<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<GoodreadsResponse>
	<Request>
		<authentication>false</authentication>
		    <method><![CDATA[]]></method>
	</Request>
	<review id="32758407">
    <user id="145025">
    <name><![CDATA[Jeff]]></name>
    <location><![CDATA[London, The United Kingdom]]></location>        
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/145025-jeff]]></url>
  </user>
      <rating>2</rating>
  <votes>0</votes>
  <sell_flag>false</sell_flag>
  <spoiler_flag>false</spoiler_flag>
  <shelves>
        <shelf name="economics" />
      </shelves>
  <recommended_for><![CDATA[]]></recommended_for>
  <recommended_by><![CDATA[]]></recommended_by>
  <read_at></read_at>
  <date_added>Sat Sep 13 03:36:48 -0700 2008</date_added>
  <date_updated>Sat Sep 13 03:48:43 -0700 2008</date_updated>
  <read_count></read_count>
    <body><![CDATA[I'm not entirely sure that this needed to be a book.  The original article was interesting. Anderson gave a name to a phenomenon that a lot of people intuited was happening, and he provided solid numbers to back up that intuition. While the book expands on the original article, I don't think it improves on it.  While I know Anderson did quite a bit of additional research for the book, it feels like the results are a number of fairly obvious examples that support his initial thesis.  Nothing earth shattering here.<br/><br/>All in all, I'm glad I only paid 99p for this at an Oxfam.  I would have felt cheated otherwise.]]></body>
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/32758407]]></url>
</review>

</GoodreadsResponse>