MGWCC #741 - “Time Travel”

[oggy]

Beamed, but not a big fan of the metanism this week. Maybe I'm missing something, but it felt sort of backwards to me.

[MyUNIQUEnickname]

I submitted and beamed, but I'm not sure I understand the full mechanism. I don't see "the square" everyone is talking about, but maybe I missed something. Looking forward to the write-up to see how I *should* have gotten the answer.

[Joe Ross]

Square confusion? It's Matt Gaffney elegance.

[HoldThatThought]

I never get the story quite right, but years ago, back when I first met her, my wife worked as an executive in Operations Management for one of the major insurance companies. Her department handled the back office aspects of institutional investments - as I'm sure most know, insurance companies are a major source of financing for the corporate world. If an airline wants to buy a new fleet of planes, they don't go down to the local bank to apply for a loan - they often turn to the institutional investments division of a large insurer for this kind of mega loan.

Part of my wife's job was to insure that these multi-multi-million dollar loans were paid in a timely fashion, and that incoming funds were properly applied to the right accounts.

As you might imagine, borrowers were given very specific instructions on when and where and how to make their periodic payments and payoffs, but, from what I've learned, even the treasury departments of major corporations were occasionally prone to little league level screwups.

One day, an inter-office envelope arrived on my wife's desk, and inside, without any of the expected paperwork, legal documents, routing numbers, or, in fact, any accompanying notations at all, was a check, drawn on a major US bank, made out to my wife as sole payee - for $89 million dollars.

You know those feel good stories about the man or woman who finds a wallet in the street with $120 inside, and returns it to its rightful owner? This ends up like that.

[Wendy Walker]

^
That is an amazing story! When I became treasurer I attended a course for officials of not-for-profit groups about how to avoid fraud and set up appropriate controls. It was fascinating. The instructor said that most swindlers just cannot resist living beyond their means -- nine times out of ten that's what trips them up.

[cbarbee002]

The brother-in-law of one of my best buds had the ability (through his girlfriend) to get amazing tickets to concerts. A year before he died, we scored 10th row center tix to see Tom Petty (Steve Winwood was the “warmup band”, and was amazing!). About 2 months later, my buddy called me and said, “Barbs, strange question, but how did you pay (his brother-in-law) for the tix.” I said I wasn’t sure, but probably cash. He said, “great, because I paid by check and I just had a visit from the FBI.” Turns out the girlfriend worked in the DA’s office and was stealing funds forfeited by nabbed criminals. She used the funds to buy great tix online, but told us that she just had a great contact. Who knows the motivation, but glad to have done a cash transaction . . .

[HunterX]

I never get the story quite right...

...insurance companies are a major source of financing for the corporate world.

One day, an inter-office envelope arrived on my wife's desk, and inside, without any of the expected paperwork, legal documents, routing numbers, or, in fact, any accompanying notations at all, was a check, drawn on a major US bank, made out to my wife as sole payee - for $89 million dollars.

You know those feel good stories about the man or woman who finds a wallet in the street with $120 inside, and returns it to its rightful owner? This ends up like that.

Love this story! As a former banker, I can appreciate it in multiple ways, though I never had the kind of luck your wife did. For instance, as a commercial real estate lender, I am well aware of those pesky insurance companies and the competition they provided. They just don't have quite the same regulatory oversight or restrictions we poor bankers had to deal with.

And I spent the early part of my career doing "workouts" which sometimes involved trying to track down and capture an individual developer's cash. Fondly remember how one guarantor who refused to pay until the sheriff took his wife's Cadillac using the judgment we had on him. Changed his tune pretty quickly.

And then there was the guy who wanted to bring me a physical check for $1 million as a very discounted payoff for the loan secured by his burned-down warehouse (which had a mysterious fire 3 days after my bank purchased the tiny local bank that originally made his loan). Having learned never to take (as in "physically take or pick up") a check for fear it could be construed as "acceptance" of a discount, I refused and told him multiple times not to bring it in. Yet he continued to insist on bringing it in, just to "show" it to me. He did it anyway, and even tried sliding it across the table at me to get me to pick it up.

But the discussion by @Wendy Walker and @cbarbee002 remind me of the time Frank Abagnale came to the bank to speak to customers we had invited in. He regaled us with rapid-fire tales of how to commit check fraud. The only one I can remember, went something along the lines of: "You get your PA car registration renewal bill in the mail. You send in payment with a check for $1 more than the amount on the bill. The state of PA sends you a refund for $1 from the state's general accounts payable account. In the state of Pennsylvania, the accounts payable check is printed on a toner printer, but the signature is stamped with an ink stamp. You take the check for $1 and put it in the freezer for 30 minutes. Then you take the check and put it in the microwave for 30 seconds. You take it out of the microwave and hold it in one hand while flicking it with the your other hand. The toner flies off the check, leaving you with a blank, signed check from the state of Pennsylvania."

Never tried that one. I still value my freedom.

[Joe Ross]

I never get the story quite right...

...insurance companies are a major source of financing for the corporate world.

One day, an inter-office envelope arrived on my wife's desk, and inside, without any of the expected paperwork, legal documents, routing numbers, or, in fact, any accompanying notations at all, was a check, drawn on a major US bank, made out to my wife as sole payee - for $89 million dollars.

You know those feel good stories about the man or woman who finds a wallet in the street with $120 inside, and returns it to its rightful owner? This ends up like that.

Love this story! As a former banker, I can appreciate it in multiple ways, though I never had the kind of luck your wife did. For instance, as a commercial real estate lender, I am well aware of those pesky insurance companies and the competition they provided. They just don't have quite the same regulatory oversight or restrictions we poor bankers had to deal with.

And I spent the early part of my career doing "workouts" which sometimes involved trying to track down and capture an individual developer's cash. Fondly remember how one guarantor who refused to pay until the sheriff took his wife's Cadillac using the judgment we had on him. Changed his tune pretty quickly.

And then there was the guy who wanted to bring me a physical check for $1 million as a very discounted payoff for the loan secured by his burned-down warehouse (which had a mysterious fire 3 days after my bank purchased the tiny local bank that originally made his loan). Having learned never to take (as in "physically take or pick up") a check for fear it could be construed as "acceptance" of a discount, I refused and told him multiple times not to bring it in. Yet he continued to insist on bringing it in, just to "show" it to me. He did it anyway, and even tried sliding it across the table at me to get me to pick it up.

But the discussion by @Wendy Walker and @cbarbee002 remind me of the time Frank Abagnale came to the bank to speak to customers we had invited in. He regaled us with rapid-fire tales of how to commit check fraud. The only one I can remember, went something along the lines of: "You get your PA car registration renewal bill in the mail. You send in payment with a check for $1 more than the amount on the bill. The state of PA sends you a refund for $1 from the state's general accounts payable account. In the state of Pennsylvania, the accounts payable check is printed on a toner printer, but the signature is stamped with an ink stamp. You take the check for $1 and put it in the freezer for 30 minutes. Then you take the check and put it in the microwave for 30 seconds. You take it out of the microwave and hold it in one hand while flicking it with the your other hand. The toner flies off the check, leaving you with a blank, signed check from the state of Pennsylvania."

Never tried that one. I still value my freedom.

As a moderator, I'm unsure of my legal responsibility to delete or not delete this post... Peter @Abide?

[boharr]

^
What? And leave a blank post? Ripe for a spoiler?

[Joe Ross]

^
What? And leave a blank post? Ripe for a spoiler?

Is that a signed blank post?

[boharr]

^
What? And leave a blank post? Ripe for a spoiler?

Is that a signed blank post?

With a fraudulent signature.

[HunterX]

As a moderator, I'm unsure of my legal responsibility to delete or not delete this post... Peter @Abide?

During his talk, I kept wondering why he was giving away all these secrets. And, even more, why my company, a bank, was letting him give this talk. At the end, he gave a huge plug for our "Positive Pay" service, where a company sends an electronic list of all the checks their system has issued. Whenever a check on their account is presented to the bank, the check has to exactly match the info from their list for us to pay.

Makes me wish I had been able to invite more of my customers.

[woozy]

Beamed, but not a big fan of the metanism this week. Maybe I'm missing something, but it felt sort of backwards to me.

I liked it. It could have been more elegant. I should have been more elegant. But as a puzzle it was something to chew and to try to puzzle out and it was very satisfying to get to the "oh, now I get it point". It was one of the more puzzle like metas I've seen in a while.

[HunterX]

Okay. FINALLY got it. Beam me up!

Had to do the old "ask the spouse" routine to shake things loose. As is common with many of us, she doesn't do meta-puzzles, and tolerates my doing them. When I get desperate, I ask her to look and she usually glances, makes a single comment, then hands it back and says, "Well then I don't know."

As we sat watching the sunrise this morning on the deck of the rented beach house, I asked. "I KNEW you were going to do that!" was the response.

Wife: What about this?
Me: No, because it doesn't work with this and this.
Wife: Well then this...
Me: No. It has to relate to this...
Wife: The answer is this.
Me: Nope. Doesn't account for this or this.
Wife: I still think that's the answer. Done.
Me: NO!
Wife: Well, maybe you use this.
Me: That doesn't match any of this...
Wife: I still think you should use this... and... this is the answer.
Me: Damn! That's it! You got it! High five!
Wife: Well, I'm smart. Whey didn't you write thusandsuch down?
Me: I did. On this page here (swipe left to show note page)
Wife: Then why didn't you see it???
Me: I'm not as smart as you, I guess.
Wife: Exactly.

And slowly he drew her into the cult, little by little....

[DrTom]

Well, @HoldThatThought, @cbarbee002 and @HunterX thank you for a very interesting morning of reading. Most of my stories of cheating unfortunately involve people absconding with controlled substances as opposed to money and are not near as interesting.

How can you not love a place that, even when the Meta solving is done, provides ongoing entertainment and some interesting tips! Now let's see, I need a freezer, a microwave....

[DrTom]

Okay. FINALLY got it. Beam me up!

Had to do the old "ask the spouse" routine to shake things loose. As is common with many of us, she doesn't do meta-puzzles, and tolerates my doing them. When I get desperate, I ask her to look and she usually glances, makes a single comment, then hands it back and says, "Well then I don't know."

As we sat watching the sunrise this morning on the deck of the rented beach house, I asked. "I KNEW you were going to do that!" was the response.

Wife: What about this?
Me: No, because it doesn't work with this and this.
Wife: Well then this...
Me: No. It has to relate to this...
Wife: The answer is this.
Me: Nope. Doesn't account for this or this.
Wife: I still think that's the answer. Done.
Me: NO!
Wife: Well, maybe you use this.
Me: That doesn't match any of this...
Wife: I still think you should use this... and... this is the answer.
Me: Damn! That's it! You got it! High five!
Wife: Well, I'm smart. Whey didn't you write thusandsuch down?
Me: I did. On this page here (swipe left to show note page)
Wife: Then why didn't you see it???
Me: I'm not as smart as you, I guess.
Wife: Exactly.

And slowly he drew her into the cult, little by little....

Shades of "Try it, you'll like it..." , cue the Alka Seltzer

[Bird Lives]

I got the answer all by myself, but I needed an explanation from a wiser muggle to appreciate the elegance of the mechanism. I still submitted it as a "solo solve." It just wasn't a "solo understand."

[Joe Ross]

All of the "Good time to..." clues included partial months as their entries, with the months first three letters (also their abbreviations) missing. The letters of the geographical places to visit in the clues indicated which months were the "good times to visit."

6A was unique in that two geographical places were noted in the clue & the entry was YUST. JULYAUGUST elegantly filled the bill for 6A.

The remaining FOUR MONTHS (see the meta prompt) were, with month abbreviations not in BOLD:

MARCH
APRIL
MAY
JUNE

Reversing the grid mechanism & deleting the month abbreviations in the four remaining months gives CHILE as the meta answer.

[MikeM000]

This one was rather brilliant in the cleverness department; if I'm going to beef on it at all it's the clue for 6-down. For something that was a key to the whole thing, I don't think it was clued well. For people of a certain age...in my childhood and most of you's...slightly older years, a pleasant conversation (that today might be called a "convo") was often referred to as "rapping". This has gone away as "rap" means other things now, but RUST is a real word, and in my mind "yap" would be either a big mouth (noun) or to talk incessantly and pointlessly (verb), where as "shoot the breeze", to me, connotes more closely to the 1970s usage of "rap".

I don't know if others' headspaces were similarly situated, but that was the root of my problem with THAT SQUARE.

[Joe Ross]

This one was rather brilliant in the cleverness department; if I'm going to beef on it at all it's the clue for 6-down. For something that was a key to the whole thing, I don't think it was clued well. For people of a certain age...in my childhood and most of you's...slightly older years, a pleasant conversation (that today might be called a "convo") was often referred to as "rapping". This has gone away as "rap" means other things now, but RUST is a real word, and in my mind "yap" would be either a big mouth (noun) or to talk incessantly and pointlessly (verb), where as "shoot the breeze", to me, connotes more closely to the 1970s usage of "rap".

I don't know if others' headspaces were similarly situated, but that was the root of my problem with THAT SQUARE.

RUST obliterates the elegance of 6A JULYAUGUST.