] with great interest.

I grew up going to Sears on a regular basis with my parents to shop for everything from Toughskins jeans and DieHard car batteries to Kenmore dishwashers, and it worked out great for us in the '70s and early '80s. Not one of my family members has set foot in a Sears store since then. When you get a chance, please ask Eddie Lampert if he could just tell me, in one sentence or less, why I should shop at Sears or what Sears stands for. When he clues me in, I will stop shopping at Wal-Mart (which stands for low prices) and Home Depot (which has all the tools you need in one place at decent prices).

—J. Meyer, Garrison, New York

I knew shortly after this union took place, when my local Big K was converted into a Sears Essentials, that it was ill-fated. Before the conversion, the Big K was a bright, lively place full of nice merchandise, with a full-service customer-service counter staffed by helpful and competent personnel. That all went out the window. The place is now neither fish nor fowl; it looks plainer and emptier, with a customer-service counter staffed by surly people (when they are there at all). A few Sears-type appliances in the back corner fail to lend the place an upscale feel. I don't shop there anymore.

—Barbara Parcells, San Diego, California

I have worked for Kmart for almost 10 years. It was once a good place to work, but over the past several years, the environment has become demoralizing, and we have lost most of our talented managers. The emphasis is now on keeping payroll as low as possible. Because we are a consumer-oriented business, this approach means that customer service suffers. Managers stay out of touch with customers and most employees. The turnover rate is extremely high, and middle management is proud of that. Some stores in southwest Florida have had no store manager for months. Having no one at the helm is no way to run a successful business. This has been a bad marriage from a management point of view. The only positive outcome has been the increased variety of merchandise.

—M. Barnes, Venice, Florida

The Motorcycle Diary

I read with surprise Owen Edwards' January article, "Ducati's New Financial Cycle," which characterized the past decade at Ducati as a period of serial decline and degeneration. As a former director of Ducati, as well as a former partner of Texas Pacific Group, I would characterize the past decade quite differently. In 1996, Ducati was rescued from insolvency by T.P.G., which recruited Federico Minoli from Italy to design and lead the execution of Ducati's new business strategy. As C.E.O., Minoli and the team he personally assembled transformed Ducati from a company facing certain liquidation to the dynamic powerhouse it is today.

The results of Minoli's leadership and the extraordinary efforts of his energized cadre were a tripling of annual motorcycle sales volume, the addition of new model categories, and the launch of a line of high-performance technical accessories and racing apparel. Ducati's workforce has more than doubled. In the past decade alone, Ducati sold more than 350,000 bikes, probably five times as many as it sold in the decade before the arrival of T.P.G. and Minoli.

Though Minoli left the company in mid-2007, his strategy is now bearing fruit, with a fantastic new line of bikes again setting the industry standard. Minoli and his team led an amazing turnaround.

—Abel Halpern, London, England

Diversity and the Races

While Nascar appreciates Condé Nast Portfolio's coverage, we are disappointed with "Nascar's Race Problem" [February]. Most notable is the premise that Nascar's commitment to diversity is ratings-driven. On the contrary, Nascar chairman and C.E.O. Brian France named diversity our organization's top priority five years before Nascar's highest-rated season, 2005. France said making the sport look more like the rest of America is the right thing to do; drawing new talent, fans, and business partners simply makes for a better sport. Many important on- and off-the-track diversity initiatives were established and continue today, stronger than ever.

To write a story on diversity in Nascar without attending its annual scouting event, in which two dozen minority and female racers compete for a fully funded ride in Nascar, is like covering a moon shot without visiting Cape Canaveral. Readers would have met the ultimate 2008 class: eight talented minority and female drivers joining 17 others who have competed in Nascar's developmental series. Impressive black drivers like Marc Davis and Chase Austin also continue their rise.

Nascar is creating fertile opportunities for minorities. More people of color are competing in Nascar and have key positions behind the scenes. There's still opportunity ahead, and Nascar and the entire industry will continue to work hard to broaden the sport's reach.

—Andrew Giangola, director of business and multicultural communications, Nascar, New York, New York

The Conversation …

The Sears-Kmart saga captured our readers' attention

Based on the online discussion engendered by "The Marriage From Hell," it would seem that neither investors nor consumers are very happy with fund manager Eddie Lampert's experiment in running a retail operation.

"Lampert would be smart to hurry up and locate Lou Gerstner [the former chairman and C.E.O.] of I.B.M. to help him resurrect this dead horse," a reader named Ray wrote. "Kmart has been dead for 10 years now. The jig is up, and I'm shorting Sears Holdings without mercy."

Some readers didn't place all the blame for the company's poor performance on Lampert. "The bad decisions at Sears started long before Eddie," VRoark noted. "Why did Sears disband its catalog division at the start of the internet-shopping boom? Sears should have kept its catalog division and sold the stores. And there were good reasons that Kmart was going bankrupt—bad merchandise, dirty stores, and nasty employees."

Some readers agreed that the lack of convenience, quality, and service is what has hurt the reputations of both companies. "Retail is shockingly simple to analyze sometimes," Eric wrote. "Step into a store, shop for an hour, and jot down your takeaways. Shopping at Sears isn't pleasant; its hospitalesque lighting and overall blandness make the experience a dreary one. And Kmart is just a poor man's Sears. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to conclude that unless a major competitor like Target trips up," Eric continued, "Sears and Kmart will cease to be necessary to American consumers."

"The reason they are struggling so badly is that their prices are just awful compared with Target and Wal-Mart," Tyler wrote. "I stopped at Kmart the other day because of a sale on Pepsi (the price was good—$2.50 for a 12-pack, but the regular price was a mind-boggling $4.89). I had a few other things on my list: Lay's Stax chips ($1.79, versus $1 at Wal-Mart), a 200-ounce container of Tide ($16.99, versus $11.99 at Wal-Mart), and Suave shampoo ($1.49, versus 89 cents at Wal-Mart). It's so disgraceful that I don't feel like stepping into a Sears either; I assume its nonsale items are equally overpriced."

Eric, at least, hasn't totally discounted Lampert, writing, "Warren Buffett bought Berkshire Hathaway in '62, when it was a declining textile company. He didn't start using its cash flow for investments until '67. And to cap it off, it wasn't completely shut down until '85, a full 23 years later!"

He continued, "Lampert's too smart to keep fiddling with Sears, too smart to not see that it's a declining brand. Perhaps he just doesn't see many good investments in the market now, so to occupy his time, he micromanages Sears."

Letters to the Editor

Please send emails to letters@portfolio.com. Include your name, address, and daytime phone number on all letters and emails to the editor. Correspondence may be faxed to 212-286-4435 or mailed to Condé Nast Portfolio, 4 Times Square, New York, NY 10036. The magazine reserves the right to edit submissions, which may be published or otherwise used in any medium. For subscription inquiries, write to subscriptions@portfolio.com or call 800-967-2081. Address all other editorial queries to editors@portfolio.com.

---