HOW TO UNLOCK VODAFONE 3G USB K3565 STICK

PREVIOUSLY, ON "A CUP OF VITRIOL" ....
I had given up. I had accepted that my £80 UK Vodafone K3565 Data Stick was about as useful as a paper condom. Here in New Zealand, I looked for unlock software on the internet, only to have intrusive browsers and unwanted software on my PC. I persevered. And then I found THIS tutorial .... IT WORKED!! Not only did it unlock my K3565 for use in New Zealand, but I can now use it on the New Zealand 2-Degrees 3G/GPRS network with a 2-Degrees SIM chip. So wrapped am I, I re-post it here as a "Screw you, Vodafone!"

INTRODUCTION
Vodafone 3G USB K3565 Stick users: you might have noticed that the Stick doesn’t work upon inserting another provider's SIM. In addition, you might have noticed that the Stick also doesn’t work in another country - even with a local Vodafone SIM! It's a pity, because the K3565 Stick provides high internet speed anywhere within range of a GPRS/3G network. At the time of its release, with a top speed of 3.6Mbps, it was one of the best Huawei USB modems. This tutorial will show how you can use any SIM on the Vodafone USB K3565 Stick, in any GPRS/3G country, to access the internet. What’s more you can even make and receive voice calls, video calls from the Stick using the Mobile Partner software. All you need are a few tools and firmware. Although this post is specially written for Vodafone USB K3565 Stick, this tutorial works for all other Data Cards manufactured by Huawei (Idea Netsetter, BSNL 3G etc).

The Vodafone Mobile Connect (VMC) version of the Stick usually comes with VMC Lite software stored in the stick. When you insert the Stick into a USB slot in your PC, the VMC Lite software triggers your PC's Autoplay, asking you to run the software. Before implementing the steps in this tutorial, make sure your VMC Lite software IS installed. So, allow the Autoplay to run the setup file. If you can, make sure the Stick is working on the Vodafone Network of the country of purchase, even though the Stick will not provide internet connection in another country or with another supplier's SIM at this point.

The green or blue blinking light is your indication that, at least, the device is detecting a GPRS or 3G data network in your country, with the SIM you're using. However, your K3565 is still locked to Vodafone, the country of purchase, and even to the Vodafone of the county of purchase! See the Vodafone user guide HERE for details on what the respective lights tell you. This tutorial should leave your K3565 region-free and supplier-free! Follow these steps:

STEPS TO UNLOCK THE K3565

STEP 1 - Find the IMEI Number
First, find the IMEI number of the USB Stick. It's usually written on the USB Stick itself. If the IMEI number isn't written on the K3565 cover, you can use the DC Unlocker Client to find the IMEI number written inside the card on its firmware. Click HERE to go to, and download, the DC Unlocker Client software. Insert the K3565B in a USB slot in your PC. Once it's detected by the PC, run the DC Unlocker Client software to reveal your Stick's IMEI number. Copy and write this number down for use in STEP 3.

STEP 2 - Download the Unlocker Software
Download all the necessary software files and firmware from HERE, through the Reference site at the end of this post, or from Forums mentioned at the end of this post. Move them into a folder where you can see and run the files easily. If you download the software files from the Skydrive Live site (recommended), you should see three grey boxes, like this:

STEP 3 - Find the Unlock Code
You have the IMEI number. You now need to find the Unlock Code for your Stick. To do this, run the “Huawei Unlocker” software you downloaded. It should look like the screenshot below. Make sure you click on the "Huawei" tab, not the "Connection" tab. Type in the IMEI code in the box provided, then click the "Calculate Code" button to reveal the code. Copy or write down your newly-revealed Unlock Code.

STEP 4 - Unlock the Stick
Run the “CardLock UnLock” software you downloaded (screenshot below) and then type in the Unlock Code when you just noted down. Press OK and wait for the "Unlocked Successfully" message.

STEP 5 – Uninstall VMC Lite
This step is where you wish to use the K3565 for a SIM other than Vodafone, by uninstalling the VMC Lite software on your PC. The K3565 USB Stick is now unlocked but it won’t work just yet with another supplier's SIM. First, make a backup of the VMC Lite set-up files, somewhere accessible on your PC. This gives you the option to re-install VMC Lite in the future, in the event you may wish to use a local Vodafone SIM for broadband use. Now, uninstall the Vodafone VMC Lite software that comes with the stick. Only uninstall VMC Lite if you are NOT using a local Vodafone SIM.

STEP 6 - Flash the K3565
Now it’s time to flash the Data Card. Run the installer software “Mobile Partner UTPS16.001.06.01.500”. The software will search and detect your stick (as in the screenshot below). Then, go through the Steps carefully and wait for the process to complete.

That’s it! Now open (run) the Mobile Partner software and you will be able to use the Stick with any supplier's SIM on their GPRS or 3G Network, in any supporting country. This is what your Stick will look like to your PC after Flashing:

Here's an example of the Flashed (unlocked) Vodafone 3G USB K3565 Stick working on the BSNL 3G network.

So if this worked for me, I hope it would work for you too. Caution: Try it at you own risk. I am not responsible for any damaged caused.

Reference Site:
http://indiabee.blogspot.co.nz/2010/07/unlock-usb-modem-latest-technique.html

Data Card Unlocker Forum
http://www.dc-unlocker.com/forum/showthread.php?p=9310

MY “VODAFONE EXPERIENCE”

Now here’s a couple of interesting articles:

“Vodafone earns a Tui's from Aardvark”

“Vodafone's deception uncovered?”

With so much Vodafone talk about the “Vodafone experience,” I want to share MY “Vodafone experience” with you. Today, I have concluded my 6-month struggle to make my Vodem (Vodafone broadband modem, pictured right) work here in New Zealand. And what is that conclusion? I'm told, "Your [80 quid!] UK Vodem can’t be unlocked for use in New Zealand.”

When I was in the UK in June 2010, I was in a house with no internet. I needed internet. I was cut off from the world – naked, alone. Mother says, “You need a Vodafone data stick – they’re amazing and cheap.” £80 down, and a struggle to get it to work, I remind myself NEVER to seek technology purchase advice from my Luddite mother, ever again. The Vodem’s installation certainly wasn’t intuitive! It worked to a fashion, but I was also in a house with poor Vodafone coverage. As I was only in the UK for 7 weeks, I wasn’t too worried about the cost or inconvenience of getting it to work. After all, I could use it back in New Zealand, couldn’t I?

Come the Christchurch earthquakes of 2010-11, I was ruing the fact that I did not test my Vodem stick on landing back in Godzone New Zealand. I didn’t have a New Zealand SIM chip for it, and I didn’t have any credit on it. Power went out as a result of the quakes, and I had no way of emailing, Facebooking or blogging folk to say “We’re OK!” So, I had to (gasp!) plug in an old cord analogue phone, and actually talk to people.

But why shouldn’t my Vodem work? I shouldn't have needed to test it - should I ? After all, Vodafone is an international brand. You should be able to take your Vodafone devices around the world, put in a local SIM chip and use them as you see fit, shouldn’t you? I took my Ericsson phone from New Zealand, bought a UK SIM chip, and BINGO! It worked. Much cheaper than Vodafone Global Roaming, and I still had my NZ phone numbers. However, as the articles above imply, this ability to take MY devices overseas and use a local SIM chip is an increasingly rare occurrence. Vodafone are starting to lock devices so that they only work in the country of purchase. Hands up who thinks that’s bloody wrong?

Vodafone might say, “Well why didn’t you just take your NZ SIM chip over to the UK and use the full ‘Vodafone experience’ with global roaming? Retain your phone number and still send/receive texts as though you were in New Zealand?” Why didn’t I? Because it is sodding, prohibitively expensive. I have heard too many first-hand accounts of friends who have done exactly that, and ended up with a Vodafone bill at the end of the month for THOUSANDS. By locking phones, Vodafone are forcing us down that path. Hands up who thinks that's an exercise in fleecing?

So, when I finally came to test my Vodem here in NZ, I encountered an increasingly ridiculous set of barriers to having it work. When I plugged the Vodem into my new laptop, unsurprisingly, a message told me; “Your software is out of date for your device – please update to the latest version.” So I did. I downloaded a larger, more intrusive Vodafone application to my laptop that wanted to control all my network connections! Sigh. Still, the Vodem didn’t work. I took my laptop and Vodem to the Vodafone shop to be told, I had the “wrong kind” of money on the SIM chip. It needed to be DATA money, you see. Hands up who thinks that’s just silly? So, still no joy. The Vodafone rep continued by telling me, “Hmm … Because you bought it in the UK, you need to phone our Helpline to get the settings changed.” So I phoned the helpline. And just now, “Abdul” from the overseas “Vodafone” Helpline has told me that the device – MY Vodem that I paid 80 quid for – is locked to the UK and can’t be unlocked. In other words, folks, Vodafone devices are now being "zoned."

This is as insidious as the whole DVD-region-zoning farce. As with zoning of Vodafone devices, Region Zoning of DVDs by the film studios has absolutely NO BENEFIT at all to the consumers, and is designed PURELY to achieve the maximum possible additional marginal revenue in the targeted country. In other words, UK consumers are prepared to pay more for a DVD than NZ consumers – but the only way corporations can take advantage of that – C O N T R O L T H A T – is by the region zoning. They make a DVD that will work in the NZ, but not the UK. SO, UK customers can’t buy the cheaper NZ DVDs – they have to buy the more expensive UK DVDs. It is a market aberration - something that the right-wing hacks never talk about when their precious corporations break the rules of their precious “free” market. And they wonder why pirate downloading is so prolific? Vodafone's programme of locking of devices is another perfect example of that market aberration. There is absolutely no reason to lock its devices. The customer doesn’t want it. But Vodafone wants it. Vodafone wants the lucrative, get-money-for-doing-nothing-extra revenue. Actually, it comes down to our misperception that Vodafone is an international company. It’s not. It is a set of local companies called “Vodafone” who all have their own, separate accounting to an international holding company. This, then, actually lends itself to individual country Vodafone companies competing with each other; Vodafone NZ doesn't want Vodafone UK poaching "their" revenue. So, with roaming, Vodafone NZ will secure the revenue when I take my NZ phone to the UK – but not if I buy a UK SIM chip! Hence, the anti-competitive, anti-customer moves from Vodafone to lock devices - when it suits Vodafone.

It gets better (!). Wait till you hear about the hypocrisy. When the boot is on the other foot, Vodafone bleat, “Foul.” In Germany, T-Mobile are also starting to lock their devices - iPhones in this instance. Vodafone wants to prevent this to get a slice of the action. So determined was Vodafone to ensure unlocked devices in Germany .... IT WENT TO COURT:

“According to the [Vodafone] injunction, filed at a regional court in Hamburg, the goal is to stop the sale of the iPhone if it is sold only in connection with a 24 month T-Mobile contract and/or is blocked in such a way that it can only be used in a T-Mobile network.” [Reuters].

In other words, Vodafone wants T-Mobile, the German incumbent, to UNLOCK iPhones (because it suits Vodafone in Germany, of course). Yet, in the UK and New Zealand, Vodafone is doing the exact opposite! Unbelievable. This kind of hypocritical, greedy, anti-competitive behaviour is exactly what sprouts protest from the people [CLICK HERE]. God Bless social media.

And God Bless true competition, in the form of newbie, 2-Degrees. So, stuff you, Vodafone. I’ll bin my worthless £80 Vodem, and buy a rival $45 2-Degrees data stick. At least they seem to be trying to help the New Zealand customer – for now. And yet, I wonder if 2-Degrees will behave in exactly the same way as Vodafone, when 2-Degrees becomes as big. Why did the scorpion sting the fox as he was hitching a ride on that fox across a wide river - knowing he too would drown? Because that’s what scorpions do. Like the scorpion, big corporations will always try to sting the consumers they depend on – because that’s what big corporations do.

KISS THE ALL BLACKS GOODBYE

This is a mighty rugby union country, where kids can start playing the game as young as 3. All three of my kids play for Parklands Rugby Football Club, here in the City of Christchurch, New Zealand. My youngest (5 years) is in his second year of Rippa Rugby. Last weekend, he had the unfortunate experience of playing against a third team from Christchurch RFC. Despite the fact that Rippa Rugby is supposed to be non-contact, at least two players came off injured after being thumped by Christchurch players. One was such a blatant tackle near the try-line, that it should have been a penalty try. This is the fourth time I have witnessed a Christchurch RFC team use illegal tackling and shirt-pulling in a (supposed) non-contact scenario. Saturday’s game has prompted me to pour you another Cup of Vitriol.

Woah! Hang on. Back-up; what the hell is Rippa Rugby?!!!!

Well, Rippa Rugby is the junior (Under-6 and Under-7 grades) version of Rugby Union. Instead of tackling, the kids rip off fluorescent tags from a Velcro belt. It’s not too dissimilar to Touch Rugby. Tackle rugby, in New Zealand, starts at the Under-8 grade. Rippa Rugby is the precursor to that collision game. The clever use of bright tags focuses the kids on the future tackle area; the hips. For my sins, I have the huge honour, privilege and pleasure of coaching my son’s Under-6 Rippa Rugby team. However, with that coaching comes significant responsibility.

I have a responsibility for the kids’ enjoyment of the game. I have a responsibility to develop their skills. I have a responsibility to the Parklands Rugby Club to uphold their good reputation. However, more than anything, I have a responsibility to the kids and their parents to keep the players free from harm under my care.

I believe the worst offenders of these physical infringements, that I have ever seen, are 2012 Christchurch U6 Bronze (and yes, I’m naming you!). Here’s a quote from the official NZRFU site on Rippa Rugby; “It is a very safe, non-contact, easy to play game…” I think the coaches of Christchurch Bronze need to read that statement many times; “very safe and non-contact…” I had FOUR players off injured from contact in that particular game, three weeks ago. “...it’s fun and exciting for all involved…” Two of those players – and we’re talking hardy kids here – had been thumped to the ground so many times, they didn’t want to go back on. The parents of our team, my co-coach, and I were appalled. It was such a disgusting display, that one of our parents wrote a strong and eloquent letter to the Canterbury Rugby Football Union to protest. As a result, Christchurch Bronze will be audited by the Union. But Christchurch RFC is a very large and successful rugby club, and a major part of the provincial Canterbury RFU. I’ve heard parents sign up their littlies at Christchurch RFC, in the expectation of becoming a part of that successful, winning culture. It's apparent that parents sign up their kids there, thinking they'll all be All Blacks. When you see that, you see why winning becomes everything there – at any cost – even in the junior teams. The parents' need to win becomes secondary to the little kids' enjoyment of the game.

I’ve become a cynical boor in my old age, when it comes to “process,” “auditing,” and “taking action.” So here’s what I think will happen; Christchurch Bronze will be audited, I’m sure. And, the coaches might be apologetic: “Oh, it’s kids being kids. We’re trying to rein them in, but they love their rugby soooooo much. And they so want to play for Christchurch.” [yeah, right. The PARENTS want them to play for Christchurch].

From my experience, the Christchurch perspective will be full of spin, and our account will be trivialised: “Oh, come on, they’re exaggerating, this is a physical game, it’s nowhere near as bad as they’re making out, they’re sore because they lost. We’re trying to breed hard kids here. Rugby isn’t tiddlywinks.” In other words, I think nothing will come of it.

Please prove me wrong, Canterbury Rugby Football Union. Show me you’ll take action when our concerns are corroborated, when the safety of 5-year-old kids is threatened.

Setting aside for now, the injury potential for my son and his mates (and that WILL be difficult), there’s a deeper worry the CRFU need to think about. It’s been whispered in my ear that the real reason Rippa Rugby was introduced, was because Mrs White-Middleclass became worried about all those big Pacific fella’s thumping down on poor wee Johnny. Pfff! Really? True or not, the NZRFU say, "Rippa Rugby will promote excellent ball handling and running skills, and give all kids a chance to participate in our national game," before the kids enter the tackle aspect of rugby. Now that, I do agree with.

Yes, yes, yes. I know that my Under-6 kids will have to get into the collision game eventually. I can hear my critics screaming now, “Rugby is a physical, contact game – get over yourself!” I truly don’t have a problem with tackling, per se. My issue with sticking to the non-contact rule in Rippa Rugby, is about giving my players a level playing field (no pun intended). Why should Christchurch Bronze players be allowed to tackle when my players aren’t? Why should I have to take my Under-6 kids, who have been taught running and evasion, onto a field with Under-6 kids who seem to have been taught tackling and shirt pulling? I want to develop my kids LOVE for the game first, before they mature into tackle-readiness. THEN, I’ll develop my fit, hardy players into tackle monsters.

So here’s the clever part from the NZRFU (in my humble opinion): mums LOVE Rippa Rugby. It is truly a fast, exciting kids’ sport that parents love to watch. AND, kids can be playing Rippa for up to four years before they enter the tackle game. By this time, the kids are hooked. They have fallen in love with rugby, as my three sprogs have done. Once the love for rugby is there, the KIDS are in control of their sport, not the mums. I've seen Rippa suck those faint-hearted mums inexorably into tackle-rugby. So, when the tackle game comes along and Johnny gets thumped at Under-8, the mums can “Ooooh! Ahhhh! Ouch! Poor Johnny!” all they like, but Johnny now loves the game - and wants to keep playing! “No Mum, I’m fine – I’m going back on the field!”

And here’s the threat to all that: When asses like the coaches of Christchurch Bronze fail to rein-in the physical play at the non-contact Under-6 level, lots of 3-, 4-, and 5-year-olds are going to get hurt. Enough to put them off the game! And if that proliferates to other Under-6 teams, a heap of mums will start to pull their kids out of rugby – before the love takes hold. The mums will take their wee ones back to (gulp!) that strange game with the spherical ball, for histrionic prima donnas. By definition, there will be less young talent going into the All Blacks Funnel. So when that happens, lack-of-depth will threaten the very future of our national rugby side.

And if that takes hold for any length of time, my friends, you can kiss the All Blacks goodbye.

THE PAIN OF BEING RIGHT

Now here’s a couple of interesting articles:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/6673730/Electricity-prices-tipped-to-rise-steeply
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/6675785/Tax-cuts-blamed-for-zero-Budget-admission

How are they linked? Well, I predicted electricity price rises as a consequence of reduced income tax revenue in my article last year:

“...all that results in lowering income tax is this:
• It empties the government’s coffers of much-needed tax revenue. Governments then find new taxes to fill them – usually regressive taxes – such as increased GST, increased power bills, or increased duty on fags and booze.
• It gives more money to those who already have it, not to those who need it
• The rich get richer, and the poor get poorer”

And guess what? What have we seen since the Smiling Shark came into power:

* increased GST
* increased customs duties on cigarettes and alcohol
* increased electricity prices.

[Heavy sigh]

I hate it when I’m right. I really do. It gives me no satisfaction when I’m proven visionary and correct (as well as modest) on these issues. This is because I still have to endure the pain of the wrong, when everyone says, “You’re wrong.” In this specific case, my budget is hurting like yours. But when I’m later proven right, it’s too late to change the wrong. I bemoaned another term of right-wing spin after the 2011 election, and everyone laughed at me for exaggerating like an old gay socialist. Well, they ain’t laughin’ now, with their increased GST, increased prices on beer crates and increased power prices. One year on, and the derision on this old leftie is replaced with, “Hmm, why can’t I afford some of the basics anymore? Why is my pay not going as far? Why is my tax cut not helping?” Because lowering income tax doesn’t work. And we still have another three years for the Smiling Shark to do even more damage. Read this exchange about the effect of tax cuts on affordability:

"Tax System Changes—Effect on New Zealanders"

Did you like Bill English's spin? Right-wing governments, eh? You can always trust ‘em to raise regressive taxes and not care about the effects on low-income families. What amazes me is why we let them do it?!! Regressive taxes adversely affect many more of us - real people - than the few who are part of the rich establishment. If you think about it logically, there is no way that a voting populace in a mature democracy would allow a rich 10% of the population to benefit from almost half of the total tax cut revenue. Surely, there is NO WAY that a mature democracy would allow subsequent taxes to be placed on the very people who can’t afford them?

The answer to “How can these happen?!!” is an easy one: because selfish human greed allows it to happen. First of all, the rich few sponsor a political party with the intent on having their own taxes reduced. They bleat that they pay more tax than everyone else. Duh! That’s because they earn more than anyone else! So, when The Few lobby and sponsor a political party to reduce income tax, it’s simply an opportunity cost for them; there is no moral or ethical consideration of the effects. However, that’s only an elite minority with few individual votes. For that party to come to power, we, the voting populace, have to vote them in. How on earth did enough of the population agree to such madness? Well, you, the mortgage whores, allowed it to happen by prostituting your vote. You are intelligent, thinking people, yet you sold your vote to a regressive tax government; for the “crumbs from the rich man’s table.” [Luke 16:19-31]. Do you remember this line when you voted National:

“A tax cut for every New Zealander.”


WERE YOU MAD??!! Did you really believe that GST wouldn’t be raised? Did you not realise that electricity prices would be raised again to raise revenue??!! How did you THINK such tax cuts were going to be funded?!!

Was it worth that temporary little increase in your budget? Your vote was bought.

"The Government is having to borrow in order to cover the tax cuts that they gave and so now it is putting pressure right through the Budget." [Dr Russel Norman, April 2012].

And please don’t whine and tell me, “But I never agreed to raising GST and other taxes. It wasn’t part of their election promise. I didn’t vote for that!” Well here’s another quote:

“To point out the blindingly obvious: New Zealanders in 2008 voted tax cuts for themselves that we could ill-afford as a nation... No one who voted for National in 2008 can genuinely claim ignorance – we were warned. News of the building crisis and recession filled the media. New Zealanders’ greed for money simply outstripped their common sense.” [Frank Macskasy]

You voted for tax cuts. You voted in the National Party. You voted in right-wing spin doctors who had enough financial backing to buy the advertising which kept them there for a second term. So the National Party can do pretty much anything else it wants to for the next three years. Haven’t you learnt that yet?

Clearly, I’m angry and bitter about the behaviour of this National government. I was an impoverished student during the Thatcher years, so after 17 years of right-wing government corruption in the UK, I swore blind I would never vote for a right-wing party. And I haven’t. Sadly, not everyone agrees with me. But surely many of you have similar experiences, haven’t you? Yup, you sure do.

But then a professional “Labour” party gets in and fucks it all up, so that a right-wing party sings sugar-sweet in your ears, and the entire rotten cycle begins again.

Sigh.

RUGBY AND POLITICS - HOW TO CORRUPT THE WORKING MAN

Now here’s an interesting article:

http://www.spectator.co.uk/australia/6273863/league-is-the-game-they-play-in-heaven.thtml

To summarise the article, Mark Latham is lauding the simplicity of rugby league, and lambasting the complexity and elitism of rugby union. However, as I read though the entire article, there was an underlying thread that made me think about the journey of the working man through history. In that context, there is a comparison between rugby and politics. Mark Latham reminds us that the working man founded rugby league. Rugby league was founded as a professional sport to answer the working man’s needs for travelling expenses and subsistence while playing the game. There’s a similar journey by the working man in politics.

But first, I need to point out that Aussie Mark Latham’s logic doesn’t quite add up for rugby union in New Zealand, does it? Here, rugby union has always been the every-man’s game. Colin Meads, Zinzan Brooke, George Nepia and many other working-men All Blacks legends say they played for the All Blacks, despite the fact that they didn’t get paid. Indeed, any resentment or envy has only come out in the last few years when such legends grizzle at the salaries of our new generation of All Blacks legends. Even despite that, rugby union still draws more grass-roots support in New Zealand than rugby league. The article’s premise may hold truth for Australia, but not for New Zealand.

So let’s get back to politics. You know, the pursuit of subsistence while pursuing politics is exactly why the Chartists protested in 19th century Britain. Their Six Point Charter listed demands from the establishment, to allow the working man to have a democratic voice. Indeed, we have since adopted all of those points but one (we’ve rejected annual elections) as the building blocks for our modern democracy. I should add that the Chartists, at the time, were all imprisoned for their efforts.

Eventual success by the Chartists led to the adoption of one-man-one-vote and paid electorates. This led inevitably to working men founding Labour Parties across the commonwealth in the 20th century. Let’s have a look at their record today, say, in New Zealand. How many radical acts or policies do you remember to come out of the “Labour” party in modern times? How many working men in the street would say that the $150,000-earning Labour electorates are in touch with them? There aren’t many voices coming out of the Labour party in support of the Auckland wharfies, are there? Does anyone else find it cynical that such Labour Party hacks are creeping out the wordwork only when the Auckland wharfies dispute has gained mass, popular support? And I wonder how fewer would be those supporting Labour politicians, if Labour was in power managing the dispute?! Despite 11 years in power by our so-called Labour Party, New Zealand is still a right-wing country.

And here’s the comparison: politics is exactly like sport for the working man. As soon as you have a professional sport, paid representatives, it stops being the every-man’s game. It becomes A BUSINESS for the Executive Class to milk. The problem is that working men still think that the legacy sport is “there’s.” Take soccer in the UK. Long ago, former players would end up as coaches, and subsequently form part of the (voluntary or averagely-paid) board of the club. Many a working man still goes to the matches on a Saturday afternoon, but working men no longer run those clubs. A swathe of rich owners and executives own the sport in the UK. How few of those soccer executives actually played the game in the past?


And that scenario is the same for rugby league. Mark Latham’s article is true on the history, but the working man no longer owns rugby league. I find it supremely ironic that Mark Latham, former Australian Federal Labor leader, has written this article. I agree when he says, “rugby league has … maintained its working-class fan base” but I would add that working men have been deceived into thinking that they still own the game. In the same way, we no longer own rugby union here in New Zealand. It is owned by the sponsors and Sky TV. We have sold our soul to the devil (pictured left).


However, the ball sports executives still need the collective money and the collective viewing figures of the working men to feed the game – which is why the illusion is maintained. The ball sports still need the TV ratings to allow the corporate sponsors to sell to the fans. Yet, it is these very corporate sponsors which, like parasites, threaten all ball sports by deluding the working man. Social commentator John Clarke (pictured right) expressed that Sky sports would love nothing else for rugby union than the stadium to be filled with corporate boxes, and the working man sit at home watching the game on Sky – being sold to by adverts and sponsors.

Indeed, I’ll tell you where all these football codes are going. The working men still thinks the team is “Their Team.” Southern men still believe that the Highlanders are from Otago!! The thugs at Chelsea still scream at rival London fans, as they watch “Their Team” compete. But how many of those players were born, or even bred, in Chelsea? The teams from the working mens' ball sports are not “Their Teams” any longer. They are franchises. They are businesses. They are corporations. They no longer represent the working man, whatever the code of football. In America, a number of grid-iron franchises (not teams!) upped-and-left their host cities to move to other cities. The “Oakland” Raiders left Oakland in 1982 – then left Los Angeles to go back to Oakland in 1994!

Fans would become so incensed at “Their Team” leaving, some grid-iron franchises had to move city in secret, in the middle of the night, to avoid the anger from those betrayed, delusional fans. Such is the loyalty of the franchise model and corporate business to its customers – the fans.

And politics is no different. How many Labour politicians do you believe are there to genuinely make a difference for the working man? Or are they there for themselves, at the trough? That’s the dilemma and consequence of having professional politicians in the Labour Party. Sadly, I believe that Taito Philip Field was not the only one guilty – he just got caught.

In the same vein, I wonder how many of the Executive Class in rugby league are there for the sport, Mark?

Let’s leave my radical, rambling rantings finally, and focus on the sport. I’ll focus on the difference between the rugby codes. I agree with the article, to the point that League is more free-flowing. However, I love the technical aspect of the Union game. I love the set-pieces, the scrums, the mauls, and the clever, brutal conflict up-front. Rugby Union has become the thinking-man’s game, while League has become Thug Rugby. And that’s exactly how the elite at the IRB want it. As a prominent board member of the English RFU said to Will Carling (and that’s not all that bloody long ago!), “We can’t have just anybody playing this game, you know.” The IRB want to keep a certain “quality” of individual playing the game – ideally from a fee-paying school! That’s certainly happening in Australia, England and Scotland. Wales and New Zealand still seem to be resisting that, thankfully. However, I wonder with sadness, how long it will be until the IRB makes Rugby Union so complicated, that the game becomes unplayable?

THE CONVERSATION

Parklands residents in Christchurch seem to be screaming out to “Go Red.” They want to take the government “offer” following the earthquakes and get out. I think there’s a lot of folk missing a fundamental point here. If we “Go Red,” those of us who are not insurance re-builds will have to find the $100,000 shortfall - or more - to pay for the same kind of home we had before the quakes, as a result of John’s “offer”. Yes, if we stay “Green TC3,” we may be subject to liquefaction. I know neither scenario is palatable, but if we “Go Red,” the government will deliver us into the waiting hands of the mortgage lenders, property developers and lawyers. Call me old fashioned, but that’s why I paid off my mortgage in the first place – to be rid of those parasites. Uh, oh - I can hear my critics now. I’m going to be accused of being harsh; “These are not parasites - these are professional people providing you a valued service!”

“parasite n. interested hanger-on; sycophant; animal or plant living in or on another.” [Oxford Dictionary]

Now, if I was a cynical man (and recent events are getting me there), this is the kind of conversation I bet took place last year:

JOHN: Hmm. This earthquake’s a bit of a bugger, Gezza. And we’ve got a recession. Our corporate friends are finding it pretty tough in Christchurch. What can we do?
GERRY: What about making those middle-class mortagage whores in Parklands homeless?
JOHN: How would that help the economy?
GERRY: Well, they would need to find and pay for new homes. There’ll be all kinds of spin-off revenues for our friends; land deals, new sections, lawyers’ fees, new mortgages, new house sales. Yummy.
JOHN: We can’t do that! We can’t just turf them out of their homes … Can we?
GERRY: Oh.... Yeah … Good point. Hmmm. Hang on! What about giving them a little “compensation”? Not enough to buy a new home as they had, but enough to give them some more vain hope.
JOHN: Sorry; what do you mean by “more vain hope”?
GERRY: Well, they’ll have to work even longer and harder to afford those new homes (the ones they already had before the quakes), in the vain hope of perhaps getting promotion at work, a pay rise, or even (snigger!) paying off the mortgage.
JOHN: Not sure about this. They’ll be mightily pissed off that we’re not fully compensating them for the loss of their home in the quakes. Let’s face it, we’ve had sixty years to prepare for this, and we’ve given it all away in tax cuts to our friends. Remember, you big bugger, you said publicly on Campbell Live, “It’s all about equity preservation.”
GERRY: Pfff! They’ll forget that. I’ll just deny it or put another spin on what I really said. They’ve been through quakes and liquefaction – they’ll want out at any price.
JOHN: But how the buggery would we afford that? Even SOME compensation is going to cost. Putting up income tax would hurt our friends – the ones who sponsor us.
GERRY: Pfff! We’ve bought off the mortgage whores before. We gave our establishment friends big tax cuts, and those pokey homeowners were happy with crumbs off the rich man’s table. No, we’ll just put up GST and other regressive taxes, instead. Tax the proles.
JOHN: But GST hurts our friends as well – it would mean luxury boats, designer suits and exclusive cars would cost more.
GERRY: That’s OK, they can afford it. They’ve got that back in spades from the huge income tax cuts we gave them three years ago.
JOHN: What about the proles – petrol, food and power will be much more expensive in relative terms.
GERRY: Fuck ‘em.
JOHN: I’m listening.
GERRY: And because jobs are so scarce in Christchurch right now, our friends wouldn’t have to put up with all those moaner mortgage whores asking for pay rises.
JOHN: So what you’re saying is, we make the quake-shocked homeowners homeless, give them some (not a lot) compensation for their house, so that they’ll work harder and longer to pay for the additional mortgage payments? We deliver traumatised, vulnerable people into the waiting hands of our mortgage lender, property developer and lawyer friends?
GERRY: Yup.
JOHN: Get it done.

THE PERILS OF GOING RED

This is our street; these are our friends and neighbours:

• “Quake-hit residents forget it's Christmas” [NZ Herald 27 Dec 2011]
• “Depressing deja vu for quake victims” [ODT 27 Dec 2011]
• “Flooded area can't be fixed – expert” [The Press 27 Dec 2011]

The 23 December quakes seem to have broken the resolve of Monterey Place, Parklands, Christchurch. The street is flooded from liquefaction for the third time in a year. It looks like the entire street wants to be “Red-Zoned.” I live in Monterey Place, I’ve done the research, and I don’t want to be Red-Zoned. This article explains why. I'm not necessarily disagreeing with what Vanessa says (apart from, perhaps, the confirmed number of re-builds); it's the Red Zone compensation plan I take issue with. Forgive me if I sound bitter or cynical at times as you read this – you’ll see why.

I write with a lot of sadness, but understanding, when I hear about my friends and neighbours in Monterey Place who have had enough. To be fair, my family and I haven’t been around for the third clean-up, the clean-up resulting from 23 December’s quakes. I’ve a feeling that has been the final straw for some. We’ve only been through two clean-ups, and my family still wants to live there long-term. So, in 10-15 years, we hope the quake effects would be behind us. However, we all have different agendas, different experiences, and different effects from the quake. As you might appreciate, this article is written from my family’s perspective.

In June 2011, the New Zealand government determined a system of coloured “zones” for quake-hit Christchurch residents, following the quakes of September 2010, February 2011, and June 2011:

• White Zone – the land still has to be assessed.
• Green Zone – the land has been tested and is determined fit for habitation.
• Orange Zone – the land has already been tested, but is awaiting further testing and a decision. Such land will subsequently be determined as Red or Green.
• Red Zone – the land is condemned, unfit to place a dwelling.

http://www.landcheck.org.nz/

In the event of land condemnation ("going Red"), the government will put together an “offer.” I put “offer” in inverted commas, because it isn’t an offer at all – we don’t have a choice. If we don’t accept, we’ll be forced off our land. Well, that offer in question is the GV (government valuation) of our land-plus-dwelling based on the 2007 rateable valuation. Sounds fair? Read on. The “offer” doesn’t come anywhere close to giving my family the house we have, elsewhere in Christchurch.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/christchurch-earthquake/5179959/Crown-to-buy-worst-hit-Christchurch-homes

In our case, we would secure $542,000 from the government “offer” if our house is placed in the Red Zone, and we are forced from our home. This might seem a lot to anyone outside Auckland, but it’s about comparing like-with-like. We found that our house will cost in excess of $600,000 just to rebuild – before we even find a section. Lord knows what the cost will be in a few months time. The key issues here are; house-affordability, and securing that like-for-like. We have neither with the government “offer”

There’s a lot of talk about re-building for quake-hit residents. In the aftermath of the February and June 2011 quakes, Mayor Bob Parker championed “10,000 sections” that will be available for evicted homeowners. Sections in Halswell are kicking around the $250,000 mark at the moment – up $50,000 since the government announcement in June 2011. It’s a prosperous household in these times that can afford to pay $250,000 for a section to build on, before even thinking about the kind of house they’d like. Frankly, that’s completely out for most of us. Remember, the earthquakes have destroyed thousands of jobs and livelihoods.

So, the obvious cost-conscious solution is to buy an existing house, elsewhere in Christchurch. Guess what’s happening to those houses that are habitable and are in areas which have avoided the liquefaction? Yup – prices are on the rise. What did Gerry Brownlee say on Campbell Live, when a Bexley resident predicted this in June 2011? “Oh, I don’t think that’s going to happen.” Thousands of displaced homeowners, and Free-Market Gerry didn’t think that such demand would increase house or section prices?!! And what did Gerry say to those that said the “offer” isn’t enough to buy another house? “This is when you need to talk to your bank.” In other words, folks, we’ve got to get deeper into hock. And what did Gerry say in the run up to the offer being announced? “It’s all about equity preservation.” If the “offer” is “all about equity preservation,” why is he saying people should be talking to the banks to arrange $100,000 more debt?!!

When I explain this financial wrangle to people, those who aren’t going through this, I’m asked, “Well, you have insurance, don’t you?” Yes, we do. In fact, we have Full Replacement House Insurance. However, this is where the insurance companies are behaving quite cynically (albeit, to be fair, probably to the letter of their policies!). You see, our house is not a technical write-off. So even though the government condemns our land, AMI will say, “But your house is reparable – here’s the repair money.” And wait; that repair money will be deducted from the government payout!! So we still will receive only $542,000 to find a new house.

And by the way, that $542,000 has to include lawyers’ fees, any additional mortgage application, planning applications, surveying costs, moving costs, and anything else associated with buying or building a house. Remember, we don’t want to move – the government would force us to move.

This is why we can't embrace being "Red-Zoned.” Yes our market value will take a hit - but we won’t lose any money if we don’t sell! We don’t want to move – we love our house! In a couple of years, the quakes will settle down, our house will be repaired, and we will achieve that “new normal” that everyone keeps talking about. Yes, our market value will take a hit, but it’s still better than the government’s derisory “offer.” I accept that many of my neighbours want out, and some don’t. What might be a good idea in marginal streets like ours (Green TC3, Blue) would be to give homeowners the choice; take the “offer” or stay in the street.

The financial truth is that for most, the government payout is woefully inadequate. I accept that the government had to come up with some solution, but is this truly the best they could do? It was certainly the cheapest and least imaginative. I hear Gerry and John talk about “winners and losers.” Well, those “winner” stories are keeping awful quiet. Or maybe those winners are few and far between. The truth for my family is that we will NOT be able to buy like-for-like. When you have insurance, isn’t there an expectation to be compensated like-for-like in the event of your house being condemned? You’d think so. We hear arguments about how this is a major event, and an act of God, so insurance doesn’t apply. In defence of the offer, we also hear arguments about how our house is worthless now anyway, because of its location and the earthquake. All these arguments try to tell us the government offer is fair.

Well, if we didn’t have the EQC then that might be true.

When the Earthquake Commission (EQC) was formed in the wake of the 1931 Napier-Hastings quake, there was an expectation that we would be “covered” in the event of the next big quake. There was an expectation that we would get “like-for-like.” As part of our insurance premiums, we also put into the EQC fund which has since been put into off-shore government bonds. In other words, successive New Zealand governments have had sixty years to prepare for the next big quake. Sixty years. The government has created an expectation within New Zealand, and now it’s baulking. Prime Minister John Key makes us feel that we’re fortunate to be getting this “offer,” because this is the biggest government land deal in history. Well, we don’t buy it. It’s insulting, it’s belittling, and it’s not enough for another house.

The next phrase we get from worried taxpayers is, “But who’s going to pay for it all?” Answer: The government. Yes, the taxpayer. Get over it. Raise the upper tax rate; tax those who can afford it. It’s an emergency event for crying out loud. Europe’s doing it, and even America’s considering it!

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/world/5653077/Obama-tax-rich-to-cut-deficit

In summary, here’s the reality if the government forces us out of our home:

• The government will give us $542,000 compensation for our section-plus-dwelling, if they condemn our land.
• We haven’t gone “Red” yet. So every day that goes by, in the event that we DO go Red, devalues that $542,000, as Christchurch house and section prices continue to rise.
• To rebuild our house on another section will cost in excess of $600,000 – before we even factor-in the cost of the land.
• Current equivalent houses, already built in Christchurch, are selling at around $600,000 to $650,000.
• Our house isn’t damaged enough to be an insurance rebuild. Even if the land is condemned, AMI insurance company will say, “We will repair your house, not re-build it.”
• Any repair money given to us by the insurance company will be deducted from the government “offer.”
• If we stay in our house, and resist the “offer,” we will be threatened with a “reduced offer.”
• We have Full Replacement House Insurance, yet we will have to find another $100,000 to buy the equivalent house for my family - because $100k is about the difference between what the government will give us and what the equivalent house in Christchurch ACTUALLY costs!

If we had a like-for-like offer, we might happily "Go Red". However, the recession-ridden, cold-hearted decision-makers of this government have delivered vulnerable, quake-shocked people into the hands of the banks, the property developers, and the lawyers. When such people are already down, they don’t have much fight left in them.