Like a virgin for the money.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

This site is a little project that lets me make fun of some things and sense of others. I use it to think a little more relationally without resorting to doing actual math.

You, too can earn a living with visuals.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
March 3rd, 2010 at 1:07 pm
Superb. I guess the bottom of the curve would be “Normal people”?
March 3rd, 2010 at 1:54 pm
Nadir = Nader
March 3rd, 2010 at 2:58 pm
We need to show the inverse relationship between “purity of image” and “actual purity.”
May have to call BS on the “high purity of image = high revenue” correlation. (Are we talking Disney auto-pop acts? Or…?) Pat Boone has a pretty high purity of image, but I don’t think his revenues are that high anymore. (Of course, when he was at the top of his game, his revenue was pretty high…maybe there is something to it.)
March 3rd, 2010 at 6:28 pm
This is so on point! Your creative ability to see and expose the less exposed truths. Love it Jessica!
March 3rd, 2010 at 11:16 pm
If the curve dips below both axises (both revenue and purity) then you are probably a golfer from Florida.
March 4th, 2010 at 9:27 am
So Tiger Woods went from the right end to the bottom, and to get back on top he needs to climb up the left branch? Ditch the marriage counselor and get mo’ hookers and blow, Tiger!
March 4th, 2010 at 12:59 pm
I’m with David L. on this one… I think the “pop stars” arrow needs to point at the other high end of the curve.
March 4th, 2010 at 7:19 pm
[...] Go to Source [...]
March 7th, 2010 at 8:14 pm
red - The arrow points to the curve, not just a single point on it.
March 23rd, 2010 at 2:05 pm
@ David L. I’d like to see the comparitive graphs on that for our president.