For some reason I'm getting an error when I try to respond to the poll. My 2 cents though on length is that it's a trade-off.
For example, I like Scott's writing, but whole sections of his reports are copied/pasted from previous ones. In part I get it, you both get asked the same questions repeatedly sometimes and that might be one way to head that off. I understand that some of the copy/paste is necessary for various disclosures, but at times whole chunks of the article are copied/pasted. It feels like some of that might be better suited for a wiki format (not sure of the extent to which that's possible with you guys still needing to paywall it) so that ongoing issues and topics can be listed there for reference.
This article felt a bit too punchy though. Even the paragraphs almost felt like bullet points. I tend to prefer paragraphs to express a reasonably complete idea, otherwise things can be broken up so much that it's ironically hard to follow despite being short and uncomplicated. I think the "Other Thoughts" section is an example. All of those are really the same idea. Interest rates went up again, which worsens the outlook for CCI if it moves forward with its capital expenditures since those will need to be funded at these relatively high rates. It's three paragraphs though, which feels off and almost seems to disconnect these ideas from one another despite you obviously wanting these to be connected.
Anyway, just my 2 cents. You do this for a living, and it's ultimately your style and content that's worked for you thus far. There's no harm in changing when you think it's a good idea, but aiming to please all audiences is an impossible task.
For some reason I'm getting an error when I try to respond to the poll. My 2 cents though on length is that it's a trade-off.
For example, I like Scott's writing, but whole sections of his reports are copied/pasted from previous ones. In part I get it, you both get asked the same questions repeatedly sometimes and that might be one way to head that off. I understand that some of the copy/paste is necessary for various disclosures, but at times whole chunks of the article are copied/pasted. It feels like some of that might be better suited for a wiki format (not sure of the extent to which that's possible with you guys still needing to paywall it) so that ongoing issues and topics can be listed there for reference.
This article felt a bit too punchy though. Even the paragraphs almost felt like bullet points. I tend to prefer paragraphs to express a reasonably complete idea, otherwise things can be broken up so much that it's ironically hard to follow despite being short and uncomplicated. I think the "Other Thoughts" section is an example. All of those are really the same idea. Interest rates went up again, which worsens the outlook for CCI if it moves forward with its capital expenditures since those will need to be funded at these relatively high rates. It's three paragraphs though, which feels off and almost seems to disconnect these ideas from one another despite you obviously wanting these to be connected.
Anyway, just my 2 cents. You do this for a living, and it's ultimately your style and content that's worked for you thus far. There's no harm in changing when you think it's a good idea, but aiming to please all audiences is an impossible task.
Scott's reports seem repetitive and over-long to my taste.
When the writer is an amazing skillful author, more words are needed.