Black Hills Gold & The Vaudeville Musician

The above image is clickable for better viewing.
Heather, a travel blog reader, recently sent us an interesting email. She had been sorting through a collection of antique sheet music and other belongings that had been in her family for years.

Among them was an old poster dating back to the 1930’s or early 40’s. The poster was from the Black Hills Jewelry Shop, owned by E.O. Lampinen, and formerly located at 48 Sherman Street in Deadwood.

After a little digging and some help from the folks at the Deadwood Historic Preservation Center, we found out that the poster has quite the past. It belonged to a man named Frank Ernest, who as far as we can tell, was a traveling vaudeville musician.

Ernest, it seems, performed all over the country, including the once famous Gayety Theatre in Detroit. At some point during Ernest’s travels he made his way into the Black Hills and bought his wife, Sarah Ernest, some Black Hills Gold jewelry from E.O. Lampinen’s store.

Now Lampinen, you see, was one of the early pioneers of Black Hills Gold manufacturing and owned the store, but also the Black Hills Gold Manufacturing Company. As you can see on the poster above, most prices of Black Hills Gold jewelry at that time were in the $3 – $5 range.

On the back of the poster is a hand-written note indicating that Frank Ernest, the musician, spent a whopping $6 at Lampinen’s Deadwood store!

The details of Frank Ernest and his wife trail off after his purchase in Deadwood, but the story of E.O. Lampinen’s Black Hills Jewelry Shop continues. Years later, in 1944, Lampinen sold his business to an area entrepreneur named Ivan Landstrom. The sale included all tools, molds and equipment from the store and the manufacturing company.

Ivan Landstrom moved the business to Rapid City and created the now world-famous Landstrom’s Original Black Hills Gold Creations company. Fast forward about 50 years; in 1995 Landstrom’s acquired the F.L. Thorpe jewelry company, also of Deadwood.

Thorpe was one of the other original Black Hills Gold manufacturers and he and Lampinen were actually one-time business partners. The acquisition of the Thorpe company effectively made Landstrom’s the sole owner of all of the original Black Hills Gold designs.

Landstrom’s still operates in Rapid City and is open year-round for tours of the facility. Tours are given daily at 10:00 a.m and 1:00 p.m. If you go, be sure to ask about Lampinen, Thorpe and the others who helped make Black Hills Gold the unmistakable design that it is today.

********************************************
This wonderful article and graphic is reprinted with permission by the author, Joe Rainboth. Joe writes articles in the Black Hills Travel Blog. Our heartfelt thanks to Joe for graciously allowing us to share this wonderful article.

Joe is a resident of Spearfish, S.D. He grew up in the tall-corn state of Iowa, where he developed an early interest in all things outdoors. After high school he moved to Vermillion, S.D., where he earned his bachelor’s degree in public relations and advertising. During his college years, two things caught his attention: the beauty of western South Dakota’s Black Hills and a girl from those Black Hills. After graduating from college, Joe traveled across the country as a recruiter for the University of South Dakota. He saw the sights from Pittsburgh to Las Vegas and everywhere in between, but it was the Black Hills (and the girl) that kept drawing him back. He and wife moved back to the Black Hills in 2008. He's an avid hiker, mountain biker and road cyclist whose future plans include trying to fit a pair of kayaks into the spare bedroom.

Internet Retailer Conference And Exhibition 2010 - June 8 to 11

Hear the Nation's Top Retail Experts

The speaker roster for the Internet Retailer Conference and Exhibition 2010 represents the largest group of expert speakers ever assembled in online retailing. The 175 speakers at IRCE 2010 represent all industry segments that conduct e-retailing operations. Such diversity of speakers is one of the hallmarks of IRCE, and it explains why its conference agenda appeals to all players in e-retailing. Simply put, the IRCE agenda covers e-retailing from a wide variety of perspectives and shows bias toward none.

This year's Internet Retailer Conference keynote speaker is Imran Jooma, Senior Vice President and General Manager, E-Commerce, Sears Holdings Corp., who will discuss Sears' extensive e-commerce strategy, which includes not only web sites but also mobile commerce and a far-reaching social media effort. He will tell attendees how that approach prepares Sears for today's always-connected but careful spending consumer—and how that strategy will enable Sears to take market share in the new retailing world.

Featured Speaker Dennis McEniry will talk about how Estee Lauder took its premium worldwide beauty brand to 300 web sites in 29 countries with $100 million in annual sales and grew it to become Estee lauder's fastest growing sales channel and a major contributor of bottom-line profits.

Featured Speaker Geoffrey Robertson will discuss how the century-old auto-parts retailer Whitney Automotive became an Internet business as a way to shore up its fading prospects. Featured Speaker Tony Ellison will talk about how he leveraged the advantages of being a small online-only retailer to grow sales in the recession while his bigger office supply competitors were shrinking.

Largest Display of E-Commerce Technology

Propelled by such significant and steady growth of conference attendees, IRCE has always been the favorite show for e-commerce vendors, who know they will be exhibiting their solutions in a high-traffic exhibit hall. As a result, IRCE's exhibit hall has always boasted the largest display of e-commerce technology in the world with more booths than all other U.S. e-retailing events combined. IRCE 2010 will be no exception. Its 170,000-square-foot Exhibit Hall will house the exhibits of 375 e-commerce solution providers who collectively account for three-quarters of the e-commerce technology market, making the information available in the Exhibit Hall as compelling as that provided in the conference sessions.
Click Here For More information And To Register Online.

Decline In Loyalty For Many Consumer Goods Brands

comScore ARS Reports Decline in Loyalty for Many Consumer Goods Brands During Recession

Clear Evidence that “Trading Down” is Driven by Consumers’ Need for Cost Savings

comScore, Inc. (NASDAQ: SCOR), a leader in measuring the digital world, today released the March 2010 results of a study on brand loyalty among consumer goods products, showing a significant decline in consumers’ allegiance to their favorite brands during the past two years. The results of the study were presented by comScore chairman Gian Fulgoni at the Festival of Media conference in Valencia, Spain on Tuesday, April 20, 2010.

“A decline in loyalty to consumer goods brands is typically one of the byproducts of a recession as consumers give greater consideration to price,” said Mr. Fulgoni. “Research we’ve conducted at comScore ARS has quantified the impact of the ‘trading down’ effect within a number of different product categories, highlighting consumers’ increasing willingness to switch brands in the face of pocketbook constraints.”

Brand Loyalty Diminishes Across All Product Categories and Segments in Study

The study evaluated the change in brand loyalty within a number of consumer goods categories, including health & beauty aids, OTC medications, apparel, food, household products and housewares. As the economic downturn has continued, the percentage of shoppers who typically buy the brands they want most has steadily declined across the categories examined. In March 2010, less than 50 percent of shoppers reported purchasing the brand they want most.

In some categories, particularly CPG household products and housewares, consumers were already more likely to buy a brand they didn’t “want most” at the start of the recession. Some categories (e.g., paper towels, facial tissue) have not seen increased trading down from a brand perspective, possibly because such categories have led the way in tiering, allowing consumers to stick with their preferred brand at a more attractive price point. As the economic downturn has persisted, this trading down behavior appears to be spreading to categories that were previously immune (e.g. HBA, OTC). The increases in trading down in these categories have largely occurred in the last year. Higher ticket items have seen large increases in trading down possibly due to larger absolute savings on a single purchase.


As part of the study, U.S. consumers were also asked about the type of brand they did buy when not their preferred one, with a focus on the importance of promotional discounts and lower price in causing the shift.


For most categories, the drop in likelihood to shop for the brand wanted most is not restricted to buying other brands on sale. Rather, a sizeable percentage of the change in shopping approach is being driven by a decision to convert to less expensive brands to save money.

Mr. Fulgoni added: “Despite these shifting consumer dynamics, research has repeatedly shown that premium brands which invest in marketing and promotion activities aimed at maintaining buying at ‘preferred’ levels are able to minimize short-term erosion of share to less expensive brands and position themselves for a bounce-back when the economy improves.”

Update: Stolen Mail Report

We just contacted KELO, a local news station about a report they did this evening about our mail that disappeared in 2007. The reporter will be sharing our story sometime tomorrow.

The reason for the follow up is because the news station was led to believe that the mail theft victims got their stuff back when not everyone did. All we got was empty packages.

** Here is the link to our original story:

http://thereevesreport.blogspot.com/2010/05/where-do-missing-packages-go-mail-theft.html

** Here's the news report:

Stolen Mail Found Years After Being Sent

By Ben Dunsmoor
Published: May 5, 2010, 5:54 PM

SIOUX FALLS, SD - Thousands of people who sent a letter or package that never made it to its destination are now getting them back.

Last June, Michael Dallas Andersen of Garretson was sent to prison for stealing that mail. Andersen pleaded guilty to one count of stealing and opening mail last year. He admitted to taking the mail between 2006 and 2008. But it wasn't until after the case was closed that authorities found the more than 30,000 pieces of mail Andersen had stolen.

Packages are being returned to sender by the postal service, not because they had the wrong address but because they just found the mail that is nearly four years old.

"What we've been trying to do is find a way to get this mail back to its rightful owners," Pete Nowacki of the U.S. Postal Service said.

Officials with the Postal Service say Michael Andersen worked as a private contractor who would haul the mail from the Sioux Falls processing center to the airport. For two years, Andersen took thousands of parcels and stocked them away in an abandoned storage garage. Authorities didn't find the garage until this past February, eight months after Andersen was sentenced for the crime.

"There were materials that were being sent to somebody that had been separated from the package. So we've been doing what we can to sort of do a little bit of detective work trying to match this up and trying to make sure it gets back with the correct package," Nowacki said.

After finding the mail in February, federal investigators sifted through it, and now it is starting to be mailed back.

"The type of service we normally provide wasn't provided here and there's nothing we can do to make up for that, but what we can do is everything we can in our power to try and help people get some sort of closure, some sort of peace of mind that they know at least they've gotten their piece back. They know it's not out there missing somewhere," Nowacki said.

Andersen was sentenced last June to one year in prison and ordered to pay $2,600 in restitution.

KELO & this story

Latest UPDATE:

Today, KELO ran the update that included our packages that were caught in the mail theft that took place here, in Sioux Falls.

** Here's the report and a video:

Stolen Mail Returned To Woman

Posts By Ben Dunsmoor
Published: May 6, 2010, 6:12 PM


SIOUX FALLS, SD - A Sioux Falls woman is upset over her stolen mail that hasn't been returned. The mail in question was stolen between August 2006 and August 2008.

A couple of torn up envelopes is all Brenda Reeves has to show for the jewelry she sold on e-Bay two-and-a-half years ago.

"There I sat thinking, 'Gosh, I wonder what was in there,'" Reeves said.

The two small envelopes had fashion jewelry; as for this large package, she's still trying to figure that out.

"December of 2007. That's almost two and a half years ago. That's a long time," Reeves said.

The confusion started when the packages showed up on her doorstep this week. She wasn't expecting anything, but when she opened up the parcels and found ripped up envelopes and a letter from the U.S. Postal Service saying her mail was stolen two years ago, she was speechless.

"Wasn't too sure what to think and then I opened them and then I was horrified," Reeves said.

She wasn't just horrified that her mail was stolen, but that this case had gone on for more than three years and she didn't know anything about it until this week.

"Somebody got away with our merchandise and we had unhappy customers evidently because they didn't get their merchandise and I'm questioning why were we never contacted," Reeves said.

Michael Andersen was sentenced to one year in prison last year and ordered to pay $2,600 in restitution. But by looking at her torn up envelopes, Reeves thinks Andersen stole, stored and never delivered a lot more mail than that.

"If you've got 30,000 pieces of mail missing and I have three right here that had nothing in it, how many others didn't have anything in it?" Reeves said.

The Postal Service didn't find the garage where Andersen kept the mail until February of this year, eight months after Andersen was sentenced.

Officials say they're doing their best to match up items that were found in the garage with the empty packages that were also in the garage. But with 30,000 pieces of mail, it's a big job to take on.

KELO & this story



The comment about the number of packages and how many may be missing their contents was made in regards to the restitution that was set in the legal case in this story. It just seems like an awfully low amount considering how much merchandise this person likely made off with. How many others got nothing but empty envelopes or boxes back? How much should the restitution have really been set at?

Also, if the missing items are sitting in some bin somewhere in the USPS system, what are they going to do with it? They never contacted us to see what might have belonged in the packages. It doesn't seem like USPS did all that they could to match up the contents to the empty packages.

We will be contacting USPS about this situation to see what else may be done.

eBay Pulls Auction For Madonna's Personal Journals

eBay pulled a multi-million dollar auction for Madonna's personal journals and other Madonna related items at 10am Monday morning. TMZ reports that "a rep for the singer was able to convince eBay that "they" were the rightful owners."

The seller, a man who bought the collection at a blind auction for $150 at a Chatsworth, California storage facility, is rightfully upset.

The storage unit belonged to Melissa Crowe. Crowe was Madonna’s personal assistant from 1987 to 1996. In the storage unit was Madonna’s personal daily journals, from 1988 to 1992, an address book containing famous names, personal pictures of Madonna and her family, among other things. The items in the unit went up for auction when the storage fees went unpaid.

The collector who bought the Madonna items and then placed them on eBay listed them with a starting bid of $2.5 million for the whole lot.

In the description of the items on eBay, the seller stated:

"Today at a moving company, I bought some boxes that were owned by Melissa Crowe. She was Madonna Ciccone's (singer known as 'Madonna') assistant from the years 1987-1996 ... 17 binders/book on everything Madonna and Melissa did! I have not looked through each page, but there is a little of everything in them."

Crowe had gone on blogs making negative comments about the auction and telling people not to buy the items.

PopEater reports that Madonna's publicist, Liz Rosenberg, told them - "These are not Madonna's diaries."

Madonna’s personal daily journals, from 1988 to 1992.



A peek inside of one item.



Madonna’s address book



1959 - Baby Madonna and her family.

"Faux" Is NOT A Legal Qualifier For Pearls

The FTC has strict guidelines regarding precious metals and gemstones. They are located here: http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/guides/jewel-gd.shtm .

It is often that you will find sellers on various venues improperly listing their jewelry items. We have pointed out the FTC guidelines, rules, regulations and etc. to several of these marketplaces in hopes of educating the sellers. It seems no matter what, the FTC information we provide these sites is ignored.

Yesterday, we received a newsletter from one marketplace that bothered us. We have brought this subject up in their forums only to be blasted by irrate sellers and blown off by staff. Even after the entire FTC info was sent, the sellers on this site continue to list their jewelry incorrectly.

This is the section of the newsletter that bothered us:

Not only does it show that the improper terminology is still being used by the sellers on the site, it also proves that the sites' own newsletter is not using legal qualifiers to describe jewelry items in the above links it provided. It is as though the site is laughing at the FTC.

In case you are unsure of which words in the above graphic are incorrect, they are - "Faux pearls". The other terms, such as "Reproduction antiques," appear odd to us also but we know little about those topics so we are addressing the topic we are sure of.

When we clicked on the link provided in the newsletter, we found over 1400 listings for the term "faux pearl" BUT they did not have the proper qualifier in the title. When opening the listings, most did not mention that the pearls were not real but they continued to use the term "faux pearl" throughout.

According to the FTC:

§ 23.18 Definitions of various pearls.

As used in these guides, the terms set forth below have the following meanings:

(a) Pearl: A calcareous concretion consisting essentially of alternating concentric layers of carbonate of lime and organic material formed within the body of certain mollusks, the result of an abnormal secretory process caused by an irritation of the mantle of the mollusk following the intrusion of some foreign body inside the shell of the mollusk, or due to some abnormal physiological condition in the mollusk, neither of which has in any way been caused or induced by humans.

(b) Cultured Pearl: The composite product created when a nucleus (usually a sphere of calcareous mollusk shell) planted by humans inside the shell or in the mantle of a mollusk is coated with nacre by the mollusk.

(c) Imitation Pearl: A manufactured product composed of any material or materials that simulate in appearance a pearl or cultured pearl.

(d) Seed Pearl: A small pearl, as defined in (a), that measures approximately two millimeters or less.

§ 23.19 Misuse of the word "pearl."

(a) It is unfair or deceptive to use the unqualified word "pearl" or any other word or phrase of like meaning to describe, identify, or refer to any object or product that is not in fact a pearl, as defined in § 23.18(a).

(b) It is unfair or deceptive to use the word "pearl" to describe, identify, or refer to a cultured pearl unless it is immediately preceded, with equal conspicuousness, by the word "cultured" or "cultivated," or by some other word or phrase of like meaning, so as to indicate definitely and clearly that the product is not a pearl.

(c) It is unfair or deceptive to use the word "pearl" to describe, identify, or refer to an imitation pearl unless it is immediately preceded, with equal conspicuousness, by the word "artificial," "imitation," or "simulated," or by some other word or phrase of like meaning, so as to indicate definitely and clearly that the product is not a pearl.

(d) It is unfair or deceptive to use the terms "faux pearl," "fashion pearl," "Mother of Pearl," or any other such term to describe or qualify an imitation pearl product unless it is immediately preceded, with equal conspicuousness, by the word "artificial," "imitation," or "simulated," or by some other word or phrase of like meaning, so as to indicate definitely and clearly that the product is not a pearl.

§ 23.20 Misuse of terms such as "cultured pearl," "seed pearl," "Oriental pearl," "natura," "kultured," "real," "gem," "synthetic," and regional designations.

(a) It is unfair or deceptive to use the term "cultured pearl," "cultivated pearl," or any other word, term, or phrase of like meaning to describe, identify, or refer to any imitation pearl.

(b) It is unfair or deceptive to use the term "seed pearl" or any word, term, or phrase of like meaning to describe, identify, or refer to a cultured or an imitation pearl, without using the appropriate qualifying term "cultured" (e.g., "cultured seed pearl") or "simulated," "artificial," or "imitation" (e.g., "imitation seed pearl").

(c) It is unfair or deceptive to use the term "Oriental pearl" or any word, term, or phrase of like meaning to describe, identify, or refer to any industry product other than a pearl taken from a salt water mollusk and of the distinctive appearance and type of pearls obtained from mollusks inhabiting the Persian Gulf and recognized in the jewelry trade as Oriental pearls.

(d) It is unfair or deceptive to use the word "Oriental" to describe, identify, or refer to any cultured or imitation pearl.

(e) It is unfair or deceptive to use the word "natura," "natural," "nature’s," or any word, term, or phrase of like meaning to describe, identify, or refer to a cultured or imitation pearl. It is unfair or deceptive to use the term "organic" to describe, identify, or refer to an imitation pearl, unless the term is qualified in such a way as to make clear that the product is not a natural or cultured pearl.

f) It is unfair or deceptive to use the term "kultured," "semi-cultured pearl," "cultured-like," "part-cultured," "pre-mature cultured pearl," or any word, term, or phrase of like meaning to describe, identify, or refer to an imitation pearl.

(g) It is unfair or deceptive to use the term "South Sea pearl" unless it describes, identifies, or refers to a pearl that is taken from a salt water mollusk of the Pacific Ocean South Sea Islands, Australia, or Southeast Asia. It is unfair or deceptive to use the term "South Sea cultured pearl" unless it describes, identifies, or refers to a cultured pearl formed in a salt water mollusk of the Pacific Ocean South Sea Islands, Australia, or Southeast Asia.

(h) It is unfair or deceptive to use the term "Biwa cultured pearl" unless it describes, identifies, or refers to cultured pearls grown in fresh water mollusks in the lakes and rivers of Japan.

(i) It is unfair or deceptive to use the word "real," "genuine," "precious," or any word, term, or phrase of like meaning to describe, identify, or refer to any imitation pearl.

(j) It is unfair or deceptive to use the word "gem" to describe, identify, or refer to a pearl or cultured pearl that does not possess the beauty, symmetry, rarity, and value necessary for qualification as a gem.

Note to paragraph (j): Use of the word "gem" with respect to cultured pearls should be avoided since few cultured pearls possess the necessary qualifications to properly be termed "gems." Imitation pearls should not be described as "gems."

(k) It is unfair or deceptive to use the word "synthetic" or similar terms to describe cultured or imitation pearls.

(l) It is unfair or deceptive to use the terms "Japanese Pearls," "Chinese Pearls," "Mallorca Pearls," or any regional designation to describe, identify, or refer to any cultured or imitation pearl, unless the term is immediately preceded, with equal conspicuousness, by the word "cultured," "artificial," "imitation," or "simulated," or by some other word or phrase of like meaning, so as to indicate definitely and clearly that the product is a cultured or imitation pearl.

§ 23.21 Misrepresentation as to cultured pearls.

It is unfair or deceptive to misrepresent the manner in which cultured pearls are produced, the size of the nucleus artificially inserted in the mollusk and included in cultured pearls, the length of time that such products remained in the mollusk, the thickness of the nacre coating, the value and quality of cultured pearls as compared with the value and quality of pearls and imitation pearls, or any other material matter relating to the formation, structure, properties, characteristics, and qualities of cultured pearls.

******************************************
We wish that the owners of all sites would take this issue more seriously and make their sellers list properly. It is all about consumer protection and if a site intends to hold any credibility, they should follow all of the laws, rules, regulations and guidelines as they pertain to them and the products represented on their sites. They shouldn't simply pick and choose which one's they are going to follow.

Where Do Missing Packages Go? Mail Theft Does Happen

Most online sellers have had buyers who have contacted them because their package is slow to arrive or has failed to arrive. Sometimes it is a case of another family member picking up the mail and forgetting to let the buyer know that it has arrived, it may be a case of being impatient or whatever. Then of course, once in a very great while, it is someone trying to get two items for the price of one. At any rate, things may not always be as they seem.

We have only had one serious incident with USPS in all of our years selling online. That was when 8-10 packages turned up missing and when we contacted the PO, they said that a whole truck of mail was abandoned in a mountain pass in the dead of winter. We never saw the mail again, the buyers never got the mail and in the end, all were refunded, including us.

After what happened today, we have realized that there is another twist that can take place.

Today, we got some USPS shipping supplies. We were not around when the mail carrier arrived so they left them on the front step. Under the supplies were 3 priority mail envelopes.

We were horrified when we opened them.

One was a priority mail box that we sent 12-08-07
One was a 4 X 8 bubble mailer we sent 12-08-07
The last one was a 4 X 8 bubble mailer we sent 02-09-08

All had been torn open with the contents missing.

USPS enclosed the same letter in each package. We were just sick.

Here's the letter:

Dear Postal Customer:

The enclosed mail piece was recovered recently from an abandoned storage unit in Sioux Falls, South Dakota. We believe that the storage unit was used by a suspect in a mail theft prior to his arrest. On June 19, 2009, that suspect was convicted and sentenced to one year imprisonment for the violation of Title 18 USC 1702, Obsrtuction of Correspondence.

Our investigation is now closed. This letter is to inform you that we no longer require custody of the enclosed mail piece and are returning the mail to you. It is apparent that your mail piece was tampered with and that some or all of the contents are missing. We have worked as best as we can to match any loose contents to the appropriate mail piece but have not always been successful.

If you have experienced a financial loss due to the theft of the enclosed mail, please enter a mail theft complaint at www.postalinspecors.uspis.gov or call the Postal Inspection Service at (877) 876-2455, option 3. If you believe you may have been the victim of identity theft, please contact one of the following credit reporting agencies to place a fraud alert on your account:

Equifax (800) 525-6285
Experian (888) 397-3748
TansUnion (800) 680-7829

We regret any loss and inconvenience this may have caused you. Please be assured of our continued attention to the security of mail while in the custody of the U.S. Postal Service.

Sincerely,
Handwritten Signature Here
Joseph P Schneiders
Postal Inspector

After thinking about it, this means that the mail disappeared while in USPS custody. It did not happen after it was delivered, it happened right here in Sioux Falls after we sent it on it's way. It never got out of town and all of it was headed for cities on the different coasts.

It is hard to believe that this kind of thing can happen but low and behold, it happened to us.

We don't remember these particular pieces and will have to go through our records to see what the items were and go about filing the complaints as necessary. It sure seems odd that USPS never contacted us in all of this time. The one who stole the mail is due to get out of jail next month, if he hasn't already.

We wonder:

Why didn’t USPS let us know something earlier so we could advise our customers? We didn’t have to tell them what happened as far as the exact details but just to give them a heads up that there was a problem.

The way this was handled, the customers likely thought we may have been less than truthful with info about the package.

It just seems that 2.5 years after the first packages disappeared and just before the culprit that stole the packages gets out of jail is, at the very least, a little bit late.

Why wasn't any of this on the local news or in the newspapers? It was such a hush, hush deal that even those that were victims had no idea about it until now.

Sellers don’t always watch all of the Delivery Confirmation or tracking info on their packages until they arrive to the customer. After all, they have tons of other things they need to be doing but it appears that sellers should check the Delivery Confirmation and tracking on all of their packages from now on if they don't already.

When a buyer contacts the seller claiming that their package has not arrived, this is another scenario that the seller may want to consider when trying to locate the item.