This month's figures

[peterbirks]

Just to show that I am not the type to hide my face from the grizzly stuff, here's the month's figures.

BTW Mike, I've had some thoughts about how to convert the Excel stuff into HTML, but it's messy. Basically you use the macro (or parts thereof) that I sent you, which converts from Excel to raw HTML. You then open that HTML in Word and run a Word macro on it which looks for the minus figure. When it finds a minus figure, it "steps back in time" to find the "td" code before that minus figure. It then pastes in the bgcolor="#FF0000" directly after the td code. It then searches for the next minus figure, and repeats the process. This gives you a customised red figure, but does not delete the minus sign.

You then close the file (saving it as a text file) and repopen int in Notepad. Strip out the crap, and you have a nice HTML table.

Well, I said it was messy. But it's quicker than doing it manually.

SITE	$10-$20	$5-$10	$15-$30	$5.00	25c-50c(PLO)	50C-$1(TD)	$25.00	Grand Total
PTY	$102	-$255	$175					$22
PP					$47			$47
Betfair	-$351	-$86		-$17				-$454
UB					$159	-$3		$156
SJ							-$55	-$55
Winnings	-$249	-$341	$175	-$17	$206	-$3	-$55	-$284
Sum of Hours	1.50	64.75	16.75	6.00	16.50	0.25	2.00	107.75
Avge Per hour	-$166	-$5	$10	-$2.83	$12.48	-$12	-$27	-$2.64

Not much to be said, really. A sea of red, but somehow I still managed to end up in profit on Party on the month (not that we are counting months any more :-). The Betfair numbers really are a bit of an anomaly -- I've won so much on that site in the last year (given how few hours I have played on it seriously) that a couple of hours' nightmare in a good game are going to wreck any figures.

I still need a break. I think I shall just play out the bonus on Party this month. In fact, I might go on a bonus hunting foray.

Comments

[pb9617.livejournal.com]

Just save an excel table as a web page, view the webpage source, copy it, strip out the microsoft junk and paste the html.

Save as web page option

[peterbirks.livejournal.com]

Ahh, but it's the "strip out the microsoft junk" thing.

You see, I don't want the HTML (which you see above, and which I note still isn't formatting quite right) to look exactly like the Excel spreadsheet. And therein lies our rub. Cell-padding, red text on white cells, black text on red cells, etc etc, are not customisable in Excel (or, if they are, I haven't figured out how to do it). You can customise a negative number to appear in red, but not for it to appear in black on a red background, with zero cell-padding.

However, I might play around with this option to see if a macro can strip out the microsoft junk for me. But, oh my goodness, it is a hell of a lot of junk to strip out.

Re: Save as web page option

[geoffchall.livejournal.com]

I'm sorry about not understanding the problem - but who gives a shit? Why can't you just leave it as a minus, we're all grown-ups.

Re: Save as web page option

[peterbirks.livejournal.com]

Hmm, I think that the best answer would be to ask you to compare your earlier zine Tigger with your effort more than a decade later with Home of the Brave. Both understandable, but one more aesthetically pleasing than the other. Since I have to read figures from a number of companies, I have come to appreciate those companies that put an effort into making them easier to comprehend. A sea of figures on a white background with just minuses to indicate the negatives just fails to convey the information. Mr Woodhouse is more of an expert in this, since I think he has done some work on how to convey numerical information as quickly as possible to the brains of those on trading desks.

And if the banks are prepared to invest millions in it, surely it must be of some relevance?

Hmm, don't answer that.

Re: Save as web page option

[geoffchall.livejournal.com]

Bizarrely there was more effort went into the creation of Tigger than into Home. You've done your time drawing onto stencils, so you know where I'm coming from there. But of course this was all long ago and far away and I find I care far far less about that sort of thing than I used to.

Sometimes I feel that corporates or those seeking to behave corporately value appearance over content. You're quite right about company reports, but the attempt to put a smooth veneer over company reports does nothing for their legibility. I have battles here with Jane (secretary/PA/etc) who has been raised proper and is horrified by the sloppy approach I take to letters with deliberate mis-spellings, apostrophes, abuse to clients and hand-written crossings out. I would have been on Jane's side 20 years ago, but now I just go with what works rather than what's right and proper.