January 2011

In The Pipeline: CoStar Development and Construction News for Jan. 23 – 29

January 25, 2011

In The Pipeline is a column on significant land sales, transactions and trends affecting office, industrial, flex, multifamily, mixed-use, hotel and public works developers. Send us news leads about your new project — and sign up to be added to our distribution list to receive future In the Pipeline columns by e-mail. Read previous columns and articles. Architect Billings Indicator Hits Three-Year High The Architecture Billings Index (ABI) jumped…

Read the full article →

Obama’s Clean Energy Aspirations Face Dirty Reality

January 25, 2011

$150 billion in the next ten years–that’s what the Obama administration has been promising in government spending for clean energy since the president was still just a candidate running for office. When the president delivers his State of the Union address this Tuesday, he is expected to announce his intent to support programs that will help the nation to pursue cleaner sources of energy–a potentially large source of new jobs. Obama’s rhetorical commitment to clean energy has been well documented. But despite the fervor of his speech, his follow-up on a clean energy agenda, both in early-stage innovation and in large-scale deployment, has been seriously hampered by the administration’s inability to pass the legislation necessary to facilitate a thriving clean energy future. Obama has vowed to transform the landscape of the energy economy, weaning America off its foreign oil dependence and shifting to renewable sources over the next ten years. Specifically, he has repeatedly promised to devote $15 billion dollars in clean energy investment each year, as well as announcing his intention to pass sweeping energy reform legislation to reduce greenhouse emissions. “This is the beginning of the 2012 elections,” said Mark Muro, an energy expert at the Brookings Institution. “I think we’re going to hear very powerful rhetorical arguments, but meanwhile, the budget realities don’t seem very promising. There are simply areas where we have done too little, and we need to invest much more.” In the 2010 State of the Union Address , Obama promised to pass “a comprehensive energy and climate bill with incentives that will finally make clean energy the profitable kind of energy in America,” echoing his 2009 statement that he wanted Congress to send him “a market-based cap on carbon pollution.” The energy bill that would have delivered these very things languished in the Senate this summer before finally vanishing altogether–in what may have been the Obama administration’s best chance for passing energy reform. The right-shift that hit Congress this November will only make it more difficult for legislators to get any major energy reform passed. “We really are in the clean energy arena, wrestling with what comes after cap-and-trade if we’re not going to have it,” said Muro. “But there’s no way around the fact that we’re going to need some revenue.” And that revenue has been at the heart of Obama’s promises since back in his campaign days, when he pledged to “invest 150 billion dollars over the next decade in renewable energy” during his 2008 speech at the Democratic National Convention –a figure he reiterated up until his 2009 State of the Union Address. With the passage of the American Recovery Act, $59 billion dollars were allocated to clean energy expenditures, with $400 million going to found ARPA-E , a government lab for energy innovation. Of those $59 billion dollars, $32.5 billion has been spoken for, and about $3.5 billion has actually been spent–in part because of the long-term nature of such projects. But some experts fear that the unspent money will be subject to pushback in Congress. “It’s fair to say that money that hasn’t been spent and hasn’t been granted is certainly subject to recall or removal,” said Gerry Langeler, managing director of OVP Venture Partners, a venture firm with a clean energy focus. “I’m sure we’ll see some of that.” Over the years, Obama’s promises on clean energy have grown less specific, if not any less passionate. After the recent BP Oil Spill , he again reaffirmed the need to “seriously tackle our addiction to fossil fuels,” rattling off a series of possible solutions without committing to any one of them. “The one approach I will not accept is inaction,” he concluded. It may be that the president recognizes the steep challenge he faces to push through serious energy reform in a divided Congress. In a recent interview with Rolling Stone , he affirmed that the energy policy may have to be done “in chunks, as opposed to some sort of comprehensive omnibus legislation.” But for all of his ardent talk, Obama has not yet been able to introduce the transformative changes he has sought. On Tuesday night, many will be watching to see what renewed commitments he will make to the sector–and whether he can follow through. “I think there’s a little bit of lip service–this has been publicly his agenda for some time,” said David Cheng, a senior analyst at Cleantech Group, a clean energy research and consulting firm. The recent appointment of General Electric CEO Jeff Immelt as the head of the Council on Jobs and Competitiveness seems to point to a greener leaning administration–in his time at GE, Immelt has been outspoken in his support for clean energy initiatives. While introducing Immelt, Obama singled out GE for “investing in innovation, building a clean energy center, an advanced battery manufacturing plant, and other state-of-the-art facilities in Schenectady that are resulting in hundreds of new American jobs and contributing to America’s global economic leadership.” Immelt is a member of the American Energy Innovation Council , a group of business leaders who have urged strong action on the clean energy front, including recommending expenditures of $16 billion for research and development each year–last year, the U.S. spent about $5 billion in the sector. “No business will invest when there is no certainty about what a market will look like two, five or 10 years into the future,” he said in their report . “If we’re serious about transforming our energy markets, we must send the right signals and create demand for the technologies that solve these problems.” Those who’ve watched Immelt navigate GE through the changing energy field are enthusiastic about his experience, as well as his ability to turn clean energy into a viable buisness venture. “Jeff Immelt and GE have made clean energy a profitable business segment for them,” said Dennis Costello of Braemar Energy Ventures. “They’re now a major player in that industry.” But Immelt, in statements to the Financial Times , didn’t seem too optimistic about the prospects for comprehensive national energy reform. “In the short term, it’s going to be driven by companies, and maybe some states. I think a city and a state in the US can still be a catalyst,” he said. “It’s not going to be a high priority of this Congress to attack all this stuff, but there will be plenty of activity that takes place even without that.” Still, clean energy players seem optimistic about the appointment of a private sector leader in what will be a very public role. “The beauty of appointing Jeff and specifically someone who’s running GE is that they have so consistently thought both long term about their business and particularly about being a leader,” said Langeler. “His mindset is not only should the U.S. create jobs, but where will we create them and how competitive will we be in the world when we do. He’s going come out helping the country as best he can to lead.” The president claimed recently that he keeps a checklist in his pocket of the promises he made during the campaign, and that his administration has accomplished 70 percent of what he had set out to do. The short energy checklist of the Obama-Biden campaign promised the following: the creation of five million jobs through the investment of $150 billion dollars in a decade, saving more on oil in ten years than was then imported from the Middle East and Venezuela combined, putting 1 million hybrid cars on the road by 2015, 25 percent dependency on renewable sources by 2025 and 80 percent gas emission reduction by 2050 through cap-and-trade. Though for many of these changes it will take years, even decades, to fully judge their implementation, the concrete goals that have been set seem to be mired in administrative difficulties. Still, Obama’s greatest accomplishment may be his public dedication to clean energy–words that resonate, even if they don’t do. “Time and time again he’s demonstrated that he understands that the greater problem that are going to affect America are not just economic but environmental,” said Cheng. “This president has been the most progressive, the most aggressive in terms of pushing out a clean energy agenda than any other president in the past.”

Read the full article →

Arianna Huffington: Davos Diary: Heading to the World Economic Forum at a Crossroads Moment for the World

January 25, 2011

As soon as I hit “Publish,” I’m getting on a plane for the seven-hour flight to Zurich, followed by a two-hour drive to Davos for the 2011 World Economic Forum. According to early reports , the mood in Davos this year will be “somber.” “Humanity is at a cross-roads,” Klaus Schwab, the Forum’s founder, plans to say in his open remarks. “We can either continue to work as lobbyists for our narrowly defined self-interests and keep doing the same old things that got us into the crisis in the first place,” or we can “act together as true global leaders, with the long term global public interest in mind and at heart.” It’s a sweeping statement, but I don’t think Schwab is overstating the case. Nearly 40 years ago, Jonas Salk talked about how the world was moving from Epoch A (based on survival and competition) to Epoch B (based on collaboration and meaning). But a global economy that leaves millions behind and is driven by greed, injustice, and the “narrowly defined self-interests” that Schwab warns of, makes it harder to move to Epoch B any time soon. It’s telling that a survey of Davos participants found that growing economic disparity is seen as one of the two biggest risks facing the world in the coming decade. In a piece previewing Davos, James Ledbetter, the editor of Reuters.com, describes the growing gulf between the world’s rich and poor as “not only immoral, but dangerous, as it can lead to open conflict between nations and internal political turmoil.” Indeed, today, a country’s internal economic health is as much a national security issue as the size and quality of a country’s army was in the 20th century. The solution, according to Schwab, is an embrace of “basic values and shared norms” that can “guide the decision-making of leaders and help ensure inclusive rather than exclusive outcomes.” As part of the push for inclusive outcomes, the forum is once again granting full access to a collection of social entrepreneurs from around the world. This is the 10th year the conference has offered a platform to what it considers “voices from the ground.” But there is something different this time around. In the past, social entrepreneurship and efforts at developing civil society were the Davos equivalent of icing on the banker/CEO/head-of-state cake. Now they are an essential ingredient, baked into the cake. This shift stems from the growing sense, even among the elites, that our current political and economic systems are inadequate to the task of addressing the multiple crises the world is facing. As Schwab puts it, “One thing is certain: we can’t keep doing the same old thing in a new era that requires new responses.” So there are panels like the one on “Scaling Up Big Ideas,” moderated by James Gregory Dees, a professor of Social Entrepreneurship at Duke University. According to the Davos schedule, it will look at “models of collaboration,” the “nature of social innovation,” and the “challenges of scaling,” while addressing the question, “How can social innovations be scaled up for wider effect and greater impact?” There’s also an IdeasLab featuring Marissa Mayer of Google, the Crown Prince of Norway, and “young global leaders,” including Calvin Chin, the CEO of Qifang, a Shanghai-based online community that helps poor Chinese students pay for college, and Allon Raiz, CEO of Raizcorp, a South African company that helps entrepreneurs grow their businesses. Among the topics to be discussed: “promoting transparency in government, business, and civil society.” I’ll also be interested in a panel on the “Media’s Role in Shaping Norms” that will feature David Brooks, Peggy Conlon, CEO of the Ad Council, and Naif Al-Mutawa, a Kuwaiti social entrepreneur. The overarching theme of this year’s forum is “Shared Norms for the New Reality.” Among the shared norms Schwab will highlight in his opening remarks is “collective sacrifice.” It’s a notion that has been conspicuously missing from America’s political dialogue — even in the face of the economic hardships of the last two-plus years. As David Leonhardt recently noted in the New York Times , countries like Germany and Canada have avoided mass layoffs by cutting hours and pay for everyone, while the notion of shared sacrifice has failed to catch on among our political leaders. That’s why early reports that President Obama will use his State of the Union speech to deliver a theme of national unity and renewal have been so encouraging. It’s expected that the 44th president will hearken back to another president who faced a crossroads moment, JFK, who, in 1961, responded to the national shock at the Soviet Union having pulled ahead in the space race with the launch of Sputnik by promising to put a man on the moon by the end of the decade. “Expect the president on Tuesday to hearken back to that time,” wrote HuffPost’s Howard Fineman, “and to say we face another ‘Sputnik moment’ — an economic one.” And the New York Times calls the president’s speech “a pivot point not only for himself but also for the nation.” Crossroads and pivot points. This is one of those moments when you have the feeling that if we get it wrong, we’ll be living in a very different world. From Davos to DC, it’s clear that the world is in need of big ideas. Let’s hope the president, and those business and government leaders gathering a continent away, rise to the challenge.

Read the full article →

Cisco Names Blair Christie Chief Marketing Officer, Worldwide Government Affairs

January 25, 2011

Susan Bostrom to Leave Company After 14 Years of Service, Five Years of Marketing Leadership

Read the full article →

McCaffery Interests, Inc. Announces New Company Chairman, President and Expansion Plans

January 25, 2011

Dan McCaffery Assumes the Role of Chairman While Ed Woodbury Is Named President

Read the full article →

Ernan Roman: Lessons From My Chimney Cleaner About Service and Marketing Best Practices

January 24, 2011

A few weeks ago I called a local chimney-cleaning company and set up an appointment for a cleaning. When the workmen arrived, I asked them to remove their sooty shoes when walking around the house. Despite this request, the workers left an ugly trail of black soot stains on our basement carpeting. So began a fascinating opportunity to experience how some companies are mastering the integration of marketing and customer service. My problem was turned into a marketing opportunity by the company — but only because the person I spoke with to file my complaint understood that customer service is actually a marketing opportunity. That person happened to be the owner of the company. Viewing customer service and marketing as two sides of the same coin is the first step in turning service disasters into marketing opportunities. This can only occur if marketing and customer service teams work together based on the recognition that customer retention is essential. Marketing can no longer afford to view customer service as a labor intensive “operations” function. In this era of empowered consumers with social media megaphones, the ability of dissatisfied customers to voice their opinions worldwide is astonishing and frightening. Back to my chimney-cleaning saga: The owner listened carefully to my complaint and acknowledged his company’s responsibility for the problem. He said, “On behalf of our company, I would like to apologize for what happened. I would also like to thank you for taking the time to call . We will do what it takes to clean up the mess we created.” The owner and I reviewed the details of the damage and the follow-up action, which was to have a professional carpet cleaning company come to my home within a week, at no charge. I then asked why he had thanked me for making the call. His reply was the essence of both great marketing and great customer service. He said, “I want to be able to go to your home next year and the following year and the year after that, to clean your chimney. By calling our company, you provided me with the opportunity to prove to you that, while we made a mistake, we have the professionalism and integrity to take care of our customers. I want to prove to you, that even though we have already been paid for this job, we are not just looking for the bucks. I want you as a long-term customer.” I was intrigued. What he had just said was in line with one of the most important, though often overlooked tenets of innovative marketing: One of the most important metrics for identifying the success of a marketing initiative is its capacity to generate repeat purchases. I asked about the company’s customer service team. Was I getting a good outcome simply because I had been lucky enough to speak with the owner of the company? Or was this approach really part of the organization’s service culture? My call, as it turned out, had been no accident. Customer service reps at this firm were empowered to resolve customer problems ; they worked closely with the marketing department to ensure that customer acquisition and retention were tightly integrated. This was a fairly small company, a fact that intrigues me on two fronts. First, smaller organizations (which are likely to have fewer problems with “turf and fiefdoms”), may well have the inside track when it comes to seamlessly coordinating marketing and customer service efforts. Second, those companies that do manage to integrate these departments successfully find themselves in a position to significantly improve the customer experience and increase customer lifetime value. Here are seven tips to help you improve your customer experience: 1. Do not view customer service call centers as cost centers. These are revenue centers. 2. Customers’ post-sales experiences have significant impact on repeat purchase likelihood and willingness to recommend the company . Companies must consider the financial ramifications of losing customers due to poor post-sale experiences. 3. Do not cut back on training, quality control procedures, and related investments in customer service call centers. 4. Remember that it’s seven to 10 times more expensive to acquire a new customer than to sell an existing customer. 5. Mistakes happen. Make sure that, when they do, your frontline people are empowered to take responsibility for those mistakes, and propose a solution that is fair to the customer. 6. Customers expect high-quality post-sale support. If it is lacking, they will not only be inclined to go elsewhere, but they will also be inclined to use the power of social media to let others know about their dissatisfaction. 7. The big question is not whether we can get a customer to buy from us once, but whether, after a customer service problem, we can get him or her to buy from us a second time. What kind of experience will make a customer decide not only that he or she isn’t going to demand a refund, but that a repeat purchase is in order? The owner of that chimney-cleaning company knew that I, as his customer, considered the marketing and customer service experience to be inseparable — so he made sure that he and his entire team operated under the same assumption. As a result, I am now a satisfied customer, a committed candidate for repeat business — and an evangelist for his firm. Ernan Roman is President of the marketing consultancy, Ernan Roman Direct Marketing. Recognized as the industry pioneer who created three transformational methodologies: Integrated Direct Marketing, Opt-In Marketing, and Voice of Customer Relationship Research. Cross posted at 1to1® Media .

Read the full article →

Max Fraad Wolff: Squeezed

January 24, 2011

As the holiday season slips into memory the public sector squeeze is on. We are into the shorter, colder days of winter. The American public sector is struggling through a long, cold season. Yes, the economy has made up some of the ground lost in 2008 and 2009. Yes, the recession has been declared officially over. The stock market has rallied and corporate profits have rebounded. State, local and federal government finances remain mired in pain. Cuts in services and employment are occurring and proposed across the country. Last year, total state and local employment declined by more than 400,000 jobs. An unusual number of Americans are dependent on state and local services and employees. Many millions are in poverty, seeking food assistance and qualified for emergency state and local aid. Government jobs are essential supports in many area economies. These jobs employ many victims of past labor market discrimination, offer a way up and out. State and local services are one of the few lines of defense that remain in our thoroughly tattered social safety net. The discussion of public sector workers lately focuses on the cost. This is vital and should be open to discussion. However, we tend to forget all that we rely on these millions to do. We have also developed a dangerous inclination to discuss state and local workers as an undifferentiated mass with new specific attributes or history. This is a serious mistake as so much is now at stake and so many services and contracts are on the line. Our 20 million state and local workers provide many vital services. These folks provide education, fire, police, clerical, court/legal and social services. Major coming battles are to be fought over which state and local jobs to cut. Who will be fired? What pensions/benefits will be cut? How many services will be cut? Who will go without? This will likely reach a fever pitch as the federal debt ceiling is reached in March/April and the state and local fiscal year ends in June. Sometimes pictures are worth 1,000 words. This also goes for graphs. Below is a sketch of state and local workers. Few of the recent discussion really ask how many state and local workers there are. What do these people do? What are the pay levels? Who are these people? Conversation is usually dominated by ideologically and politically inflected diatribe. How many state and local workers are out there? Figure 1. State and Local Employment Bureau of Labor Statistics CES Figure 1 makes clear that there are about 20 million state and local workers in America. There were 14.3 million local workers at the start of 2011 and 5.2 million state employees. There has been a steady rise in state and local employment over the last half century. Growth has not been particularly rapid over the last decade. Figure 2 speaks to relatively flat employment levels at the state and local levels in the new millennium. Growth in state and local employment has occurred as population has increased and past social movements have won expanded benefits. The very high cost of medical care and social problems associated with crime, drugs, lack of affordable housing have added to costs. Public education — at all levels — has also grown as a cost to state and local governments. Our massive networks of jails, parole officers, probation officers and prisons have grown rapidly. The relative strength of state and local employee unions in some areas has also contributed to employment growth. Most American communities rely on a host of state and local services as well as employments and incomes that flow directly and indirectly from state employment. In some communities these jobs and services produce and support much of the local middle class. Figure 2. BLS Data State and Local Government Employment 2000-2010 (Thousands) In 2009, the latest available data, the average state employee earned $23.67 per hour, $49,240 per year. The average local government employee earned $21.68 per hour or $45,090 per year. These averages hide large differences in pay by location, age and job type. The national average earning per hour for all employed Americans in December of 2009 was $22.38, $44,760 for a 2,000 hour year. State and local government employees earned about the national average per hour in 2009 and 2010. State and local workers, particularly in the six states with the highest levels of unionization, received better benefits than the average private sector worker in a similar job. Public sector workers are more likely to receive benefits than those in the private sector. Benefits have been negotiated up by these workers as an alternative to higher wages in many localities and cases. The value of benefit packages adjusts with the costs of health care, prescription drugs and returns on pension investments. Benefits in public sector work continue to be in line with historical middle class benefit levels. However, there has been significant erosion in benefits for many private sector workers since the 1980s. Thus, public sector workers often have more generous benefit packages than their private sector counterparts. What services do state and local workers provide? The jobs most commonly performed by state and local employees include education/teaching, law enforcement/public safety, fire protection, transportation, social, legal/court and medical services, clerical services. Figure 3 below lists the most common jobs and salaries for state and local employees according to the BLS Career Guide to Industries, 2010-2011 Edition. State and local government employee earnings were close to the national averages in most occupations. The annual earnings of most state and local workers track and move fairly closely with average earnings in the private sector. There are some exceptions and these usually have resulted from particular local political struggles and circumstances. Figure 3. Most Common State and Local Government Occupations and Mean Hourly Compensation Demographic Features and Context State and local workers are heavily unionized. Cuts in employment, wages and benefits at all levels of government will dramatically decrease the proportion of union employment in the US. As this goes to press 12.3% of Americans are represented by unions, 14.7 million people. This number declined by 612,000 across 2010. The rate of unionization has been falling since 1983, when these numbers began being tracked by the BLS. 2010 marked a new low with 11.9% of workers represented by unions, down from 20% in 1983. 36% of public sector workers were unionized in 2010 and 6.9% of private sector workers were in a union. More than half of all unionized workers are in the public sector. In 2010 7.6 million public sector workers were unionized and 7.1 million private sector workers were unionized. Six states: New York, California, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Ohio, New Jersey contain more than half of all union members. Rates of union membership are lowest in the Southeastern US where many states have less than 5% of their labor force in unions. Given the dramatic overrepresentation of unions in the state and local public sector, any major shift in employment in this sector will immediately and profoundly shift the role and size of unions in America. Figure 4. BLS Data % of Workers Unionized by Employer Type State and local employees have several demographic attributes that are not seen universally in the working public. African Americans have higher rates of government and union employment because of their concentration in regions and occupations covered by state and local unions. African Americans have a higher rate of state and local employment and a higher rate of unionized employment than the population average. Equal Opportunity Employment Committee data from 2007 suggests that 18% of full time state employees are black. At the city level, the same EEOC data suggest that 19% of full time employees are black. Major shifts in employment at the state and local level are likely to disproportionally impact communities of color- particularly African American communities. There is a unique history behind high levels of African American employment in many states and locales. This history emerged out of civil rights struggles and past patterns of severe employment discrimination against African Americans in hiring. Ethnic demographics of state and local employees display this pattern among historically abused ethnicities and women. Veterans are significantly overrepresented in public sector employment, including at the state and local level. In 2009, nearly 13% of all employed veterans worked for state and local government. Public sector employees tend to stay at jobs longer and tend to be older than private sector workers. Public sector workers are statistically more likely to be older, to be veterans, to be from communities of color and to be concentrated in urban areas of the Mid-Atlantic, West Coast or upper Midwest. These groups will be uniquely hurt by significant cuts in employment, pay, benefits to the public sector. I know some of the above information is dry. However, it is essential to have a realistic conversation about who, what and where we are cutting. Needless to say, lower income and special needs populations are likely to suffer most acutely from reductions in state and local services. Restrictions and reductions on hiring and compensation will further erode the middle class and are likely to increase inequalities of wealth and income.

Read the full article →

Robert Reich: The State of the Union and the Federal Budget: Investing in America’s Future

January 24, 2011

Word has it that the president will be emphasizing “improving American competitiveness” in his State of the Union Address Tuesday night. As I’ve noted , the term is meaningless — but it’s politically useful. CEOs and many conservatives think it means improving the profitability of American companies. Liberals and labor unions think it means increasing export jobs. Neither touches at the heart of the matter. Hopefully, the president will. Over the long term, the only way to improve the living standards of most Americans is to invest in our people — especially their educations, skills, and the communications and transportation systems linking them together and with the rest of the world (infrastructure). In the global economy, the only “asset” that’s unique to any nation — and that determines its living standard — is the people who comprise it. Almost everything else moves across global boundaries at the speed of an electronic impulse. (Money is available to any major business from anywhere around the world. Any entrepreneur can rent or purchase additional office or factory capacity, and the most up-to-date machinery, instantly from anywhere. Commodities, supplies, and components can be summoned almost as quickly from anywhere.) That’s why spending on education, infrastructure, and basic R&D (which educates our people in the technologies and processes of the future) is fundamentally different from other categories of government spending. These outlays are really investments in the future productivity of our people. Here’s where the debate over the deficit comes in. If the federal budget were organized sanely, it would be divided into three parts: (1) Past obligations, (2) Current needs, (3) Future investments. Past obligations reflect payments Americans have made over the course of their lives in the expectation of receiving social insurance (mostly Social Security and Medicare) when they retire. These past obligations need to be honored because they’re based on implicit contracts between the public and the government. If such contracts are to be altered, they should be altered only for future generations who haven’t yet entered into them. Current needs reflect everything we want today in order to remain safe and healthy (from national defense through Medicaid). The current needs budget should be balanced each year. It’s appropriate that we pay for all our current needs through our current taxes. But future investments are qualitatively different. There’s no problem with borrowing in order to finance such investments. While it might be irresponsible for a family to go into debt in order to finance a worldwide cruise, it could be equally irresponsible for the same family not to borrow money in order to help finance their kids’ college. In fact, borrowing in order to increase future productivity is sensible — up to the point where the return on the investment is no longer higher than the cost (principal plus interest) of the loan. Ideally, the federal budget would be divided along these lines — past, present, and future. And the future, or “capital,” budget (containing spending on education, infrastructure, and basic R&D) would be separated from the rest, with its own system for “scoring” — that is, evaluating — whether the likely return is worth the cost. It won’t be an easy call in every case, of course, but the Congressional Budget Office and the OMB take on much harder ones. Who knows? The president may even propose something like this tomorrow night. Robert Reich is the author of Aftershock: The Next Economy and America’s Future , now in bookstores. This post originally appeared at RobertReich.org .

Read the full article →

Carolyn Ziel: Are You Over-Doing All the Right Things?

January 24, 2011

Why are some entrepreneurs more successful than others? This is a burning question for many over busy, over tired and over struggling entrepreneurs whose energy, drive and motivation have evaporated as they do ‘all the right things’ and yet they aren’t moving forward. Just because you think you’re doing ‘all the right things’ if they aren’t tied to your core mission and passion, they might not be right for you. While certain structures do need to be in place, in this ever-changing business environment you don’t have to follow a cookie cutter model if it’s not for you. At first, it may sound too ‘new age’ to incorporate your own ‘happiness’ into your strategic plan. Yet, according to Daniel Pink, author of DRIVE , “The secret to high performance and satisfaction–at work, at school, and at home–is the deeply human need to direct our own lives, to learn and create new things, and to do better by ourselves and our world.” This is not only a formula for happiness; it’s a formula for success. Unfortunately for so many of us, somewhere along our entrepreneurial journey we become inundated with what we think we should be doing. The goals we set aren’t tied to our passion, but many times to extrinsic motivators like money and we lose motivation, clients and sales. We also lose our happy selves. So what do you do? Re-discover what motivates you. Re-think the original reason you started your business. Re-visit what your strategic plan and include words like happiness, satisfaction and fulfillment in your definition of success. Without intrinsic motivators, chances are against you achieving your goals because you’re likely to burn out along the way! According to Daniel Pink, “Rewards…can transform an interesting task into a drudge. They can turn play into work…by diminishing intrinsic motivation, they can send performance, creativity and even upstanding behavior toppling like dominoes”. Researchers have found that when creative people create for the sheer joy of creation, they are more productive and happier. In addition, their work is of a higher caliber. Another thing you can do is join me on January 28th and 29th in Ontario, CA where I will be attending Lisa Marie Platske’s LEADERSHIP SUCCESS SUMMIT 2011 . Lisa Marie is the award winning CEO of Upside Thinking , an international leadership development company committed to transforming the personal and professional lives of leaders. This year’s summit theme is, “Moving Forward: Prosperity in Changing Times”. Lisa Marie believes that “a lot of people aren’t moving forward, even with money and sales skills…sometimes the only things they need are small steps to attract clients and profitability and …an action plan.” Doing what we love needs to be balanced with structure and finding our own path. How do you balance what you love with what you have to do to run the day to day of your business? Lisa Marie’s answer is to “invest in what you do best and network the rest… otherwise your battery dies”. Lisa Marie ensures that entrepreneurs will leave her conference with tools to move forward. Included in these tools will be the power to reconnect with intrinsic motivators as well as learning how to “network the rest”. “This year’s Leadership Success Summit is all about a path to success that’s a better, simpler, and a more authentic way to create prosperity at every level of your business – and your life. … It all starts with where you are right now…” That doesn’t mean undermining the solid work you’ve done and your current accomplishments. It just means that, in this market, there is a lot of room for creativity. Entrepreneurs need to turn these strategies into real-life actions to move forward. This begins with connection. It might mean reconnecting to what your personal motivators are and then connecting with other entrepreneurs to create strategic partnerships and long term business friendships. Connection, in all aspects, is one of our most valuable assets in today’s marketplace. “The power of motivation and increasing your sphere of influence” is one of Lisa Marie’s sure fire ways of moving forward. She believes, “You have to look at motivation like a car battery and what keeps it moving is that internal piece and there is a big difference between movement and motivation.” Lisa believes that her clarity of vision drives her activities and they are based on what is meaningful for her. In other words, her actions are in alignment with her core mission. We can’t ignore what we love any longer. Science is supporting us now! Drawing on four decades of scientific research on human motivation, Daniel Pink exposes the mismatch between what science knows and what business does–and how that affects every aspect of life. If we spend the majority of our days doing what we love, we will be more successful. We will easily stay motivated as we move forward.

Read the full article →

AIG’s CEO To Stay On Despite Cancer

January 24, 2011

BOSTON — American International Group Inc. said Monday that CEO and President Robert Benmosche is healthy enough to remain in his leadership post as he continues undergoing treatment for cancer. Monday’s announcement came three months after the New York insurance company said Benmosche had been diagnosed with cancer and was undergoing aggressive chemotherapy. The company has not specified what kind of cancer Benmosche has. The 66-year-old said in a news release Monday that doctors have given him “an encouraging prognosis,” and that he feels “good.” Since he has responded well to treatment, Benmosche said his doctors “believe I can continue to apply the same commitment and energy to AIG over the next 12 to 18 months.” Benmosche said it’s likely he’ll return to his retirement in 2012. He initially retired in 2006 after leading insurance company MetLife Inc., but was recruited to lead New York-based AIG in August 2009. He replaced Edward Liddy, a former Allstate Corp. CEO who was appointed to lead AIG in September 2008 in connection with the company’s federal bailout. Benmosche has led AIG’s efforts to repay the $182 billion bailout, which pulled the company from the brink of bankruptcy. Earlier this month, that rescue came closer to an end as AIG paid its $21 billion outstanding balance to the New York branch of the Federal Reserve. AIG also converted preferred stock owned by the Treasury Department into more than 1.6 billion shares of common stock that can be sold on the open market. The government will wind down its largest and most complex rescue from the financial crisis by selling stock over the next two years. AIG first announced its repayment plan in September. Since then, the company has worked to raise cash to pay back the government by selling parts of itself around the world. AIG gave an update on Benmosche’s health after the market closed Monday. Its shares fell $1.05, or 2.4 percent, to close at $41.95. The stock added 29 cents to $42.24 in after-hours trading. AIG also said on Monday that its board has agreed that its contingency plan to potentially replace Benmosche remains unchanged. On Oct. 27, two days after announcing Benmosche’s illness, AIG said that if he became unwilling or unable to continue, current Chairman Robert Miller would step in as interim CEO until a permanent replacement for Benmosche is found.

Read the full article →

Marc Stoiber: Green B2B: The Secret Sauce For Better Employees?

January 24, 2011

Sustainability is very much a headline in B2C. But we don’t hear much on the subject in B2B. Is it happening? What are the motivators for B2B businesses going green? And what are the consequences of ‘wait and see’? This article is the second in a three part series exploring B2B sustainability issues, culminating in a webinar Tuesday, February 8, 1pm EST (10am PST). To add the webinar to your Outlook calendar, click here . Sometimes, a clever opener is the best way to draw readers. And other times, well, you just let the facts speak for themselves: • Mail sorters at the main US Post Office in Reno, Nevada became the most productive and error-free in the western US after a ‘green’ energy and lighting upgrade in their building. The $300,000 upgrade produced $50,000 in yearly energy and maintenance savings…and a whopping $400,000 annual productivity gain from employees . • VeriFone, a subsidiary of Hewlett-Packard that makes electronic swipe readers to verify credit cards, renovated their building, beating California’s strict Title 24 building code by 60 percent with a 7.5-year payback. More astonishing, however, was the five percent increase in employee productivity and 45 percent drop in absenteeism after the overhaul. These benefits brought payback to under a year, for a return on investment of more than 100 percent. • The Superior Die Set Corporation of Oak Creek, Wisconsin upgraded lighting for $3,000, providing annual energy and maintenance savings of $1,750 – a payback of 20 months. But reduced reflections allowed drafters to cut turn-around time for drawings by more than 11.3 percent , worth $37,500 a year, reducing the payback to under one month. These cases have two things in common. First, each company greened their operations to raise operational efficiency and comply with legislation. And second, each company was taken by surprise when a side benefit – happy employees – seemed to produce unexpected returns. The Best Employees Want Green A recent poll on MonsterTRAK.com found that 80% of young professionals are interested in securing a job that has positive impact on the environment, and 92% would be more inclined to work for a company that is environmentally friendly. How do they find those jobs? One way is through the Environmental Defense Fund’s unique Climate Corps . EDF Climate Corps places specially-trained students from leading business schools in companies to develop energy efficiency plans. One glance at Climate Corps’ website reveals the top caliber talent attracted to the program – and the incredible benefits to partner companies. But are employees picking green companies in meaningful numbers? Anecdotal evidence would suggest so. On a recent visit to Patagonia HQ in Ventura, CA I learned that for each job opening posted, the company receives thousands of qualified applicants. It’s no surprise the company defied the recession, and continues to grow at a healthy pace. Attracting talent is only part of the equation. Andy Mercy is CEO of Angelpoints , a company that helps clients build more effective corporate social responsibility (CSR) programs. In a recent conversation, Mercy said employee CSR programs create benefits far beyond lessening the company’s ecological footprint. In one of the companies serviced by Angelpoints: • Galvanizing employees around CSR produced one of the most positive aspects of job satisfaction 75% of the time; • 49% of employees reported they learned valuable new job skills through the CSR activities; • 64% of the CSR activities resulted in new business leads, when employees were teamed with clients or suppliers in joint programs. Creating a happier, healthier workplace seems an obvious way to boost productivity and attract the best workers. Sadly, this fact is lost on the majority of B2B CEO’s. What Are You Missing? Ian Sugarbroad, former CEO of LGC Wireless, built his B2B company in the hypercompetitive environment of Silicon Valley. In a phone conversation, Sugarbroad credited his corporate green programs with maintaining a stable, highly motivated workforce. And he can’t believe green hasn’t become par for the course among B2B CEO’s. “It definitely hasn’t become standard procedure in Silicon Valley. I believe only 30% of CEO’s think about CSR. 20% just go with the flow, adopting the same green behavior as their competitors. And 50% don’t get it at all – they think building a great company is still as simple as building a great product.” Fact is, an alarmingly high number of B2B companies aren’t up to speed on green issues that could seriously impact their business. According to Scott Wilson of IHS , a recent study conducted by his firm revealed that 45% of B2B’s were unaware of ‘conflict mineral’ legislation enacted in July 2010 – legislation that could cripple electronics suppliers. How does your company stack up? Are you at risk of losing employees, as well as being penalized by legislation or customers greening their supply chain? Learn. Adapt. And Communicate. There are three major lessons to be learned. First, stay informed. This is easier said than done, as information flow has become a torrent. But it’s vital that someone in your company tracks both customer trends and legislation. Second, use the information to adapt to your environment. This adaptation needs to be strategic – choose your areas of green focus with an eye on the white space you could claim. And finally, communicate and engage your employees. Ensure they know what you’re doing in green. Even better, engage them to shape the green course of your company.

Read the full article →

Scott Gerber: What’s The Best Way To Increase The Size Of Your Network?

January 24, 2011

Q: What is the best way to increase the size of my network? How can I get myself and my brand in front of people? –Christina Montgomery, FL The following answers are provided by the Young Entrepreneur Council , an advocacy group founded by serial entrepreneur Scott Gerber that works to take action against youth unemployment by teaching young people how to build successful companies. The council’s members include Generation Y entrepreneurs and experts in a variety of fields. A: Attend Events First, figure out what kind of network you want to build: do you want to meet other entrepreneurs? Marketing thought leaders? Fellow kayak enthusiasts? Then, go to your college alumni e-mail list or even Craigslist, and see whether there are any meet ups in your area. If there are none, think about starting your own group and posting to your college list/Craigslist. Get out there and mingle! –Eric Bahn ( @beatthegmat ), founder of beat the gmat A: Go Out There Make sure that you have business cards with your logo on them with you at all times. Wear a t-shirt with the logo on it. It’s easy and when someone glances at the shirt it opens the door for you to tell them about it. Being out and about you may find customers, future contacts, employees and who knows maybe even someone who might want to work with you. People get to see the brand face to face. –Ashley Bodi ( @businessbeware ), co-founder of Business Beware A: Tap Social Media For Personal Branding The best way to meet new cool people is through a personal introduction from someone already in your network. Ask someone you know if they know someone who you should meet. Most likely they do and would be happy to do an e-mail intro. –Elizabeth Saunders ( @RealLifeE ), founder of Real Life E A: Be A Connector Networking is hard work, not because the interactions are actually difficult, but because it must happen on top of all the other daily tasks your business requires. This makes it easy to stay holed up in your office. I am constantly amazed at how quickly and easily those extra meetings pay off, so be sure to time take for the early breakfast meeting or meet someone for coffee in the afternoon. — Anderson Schoenrock ( @ScanDigital ), co-founder of ScanDigital A: Become An Industry Expert The best way to increase the size of your network is to be active both online and offline in the same places your target audience is active. If your audience is on Twitter, you should be on Twitter. If you audience also attends local Meetups, you should attend local Meetups. The first step is to be there and listen. The second step is to engage. –Heather Huhman ( @heatherhuhman ), founder of Come Recommended A: Leave Your Comfort Zone Sometimes meeting new people is as easy as shooting them an email and inviting them to lunch. When you email a prospective lunchtime consultant, be sure to clearly identify who you are, offer concrete reasons why you are worth the person’s time, list the specific topics you would like to discuss, and throw out at least three potential dates, times and locations. –Scott Gerber ( @askgerber ), founder of Sizzle It!

Read the full article →

Crosswind Renewable Energy Corp. Appoints Keith Mahoney as President and Director

January 24, 2011

NAPLES, FL–(Marketwire – January 24, 2011) – Crosswind Renewable Energy Corp. ( PINKSHEETS : CWNR ), a Clean Energy Solutions company and global provider of category leading renewable energy technology, announced that effective immediately, Keith Mahoney has been appointed President and a Director of Crosswind Renewable Energy Corporation.

Read the full article →

Sam Pizzigati: Life at the Top: An Endless Bowl of Bonuses

January 24, 2011

Back in the Great Depression, even at the height of America’s misery, some people made quite a bit of money. Chase National Bank chair Albert Wiggin, for instance, netted a windfall worth over $4 million after the 1929 stock market crash — the equivalent of over $52 million today — trading his own bank short. But most of America’s rich actually saw their fortunes sink, and significantly so, during the Great Depression. The average incomes of the nation’s richest tenth of 1 percent, calculates economist Emmanuel Saez, fell from $1,242,237 in 1928, the last full year before the Great Depression, to $737,861 in 1931, as measured in today’s dollars. Our current Great Recession is most definitely not repeating this sinking-at-the-top history. Our rich today are more than holding their own. On Wall Street, business has hardly ever been better, with profits this past year projected to settle at the fourth-highest all-time total. Wall Street bonuses, new data show, are enriching bankers and traders at levels not far off the records set in the go-go years right before the 2008 financial industry meltdown. At JPMorgan Chase, news reports last week detailed , $9.33 billion in 2010 compensation will be divvied up among 26,314 employees, for a $369,651 per employee average, about the same as the $378,600 average in 2009. But few “average” JPMorgan employees will make anywhere near that $369,651 figure. Bonuses at JPMorgan — and every other Wall Street giant — go disproportionately to top bankers and traders. At Goldman Sachs , 35,700 employees will “share” $15.4 billion in compensation for 2010, a $430,700 average, down somewhat from 2009′s $498,246 average. For Goldman execs, not to worry. The $15.4 billion 2010 pay total doesn’t include any of the stock trading windfalls that Goldman’s top executives — the bank’s 475 managing “partners” — will soon be reaping. Back in December 2008, with Wall Street reeling and Goldman shares selling at a bargain-basement $78 each, Goldman’s power suits awarded themselves options to buy 36 million shares of Goldman stock at that bargain price, ten times more options than Goldman granted the year before. Goldman shares have lately been selling around $175 each, creating a potential $100 per share personal profit for Goldman’s elite. Overall, analysts reported last week, Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein and his family are now sitting on a stash of Goldman shares worth $355 million. All these dollars cascading onto Wall Street, says JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon, signal “the foundation of a broad-based economic recovery.” That signal, outside Wall Street, remains exceedingly weak. Unemployment rates in the United States are running substantially above jobless rates in Germany, Japan, and other peer nations. And U.S. wages, the Wall Street Journal noted earlier this month, “have taken a sharp and swift fall” all across the nation. One consequence: America’s “doubled-up” population — families that have lost their homes and moved in with friends or relatives — has hit the 6 million mark. These hard times everywhere but at the top, New York Times analyst David Leonhardt suggested last week, most likely at root reflect contemporary America’s deep-seated power imbalance “between employers and employees.” U.S. employers , notes Leonhardt, now “operate with few restraints.” With labor protection laws loophole-ridden and courts tilting aggressively the corporate way, companies can dictate outright labor relations terms with their employees. To maintain profit rates, these companies can downsize, outsource, and replace full-timers with temps. Or shove down wages and slash benefits. Or hoard cash and speculate on financial markets — and never have to worry that anyone in government will intervene. We historically, here in the United States, have had a word for power imbalances this striking and stark: plutocracy, or rule by the rich. The plutocratic rule we experience today can seem all-encompassing. The rich and powerful appear to slide endlessly and effortlessly from the summit of one sphere of American economic and political power to another . Some of these moves make national headlines. Peter Orszag, after running the federal budget office for the Obama White House, moves to a plush senior global banking slot at Citigroup. Former JPMorgan Chase executive Bill Daley becomes the new White House chief of staff. Other moves go more under the radar. Former U.S. senator Mel Martinez, a Florida Republican, moves to JPMorgan Chase. Theo Lubke, the lead derivatives expert at the New York Federal Reserve Bank, hops in bed with Goldman Sachs. The top exec in the New York City public school system, Joel Klein, joins the Rupert Murdoch media empire as an executive vice-president. In this clubby atmosphere , backs get scratched at the power summits — and everyday people get shafted. New York City’s richest 1 percent, as one new report details, now average more income per day — about $10,000 — than New York’s poorest 1 million residents average in a year. How long can this state of affairs continue? History can be a guide — and an inspiration, too. In the Great Depression, over five years passed before Congress felt enough grassroots heat to start passing the landmark bills — like the Wagner labor rights legislation — that truly upended America’s power dynamics. We’re still only three years into the Great Recession. Wall Street’s bonus boys may not be as home-free as they think. Sam Pizzigati edits Too Much , the online weekly on excess and inequality published by the Washington, D.C.-based Institute for Policy Studies. Read the current issue or sign up to receive Too Much in your email inbox.

Read the full article →

Les McKeown: Stop Trying to Find Your Passion and Get to Work

January 24, 2011

Let’s get something straight: passion is not a requirement for business success, and the seemingly 24/7 ‘passion-in-business’ industry is selling you a pup. Despite the ever-multiplying “find-your-passion” gurus and the breathless profiles of passionate leaders by never-ran-a-business-in-their-life journos, possessing passion is about as relevant to business success as possessing Steve Job’s black turtleneck: try hard enough and you can get your hands on either (or both), but neither will guarantee you business success. There are two significant ways in which this fixation on passion as a prerequisite for success in business is seriously damaging: it deludes new and potential entrepreneurs into believing that if only they can find their ‘true north’, then their business venture will surely succeed; and it is hijacking (or at least hobbling) the development of serious leaders with genuine depth. Here’s the problem with selling passion as a fundamental of business success: 1. It’s largely a fiction : Sure, there are a cluster of usual suspects who get rolled out in every ‘passionate leader’ discussion: the aforementioned Steve Jobs, Richard Branson, Tony Hseih and (insert your personal favorite here). There are any number of problems with this roster, but let’s focus on just three: First, every one of these people are successful because they’re brilliantly competent, not because they’re passionate. Second, most of these folks, brilliant as they are, know how to mix great PR and communication skills with a laser-like focus on a world-class strategy, which is a complex and nuanced skill. Reducing it to ‘passion’ demeans them and their accomplishments. Third, for every poster child for passion, there are literally hundreds, if not thousands of counter-examples — business leaders that only you or I or their employees or their immediate family have heard of, because they’re just quietly getting on with being successful. If we all had to be like Tony Hsieh to succeed, the economy would be screwed. 2. It gets in the way : Have you ever actually worked with somebody who is driven, night and day, by raw passion? It’s tiresome in the extreme and highly ineffective. It makes everything a drama, posits challenges where there need only be action, and disrupts needed rhythm and focus from the daily routine that ninety percent of business tasks are composed of. Don’t get me wrong. I love meeting ‘permanently passionate’ people. I even enjoy the odd cup of decaf coffee with them. Maybe even lunch (maybe – so long as it’s two courses, max). After that, I want to get back to the real world, where the rest of us live. 3. It doesn’t do the job : There are times when passion is an important part of a leaders job, but those times are limited. If I attended spin class (which I don’t) I’d want my spin class leader to be passionate, but for one reason only — that’s part of the deliverable. Don’t get me up on my toes and this thing isn’t going to happen. But my muffler replacement guy? No thanks. I just want him to be competent. And my top sales person. And my GP. And my VP Accounting. And my CEO. I want competence over passion, any day. When you’re 24-3 down in the playoffs, it may be great to see your team barreling into the next huddle like viking invaders with their hair on fire, but it only means something when they step up and competently execute a 14-play drive that ends in a touchdown. Soaring oratory in a difficult time can help raise morale, but it actually means something only if you have an effective strategy and world-class execution to back it up. And in both cases I know which one – passion or competence – is optional. The passion-driven leader may be pretty to watch, but selling people on the concept that passion means everything for business success? No thanks. I’ll take competence — even mercenary competence – every time.

Read the full article →

Thanos Dimadis: Will Americans Pay for the Euro Zone’s Debt Crisis?

January 24, 2011

Most of us may have been informed of many aspects regarding the Euro zone’s debt crisis and particularly of the risk that the EU members run of getting caught in a vicious cycle of instability, which would definitely cause disastrous effects on the financial system, not only in Europe but also in the rest of the world. But not many of us are aware of the reasons for which the European debt crisis should end with less possible negative effects. There is no other choice ahead for European leaders except that of supporting the euro’s currency survival by making radical decisions in terms of proving that at any given moment they respect the Europe’s cornerstone: the prosperity and the solidarity among all European countries. After a long time of European political confusion, indecision and the inability of dealing with the problem of guarantees expected by the international markets, right now it has become common sense that the debt crisis does not concern only the European countries, but also the whole of Euro zone’s members. What’s occurring in the European continent, should not be — and is not — isolated by what Americans set as their priority, namely, good prospects for their economy, creation of more job opportunities, increased exportation and greater competitiveness for the American products. The truth is that none of these economic targets can be met while the Euro zone’s countries are struggling against the financial markets’ intimidation, the even higher interest rates and the constant danger of an extending and persistent degradation for their high indebted economies. While the European economy continues to remain under the cloud of uncertainty and insecurity for its future, the global economy, the major player of which is still the United States, is under the threat of being affected by the colossal spillovers reflected in terms of the micro and macro-economic level. Of course, American President Barack Obama is fully aware of the interconnectedness between the Euro zone’s debt market and his presidency’s goal of recovering American economy. At this point it needs to be highlighted that thanks to his intensive pressure towards the German Chancellor Angela Merkel in order that she soften her rigorous stance during the inner-European negotiations, the Euro zone’s political leaders agreed on a temporary support mechanism for Greece and, lately, for Ireland. The exceptional role of International Monetary Fund (IMF), lending billions of dollars through that mechanism, is not disengaged from the European political reactions. There is no doubt that the US economy would only lose by just standing as a passive spectator of the Euro zone’s economic collapse, while it would only gain a lot by supporting the debt-ridden European countries. Given that context, the intervention of IMF into the current rescue mechanism — developed and put into practice for the first time in case of Greece — strengthens the conviction according to which the overcome of Euro zone’s crisis will be a victory for the US as well. By being the largest funder among many other countries in the IMF’s executive office, the US is becoming a kind of guarantor for the Euro zone stability. Money given through the IMF’ bailout to Greece, Ireland and probably to Portugal sooner or later is a lifeguard for those economies and, extensively, for the overall global system’s balances. However, through the IMF bailout, the US is extending its financial alongside with its political influence on the Euro zone. With China having demonstrated its intention to buy European bonds, it is clear the Euro zone is being transformed into an area, where each one of these two world’s economic leaders are trying to obtain much more financial, but mainly political impact. While China’s Euro zone bond holdings are limited, the US through the IMF is enhancing its role as the principal financial partner to the Euro zone. The IMF has not apparently the authorization to participate into the oncoming new context of financial governance in the Euro zone, but certainly it has already established its distinctive role of participating in the European crisis resolution management for now and the near future. European leaders constructed more than ten years ago the vision of a common currency among its members, but they didn’t develop the appropriate mechanism for a solid not only monetary but also fiscal environment. Reacting to some Republicans statements, like those of House Republican Caucus vice Chairwoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers and House GOP Caucus Chairman Mike Pence, I need to express my surprise of how easily politics create false impressions. Of course, the case of debt-ridden Greece is not an example of a reliable economic management. But in that case, the problem was not only Greek. The crisis — as we see today — is concerning the total of the Euro zone and so the overall financial system. Some American politicians by supporting the argument that US citizens cannot pay through the IMF’s bailout for the Greek debt or the Euro zone’s crisis, tend to oversimplify the reality. American citizens are not responsible for saving neither Greece nor Ireland or any other state of the Euro zone. But, it is in the American interest that the European countries overcome their economic difficulties, before the spread of economic contagion across the Atlantic Ocean. Hopefully, American President Obama confirms what Henry Kissinger had said that during a crisis making a bold choice and decision is often the safest way. No doubt that the current crisis requires such strong choices and decisions.

Read the full article →

Vampire Squid? Big Government? U.S. Crisis Reports Murky

January 24, 2011

WASHINGTON (By Kevin Drawbaugh and Dave Clarke) – Three competing, politically recognizable tales of the financial crisis will emerge this week when a U.S. congressional panel finally concludes its 20-month investigation. The Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission has failed to produce a consensus explanation of the 2007-2009 banking debacle, as it was asked to do in May 2009. Instead, the 10-member panel has fractured along the same ideological fault lines that divide much of political Washington. Three reports will be issued by commission members on Thursday, each conforming with a familiar political slant. The panel’s six Democrats, including Chairman Phil Angelides, will offer a report focused on the greed and power of Wall Street, a lack of effective regulation and the “shadow banking” system, said people familiar with the document. Derivatives markets will come in for sharp criticism from the Democrats, along with a 1999 law that allowed bank holding companies to move into other financial businesses, and the immense influence of Wall Street on government. One person, who asked not to be identified, compared the Angelides report to the “vampire squid” view of the crisis, referring to a memorable 2009 description by journalist Matt Taibbi of Goldman Sachs Group Inc as “a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money.” Republican commission member Peter Wallison will offer his own dissenting report that largely blames the crisis on the housing policy of “big government.” This well-worn GOP view is shared by conservative foes of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the troubled giants of mortgage finance. THIRD REPORT Three other Republican commission members will offer a separate account of the crisis. People familiar with it said it will downplay the banks’ culpability and clout and stress a confluence of global trends in tracing the origins of the devastating crisis that peaked in late 2008. “It is what it is,” Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a Republican commission member said of the lack of a single narrative coming out of the commission’s work. “We know where Peter Wallison is, and in my view the majority went too far to the left for me to sign on. So we ended up in the middle,” Holtz-Eakin told Reuters regarding the report he will issue with former GOP Representative Bill Thomas and former Bush White House economic adviser Keith Hennessey. That dissent, like Wallison’s, will be attached to the main report being released by Angelides and the Democrats. A year ago, the commission hauled some of banking’s heaviest hitters into public hearings for questioning. Goldman Sachs Group Inc Chief Executive Lloyd Blankfein, JPMorgan Chase & Co CEO Jamie Dimon and former Citigroup executives testified to the panel. Angelides noted pointedly as the commission got going in mid-2009 that it would have the power to refer cases for criminal prosecution, but that now seems unlikely to occur. One Wall Street investor, focused on the still-unfolding Basel III global bank capital accord, said the congressionally appointed commission’s potential findings were “already in the past. “What else is it going to tell us? That we were light on capital and light on reserves? We know that, and that’s already going up on Basel III,” the investor said. (Additional reporting by Maria Aspan in New York, editing by Gerald E. McCormick) Copyright 2010 Thomson Reuters. Click for Restrictions .

Read the full article →

April Rudin: Impact Investing — Using Green Thinking to Make Green Dollars

January 24, 2011

Impact, socially responsible or sustainable investing has slowly crept onto the investment scene as an alternative asset class. But it has gained attention, in part, to mitigate the bad karma created by Madoff and others, non-transparency of investments, the recession, low interest rates, a depressed economy, and high unemployment. Socially responsible investing is the feel-good asset class. It’s the intersection of banking, philanthropy and Wall Street. Investors are shunning ‘get rich’ firms who are ruining our planet. Upcoming Gen-X and Gen-Y investors and their dollars want to make a difference. It will therefore be a growing social community of like-minded investors. Simultaneously, increasing numbers of high net-worth individuals, wealth managers, institutional and other investors want to “doing good while doing well.” These individuals are of the baby-boomer generation. Some have been late adopters and doubted the “depth” of this movement but clearly there is groundswell among those who want to generate return either partially or even wholly through funds or direct investments. This has led to the creation of boutique Wall St. firms which zero in on this specialization and larger financial institutions have creating small teams to focus on locating, understanding and vetting investment opportunities. As it is early, there is still conversation over whether or not impact investing is indeed an asset class or an underlying strategy which will be eventually used in all products. Once the playground of the wealthy, or for the class of investors who could tolerate lower returns, sustainability-specialized investments are becoming available to investors of all amounts and with excellent returns. Formerly, the underlying psychology for sustainable investing ranged from some investors whose expectations are to outperform the market, to others who have a willingness to sacrifice performance for effective social impact. Today, there are products and places for investors of all sizes, goals and risk tolerances. There are boutique Wall St. firms which zero in on this specialization and larger financial institutions have created small teams to laser focus on locating and vetting investment opportunities. Much has changed since the landmark 1987 UN-backed World Commission on Environment and Development, which put forth the notion that ” the needs of the present (must be recognized) without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs .” Areas of specialization within sustainable investing today include: investment areas such as adverse demography, climate change, resource depletion, global economics, and much, much more. There are direct opportunities to invest in an idea and/or funds which invest in multiple ideas and strategies. Institutional investors ( primarily pension funds) have always taken a long-term investing approach and are now trying to integrate environmental, social and governance goals ( ESG ) with their longstanding inter-generational bias. ESG is a “best practice” for any size investor. Today’s institutional investment SWAT teams are exploring how credit markets, banking and investment management can line-up together on the socially responsible playing field. Outside of institutions, early adopters in impact investing have been family offices, high net worth individuals and their entities, private banks, etc. This is a hybrid investor class that is small in size, but powerful in investable dollars. In the future, powerful investment communities will be formed by uniting like-minded investors who will deploy funds readily when the parameters meet both their performance and sustainability goals. Multi-family offices or families with substantial wealth are able to influence markets through passionate investing. They function as the “trusted advisor” across financial, philanthropic and succession planning. As with any new emerging idea, ROI benchmarks for measuring the social impact separate from dollar returns has not been met with any universally adopted formula. Qualitative analysis between metrics and results are not clear. For the time being, the feel-good “kumbaya” message is sufficient return along with some profits. Return is measured in other ways including investors who invest alongside their children and grandchildren. They choose to “measure” the benefits of modeling socially-responsible investing behaviors to family members. This, of course, is priceless. I have written before, it’s not easy being green. And we all know that it is not easy “making green.” But in the future it will be. There are even courses taught at major universities in prestigious business school where the integration of public policy, philanthropic goals and passions can come together for the good of Wall Street and every street. Our future thought leaders are sitting in those classrooms and dreaming of what the interface might look like.

Read the full article →

Grover Norquist: John Thune Must Renounce TARP Vote

January 24, 2011

Grover Norquist, president of the conservative advocacy group Americans for Tax Relief, said recently that if Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) wants to be considered a serious presidential candidate in 2012, he will first have to publicly denounce his 2008 vote in favor of creating the Troubled Asset Relief Program, the bailout initiative that is decried by many conservatives as among the most profligate examples of big-government spending. “Get up and say: ‘That is never happening again. Boy, did we get sold a bill of goods, and here is my rule of thumb as to why you know that I know that won’t happen again,’” Norquist advised in an interview with the Argus Leader . “You can change your mind on one thing in one direction credibly if you explain it.” As GOP 12 points out , Thune seems to be well aware that some key conservatives will take issue with his TARP vote. He’s taken some steps to address the matter before, though a lot of his energy has been spent on efforts to rebrand himself as an opponent of the program. John Thune, however, is likely taking some comfort in the fact that he is not the only potential 2012 GOP candidate with baggage. Every contender appears to have chinks in their armor, which are only likely to become more pronounced as they approach what is likely to be a bruising primary campaign. Republican strategist Karl Rove recently jabbed former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney for his work on a state health-care system that pushed an individual health-insurance mandate similar to that of President Barack Obama’s signature 2010 law.

Read the full article →

Jed Horne: Senator Vitter Discovers Adam Smith

January 24, 2011

There’s something vaguely amusing in the spectacle of the junior senator from Louisiana lecturing the president — formerly of the Harvard Law Review , now of the United States of America — on any topic that involves intellectual heavy lifting. Ironies abound. But David Vitter has a proven instinct for comedy, demonstrated when he campaigns as a family values candidate in front of crowds that contain a few men actually capable of fidelity to their wives. The Obama lecture is delivered in Vitter’s turn as guest blogger on the National Review ‘s website. The gimmick of the piece is to assign the president Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations as “required reading.” Excellent idea, in the unlikely event Obama never got around to Wealth of Nations in high school or college. But having made the assignment and still several hundred words shy of a finished blog, Vitter seems to be in deepwater, to use a word that has gained currency in recent months down here along the Gulf of Mexico. An important economist and something of a prophet, Adam Smith championed the “invisible hand” of the market as superior to the mercantilism fashionable in his time. (And perhaps again in ours, though China’s global ascendancy is not something Smith could have been expected to envision.) But Vitter’s blog isn’t really about Wealth of Nations . Long on bombast, short on nuance, Vitter careens from Smith to climate change, taking swipes along the way at Carol Browner, Steven Chu and others he dismisses contemptuously as “the Obama crowd.” What he really wants to talk about, though, is oil, specifically the oil moratorium that followed the Deepwater Horizon catastrophe. He deplores the moratorium as deeply hurtful to the corporate interests who have bankrolled his tenure in office. The most extraordinary thing about the blog: Vitter seems to see oil, not as the most cosseted and pampered industrial sector this side of arms manufacturing, but as a triumph of free-market economics. This is amazing. It’s as if oil hasn’t contributed so mightily to so many legislators — Vitter among them — as to become a virtual arm of government. (Hotheads might go further and argue that government is the arm and Big Oil is the government, not just in Arabia, Iran, Mexico and Venezuela, but no less obviously in Louisiana as well.) Free-market thinking has played an important part in the saga of American success, but not for a hundred years in anything like its pure form. And well before that, Adam Smith had some pretty powerful minds arrayed against him, including our cherished Founding Fathers. Vitter pauses to sigh over Wealth ‘s fateful pub date — 1776 — without seeming to realize that Alexander Hamilton opposed the Scotsman’s views and instead argued successfully for a central government strong enough both to overcome the states-rights crowd and resist predation by economic rivals abroad. Among other departures from free-market orthodoxy, Hamilton saw the need for tariffs and for creation of the federal bank that today issues Sen. Vitter his ample paycheck and a subsidized health insurance package the rest of us can only envy. The free market’s invisible hand “organizes economic activity with astounding efficiency,” Vitter writes breathlessly, seemingly unaware that while he plowed through Smith’s book, if indeed he did, Wall Street collapsed, trillions in national wealth evaporated and millions of Americans lost their jobs. Even Alan Greenspan has risen up from prostration before the altar of libertarian economics to concede that markets are not quite so marvelously self-correcting as novelist Ayn Rand had promised him they would be. Maybe Vitter has also begun to lose faith. No sooner does he deliver his full-throated paean to the glory that is oil than he is wringing his hands. It’s as though, without his help, an industry so fragile will roll over and die like an oiled porpoise. The focus of Vitter’s lamentation: the recently lifted moratorium on offshore drilling. The moratorium lasted a few months but somehow, by Vitter’s account, still threatens to rob a 150-year-old industry of a vitality that the senator holds responsible not just for the nation’s economic vigor but for “American exceptionalism” itself. (That’s all it took to destroy Big Oil, senator? A half-year moratorium? Oh, ye of little faith!) No doubt to Vitter’s delight, the hand of federal regulation had indeed become invisible in the years leading up to the BP blowout. The Minerals Management Service, since renamed, had gone giggly on oil industry booze and fine dining. With regulators off its back (or on their own backs) and with just a little help from Halliburton, BP’s free market buccaneers yielded to time-honored traditions. In a spirit of thrift that would have done Poor Richard proud, they cut corners and ignored safety protocols in ways that turned out to be — oops! — rather costly. And not just for a giant corporation and the men who died on its rig, but for Louisiana fishing families and motel proprietors all along the Gulf Coast. (To say nothing — as is usually the case — about the long-term environmental burden.) A reawakened regulatory apparatus that actually forestalls the next deepwater disaster is surely one of the best things that could happen to Big Oil. Its more thoughtful executives and directors concede as much. But not their man in Washington. Vitter’s politics are a prescription for actually extending our dependence on oil, which he refers to as “cheap energy.” He calls it “the heart of America’s recipe for remarkable growth since World War II” — forgetting for the moment that oil had risen to $150 a barrel under the Republican administration of the most oil-friendly president since, well, that same president’s father. Vitter would go Dick Cheney one better and not just eviscerate regulation but indemnify oil against the full cost of befouling America the next time it happens. His summertime initiative was a bill to cap oil company damages in a disaster — a classic example of protectionism and market meddling that would have left Adam Smith spinning in his grave. Fortunately, the bill died aborning, yet another scratch for a man with one of the Senate’s thinnest records of legislative accomplishment. Not to worry. Even with a senator in its pocket as clumsy as Vitter, oil will hold sway for years to come. Indeed, the price looks likely to spike again soon, throwing our fragile recovery into another tailspin and reminding us how foolish we — and the markets — have been to let the development of alternative technologies languish. Vitter heaps contempt on Chu for even imagining gas at $7-a-gallon — the price that could be soon surpassed if the subsidies and tax breaks were set aside and the full cost of oil’s environmental degradation were taken into account. What the Nobel laureate seems to realize — Vitter’s misconstrual notwithstanding — is that pricing oil at its actual cost is the fastest way for the next-generation technologies to flourish with something like, yes, free-market vigor. Call it mercantilism, call it the betrayal of the market, but the historical reality is this: Start-up incentives (including the Interstate highway system, to mention just one trillion-dollar gift to oil) are what brought on petroleum’s pre-eminence. It’s just that the corporate welfare and government giveaways seem to have gone on a bit past oil’s infancy. We can drill, baby, drill, all the way to China, but that’s not going to weaken the stranglehold imported oil has on our economy. And when we get to China, we’ll discover something already apparent to perceptive energy pundits (the National Review ‘s blogger excepted): China is committing mountains of yuan to the development of renewable energy sources, while men like Sen. Vitter do what they can to keep us hooked on fossil fuels. Adam Smith, by the way, quite accurately anticipated the decadent culture of special-interest lobbying that has made a lackey of David Vitter, the same David Vitter who, before Katrina, fought valiantly for lumber interests seeking to make bagged garden mulch of the Gulf Coast’s environmentally critical cypress forest — or what’s left of it. Writes Smith: “People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public… ” Striking a balance between regulatory overreach and the market’s occasional bursts of disastrous ineptitude is the challenge of our time, one that already engages the Senate’s more capable minds. With or without Wealth of Nations on the presidential reading list, markets aren’t going away. Neither is oil or the need for a free people to protect ourselves and our environment from recklessness in the pursuit of it. Jed Horne was a senior consultant to the National Oil Spill Commission and is the author of Breach of Faith, Hurricane Katrina and the Near Death of a Great American City.

Read the full article →

Halliburton Profit Soars On Jump In Oil Revenue

January 24, 2011

NEW YORK/SAN FRANCISCO (By Matt Daily and Braden Reddall) – Oilfield service company Halliburton Co. posted higher-than-expected profits, boosted by oil projects in North America, and forecast steady growth elsewhere, but said pricing competition could be tough. Shares of the world’s second-largest oilfield services company, which have long traded at a discount to those of larger rival Schlumberger Ltd (SLB.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz), outperformed the sector on Monday in response to the more than doubling of fourth-quarter profit. The rise in oil prices to near $90 a barrel during the period spurred a bout of spending on new wells, overshadowing a decline in natural gas projects, as prices for that fuel remained weak. An 80 percent jump in Halliburton’s North American revenue in the fourth quarter was driven by robust onshore activity, though offshore activity in the Gulf of Mexico remained slack. Graphic on earnings/rig count: r.reuters.com/kym67r On Friday, Schlumberger posted higher-than-expected profits and said it expected client spending to grow. Shares of Halliburton were up 0.5 percent at $39.37 on the New York Stock Exchange in early afternoon trading, off an earlier high of $40.31. The Philadelphia Stock Exchange’s Oil Service index was down 0.2 percent. Halliburton shares are up 25 percent in the last 12 months, but remain a bargain compared with those of peers, analysts said. “It’s still the cheapest of the large-cap diversified (oilfield service) companies,” said RBC Capital Markets analyst Kurt Hallead. Halliburton was trading at a 20 percent discount to rivals based on 2012 earnings forecasts, according to UBS analyst Angie Sedita, who has a price target of $48 on the shares. BEAT THE MARKET Halliburton’s fourth-quarter net profit rose to $605 million, or 66 cents per share, from $243 million or 27 cents per share, a year earlier. Excluding a 2 cent-per-share charge related to former subsidiary KBR Inc’s (KBR.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) settlement with Nigeria, earnings per share were 68 cents, topping the 63 cents that analysts had forecast on average, according to Thomson Reuters I/B/E/S. Revenue jumped 40 percent to $5.16 billion, while analysts had expected $4.88 billion. Houston-based Halliburton is looking abroad for growth in the year ahead, but margins are likely to remain under pressure as its rivals are chasing growth in the very same markets. “We do see activity increases happening throughout 2011,” Chief Executive Dave Lesar told analysts on a conference call. “The big wild card is just how tough the pricing environment continues to be.” The company said it recently won a 15-well package in Iraq, on top of three deals announced there last year, and it will double its employee headcount in the country to 1,200 in 2011. Lesar sees steady demand in North America this year, helped by the 3,200 uncompleted wells in the region — a number higher than he had expected, and that he sees rising this quarter. Gulf of Mexico activity is moribund as companies struggle to obtain drilling permits in the wake of BP Plc’s (BP.L: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) oil spill last April after a blowout that killed 11 workers — for which Halliburton, a BP contractor, could face legal liability. Halliburton is maintaining its staffing in the Gulf even though activity looks likely to stay subdued in the first half of 2011, and possibly for the rest of the year, Lesar said. Halliburton will expand deepwater operations in the Eastern Hemisphere, but did not specify how much it would spend. Competitors Baker Hughes Inc (BHI.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) and Weatherford International Ltd (WFT.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) WFT.S report results on Tuesday. (Reporting by Matt Daily in New York and Braden Reddall in San Francisco; Editing by Gerald E. McCormick and Matthew Lewis) Copyright 2010 Thomson Reuters. Click for Restrictions .

Read the full article →

Jason E. Chudnofsky Announced as President of CrossTech Media LLC — Boston Area Event Producer

January 24, 2011

Noted Expert in Face-to-Face Marketing and Publishing to Focus on New Business Development

Read the full article →

A10 Capital Hires Veteran Commercial Real Estate Financier to Head Up Northwest and Arizona Markets

January 24, 2011

Another Top CMBS Producer Rejoins Colleagues at A10

Read the full article →

Drobo Names Kevin Epstein to Serve as Vice President of Marketing

January 24, 2011

Award-Winning Storage Company’s Growth Driving Organizational Expansion

Read the full article →

La CEPA Consolide Son Equipe Dirigeante

January 24, 2011

Les changements réaffirment son engagement envers la sécurité ainsi que la participation des parties prenantes

Read the full article →

Leads360 Appoints Paul T. Ryan as Game-Changing Chief Technology Officer

January 24, 2011

Former CTO for Overture Services Will Revolutionize Technology Infrastructure and Manage Growth for Award-Winning Lead Management Software Company

Read the full article →

SmartVault Expands Executive Team — Mark Miller Named Vice President of Sales and Support

January 24, 2011

SmartVault Invests in Miller’s Extensive Sales and Customer Support Expertise

Read the full article →

Kimberley Metals Limited (ASX:KBL) Appoints Michael Hanlon As General Manager For Mineral Hill Mine

January 24, 2011

Kimberley Metals Limited (ASX:KBL) Appoints Michael Hanlon As General Manager For Mineral Hill Mine

Read the full article →

Adelaide Energy Limited (ASX:ADE) Holdfast-1 Weekly Drilling Report Ended 25 January 2011

January 24, 2011

Adelaide Energy Limited (ASX:ADE) Holdfast-1 Weekly Drilling Report Ended 25 January 2011

Read the full article →

WestSide Corporation Limited (ASX:WCL) Updates On Expansion Exploration Drilling Of Meridian Reserves in The Bowen Basin

January 24, 2011

WestSide Corporation Limited (ASX:WCL) Updates On Expansion Exploration Drilling Of Meridian Reserves in The Bowen Basin

Read the full article →

Buccaneer Energy Limited (ASX:BCC) Announces Reserves 82% Above Expectations At The Southern Cross Unit, Alaska

January 24, 2011

Buccaneer Energy Limited (ASX:BCC) Announces Reserves 82% Above Expectations At The Southern Cross Unit, Alaska

Read the full article →

Gold Anomaly Limited (ASX:GOA) First Drill Hole Of 2,500m Drilling Program Completed At Crater Mountain, Papua New Guinea

January 24, 2011

Gold Anomaly Limited (ASX:GOA) First Drill Hole Of 2,500m Drilling Program Completed At Crater Mountain, Papua New Guinea

Read the full article →

Linc Energy Limited (ASX:LNC) Continues Memorandum Of Understanding With BP Australia

January 24, 2011

Linc Energy Limited (ASX:LNC) Continues Memorandum Of Understanding With BP Australia

Read the full article →

U.S. Stocks Rise in Midday Trading

January 24, 2011

U.S. Stocks Rise in Midday Trading

Read the full article →

U.S. Stocks Rise in Midday Trading

January 24, 2011

U.S. Stocks Rise in Midday Trading

Read the full article →

Euro Eases Off 9 Week Peak in Australian Trading

January 24, 2011

Euro Eases Off 9 Week Peak in Australian Trading

Read the full article →

Euro Eases Off 9 Week Peak in Australian Trading

January 24, 2011

Euro Eases Off 9 Week Peak in Australian Trading

Read the full article →

UK GDP, BoJ Rate Decison and Australian CPI Offer Trading Opportunities

January 24, 2011

UK GDP, BoJ Rate Decison and Australian CPI Offer Trading Opportunities

Read the full article →

UK GDP, BoJ Rate Decison and Australian CPI Offer Trading Opportunities

January 24, 2011

UK GDP, BoJ Rate Decison and Australian CPI Offer Trading Opportunities

Read the full article →

Should you Trade the Trend or Trade the Double Top?

January 24, 2011

Should you Trade the Trend or Trade the Double Top?

Read the full article →

Should you Trade the Trend or Trade the Double Top?

January 24, 2011

Should you Trade the Trend or Trade the Double Top?

Read the full article →

Heavy Event Risk and Big Trades Ahead

January 24, 2011

Heavy Event Risk and Big Trades Ahead

Read the full article →