management

WATCH: College Grads Move Home, Face Uncertain Futures

May 24, 2011

LANSDALE, Pa. — One midnight in April, Sabrina Malik pulls her red Chevy Blazer into her mother’s asphalt driveway, removes the keys from the ignition, and stops to take a deep breath. Alone in the darkness, a sense of defeat courses through her body — disappointment about her past and uncertainty about what lies ahead. This, she thinks to herself, is surely what failure feels like. Six years ago, Malik fled this town for Syracuse University. Since graduating in 2009 with a bachelor’s degree in art history, she has yet to find a decent job. She hadn’t planned on moving back home and, at the age of 23, never expected to return to her mother’s house for an extended and open-ended period of time. “At times, it really feels very personal, it really feels like I’ve failed,” says Malik, standing in the kitchen of her mother’s two-story stone house and recalling the eight weeks since she returned home. She’s wearing khaki shorts and white socks that come up to her ankles. Glasses frame her brown eyes and wavy chestnut hair grazes her shoulders. “Your dream is a very personal thing and when you can’t do it, it feels like you’re being told that you’re not talented enough and that you haven’t worked hard enough.” After graduating from college, Malik moved to Boston. There, she worked as a nanny, sold books, and waited tables — a series of dead-end jobs that didn’t pay more than the minimum wage, didn’t require a college degree, and weren’t remotely related to what she wanted to do for the rest of her life. Two months ago, she ran out of money and drove home from Boston to Lansdale, a middle-class suburb north of Philadelphia, her car brimming with the contents of post-college life: canned food, twinkle lights, potted plants. A dozen of her paintings, stacked to the ceiling, kept hitting the back of her head. When a gas station attendant in New Jersey asked why she was moving and where she was headed, Malik didn’t know quite how to respond. She’s hardly alone. Malik is part of a generation of 20-somethings that’s experiencing what it’s like to graduate from college, move back in with your parents, and then get stuck there. Though estimates vary, a recent study by Twentysomething Inc., a consulting firm specializing in marketing to young adults, predicted that of the 2 million graduates in the class of 2011, 85 percent will return home because they can’t secure jobs that might give them more choices and more control over their lives . To be sure, having a college degree still matters. Nationwide, while the unemployment rate hovers around 9 percent, the jobless rate for college graduates 25 years and older is 4.5 percent. By contrast, 20 to 24-year-olds who only have a high school diploma are contending with an unemployment rate of nearly 20 percent. While college graduates typically navigate periods of economic decline far better than those lacking such credentials, the past few years have still taken an especially brutal toll on them. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the jobless rate for younger workers with a college degree has more than doubled since the recession began four years ago — from 3.5 percent in April of 2007 to 6.4 percent in April of this year. For college graduates under the age of 25, finding stable work is a particular challenge. According to Andrew Sum, an economist at Northeastern University, about half, or 3.2 million, are “underutilized”  — meaning they’re unemployed, working part-time, or working a job outside of the college labor market, such as bartending or waiting tables. Added to the lack of jobs is an increased amount of debt. Student loan debt recently outpaced credit card debt in terms of total amounts owed by borrowers. By year’s end, it is on track to surpass a trillion dollars, according to Mark Kantrowitz, an expert on student financial aid who runs the websites FinAid.org and Fastweb.com. According to the Institute for College Access and Success, an independent, nonprofit organization that works to make higher education more affordable, the average graduate finishes school with $24,000 of debt — though many struggle to repay far more. Like Malik, many 20-somethings are experiencing early adulthood as one long pause in their lives, affecting not only conventional coming-of-age milestones such as becoming financially independent, but more deeply personal things as well — like their hopes and their dreams.  THE AMERICAN DREAM Recently, after sending out dozens of resumes and cover letters, all of which went unanswered, Malik’s spirits plummeted. Even rejection feels better than no response at all, she thought to herself. In her second-floor bedroom, where handmade quilts cover the bed and charcoal drawings line the walls, she tries as best she can to avoid her mother’s notice. Mostly, she just doesn’t want her to worry. But Marilyn Malik is close to her daughter and is an expert at reading Sabrina’s shifting moods. “Sabrina gets down on herself and I worry,” says Marilyn, sitting in her home office in the basement, where she works as a nursing supervisor for a health insurance company. While she says that her daughter is welcome to live in the house for as long as she needs, she hopes that Sabrina might find a job sooner rather than later. And Marilyn is adjusting to the fact that her daughter’s path may not mirror the one she took 30 years ago, when, as a college-educated young woman, she first ventured out into the world.  Marilyn, 53, grew up in a small town in the Poconos. Her father worked as an electrician; her mother worked as a nurse. Marilyn studied nursing in college and she and her parents split the $4,000 annual tuition. She worked as a waitress to earn her share. A few years after college, Marilyn married Ajmal Malik, a Pakistani immigrant. He attended college at the University of Lahore in Pakistan and earned two master’s degrees after moving to the U.S. The couple made their home in Plymouth Meeting, Pa., where they raised Sabrina and her older brother Omar, who’s now 25. In those early years, Ajmal, an accountant, worked his way up the ladder while Marilyn picked up night shifts at the nearby hospital. She describes their standard of living as lower-middle-class — borrowing money to purchase their first starter home and relying on quick, cheap dinners of soup and biscuits to get by. Ajmal died of cancer when his children were nine and 11, leaving Marilyn to support an entire household on her income alone. “You grieve for yourself, and you grieve for your kids,” explains Marilyn, who started working full-time after Ajmal died and has yet to let up. Sending both kids to college was always the plan. The majority of the payout from her deceased husband’s life insurance went towards a college savings account, which ultimately wasn’t enough to cover the high costs associated with sending two kids to out-of-state schools. Marilyn paid about $100,000 for Sabrina to attend Syracuse University in upstate N.Y. and took out another $20,000 in loans to cover the rest. Sabrina and Omar, who attended the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, will have to shoulder their own graduate school costs, however. “She’d probably say no to doing things if she knew how much everything cost,” says Marilyn, who pays down the $20,000 in Sabrina’s student loans while also saving up for her own retirement. Sabrina is struggling to pay off about $2,000 in credit card debt and her remaining student debts weigh on her relationship with her mother. Marilyn hates owing money and tries to put an extra $100 or $200 towards paying down the student loans whenever she can. Marilyn and Sabrina find it hard to talk about Sabrina’s student loans and generally avoid the subject. Sabrina wishes she could do more to help her mother pay the debt and had planned on having a job after graduating that would allow her to do that — yet another part of her future that hasn’t exactly gone as planned. While living in Boston, she made barely enough to cover her own rent and utilities, let alone scrape together enough extra to help her mother with the monthly loan repayments. Sabrina also wonders whether paying so much for college has made her mother’s own life more insecure. “I know she’s further away from her own retirement because she sent us to such expensive schools” says Malik, whose plans for graduate education are indefinitely on hold until she can save up some money. Right now, even $80 application fees for graduate school seem like a lot.  Although Marilyn remarried a few years ago, her first husband’s absence is deeply felt — especially now, when their daughter is struggling. “I wonder if he had been around, whether my kids would have been better placed, whether they would have received better advice,” says Marilyn, who plans to work for at least another decade. She long ago decided that sending her kids to college was more important to her than saving for the day when she could retire. By this point in her life, Marilyn imagined that her daughter would have already embarked upon a well-paying career and be living on her own. She also wonders what it means for the next generation of 20-somethings, and whether they’ll have access to better opportunities than their parents’ generation. “My generation had it better than what my parents had and you’d think it would continue progressing that same way,” she says. “Historically, each generation gets better as it goes along — they’re more affluent, they have more education, they reach more goals. This generation, you would hope that would happen, too, but it doesn’t seem to be going that way.” DREAMS ARE CHEAP Half a century ago, 77 percent of women and 65 percent of men had attained traditional markers of maturity by their 30th birthday: They had left home, finished school, gotten a job, married, and started a family. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, by 2000, less than half of 30-year-old women and just one-third of 30-year-old men had attained similar markers of adulthood. A lot, but not all, of the shift has to do with work — or, more specifically, a lack of work, say analysts and others . They argue that the current recession has pushed 20-somethings farther and faster in a direction they were already headed. Sending your kid to college once was a way of ensuring their sure-footed success. But with 20-somethings mired in debt and confronting a dearth of decent-paying jobs, many are returning to the nest. “I can assure you that few people in my generation are living high off the hog in their parents’ house,” says Matthew Segal, the 25-year-old founder of Our Time , a national membership organization for young people under 30. He says he resents the popular characterization of 20-somethings as lazy and unmoored. “Trust me, they’re not getting too comfortable sleeping in their childhood bedroom or eating out of their parents’ fridge. They’re moving home because they don’t have jobs and they have a lot of debt.” Except for designated downtime, when she’s either making art or weaving on her loom, Malik spends much of her time avoiding thinking about what became of the goals her parents helped her to set. Her mother always encouraged her to think and dream big. Yet since graduating from college, she’s found herself doing the exact opposite. Her dream for the future used to encompass a well-appointed and comfortable life — a farmhouse, two artist studios, a husband, and several children. “But it’s not worth dreaming so big anymore,” says Malik. “My plans now are far less extravagant. I guess I’m learning to dream on a much smaller scale.” Specifically, she doesn’t think she’ll be able to afford a home as nice as her mother’s. Nor, she predicts, will she be able to send her own children to schools as fancy as those that she attended. “The hope that things are going to get better is really all we have,” she explains. “I mean, on top of being the generation that’s struggling, we don’t want to be the generation that’s cynical, too.” Some scholars attribute such hard-wired optimism to the way that the parents of 20-somethings raised them. Morley Winograd and Michael D. Hais co-author books about millennials (typically defined as the generation born between 1982 and 2003). “Millennials were raised the way Bill Cosby told parents to raise their kids — set rules, show encouragement, don’t use physical discipline, build up a child’s self-esteem,” explains Winograd. “If you tell someone from zero to 13 that they’re always doing a nice job and that they’re really special and wonderful, they’ll wind up believing they are.” Self-confidence breeds optimism, according to Winograd and Hais, even when times are tough. “The millennials don’t have a sense that everything is wonderful, because obviously it isn’t, but they believe as a country that things will get better and their lives will also get better,” says Hais. “In part, it’s because they’re young and they actually have time to accomplish this. But it’s also because generations like the millennials feel they’ve accomplished good things in the past and that they will again in the future because their parents told them so.” Jeffrey Jensen Arnett, a psychology professor at Clark University, is also struck by the optimism of the young adults that he studies. “I think the main reason for their optimism is that dreams are cheap in emerging adulthood. That is, their dreams haven’t yet been tested in the fires of real, adult life. And who knows, maybe they really will find their dream job?” In general, young people are taking longer to assume more traditional adult responsibilities and young lives are unfolding in a less predictable sequence , Arnett says. He views the twenties as a new and distinct life stage and classifies it as “emerging adulthood.” According to Arnett, this stage generally starts around the age of 18 and continues until an individual is in his or her mid-to-late twenties. While the category itself is fluid, “emerging adulthood” refers to a time during which young people are relatively free of obligations. But many 20-somethings, like Malik, are increasingly delaying adult responsibilities because they can’t secure a job stable enough to allow them to take the steps necessary to establish an independent life. As such, even youthful optimism has its limits . Despite a general proclivity toward positive thinking, analysts say current circumstances are weighing down this generation of 20-somethings. “The mood for young people definitely isn’t as optimistic as it’s been in the past,” says Carl Van Horn, a professor of public policy at Rutgers University. Last week, he and his colleagues released a study titled “Unfulfilled Expectations: Recent College Graduates Struggle in a Troubled Economy.” It polled young people who graduated from college between 2006 and 2010. “You expect people to be optimistic when they’re young about their ability to get ahead,” Van Horn says. “It’s pretty clear that this group of college students are feeling very much like their opportunities have been stunted.” A FALSE PROMISE? Since moving home, the highlight of Malik’s weekend involves walking to the edge of her mother’s driveway on Sunday morning and retrieving the hand-delivered copy of The New York Times . She’s on a $15 weekly budget and getting the paper delivered is a rare indulgence. Last Sunday, Malik accompanied her extended family to a pancake breakfast to support the local firehouse in the nearby town of Sellersville, Pa. Without traffic, it’s about a 20-minute drive from Lansdale. As her family and some of her mother’s friends waited for a table, Malik carved out a tiny space where she sat and read the paper in silence. She wasn’t up for answering the questions that usually follow — about what she was up to, or how the job search was going. She mostly just needed a break from the constant inquisition. “I spend a lot of my time trying as best I can to appease everyone and show them that I’m in good spirits and putting forth all this extra effort,” says Malik. “Every once in a while, I just need to be by myself. They know what I’m going through.” Even the relentless optimism of millennials is straining under the depth and length of the current recession. A poll released in April by AP-Viacom indicated that among Americans between the ages of 18 to 24, there was skepticism about the notion that life would improve with each passing generation. Four in 10 of those surveyed predicted difficulty in raising a family and affording the lifestyle they felt they deserved. Like homebuyers who took on outsized mortgages they couldn’t afford, either out of ignorance or because banks cajoled them, in order to realize the American Dream of home ownership, many students and their parents have taken on crushing piles of educational debt in order to realize another part of the American Dream: a college education. Andrew Sum, a 64-year-old economist at Northeastern University who’s studied the college labor market for the past 30 years, thinks the current economic slump is giving both recent graduates and their parents a rude awakening. Sum grew up in Gary, Ind. with a father who worked as a welder. While he says that he and his four siblings were able to achieve a better life than their parents, for the first time in recent American history, the majority of the young people he studies are not. “Every generation ought to try and leave behind a better world for the next generation,” says Sum. “And until recently, it’s generally been true that the next generation exceeded the living standard of the current one. But over the last decade, that’s no longer the case.” One of Sum’s pet theories is the “age twist effect.” He says that over the decade from 2000 to 2010, the younger someone was, the more likely they were to get fired or be otherwise left without a job. Historically, and in every decade since the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics began compiling such data, it’s been the exact opposite. Sum’s findings conclude that 7 million more young people under the age of 30 would be working today if the labor market behaved as it did only a decade ago. Sum and his colleagues predict that underutilization and underemployment will leave an indelible mark on this generation. In the near term, Sum finds college graduates moving home, and staying there. And while college degrees matter, they only matter if young people are able to then convert them into a job — hence, generating the considerable college premium. “If you can manage to do that, you can do well,” says Sum. “But if you end up outside, you’ll only do marginally better than someone who has a high school diploma and those losses stay with you for a lifetime.” For Malik, both in terms of her current and future income, the longer she’s out of work, the more dire the consequences will be. Being unemployed is always worse than working, but it’s ultimately the type of job she gets that will affect her future stability. For instance, should Malik secure yet another job outside the college labor market — working again as a nanny or as a clerk in a retail shop — the chances that she’ll regain a more permanent economic toehold will grow ever more unlikely. The impact that the job she lands will have on her future wages is likely to be staggering. For the public at large, Sum finds there’s a 73 percent gap in the annual earnings of college graduates that have a college labor market job versus those that work in a job that doesn’t require a degree — say, the difference between working as a paralegal and a receptionist in a law firm. Bachelor’s degree holders between the ages of 22 to 64 that have a college labor market job make an average salary of $52,873. Those working outside the college labor market earn $30,503 — or a difference in salary of more than $22,000 a year.  But many 20-somethings, like Malik, are also struggling with what is likely a case of bad economic timing. Graduates of 2009 were hit especially hard. A study conducted by the  John J. Heldrich Center for Workforce Development at Rutgers indicates that 50 percent of 2009 graduates are either unemployed or working in jobs that don’t require a college degree. Lisa B. Khan, who studies economics at Yale’s School of Management, recently conducted a study that looked at the long-term impact of graduating into a weak economy. Khan examined young people that graduated from college during the peak of the recession that occurred in the 1980s. In their first three years on the job market, Khan found they made about 30 percent less than classmates with more advantageous economic timing. And their subsequent salaries, even a dozen years later, were between eight and ten percent lower. This means that it might take Malik, who graduated two years ago during the beginning of a particularly brutal recession, up to a decade to recover the wages she might have earned had she sidestepped the downturn altogether. Paul Oyer, an economist at Stanford University, concedes that young people who start work when times are tough not only get behind, but generally have a tough time catching up. But Oyer also thinks that luck plays a role in the making of any successful career, good economic times or bad. What does concern him is that some historical trends seem to be withering in the current economy. Although wealth in America has increased from generation to generation, Oyer isn’t convinced that the current generation of 20-somethings will enjoy the rewards of a similar phenomenon. He attributes the shift to globalization and the number of available jobs. Because of these factors, he doesn’t think it makes much sense for young people to pile on educational debt to attend elite schools when they have less expensive alternatives — unless, of course, their parents are willing to go on the hook for it. Parents exert a powerful shaping force on their children’s decisions to go to college, as well as which college to attend. In addition, they are often caught up in the emotional rush that a college education entails, further complicating an issue that has already become a financial minefield for the middle class. “All along, I was going to make it work,” explains Marilyn. “If I had to take out loans, I was going to do that.” Once Sabrina and Omar were admitted into the colleges of their dreams, Marilyn saw it as her personal responsibility to make sure they could attend — even when it meant taking out additional loans in order to finance it. And while Marilyn says she doesn’t regret her investment, she assumed that a $120,000 degree would at least translate into a decent-paying job for her daughter. “One thing that terrifies parents more than budget deficits or a weak economy is job security for their kids. They’re afraid they won’t be able to pass along their middle class status to the next generation,” says Anthony P. Carnevale, who directs Georgetown University’s Center on Education and the Workforce. “In raising a child in America, the fear of failing is just enormous. Sending your kid to college used to pretty much guarantee their future success. It no longer necessarily works that way.” And, of course, what if this generation simply doesn’t value the same things their parents’ generation did? John Della Volpe, who directs polling at Harvard University’s Institute of Politics, spends much of the year gauging the thoughts of young people. His company SocialSphere recently conducted a study of 5,000 millennials between the ages of 16 and 24. It asked them to think about the next five to seven years of their lives and to rank the importance of what they hoped to achieve. His findings indicate that many young people aren’t focused on becoming famous or making piles of money. On the contrary, their hopes for the future revolve around making a contribution to society and staying in close touch with family and friends. “There’s a potential for this younger generation to have an economic reset,” explains Della Volpe. “It’s now okay to stay in your hometown.” AN UNCERTAIN FUTURE When it’s your decision, returning to your hometown is one thing. Being stuck there feels like something else entirely.  Malik says her days are an exercise in resilience. She has yet to shake her loneliness and general feeling of isolation. Most weekdays, she gets up by nine o’clock and immediately forces herself to get dressed. After breakfast, she typically positions herself on one of two floral upholstered couches in the sunroom, where, with laptop in hand, she begins the daily chore of scouring websites for job openings. When not job hunting, Malik helps out around the house — taking out the trash, doing the dishes, going grocery shopping, walking the dog, or making dinner a few nights a week. In some ways, the chores remind her of being in high school. Before her mother remarried and she and her brother headed off to college, it was just the three of them helping out around the house. Growing up, when her mother made dinner or when the house needed cleaning, the two siblings alternated chores. “Now that I’m back, I do those same kinds of things and it feels like the least I can do,” explains Malik. “It doesn’t feel like a task or a chore. I’m just helping my mom out, like I’ve always done.” But now, Malik is a grown woman. Part of her yearns for her own place where she can come and go as she pleases, and where the rules are hers and hers alone. On visits to see her boyfriend, who lives in Brooklyn, N.Y. and works for a private art collector, she sees glimpses of the independent life she expected to be living by now. Until she can land her ultimate gig of working as a curator in an art gallery, or begin a long trajectory of jobs that might eventually get her there, she’s looking for something to pay the bills. She’s looked into working as a clerk in a local retail shop and selling hot water heaters. Businesses in Lansdale are inundated with swarms of recent colleges graduates looking for any job they can get. Locally, there’s the option of working for a big pharmaceutical company, Starbucks or Walgreens, but not much else. When things start to feel overwhelming, Malik finds it helpful to make lists of things to accomplish. The current two-page iteration lists everything from big to small stuff — like getting a job and someday opening an art gallery to straightening her hair and eating fewer bagels. A recent addition, which has yet to be crossed off, is that Malik aspires to be less hard on herself. Namely, that for the time being at least, it’s okay to allow herself to feel sad sometimes. “Right now, it’s a battle of trying to remain levelheaded — and I don’t know if it’s trying to stay optimistic, or become more realistic, or just learn to be okay with going through the motions,” she says. “It feels like a lot of pressure. I want to make everyone proud. I want to blow everyone out of the water with everything I’ve accomplished. And I just can’t get there.” 

Read the full article →

Tealeaf Names Jawahar Malhotra Vice President of Engineering

May 24, 2011

Pioneer in Web Infrastructure and Applications, Platform as a Service, and Analytics Platforms Brings Additional Expertise to Customer Experience Management Leader

Read the full article →

Apartment Inv. and Manag. Company completes a series of large …

May 23, 2011

Apartment Investment and Management Company, AIV has completed a series of financing transactions over the last six months that repaid 19 non-recourse property loans scheduled to mature between 2012 and 2016 with …

Read the full article →

Sony To Post Huge Loss For The Year

May 23, 2011

TOKYO (By Isabel Reynolds) – Sony Corp said it expected to post a $3.2 billion net loss for the year that ended on March 31 due to a write off on tax credits, the latest in a string of grim headlines for the consumer electronics giant. The maker of PlayStation video games, Vaio computers and Bravia TVs has been battling to recover from the devastating Japan earthquake in March, and more recently, a series of computing hacking attacks that affected more than 100 million user accounts. “I have been skeptical about Sony for a long time. Sony has been overtaken by Apple and other companies,” said Yuuki Sakurai, CEO and president of Fukoku Capital Management in Tokyo. “The management is not able to show shareholders the future of the company.” Sony, once a symbol of Japan’s electronic and manufacturing excellence, has found itself outmaneuvered by Apple in portable music and Samsung Electronics in flat-screen TVs and is facing a tough fight in video games with Nintendo and Microsoft. Sony said it now expected a net loss of 260 billion yen ($3.2 billion) versus a previous forecast for a profit of 70 billion yen due to a “non-cash charge” of around 360 billion yen related to Japanese tax credits. It is due to announce its full-year earnings on Thursday. The net loss would be Sony’s biggest since 1995 and its second-largest ever. The company stuck with its earlier forecast, issued before the March 11 earthquake, for an annual operating profit of 200 billion yen, which is broadly in line with consensus forecasts. CLEAN SLATE Sony said it expected sales to rise this year and forecast a net profit. Some investors saw the revisions as a way for Sony to put the slew of bad news behind it and start with something of a clean slate. “Sony sharply revised down its net forecast to a big loss to show that the impact of the earthquake has been largely factored-in during the previous financial year, while the impact would be limited for the current year,” said Mitsushige Akino, chief fund manager at Ichiyoshi Investment Management. “Probably the company is expecting the global economy to recover during the second half of the year. Maybe this perception could be a bit optimistic, but we still have to wait and see.” In its first estimate for the year to March 2012, Sony said its operating profit would also be around 200 billion yen. The devastating earthquake and tsunami in March damaged Sony plants in northeastern Japan, snarled the global supply chain in several industries and triggered a plunge in domestic consumption. Sony estimated the impact of the quake in the current year at 150 billion yen at the operating level. Many rival corporations, including Panasonic Corp, have yet to issue forecasts for the current financial year to March 2012, due to uncertainty following the disaster. Sony last month disclosed that it had been a victim of one of the biggest cyber-attacks in history. It shut down its PlayStation Network across the globe in mid-April and has slowly started to restore access, starting in the United States. The company is still working with Japanese government authorities to restore access in that country. Sony said “known costs” were estimated at 14 billion yen. Sony is targeting the end of May for fully restoring the affected networks. Shares in Sony ended down 0.5 percent in a Tokyo market down 1.5 percent. It shares though have fallen 24 percent so far this year, compared with a 7 percent fall in the Nikkei average. ($1=81.71 yen) (Additional reporting by Tim Kelly and Chikafumi Hodo; Writing by Lincoln Feast; Editing by) Copyright 2010 Thomson Reuters. Click for Restrictions .

Read the full article →

Video: Lieberman Says Fed to Let QE2 Expire on Schedule

May 20, 2011

May 20 (Bloomberg) — Charles Lieberman, former economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and now chief investment officer with Advisors Capital Management LLC, talks about the oulook for Fed policy. He speaks with Matt Miller on Bloomberg Television’s “Street Smart.” (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

Video: Jacob Says LinkedIn’s Share Price `Difficult to Justify’

May 20, 2011

May 20 (Bloomberg) — Ryan Jacob, chairman of Jacob Asset Management and manager of the Jacob Internet Fund, talks about the outlook for LinkedIn Corp. following its initial public offering this week. LinkedIn is the largest professional-networking website. Jacob speaks on Bloomberg Television’s “InBusiness with Margaret Brennan.” (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

Video: Roger Martin Says Stock-Based Compensation Doesn’t Work: Video

May 20, 2011

May 20 (Bloomberg) — Roger Martin, dean of the University Toronto’s Rotman School of Management, discusses his book “Fixing The Game: Bubbles, Crashes, and What Capitalism Can Learn From the NFL.” Martin talks with Erik Schatzer on Bloomberg Television’s “InsideTrack.” (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

Cost Of Natural Disasters: ‘Ten Billion Dollars Would Be Conservative’

May 19, 2011

This year’s record-breaking tornadoes, floods, droughts and wildfires will cost the country tens of billions of dollars in economic losses — and these estimates are expected to climb as the Mississippi flooding and severe drought in Texas continue into the summer. Economists disagree about the precise figures — with the estimates varying by billions — but most agree that $10-15 billion in losses are conservative calculations. Severe weather in April alone — the month when record-breaking tornadoes tore through much of the Southeast and killed more than 300 people — cost the country $12 billion in economic losses, according to Steven Bowen, a meteorologist with the Impact Forecasting team of Aon Benfield, one of the world’s largest insurance brokers. The cost estimates for the flooding in Louisiana and Mississippi range from $3-9 billion, and the ongoing Texas drought, which began in November and has caused more than 10,000 wildfires across the state, has so far cost between $1.5 billion and $3 billion in crop and cattle losses. As the flooding and drought continue, government agencies say that it’s impossible to predict the long-term economic impact of the losses, which include thousands of homes and buildings destroyed by the tornadoes, casinos and ports along the Mississippi temporarily closed, millions of acres of grazing land scorched by the fires and 1 percent of the country’s cropland currently submerged in water. “It’s too early to say what effect this [the flooding] would have on the national economy,” the Department of Agriculture stated in a report on May 11. “Regardless, it probably will not be extensive given the estimated percentage of land affected.” But even as the long-term effect remains unknown, the short-term impact is clear: Individuals and small businesses are absorbing the bulk of these losses, as states, government agencies and insurance companies help foot nature’s bill. April’s tornadoes are expected to wipe thousands of mom-and-pop shops off the map. This region already had a high rate of small business failure, and before April’s disasters between 6,000 and 8,000 small businesses in Alabama, Tennessee, Mississippi and Georgia were expected to go under within the year, according to a report by Dun & Bradstreet, a research company that tracks small businesses. After the tornadoes, the number jumped to at least 10,000 shops. “Small businesses are definitely going to bear the brunt of this,” Byron Vielehr, President of Global Risk and Analytics division at Dun & Bradstreet told HuffPost in a telephone interview. The businesses won’t fail immediately, said Vielehr, but when they do it could produce a spike in unemployment and a loss of about a billion dollars in sales, just from these tornado-stricken small businesses alone. The situation of small farmers and ranchers in Texas is similar. After enduring the driest seven months on record, farmers and ranchers are being forced to abandon a cycle of wheat crop and sell off herds. Texas produces 20 percent of the country’s beef, and cattle ranchers are being slammed by the combination of scorched land unable to support grazing, and high feed and hay prices, both of which were driven up by the drought and the fires. “For a rancher, at this point he’s going to be losing about 30 percent of the income he would have averaged in the past,” said Bill Hymen, executive director of the Independent Cattlemen’s Association, the second-largest coalition of ranchers in the state. “And that’s not just this year but going forward because of dwindling seed stock,” he added, referring to the process of fewer cows leading to the birth of fewer calves in the future. As is the case in all industries, when a rancher has less pocket money, that creates a ripple effect in the local economy — with Hymen noting that ranchers, who know it’s likely that the drought will continue through the summer, are buying less and will ultimately pay less in taxes next year. Along the Mississippi and Atchafalaya rivers, a portion of small businesses and farms will likely follow the same course as the businesses that fell in the tornadoes path. Closed ports and casinos, too, are losing millions of dollars each day in lost river traffic, trade and gambling. Closing the Mississippi river itself causes even more economic damage. On Tuesday, the Coast Guard closed a 15-mile stretch of the Mississippi upriver of New Orleans by Natchez Port, a decision which could lead to losses of hundreds of millions of dollars each day, said Eric M. Holthaus, researcher at the International Research Institute for Climate and Society. The Coast Guard said that this closure is expected to last only a few days, but Holthaus also imagines a nightmare scenario in which the Port of New Orleans — the seat of our country’s agricultural exports and a handful of oil refineries — has to be closed. “I would be talking about trillions of dollars at that point,” he said. As long as the Port of New Orleans stays open, which it likely will, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, commonly known as FEMA, said that right now there is plenty of money in the $2 billion emergency fund to aid the states hit hardest by the natural disasters. FEMA has already approved about $38 million in future storm and tornado rebuilding assistance, including $9.4 million to Mississippi, $80 million to Alabama, $6.6 million to Georgia, $5.9 million for Tennessee and $16 million for Arkansas. For the flooding, FEMA has so far approved more than $11 million, including $1.4 million for Tennessee, $9 million for Missouri and $785,000 for Mississippi. As the flooding continues, the FEMA contribution is expected to rise, and these figures don’t include other public assistance that the regions will receive, either from the federal or state level. Insurance companies, too, are paying out, and April alone produced hundreds of thousands of insurance claims. Still, insurance companies and federal agencies aren’t feeling the hit of $10-15 billion in losses as acutely as individuals, towns and small businesses. “If you’re a small town in western Texas that’s lost anything, that town is going to suffer regardless of how much insurance money they get in the end. Less money in the community will mean that all unrelated jobs will take a hit,” said Holthaus, who said that the same holds true for communities affected by the tornadoes or the floods. “During a recession is a bad time for a disaster to hit,” he said.

Read the full article →

Cascade Microtech Appoints John (J.D.) Delafield to Board of Directors

May 19, 2011

BEAVERTON, OR–(Marketwire – May 19, 2011) – Cascade Microtech, Inc. ( NASDAQ : CSCD ), a leading expert at precision measurements at the wafer level, today announced it has elected John (J.D.) Delafield, Jr. to its Board of Directors effective May 13, 2011. “Mr. Delafield brings a significant knowledge of capital markets to our Board of Directors. J.D.’s addition will provide a perspective into technology-driven investments and an international viewpoint that will benefit our management team as we drive innovative test technology into new markets globally,” said Michael Burger, president and CEO of Cascade Microtech, Inc.

Read the full article →

Video: Liu Says Investors Joke China Stocks Akin to Gambling

May 18, 2011

May 18 (Bloomberg) — Liu Yang, chairwoman of Atlantis Investment Management Ltd., talks about China’s stock and real estate market. Liu also discusses the country’s economy, central bank montary policy and currency. She speaks with Rishaad Salamat in Hong Kong on Bloomberg Television’s “On the Move Asia.” (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

Grant Cardone: Leaders Define an Organization Not Managers!

May 16, 2011

It is not the policies and procedures that define an organization but purpose, not initiatives but inspiration, not mandates but the mission, and not management but leadership. Great companies, organizations and countries are fueled by its leadership, not by its management. Managers control ‘activities and leaders focus on ‘possibilities.’ Management is meant to control policies and procedures, while leadership provides the purpose, passion and influence! While management is vital to execution, management is useless without leadership. My friend Ralph Paglia says, “management without leadership is like a male dog on a beach full of bitches in heat.” It is not true however that great leadership is in the same situation without management as great managers will always follow the great leader. People don’t work for great leaders they follow them. Leadership does not require a title and can exist anywhere in an organization. Great leaders are identified by the number of people that want to follow them, work with them and execute their ideas. The difference between Managers and Leaders Managers control activities — Leaders focus on possibilities Manager focus on things to do — Leaders focus on what can be done Managers need titles — Leaders require no titles The concept of leadership conjures up images less confining than those associated with a manager. The leader has the ability to move others to higher levels of activity and achieve goals that were once thought out of reach. The best of leaders leverage the desire for personal accomplishment, overcoming of limitations, accomplishing those things not yet done, and even capitalize on a sense of duty! The manager tends to limit himself to the use of monetary carrots or punishment. Leaders know that the most valuable of people are not driven by worldly things, but more lasting personal motivations, like duty, obligation and a sense of responsibility. For any company to be great, the leader must continue to inspire, fuel the mission and provide impetus for the group. No amount of management can make up for a shortage of leadership. While managers can be leaders, great leaders are so vital to an organization it is probably best that they leave managing to others so they can lead! Grant Cardone, Author of The 10X Rule, The Difference Between Success and Failure

Read the full article →

Video: Shellady Explains Gross’s U.S. 10-Year Notes Strategy: Video

May 13, 2011

May 13 (Bloomberg) — Scott Shellady, manager of fixed income at XFA Futures, talks about Bill Gross’s trading strategy for 10-year Treasury notes. Gross runs the world’s biggest bond fund at Pacific Investment Management Co. Shellady talks with Lisa Murphy on Bloomberg Television’s “Fast Forward.” (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

Boeing Controversy At Center Of Jobs Debate

May 12, 2011

WASHINGTON — A controversial complaint recently filed by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) against the Boeing Company became the centerpiece of a passionate debate on Capitol Hill Thursday over the decline of labor unions in the U.S., the erosion of the American middle class, and the best approach to building jobs in a slow economic recovery. The hearing before the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions sought to examine why the middle class is shrinking, but much of that discussion ended up focused on the complaint against Boeing, whose vice president and general counsel, J. Michael Luttig, appeared before the committee as a guest of Republicans. In his testimony, Luttig wasted little time before blasting the NLRB, calling the complaint “preposterous on its face” and “a breathtaking substitution of the [labor] board for management in the running of an American company.” In the complaint filed last month, the labor board’s acting general counsel said Boeing broke the law when it made plans to create a new production line for its 787 Dreamliner in South Carolina, rather than in Washington state, where it had an existing workforce of unionized employees. The complaint alleged that Boeing’s move was retaliation against its Washington employees affiliated with the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, who had gone on strike in the past. A wide and growing group of Republicans have used the Boeing issue to paint the NLRB as pro-union and the Obama administration and Democrats as anti-business. Although he accused Republicans of overly politicizing the Boeing complaint, committee chairman Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) said that dwindling union membership and the decline of collective bargaining had a lot to do with the financial squeeze America’s middle class has felt in recent decades. Harkin even used Boeing as an example of the growing wealth disparity between workers and their management when questioning Luttig. He noted that the average Boeing worker in Washington earned $26 an hour and in South Carolina $18 an hour, while Luttig enjoyed a pay package of $3.7 million in 2009, a 34 percent increase over the previous year’s. “Why shouldn’t employees at Boeing get a 34 percent increase?” Harkin asked Luttig. “What’s going on here? … I’m just asking about fairness for workers.” Addressing the tough inquiry regarding his own salary, Luttig joked, “I have the sense that at this instance it may not be enough,” prompting a mixture of laughter and gasps. He went on, “Jobs and job growth is what we need to come out of this. Of course I share the committee’s concerns about the middle class. If we could pay [our workers] more, we would, and when we can, we will. Rallying to Boeing’s defense, ranking committee member Sen. Michael Enzi (R-Wy.) said, “This company deserves our congratulations and respect, not our demonization.” Sen. Mark Kirk (Ill.) went much further, saying that the NLRB had decided to “torture” Boeing through legal fees related to the complaint. Overall, the hearing seemed to indicate that Democrats are far less eager to make a larger political issue out of the Boeing complaint than Republicans are. Much like the NLRB, which has downplayed the scope and significance of the complaint , Democrats have tried to define it as a procedural matter being blown out of proportion. Republicans, on the other hand, have declared it an attack on corporations and “right-to-work” states like South Carolina, which prohibit agreements between unions and companies that make union membership a condition of employment. While labor groups have hailed the NLRB’s move as a victory for workers, earlier this week a group of Republican lawmakers and business interests assembled at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to declare it a dangerous precedent that would move jobs overseas. “Employers across the country have been greatly disturbed” by the complaint, Enzi said, adding that it “sounds like China, not the United States … It will create a chilling effect nationwide.” But Sarah Fox, legal counsel at the AFL-CIO and a former member of the NLRB, said before the committee that the Boeing complaint was made on solid legal footing. “There’s really nothing extraordinary about this complaint,” she testified. “What is exceptional about this case is not the novelty of the legal theory, but the size and power of the company that has been charged, and the magnitude of the decision that is at issue.” The NLRB, she added, shouldn’t make its enforcement decisions based on whether they will be “politically unpopular.” Although he wasn’t specifically addressing Boeing’s expansion with a non-union assembly line in South Carolina, former Labor Secretary Robert Reich testified that the shrinking number of union members in the American workforce has coincided with the slowing growth of wages in recent years. “The lines are diverging,” Reich said of worker wages relative to executive pay. “People know this. They feel like the game is stacked against them.”

Read the full article →

Finance Professionals See Business Opportunity In Strapped Michigan Cities

May 12, 2011

NEW YORK — As Michigan cities grapple with budget deficits and spending cuts, their troubles amount to an attractive opportunity for financial industry players, who are eyeing individual localities for state-sanctioned takeovers. Thanks to a new Michigan law , the governor can appoint an emergency manager to have total control over a municipality or school system deemed to be in dire financial straits. Such officials currently run three Michigan cities and the Detroit school district. Many more, from private and public industries, are waiting in the wings, boning up on municipal governance in case one of them is called upon to turn a city around. Hundreds have already been trained. In Detroit , the largest city in the state, the upcoming budgeting process carries an implicit threat: If local politicians can’t convince the state they have what it takes to repair the city’s finances, the state could appoint an outside official to do the job for them. The city has already hit several of the triggers to initiate the process that could install an emergency manager, say local politicians, who are scrambling to keep the city government out of receivership. But would-be emergency managers say they can succeed where elected officials have failed. They stand to draw six-figure salaries from the local governments under their management, but some talk about this work as if it were a civic duty. “We feel very strongly that not only is there a business opportunity here, but we want to be part of a solution for the greater good,” said Michael Imber, a principal in Grant Thornton LLP’s corporate advisory and restructuring services practice in New York. “We’re absolutely ready to help.” Imber is not alone. In February, he was one of about 50 graduates of a training course for Michigan emergency managers, a two-day program promoted in Crain ‘s business magazine. The course was popular, with a waiting list exceeding 100 people, said Eric Scorsone, an economist at Michigan State University, who helped organize the session with the Turnaround Management Association, a corporate restructuring industry group. More than two-thirds of the participants in February were from the private sector, Scorsone said. At the next training program, held in April, public sector professionals were more heavily represented, and about 400 people participated. That course, too, had a long waiting list. “There’s constant chatter going on about this,” said bankruptcy attorney Harley Goldstein, a partner at the law firm K&L Gates. “Everybody wants to make a buck.” Michigan has had an emergency manager statute on its books for 20 years, but Public Act 4, signed by Republican Gov. Rick Snyder in March, endows these officials with expanded powers over the localities where they’re dispatched. Emergency managers now can suspend collective bargaining rights for unions. They can terminate worker contracts. They can strip the mayor and the city council of all their power. These officials were once called “emergency financial managers.” Now they’re called just “emergency managers.” “That’s to emphasize that it’s not just about finances,” Scorsone said. “It’s more like a CEO rather than a CFO.” But even “CEO” doesn’t fully capture the extent of emergency managers’ authority. In the city of Benton Harbor, Joseph Harris has been the emergency manager for a year . Elected officials have resisted his rule, but thanks to Harris’ new powers, he is able simply to “put them in the timeout chair,” state Rep. Al Pscholka (R) told Bloomberg Businessweek . For Detroit, the coming two months are a crucial period, a time in which the local elected officials must prove to the governor that they can take care of the city on their own. The fiscal year ends June 30, and a new budget, which local officials are now in the process of writing, will take effect the following day. Mayor Dave Bing’s proposed budget includes cuts totaling nearly $100 million from a $1.3 billion general fund. The actual cuts could be even greater, city council members say. But it might take more than a balanced budget to convince the state to leave Detroit alone. Local politicians are also writing a plan to eliminate the city’s accumulated deficit, which exceeds $200 million, according to the mayor’s estimate. The goal is to give the city a budget surplus in five years. But for all the planning, the city’s finances could remain tenuous. For one, Detroit’s deficit-reduction plan depends on the state’s allowing the city to collect certain taxes, and to raise others. The latest Census data showed Detroit’s population had declined by a quarter over the last decade, falling below a legal threshold and preventing the city from collecting a utility tax. To get this revenue, and to raise its income tax, Detroit needs approval from the Republican-controlled state legislature — the same body that passed the new emergency manager law. Already, the city has made deep spending cuts to compensate for its depleted coffers. Workers have absorbed furlough days that amount to a 10 percent pay reduction. But city officials say they’re prepared to cut even more. The mayor has proposed shrinking the workforce by nearly 200 positions to help achieve that $100 million in savings. Other layoff counts discussed around City Hall reach as high as 1,000 workers, Council Member James Tate said. The pension and health care systems, too, are frequently cited targets for cuts. Between June 2008 and June 2010, the assets in Detroit’s General Retirement System pension plan lost nearly 40 percent of their value as the financial crisis struck, an auditor’s report shows . In his budget address last month, Mayor Bing said he wants to replace the city’s defined benefit pension plan with a 401k-style defined contribution plan for future hires, and to reduce the value of future employees’ pensions. But the city’s organized labor has resisted. In the end, budget savings might depend on whether the elected officials can successfully negotiate with unions. “We have to make those unpopular decisions,” Tate said. “I truly believe that this particular city council and this mayor will probably go down as one of the most unpopular groups of city leaders in the history of this city. We’re talking about massive change, massive sacrifice.” Outside the city, prospective emergency managers say they can do better. “There’s no question that an outside party can move things along faster,” Imber said. “Whatever the constituencies are that are resistant to change need to recognize what the reality is. If they don’t, they’re going to lose the right to choose.” While some prospective emergency managers have little or no experience in the public sector, they say their private sector experience has prepared them for this job. “We run a process to solve the financial issues of the enterprise,” said Michael Boudreau, a director at the financial firm O’Keefe and Associates, who has 20 years of experience in private industry, and who attended the February training session. “That process works in one industry as well as another industry. In this case, I’m going to say that it works just as well in private as in public.” Like elected officials, emergency managers are paid by the municipality they serve. But private sector turnaround artists are accustomed to salaries far larger than what these cities would offer. A “typical” salary for an emergency manager is about $11,000 a month, according to Terry Stanton, spokesperson for the Michigan Treasury Department. For Detroit, the salary would likely be more, said Scorsone, the economist who helped organize the emergency manager training sessions. He estimated that the annual pay for managing Detroit could reach as high as $400,000. The Detroit Public Schools’ Emergency Manager, Robert Bobb, earns about $350,000 annually . Compensation for private sector restructurings is often many times that. But clients in the private sector tend to have deeper pockets than Detroit taxpayers, who would foot the bill for an emergency manager. The city could end up paying several salaries, since the emergency manager can appoint advisers. But Goldstein, the bankruptcy lawyer, said in an email that he would consider working on Detroit on a pro bono basis. “I strongly believe that restructuring professionals should give something back to the community,” he said, adding, “Detroit’s situation is a noble cause that is deserving of altruism.” Stanton, the Michigan Treasury spokesperson, refused to speculate about whether an emergency manager is in Detroit’s future. State officials are “not waiting with bated breath to send EMs into different local units of government,” he said. What’s more, the purpose of the new law is preventative, he said. “The goal here is not to name emergency managers,” Stanton said. “The goal is to avoid having to name emergency managers.” Indeed, the new law seems to have inspired a fresh sense of urgency in Detroit city hall. A state takeover would be “tragic,” said Council Member Kwame Kenyatta. Local officials are avoiding it “like the plague,” Council Member Tate said. “It would be the end of the democratic process as Detroiters know it,” said Gary Brown, the council president pro tem. “You’d basically have a dictator that’s not accountable to the citizens of the city of Detroit.” “I appreciate people getting their training, but we won’t need them,” Council President Charles Pugh said. “I hope that that training was in vain. I hope that they wasted their time.” But not all city leaders show such confidence in the way the city is currently run. Al Garrett, president of the local division of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, said the city council members have a vested interest in avoiding emergency receivership — to protect their own jobs. Garrett expressed frustration with the way local politics works. He strongly opposes an emergency manager takeover — “it’s just a host of bad things,” he said — but he also said the current city leaders aren’t exactly ideal. “There are decisions that are made daily that make no damn sense, that lead to our fiscal crisis,” he said. “Part of what we want to see, when we go to the table, is how are you going to deal with the other issues.” “I’m not willing to voluntarily take a bad deal,” he added, “just to get the city out of receivership.”

Read the full article →

Inder Sidhu: Pharma’s Surefire Formula: Simultaneous Optimization and Reinvention

May 11, 2011

Do you have fireproof shoes? If you work in the pharmaceuticals industry these days, you’ve probably thought about buying a pair. Rarely has there been a time when so many legal, demographic and scientific changes have occurred at once. Taken as a whole, they constitute a burning platform that the industry cannot stand on much longer. Take prescription drugs. Between now and 2016, nearly a dozen top-selling, brand-name pharmaceuticals will lose their patent protection, meaning other drug makers will be able to sell generic equivalents of Lipitor, Plavix, Zyprexa and other products at greatly reduced prices. According to a report from EvaluatePharma, more than $267 billion worth of sales are at risk for drug makers Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Merck and others. Talk about an impetus for change. Throw in healthcare reform, increased regulation and other factors and you can understand why the pharmaceutical industry is feeling the heat all around it. So why aren’t the nation’s largest drug distributors sweating bullets? The answer has a lot to do with the management of these organizations, and the dual ways they react to business challenges and opportunities, in particular. McKesson , Cardinal Health and AmerisourceBergen are three of the nation’s largest drug distributors and each is enjoying a strong year despite the upheaval. How? By successfully navigating the ups and downs of their industry through a coordinated series of efforts to optimize and reinvent their businesses simultaneously. Doing both is extremely difficult, especially for companies that have market share, a revenue stream or a business model to defend. Companies tend to do whatever it takes to preserve these — often through a series of process and product refinements. While vitally important for improving efficiencies and correcting mistakes, optimization exercises can consume a company and prevent it from recognizing moments that call for greater transformation. Despite the discomforts, an organization must step outside its comfort zone every now and then. This is precisely what the Big Three in drug distribution have done and why they are prevailing in the market and on Wall Street. Shares of all three companies trade near or at their 52-week high. And each has posted recent quarterly earnings that have exceeded expectations. How? By simultaneously fine-tuning and transforming. Take Cardinal , the United States’ 19th-largest industrial company, according to Fortune Magazine . Last year, the company racked up $98.5 billion in sales of drugs and related products and services. Not bad for a company that started off in another industry altogether — food distribution. For nearly a decade in the 1970s, the company focused on the low-margin food distribution business before entering the pharmaceutical business through an acquisition. Since then, the company has acquired scores of companies, broadening its product portfolio and expanding its geographic reach. In the past two years, the company made two moves that will reshape it significantly. The first was the 2009 spin-off of the CareFusion medical technologies business, which has allowed Cardinal to focus on its supply chain operations. The second was the 2010 purchase of Zuellig Pharma China, the largest pharmaceutical importer in the world’s fastest-growing drug market. During its various reinventions, Cardinal has continually optimized its operations with a series of process and technology improvements that have made the company one of the most inventive, responsive and competitive drug distributors today. Ditto for AmerisourceBergen. Like Cardinal, AmerisourceBergen has grown through a series of acquisitions that have transformed the company from a sleepy Valley Forge, Pa., wholesaler into an industry powerhouse. Last year, AmerisourceBergen racked up nearly $78 billion in sales, which put it No. 27 on the Fortune 500 . To bolster profitability, AmerisourceBergn has invested heavily in “specialty drugs.” These advanced medications for treating chronic or rare conditions such as cancer or multiple sclerosis require more sophistication to sell and more expertise to administer. Like McKesson and Cardinal, AmerisourceBergen expanded its capabilities through new training and education. It’s also developed new business models that differ significantly from its traditional, branded-products business. As a result, the company has been able to move from the industry’s burning platform in a bold way. And changes continue. Later this year, company president and COO Steve Collis will replace current CEO R. David Yost when he retires in July. A longtime company veteran, Collis has already made significant changes in an effort to streamline decision making and better coordinate product development. Among other things, he’s consolidated the company’s reporting structure and eliminated many of the silos that separated different business functions. So are the big drug distribution companies done reinventing? Hardly. The passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 is major catalyst in the drug distribution business, one that will usher in even more change. “With 1,083 pages of legislation in the final bill to interpret and implement, this legislation marks the beginning of the reform process, not the end,” says Cardinal chairman and CEO George Barrett. His response? Bring it on. Like his peers in the drug distribution business, he’s not afraid of a little reinvention now and then. Along with ongoing optimization, it makes life more interesting, not to mention more rewarding. Inder Sidhu is the Senior Vice President of Strategy & Planning for Worldwide Operations at Cisco , and the author of Doing Both: Capturing Today’s Profits and Driving Tomorrow’s Growth . Author proceeds from sales of Doing Both go to charity. Follow Inder on Twitter at @indersidhu .

Read the full article →

Asian Activities Report for May 10, 2011: BKM Management (ASX:BKM) To Acquire Potash And Rare Earth Projects In Western Australia

May 10, 2011

Asian Activities Report for May 10, 2011: BKM Management (ASX:BKM) To Acquire Potash And Rare Earth Projects In Western Australia

Read the full article →

John Thomas Financial Affiliate Expands Private Wealth Management Division

May 9, 2011

Industry Veteran Richard Urbealis Named President of JTF Private Wealth Management

Read the full article →

Jeffrey Sachs: The Global Economy’s Corporate Crime Wave

May 8, 2011

The world is drowning in corporate fraud, and the problems are probably greatest in rich countries — those with supposedly “good governance.” Poor-country governments probably accept more bribes and commit more offenses, but it is rich countries that host the global companies that carry out the largest offenses. Money talks, and it is corrupting politics and markets all over the world. Hardly a day passes without a new story of malfeasance. Every Wall Street firm has paid significant fines during the past decade for phony accounting, insider trading, securities fraud, Ponzi schemes, or outright embezzlement by CEOs. A massive insider-trading ring is currently on trial in New York, and has implicated some leading financial-industry figures. And it follows a series of fines paid by America’s biggest investment banks to settle charges of various securities violations. There is, however, scant accountability. Two years after the biggest financial crisis in history, which was fueled by unscrupulous behavior by the biggest banks on Wall Street, not a single financial leader has faced jail. When companies are fined for malfeasance, their shareholders, not their CEOs and managers, pay the price. The fines are always a tiny fraction of the ill-gotten gains, implying to Wall Street that corrupt practices have a solid rate of return. Even today, the banking lobby runs roughshod over regulators and politicians. Corruption pays in American politics as well. The current governor of Florida, Rick Scott, was CEO of a major health-care company known as Columbia/HCA. The company was charged with defrauding the United States government by overbilling for reimbursement, and eventually pled guilty to 14 felonies, paying a fine of $1.7 billion. The FBI’s investigation forced Scott out of his job. But, a decade after the company’s guilty pleas, Scott is back, this time as a “free-market” Republican politician. When Barack Obama wanted somebody to help with the bailout of the US automobile industry, he turned to a Wall Street “fixer,” Steven Rattner, even though Obama knew that Rattner was under investigation for giving kickbacks to government officials. After Rattner finished his work at the White House, he settled the case with a fine of a few million dollars. But why stop at governors or presidential advisers? Former Vice President Dick Cheney came to the White House after serving as CEO of Halliburton. During his tenure at Halliburton, the firm engaged in illegal bribery of Nigerian officials to enable the company to win access to that country’s oil fields — access worth billions of dollars. When Nigeria’s government charged Halliburton with bribery, the company settled the case out of court, paying a fine of $35 million. Of course, there were no consequences whatsoever for Cheney. The news barely made a ripple in the US media. Impunity is widespread — indeed, most corporate crimes go un-noticed. The few that are noticed typically end with a slap on the wrist, with the company — meaning its shareholders — picking up a modest fine. The real culprits at the top of these companies rarely need to worry. Even when firms pay mega-fines, their CEOs remain. The shareholders are so dispersed and powerless that they exercise little control over the management. The explosion of corruption — in the US, Europe, China, India, Africa, Brazil, and beyond — raises a host of challenging questions about its causes, and about how to control it now that it has reached epidemic proportions. Corporate corruption is out of control for two main reasons. First, big companies are now multinational, while governments remain national. Big companies are so financially powerful that governments are afraid to take them on. Second, companies are the major funders of political campaigns in places like the US, while politicians themselves are often part owners, or at least the silent beneficiaries of corporate profits. Roughly one-half of US Congressmen are millionaires, and many have close ties to companies even before they arrive in Congress. As a result, politicians often look the other way when corporate behavior crosses the line. Even if governments try to enforce the law, companies have armies of lawyers to run circles around them. The result is a culture of impunity, based on the well-proven expectation that corporate crime pays. Given the close connections of wealth and power with the law, reining in corporate crime will be an enormous struggle. Fortunately, the rapid and pervasive flow of information nowadays could act as a kind of deterrent or disinfectant. Corruption thrives in the dark, yet more information than ever comes to light via email and blogs, as well as Facebook, Twitter, and other social networks. We will also need a new kind of politician leading a new kind of political campaign, one based on free online media rather than paid media. When politicians can emancipate themselves from corporate donations, they will regain the ability to control corporate abuses. Moreover, we will need to light the dark corners of international finance, especially tax havens like the Cayman Islands and secretive Swiss banks. Tax evasion, kickbacks, illegal payments, bribes, and other illegal transactions flow through these accounts. The wealth, power, and illegality enabled by this hidden system are now so vast as to threaten the global economy’s legitimacy, especially at a time of unprecedented income inequality and large budget deficits, owing to governments’ inability politically — and sometimes even operationally — to impose taxes on the wealthy. So the next time you hear about a corruption scandal in Africa or other poor region, ask where it started and who is doing the corrupting. Neither the US nor any other “advanced” country should be pointing the finger at poor countries, for it is often the most powerful global companies that have created the problem. Originally published by Project Syndicate.

Read the full article →

Former Oracle VP to Oversee Enterprise Development for GENWI / iSites

May 5, 2011

Oracle Vet Rahul Patel Will Enhance GENWI’s Cloud-Based Mobile Presence Creation and Management Platform for Business

Read the full article →

Corporations That Got Massive Tax Breaks Spent Millions In 2010 Elections

May 3, 2011

This story has been updated. WASHINGTON — The top five recipients of federal corporate tax breaks are also among the biggest spenders in the U.S. political system — they shelled out a combined $7.86 million in campaign contributions during the 2010 elections (in political action committee and individual employee contributions), according to analysis from the New York City Public Advocate’s office. Bill de Blasio, the public advocate, is now calling on these companies to verify that no taxpayer dollars will be used in future election spending, warning such a move could “carry financial risk to the [companies'] bottom line.” De Blasio, a Democrat, has aggressively gone after campaign finance accountability and successfully used his bully pulpit to convince several Wall Street firms not to spend any corporate dollars on political advertising . According to the analysis by de Blasio’s office, ExxonMobil, Bank of America, General Electric (GE), Chevron and Boeing had combined profits of $77.16 billion in 2010 but paid $0 in federal income taxes in their latest filing. At the same time, they gave a combined $7.86 million in political contributions during the 2010 election cycle — a 7 percent jump over their 2008 political spending. Charts via the Office the Public Advocate: According to the Center for Responsive Politics, all five of these companies ranked among the top 100 biggest political spenders between 1989 and 2010, with Chevron and ExxonMobil giving more heavily to Republicans, and the other three corporations generally balancing donations between the two parties. In 2010 alone , Boeing ranked 28th in political giving (“on the fence” in political leanings), GE ranked 30th (“leans Democratic”), Bank of America ranked 37th (“leans Republican”) and ExxonMobil ranked 93rd (“strongly Republican”). Chevron was not in the top 100 overall donors for the year. “[Corporate] tax breaks were put in place to promote growth and create jobs, not bankroll the political causes of corporate executives,” said de Blasio in a statement. “The unencumbered and anonymous spending in elections let loose by the Citizens United ruling has opened the door for a gross misuse of taxpayer dollars. No company that can afford to spend millions of dollars to influence our elections should be pleading poverty come tax time.” The Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in Citizens United cleared the way for a federal court’s decision in Speechnow.org v. FEC , which opened the floodgates for unlimited election spending by certain independent political groups, as long as they do not coordinate their activities with political candidates or party committees. These groups can raise unlimited funds from individuals, corporations and unions. Thanks to the ruling, the five companies could have contributed even more than the $7.86 million than was disclosed in 2010. De Blasio sent letters to the heads of each of the corporations, expressing concern over the use of their federal tax credits. He urged each company to “ensure full disclosure of its political spending to demonstrate that these funds and other corporate treasury dollars are not being used for political spending and electioneering.” He also asked all of them except GE to adopt policies that prohibit their trade association dues from being used for political contributions and electioneering. His office is also launching a campaign to ask the public to email ExxonMobil and urge the company to “adopt the proposed shareholder resolution on disclosure of political spending,” which will be considered at the company’s May 25 shareholders meeting. In response to de Blasio’s statement, ExxonMobil spokesman Alan Jeffers told The Huffington Post in an email that the company complies with all tax laws and disclosure requirements. He also addressed some criticism of ExxonMobil’s federal taxes. “Recent media reports have highlighted efforts by lawmakers to end economy-wide tax deductions for U.S. oil companies that were established to support manufacturing jobs in the United States and prevent U.S. companies from paying double taxation on income earned outside the country,” Jeffers wrote. “ExxonMobil is one of the largest taxpayers in the United States,” he added. “During the first quarter of this year, on earnings of $2.6 billion in the United States, we incurred U.S. tax expenses of $3.1 billion.” Boeing held its shareholders meeting on Monday and according to a spokesman, 67 percent of shareholders voted with the management against publishing amounts contributed to trade associations. The company already publishes its other political contributions online . “Like most of its competitors, Boeing does not publish amounts contributed to trade associations or otherwise mandate disclosure of funds spent for non-political purposes that are later used by the third parties to support political activity,” reads the Board of Directors’ statement in opposition . It cites problems with potentially revealing corporate strategy to competitors through this information and problems in compelling third parties to reveal whether they used Boeing-contributed funds for political purposes. GE spokesman Andrew Williams sent a statement that, like Exxon’s, did not address the issue of political contributions and also took exception to media reports on the company’s tax liability. “We will file our 2010 tax returns by September,” he wrote to The Huffington Post. “We expect to have a small federal income tax liability. In 2010, GE paid significant federal income taxes for prior years. We also paid about $1 billion in 2010 in other state, local and federal taxes in the U.S.” Williams said the company’s federal tax rate was low in 2010 because the company “lost billions of dollars in GE Capital, our financial arm, as a result of the global financial crisis. Similarly, in 2009 GE Capital’s losses were so large that the total company lost money on its U.S. operations.” He added that GE expects its tax rate will be higher in 2011 as GE Capital recovers. In March, however, GE told shareholders that the company expected to get back a $3.2 billion tax benefit from the federal government. Last year, Bank of America agreed to begin publishing a summary of its political donations online . “We comply with all state and federal campaign regulations,” said Bank of America spokesman Jerry Dubrowski. “Our policy is not to make corporate contributions to candidates for public office.” In a statement, Chevron wrote, “Chevron is committed to adhering to the highest standards of ethics and transparency in engaging in any political contributions. We have strict policies and internal approval processes so that decision making and reporting on political contributions comply with the letter and spirit of all applicable laws. A list of corporate contributions made during 2010 is available on Chevron.com.” It also defended its taxes, stating, “Between 1998 and 2008, the oil and gas industry paid $1 trillion in total income taxes. … In 2010, Chevron, as an example, paid $12.9 billion in taxes on pretax income of $32.1 billion, or an effective tax rate of 40 percent.” Large corporations that won’t be paying any federal income taxes have faced fierce bipartisan criticism in recent weeks. Former Wisconsin senator Russ Feingold, who now runs the Progressives United political action committee , launched a campaign pressuring GE CEO Jeffrey Immelt on the issue. And in April, there were massive protests in Washington state over the Democratic-controlled legislature proposing cuts to public programs over closing corporate tax loopholes. For the past month, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) has been publicly shaming what he calls the ” worst corporate income tax avoiders ” in an effort to share the burden of deficit reduction more equally, rather than letting it fall more on programs that assist low-income and middle-class individuals. The top five federal corporate tax break recipients have been particular targets of Sanders’ campaign. The piece was updated with Chevron’s statement. It was amended to clarify that the company political donations are from PACs and individual employees to reflect that the tax figures are from the companies’ latest filings

Read the full article →

Video: Obama, Musharraf, Chertoff Own Words on Bin Laden Death

May 2, 2011

May 2 (Bloomberg) — President Barack Obama, former Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf, and former Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff offer their views on the killing of al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden by U.S. special forces yesterday in Pakistan. This report also contains comments from Mohamed El-Erian, chief executive officer of Pacific Investment Management Co.; Paul Rosenzweig, senior legal fellow for the Heritage Foundation and Richard Falkenrath, a principal at the Chertoff Group and a Bloomberg Television contributing editor. (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

Video: El-Erian Says U.S. Now Needs `High-Quality’ Growth

May 2, 2011

May 2 (Bloomberg) — Mohamed El-Erian, chief executive officer of Pacific Investment Management Co., talks about the U.S. economy and Federal Reserve policy. El-Erian, speaking with Willow Bay and Lisa Murphy on Bloomberg Television’s “Fast Forward,” also discusses the impact of al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden’s death on financial markets. (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

Amazon, eBay Battle For Investors

April 22, 2011

NEW YORK (Phil Wahba) – When Amazon.com and eBay report quarterly results next week, investors will try to determine how well the e-commerce rivals’ expensive fight for shoppers is paying off. They will want to see if revenue is growing fast enough to justify the costs. Amazon has been moving further from its traditional business selling physical goods online to take on tech rivals like Apple Inc and Google Inc in areas such as selling digital entertainment and storing data. EBay is best known for its online auction website and PayPal, a payment system, but it has been making deals to compete more directly with Amazon, such as its $2 billion purchase in May of e-commerce services firm GSI Commerce. That deal is aimed at getting more retailers to sell to their customers using eBay. Amazon’s growth — its sales nearly doubled between 2008 and 2010 — has come at a cost: shrinking operating margin. Amazon has made no bones about it, warning investors to expect pressure on its profitability for some time yet. The question for investors will be how much pressure. “They (Amazon) are investing for the future and it’s just a matter of how long this investment process will take,” said Michael Koskuba, a senior portfolio manager at Victory Capital Management, which has owned Amazon stock since March 2009. Amazon shares plunged 9 percent on January 27 when it reported a lower operating margin over the holiday quarter. Amazon has been challenging rivals from Apple to Barnes & Noble Inc and many others with low prices on e-books, cheap shipping and offering customers the ability to store music on its servers in a “music locker.” A stellar sales performance by Amazon would mollify investors worried about the impact on profits, but a so-so performance could send shares down. “If Amazon has a strong revenue quarter, people will be more willing to overlook margins,” said Cowen & Co analyst Jim Friedland. “If they come in close to expectations (on sales) but margins are weaker, that would absolutely provoke a sell-off.” Ultimately, revenue will be the barometer of how well Amazon is doing at fending off a resurgent eBay. “Revenue reflects how much market share they still have to gain,” said BGC Partners analyst Colin Gillis. On average, Wall Street analysts expect Amazon to report a first-quarter profit of 61 cents per share on $9.52 billion in sales, down from 66 cents a year earlier, according to Thomson Reuters I/B/E/S. They expect eBay’s profit to come to 46 cents per share on revenue of $2.48 billion, compared to 42 cents per share a year earlier. For a graphic comparing Amazon and eBay’s revenue growth, see: r.reuters.com/nuj29r SCRUTINY OF EBAY’S AUCTION SITE Investors will most likely be swayed by how much merchandise is sold on eBay’s auction site as well as the number of new PayPal accounts. But one analyst said eBay would probably only get punished for weakness, rather than rewarded for strength. “If eBay falls short, it’s more about stronger than expected competition from Amazon, but if it rises more than expected, it’s more about the (better) overall economy,” Cowen’s Friedland said. Friedland is expecting gross merchandise volume, a closely watched measure of the total value of goods sold on eBay’s marketplaces, to be up 6 percent increase, excluding vehicles. PayPal has led the company’s revenue growth for years, while its marketplaces unit has matured. PayPal accounted for just over one third of sales last year but its revenues rose 23 percent, while the marketplaces business sales were up only 8 percent. Amazon shares trade at a 2011-earnings-to-price multiple of 55, far above most store chains as well as eBay, Apple and Google, suggesting the stock has downside. EBay shares trade a future earnings to price ration of 16.4 and analysts say that means it may have more upside than Amazon’s if its results impress investors. They have slipped 10 percent since hitting a yearly high in February. “EBay is coming back. If you want e-commerce exposure, buy eBay.” BCG’s Gillis said. (Reporting by Phil Wahba. Editing by Gary Hill) Copyright 2011 Thomson Reuters. Click for Restrictions .

Read the full article →

Ed Lawler: Sustainable Leadership: The Problem With Iconic Leaders

April 18, 2011

For the last several months CEO succession at Apple has gotten a considerable amount of attention because of Steve Jobs’ health problems. The corporate board has been asked what their succession plan is for the CEO role and so far, they have avoided giving a definitive answer. It’s no wonder that investors are concerned. There are many examples in the history of American business that demonstrate how hard it is to replace an iconic leader. GE has not done well since Jack Welch left. Polaroid went bankrupt a few years after its founder Edwin Land retired. Disney floundered for a number of years after Walt Disney retired. The most common reason given for the failure to find replacements for iconic leaders is poor leadership development on the part of their companies. But there is much more to the problem of succession in icon-led companies than simply the lack of talent development and of the succession planning. Iconic leaders such as Welch and Disney often spend decades in their CEO roles and exert enormous influence through all aspects of their company’s strategy, operations and design. They create leadership roles that fit them. They institutionalize their way of managing to such an extent that their replacements simply have to do the job the way they did it or make enormous changes in the way senior management operates. Of course, it is virtually impossible to find a leader who can replace icons such as Welch and Disney in the jobs they have created, no matter how good the internal development system of a company is. But in essence, these icons create unsustainable leadership roles in their companies. What’s the antidote to this? There is an alternative to the kind of iconic leader who is impossible to replace: have a senior leader who installs a sustainable leadership model. This of course raises the question: What is a sustainable leadership model? Perhaps, the best way to describe it is as a shared leadership approach, one where individuals throughout the organization are expected to demonstrate leadership behavior and not be overly dependent on the CEO to provide a sense of direction, mission and purpose for the organization. When leadership is shared, people throughout the organization take advantage of leadership moments to influence the direction of the corporation. Finding a new CEO is much easier with the shared leadership approach. Bill Gates did it at Microsoft and the pay-off as been continued high performance. Herb Kelleher did it at Southwest Airlines and it has continued to perform well. The implication of this for boards is clear; they need to focus on talent development and how their firm is led, not just on succession planning. But what about Apple? Is Steve Jobs more like Bill Gates and Herb Kelleher or more like Jack Welch and Walt Disney? Is he a leader that has created a sustainable leadership approach for Apple? It does not look like it to me, but only time will tell. Edward E. Lawler III is a distinguished professor of business at the University of Southern California (USC) Marshall School of Business and founder/director of the University’s Center for Effective Organizations (CEO), one of the country’s leading management research organizations. He’s authored more than 40 books, including his most recent — Management Reset: Organizing for Sustainable Effectiveness (Jossey-Bass, March 2011). Cross-posted from Forbes.com .

Read the full article →

The Top 10 Tax Breaks — And How They Help The Wealthy The Most

April 18, 2011

This is the time of year when we are most aware of our tax burdens. But what we may be less aware of are all the huge tax breaks built into our system. Most Americans benefit from one or more — but it’s the wealthy who benefit the most. The government spends money through appropriations and writing checks, but it also showers individuals and companies with a astonishing array of special exemptions, credits and deductions that amount to a $1.1 trillion giveaway each year. (For comparison: the big budget fight that concluded last week cut spending by about $38 billion.) About half of the money lost to “tax expenditures” comes from the 10 breaks listed below. Few of the biggest breaks directly benefit corporate America. Most are widely distributed among the population and are meant to reward and encourage what is generally considered responsible behavior. Each break also represents a powerful, and in some cases broad-based, constituency. But in stark contrast to, say, social programs, tax breaks vastly favor the rich over the middle class and the poor. They vastly favor people who own homes (especially expensive homes), can put a lot away for their retirements, have generous health insurance plans and live in high-tax states. Even something as simple as the deduction for charitable donations favors the wealthy: Because they pay higher marginal tax rate, they get a bigger federal subsidy for each dollar they give. Some of these terms may require a little explanation: 1. Tax-free health insurance contributions. The tax exclusion for employer-provided health benefits is the single largest tax break — it alone will cost the government $1 trillion in foregone taxes over the next five fiscal years. This huge tax expenditure massively subsidizes the nation’s employer-based health insurance system. It also provides an incentive to employers to overspend in health benefits (which are tax free) and pay less in salary (from which, of course, the IRS takes a bite). This tax break only helps families with at least one member employed by an employer who offers them health benefits. Others have to buy health insurance with after-tax dollars. 2. The mortgage interest deduction. The second-largest tax break is essentially the nation’s largest housing program . By letting taxpayers who itemize deduct the interest they pay on their home mortgages, the government massively subsidizes home ownership. The more expensive the home — and the higher the homeowner’s tax bracket — the bigger that subsidy is. 3. Treatment of capital gains at death. When you die, the government forgives your capital gains tax on appreciated assets that you pass on to your heirs. In accounting terms, this is the ” step up in basis ” on death. From the heirs’ perspective, it means that the “basis” going forward (the amount above which anything is considered taxable capital gains) is the value of the asset at the time they received it. So if you buy stock at $1,000 and it’s worth $10,000 when you die, your heir gets $10,000 as the basis. No one ever pays taxes on the $9,000 in appreciation. Now imagine a multi-million-dollar stock portfolio and multi-million-dollar homes — and you’re talking real money. 4. Tax-free contributions to 401(k)s. Federal government policy encourages savings for retirement by allowing employees and employers to make tax-free contributions to retirement plans, the most common of which is the 401(k). This break is a big gift to the financial securities industry, which is where most of this money goes, and to the very wealthy. Indeed, the bulk of benefits go to high-income households, while little goes to the lower and moderate income households. There are limits to how much can be contributed tax-free, but the amount of tax foregone through contributions to 401(k) plans, along with employer plans, when combined still make tax-deferred retirement savings the second largest tax expenditure. 5. Exclusion of net imputed rental income. Homeowners don’t pay themselves rent. If they didn’t own their own homes, they would pay rent — and whoever received that rent would have to declare it as income and pay taxes on it. But this “imputed rental income” goes untaxed — another major subsidy to homeowners. The foregone rent is called “imputed rental income,” and the White House Office of Management and Budget calculates the foregone tax that results from it at $50 billion a year . 6. Deductibility of state and local taxes. The rationale behind this deduction is that taxes paid to state or local governments reduce a taxpayer’s ability to pay federal income tax. But state and local taxes essentially “pay” for services that, if purchased directly by the taxpayer, would not be deductible. The benefits of this deduction are disproportionately enjoyed by the wealthy, property owners, and residents of high-tax states. Because so many of those high-tax states are blue, this is one tax deduction that some conservative activists actually want dead . 7. Acclerated depreciation. The tax code allows businesses to deduct the costs of investing in such things as equipment faster than the objects in question actually wear out. Seth Hanlon writes for the Center for American Progress: “Accelerated depreciation in general should be thought of as a multibillion-dollar federal spending program that subsidizes business investments. And when they single out specific industries for special benefit, depreciation rules are akin to spending ‘earmarks.’” 8. Capital gains. Salaries, rents, royalties, interest — they’re all considered regular income by the IRS, and get taxed at marginal rates up to 35 percent. But income from the sale of capital assets held for more than a year is considered long-term capital gains, and gets taxed at a flat 15 percent rate. This is a huge windfall for the investor class — and represents a quarter of a trillion dollars in lost revenue over 5 years. 9. Deductibility of charitable contributions. The IRS allows taxpayers to deduct charitable contributions from their taxable income. This amounts to an approximately $43 billion a year subsidy to charitable organizations — and because of progressive taxation, the deduction is more valuable to rich taxpayers than to poor ones. One scholar recently proposed doubling the deduction temporarily to stimulate job growth; but there is actually more talk about reducing or adjusting it instead. 10. Employer plans. This refers to employment-based retirement plans other than 401(K)s. See No. 4.

Read the full article →

WATCH: GOP Lawmaker Claims Every Time The U.S. Has Cut Taxes, Revenue Has Gone Up

April 17, 2011

WASHINGTON — As Congress addresses the federal deficit and begins debating next year’s budget, a centerpiece of the conversation is whether to raise taxes and increase revenue for the government or to simply cut spending. In his speech last week, President Obama called for allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire for individuals making $200,000 or more a year and couples making $250,000 or more. Some conservatives, such as Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) have voiced support for tax increases. But many other Republicans, especially freshmen members affiliated with the Tea Party, aren’t so keen on that idea. On ABC’s “This Week,” host Christiane Amanpour mentioned to freshman Rep. Joe Walsh (R-Ill.) that House Budget Committee Chair Paul Ryan’s (R-Wis.) budget plan doesn’t address raising revenue, while Obama’s does. “Can you really sustain what everyone’s calling for just by cuts in public services? Doesn’t there need to be revenue-raising mechanisms?” she asked. Walsh replied that the best way to raise revenues is to grow the economy. “You get taxes and regulations off the backs of businesses so that revenues can increase,” he insisted. Amanpour continued to press him, expressing skepticism that Congress can really balance the budget just by cutting social programs. Walsh insisted that tax cuts consistently help the economy grow and therefore raise revenues for the government. “In the 80s, federal revenues went up,” said Walsh. “We didn’t cut spending. Revenues went up in the 80s. Every time we’ve cut taxes, revenues have gone up. The economy has grown.” WATCH: Walsh isn’t the first lawmaker to make this argument. Last year, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) made a similar comment about the Bush tax cuts. “There’s no evidence whatsoever that the Bush tax cuts actually diminished revenue,” he asserted. “They increased revenue, because of the vibrancy of these tax cuts in the economy.” But even conservative economists have cast doubt on this claim. “Federal revenue is lower today than it would have been without the tax cuts. There’s really no dispute among economists about that,” said Alan D. Viard, a former White House economist under George W. Bush, in a 2006 Washington Post article. Robert Carroll, deputy assistant Treasury secretary for tax analysis, also said that no one in the administration believes tax cuts created a surge in revenue. “As a matter of principle, we do not think tax cuts pay for themselves,” Carroll said. Bruce Bartlett, a Reagan economist who became a strong critic of the Bush administration’s policies, used data from the Office of Management and Budget in a blog post last year to illustrate how ” the Bush tax cuts reduced revenue rather significantly .” On CNN’s “State of the Union,” Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) rejected calls for tax increases, suggesting instead to cut military spending and funds for welfare programs. “I think there is a compromise,” he said. “But the compromise is not to raise taxes, the compromise is for conservatives to admit that the military budget’s going to have to be cut. We’ve doubled military spending. I believe in a strong national defense, but conservatives will have to compromise and we will have to cut military spending. Liberals will have to compromise and we will have to cut domestic welfare. The compromise is where we cut, not where we raise taxes.”

Read the full article →

This University Endowment Owns About $1B In Gold Bars

April 16, 2011

he University of Texas Investment Management Co., the second-largest U.S. academic endowment, took delivery of almost $1 billion in gold bullion and is storing the bars in a New York vault, according to the fund’s board.

Read the full article →

Google Earnings Miss Analyst Target

April 14, 2011

SAN FRANCISCO — Google’s first-quarter earnings came in below analyst projections as the Internet search leader sped up hiring and increased spending other areas to drive up its expenses. The results released Thursday may heighten investor fears that Google’s earnings might suffer because of the company’s commitment to hire at least 6,200 workers this year. That would be the most in Google’s 13-year history. Google co-founder Larry Page, who replaced Eric Schmidt as CEO after the quarter ended, has indicated he plans to keep investing in long-term opportunities that may take years to pay off, even if that crimps the company’s short-term results. Page, known for his aloofness, made a few tame remarks on Google’s earnings conference call Thursday before turning the presentation over to the company’s chief financial officer, Patrick Pichette, who has been steering the presentations for the past year. “I’m very excited about Google and our momentum, and I’m very, very optimistic about our future,” Page said. He also assured that the management transition that Google announced three month ago is unfolding as the company envisioned, with Page overseeing day-to-day operations while Schmidt handles government relations and stalks possible acquisition targets in his new role as executive chairman. Google shares shed $27.74, or nearly 5 percent, to $550.77 in extended trading. The stock closed the regular session at $578.51, up $2.23. The company earned $2.3 billion, or $7.04 per share, in the period ending in March. That was an 18 percent increase from nearly $2 billion, or $6.06 per share, last year. If not for the cost of employee stock rewards, Google said it would have earned $8.08 per share. That was below the average estimate of $8.11 per share among analysts surveyed by FactSet. Revenue was nearly $8.6 billion, a 27 percent increase from last year. After subtracting the commissions paid to ad partners, Google’s revenue stood at $6.54 billion. That figure topped the average analyst estimate of $6.33 billion, according to FactSet. Expenses grew faster than revenue. The company added 1,916 employees to end March with more than 26,300 workers. More than half of the new staff is working on products and services to supplement the search advertising network that makes most of Google’s money. The new growth opportunities include video ads on Google’s YouTube site, ads on smartphones, and more banner advertising. A 10 percent raise that Google gave all its employees at the beginning of the year contributed to rising costs. Google also spent $890 million on data centers and other capital projects in the quarter, more than triple the $239 million it spent in the same period last year.

Read the full article →

Experts Fear Another Oil Disaster

April 14, 2011

NEW ORLEANS — With everything Big Oil and the government have learned in the year since the Gulf of Mexico disaster, could it happen again? Absolutely, according to an Associated Press examination of the industry and interviews with experts on the perils of deep-sea drilling. The government has given the OK for oil exploration in treacherously deep waters to resume, saying it is confident such drilling can be done safely. The industry has given similar assurances. But there are still serious questions in some quarters about whether the lessons of the BP oil spill have been applied. The industry “is ill-prepared at the least,” said Charles Perrow, a Yale University professor specializing in accidents involving high-risk technologies. “I have seen no evidence that they have marshaled containment efforts that are sufficient to deal with another major spill. I don’t think they have found ways to change the corporate culture sufficiently to prevent future accidents.” He added: “There are so many opportunities for things to go wrong that major spills are unavoidable.” The worst offshore oil spill in U.S. history began with an explosion April 20, 2010, that killed 11 workers aboard the Deepwater Horizon rig. More than 200 million gallons of crude spewed from the well a mile beneath the sea. Since then, new drilling rules have been imposed, a high-tech system for capping a blown-out well and containing the oil has been built, and regulators have taken steps to ramp up oversight of the industry. But deep-sea drilling remains highly risky. The effectiveness of the much-touted containment system is being questioned because it hasn’t been tested on the sea floor. A design flaw in the blowout preventers widely used across the industry has been identified but not corrected. And regulators are allowing companies to obtain drilling permits before approving their updated oil-spill response plans. After a monthslong moratorium, the Obama administration resumed issuing drilling permits earlier this year amid great pressure from the industry and lawmakers seeking to protect communities and workers whose livelihoods depend on drilling. A petroleum industry group is creating a center for offshore safety in Houston to address management practices and improve industry communication. And the agency that oversees offshore drilling now bars inspectors from regulating a company that employs a family member or friend. Also, inspectors who join the agency from the oil industry cannot perform inspections of their former employers for two years. BP says it is poised to become a much safer company. It ousted several key figures during the disaster – including CEO Tony Hayward – and created a powerful unit to police company safety. BP spokesman Daren Beaudo said that because of advances made during the crisis, “the capability exists to respond to a deep-water well blowout.” Similarly, Chevron spokesman Russell A. Johnson said his company is “confident of our ability to prevent an incident similar” to the Gulf oil spill. Whether any of that translates into better protection remains to be seen. “I’m not an oddsmaker, but I would say in the next five years we should have at least one major blowout,” Perrow said. “Even if everybody tries very hard, there is going to be an accident caused by cost-cutting and pressure on workers. These are moneymaking machines and they make money by pushing things to the limit.” After the Deepwater Horizon explosion, oil producers including BP were criticized for errors in their federally required oil-spill response plans, such as severely underestimating the time it takes oil to reach shore. Several of the biggest oil producers told the AP they have updated their response plans but are still waiting for them to be approved. The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement said it is operating under a 2002 federal regulation that allows two years to approve such plans. In the meantime, companies are allowed to proceed with their drilling applications and obtain permits as long as they certify in writing that they can handle a spill, said agency spokeswoman Eileen Angelico. The agency “is taking the oil companies’ word for it that they can handle a spill,” said David Pettit, a senior attorney for the National Resources Defense Council, one of the nation’s leading environmental groups. “This is the same kind of deference to claimed oil company expertise that led directly to the BP Deepwater Horizon disaster.” Regulators, however, point out that operators have to provide significant supplemental data before permits are approved. To bolster their case for safer drilling, the companies can point to a new system developed by industry titans including Exxon Mobil, Chevron, Shell and ConocoPhillips to contain oil spills. The system includes a cap and a series of undersea devices – including cables, a riser and a piece of equipment that would pump dispersant. Lines would be hooked up to vessels on the surface. Oil companies say the system is capable of quickly containing a blowout 8,000 feet under water and capturing as much as 60,000 barrels of oil per day. By comparison, at the height of the Gulf spill in mid-June, BP’s well was spewing some 57,000 barrels a day at a depth of 5,000 feet. Michael Bromwich, director of the U.S. agency that regulates offshore drilling, recently acknowledged that the system was not tested in a dynamic situation – meaning in the ocean or during blowout conditions. He said such testing would be ideal, but he was still confident the system would work. Martin W. Massey, CEO of the Marine Well Containment Co., the consortium of companies that built the system, told the AP that components of the system were tested on land in Houston in a controlled environment, with government officials monitoring and approving it. He suggested that ocean testing was not necessary. “We’re quite confident,” he said. “We’re ready to respond. The system is ready to go.” The consortium has said an expanded network capable of plugging a well at more than 10,000 feet below the surface and collecting 100,000 barrels of oil per day won’t be ready until early 2012. Another piece of equipment that has come under new scrutiny is the blowout preventer. In a report last month, a firm hired by the government to test the 300-ton device made by Houston-based Cameron and used with BP’s ill-fated well said the device failed to pinch the well shut in part because of a design flaw that prevented it from cutting through a drill pipe that had been knocked off center. Cameron is one of the biggest manufacturers of blowout preventers, so the finding has raised concerns that the devices may have to be overhauled across the board. No design changes have been announced since the finding, and a Cameron vice president defended the integrity of the blowout preventers at a federal hearing this month. If oil reaches the surface and threatens land, response companies today would still rely on the same equipment and technology that failed to quickly protect land during the BP spill. Floating booms, for example, would still be put in place around sensitive marshes and beaches. Bromwich said recently that some oil and gas companies continue to tell him they believe the Deepwater Horizon was an aberration belonging to one party – BP – and it could not happen to them. “In my judgment, this is as disappointing as it is shortsighted,” Bromwich said. “Our view is this was a broad problem.” ___ Mohr reported from Jackson, Miss. Associated Press writers Michael Kunzelman in New Orleans and Dina Cappiello in Washington contributed to this report.

Read the full article →

SEC Bows To Big Oil, Delays Anti-Corruption Regulation

April 14, 2011

WASHINGTON — Oil and mining interests are fighting back against an anti-corruption measure included in last summer’s financial reform package that was supposed to go into effect at the end of this week. Despite a statutory April 15 deadline, the Securities and Exchange Commission has delayed its final rulemaking on the measure, which calls for publicly traded companies listed on U.S. stock exchanges to disclose how much they pay foreign governments to acquire drilling and mining rights in their countries. The new requirement is intended to make it more difficult for foreign leaders to hide and pocket the funds that energy and mining companies pay them. Oil and mining interests — which have historically turned a blind eye to where their money went once it left their hands — are complaining that the new rule will endanger contracts and give an advantage to competitors unburdened by such requirements. The American Petroleum Institute — the tip of the formidable spear that is Washington’s oil and gas industry lobby — has led the fight against the measure. In an email to The Huffington Post, API spokesman Carlton Carroll wrote: “We have made a strong case that this would place [Securities and Exchange Commission]-listed firms at a competitive disadvantage when competing for international contacts, and we hope the SEC will keep these concerns in mind as they work through the rulemaking process.” NOT THE ONLY DELAYED RULE The SEC, which was tasked by July’s Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act with implementing dozens of new rules to protect investors, has now punted on three due this week: The resource extraction measure as well as requirements that companies disclose whether they use “conflict minerals” from the Democratic Republic of the Congo or an adjoining country, and that mining companies make public their safety and health standards. An SEC spokesman, asked about the reason for the delay, directed The Huffington Post to earlier statements by the commission to the effect that, the nature of the requirements in question “differs from the disclosure traditionally required by the Exchange Act” and therefore necessitated particularly extensive public input. The commission is also widely considered to be overworked and understaffed. The recently postponed, 102-page proposed rule for “disclosure of payments by resource extraction issuers” was first published in December, and the SEC opened the window for comments for 30 days. But the commission was soon swamped with responses from special interests — including several requests for more time to respond. In late January, it extended the comment period another 30 days — making the April 15 deadline for a final rulemaking all but impossible. More comments ensued . And just a few days ago, the commission updated its calendar for Dodd-Frank rulemakings to show that it doesn’t intend to have the resource extraction rules (or the conflict mineral rules or the mine safety rules) finalized until sometime between August and December at the earliest. “I don’t see it as significant that it slipped — although it certainly is serious for an agency to miss a deadline that’s in a statute, with zero outreach to Congress to explain,” said Neil Brown, a senior staffer with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. “We all want the best rule possible,” he said. INTERNATIONAL MOMENTUM The anti-corruption measure’s inclusion in the Dodd-Frank bill spurred European governments to approve similar rules. Ironically, those may be in place sooner than the ones in the United States. “This has kicked off what looks like regulatory harmonization in other markets,” said Isabel Munilla, U.S. director of Publish What You Pay, a pro-disclosure group funded by humanitarian and human-rights groups including the Open Society Institute. “Essentially what this is going to do is establish a global standard.” Nevertheless, advocates worry that a delay in the U.S. could slow down the international momentum — and might even be a sign that the SEC is backing away from the full intent of the law. “I think it’s quite important that this ruling be implemented as quickly as possible, as was the congressional intent,” said Paul Bugala, an analyst who monitors oil, gas, mining and timber companies for Calvert Asset Management, a socially responsible investment company. “Not only because the issues at hand are important enough that we need these standards imposed as soon as possible, but because at the end of the day, I think a lot of the other markets are waiting for the final rules from the commission.” “There’s definitely a possibility that there could be backsliding, given all the industry pressure,” said Corinna Gilfillan head of the U.S. office for Global Witness , a group that promotes policies to stop natural resource corruption and conflict. THE GENESIS The provision made it into Dodd-Frank after being proposed as a separate bill by the bipartisan duo of Sens. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) and Ben Cardin (D-Md.), as a way of combating what’s known as the ” resource curse .” “History shows that oil, gas reserves, and minerals frequently can be a bane, not a blessing, for poor countries, leading to corruption, wasteful spending, military adventurism, and instability,” Lugar explained in a floor speech in support of the measure. “Too often, oil money intended for a nation’s poor ends up lining the pockets of the rich or is squandered on showcase projects instead of productive investments.” Lugar pointed to the “classic case” of Nigeria, which is “the eighth largest oil exporter,” he said. “Despite $ 1/2 trillion in revenues since the 1960s, poverty has increased, corruption is rife, and violence roils the oil-rich Niger Delta.” The U.S. is not immune from the instability in Nigeria and other petro-states, the Indiana Senator warned. “This ‘resource curse’ affects us as well as producing countries. It exacerbates global poverty which can be a seedbed for terrorism, it empowers autocrats and dictators, and it can crimp world petroleum supplies by breeding instability,” said Lugar. It’s a dynamic most vividly on display today in countries such as Equatorial Guinea , a resource-rich but poverty-ridden nation that is the scene of endemic public corruption and squandering. “We also know that countries are more likely to prosper when governments are accountable to their people,” Barack Obama told the United Nations a few months after Dodd-Frank’s passage. “So we are leading a global effort to combat corruption, which in many places is the single greatest barrier to prosperity, and which is a profound violation of human rights.” “That’s why we now require oil, gas and mining companies that raise capital in the United States to disclose all payments they make to foreign governments,” the President said. THE ARGUMENTS AGAINST While corporate interest groups like the American Petroleum Institute are vociferously opposed to the new SEC disclosure rules, their logic can sometimes be elusive. Some of API’s reasoning, as expressed in its 47-page letter to the SEC , is circular at best. For example, it argues that too much disclosure could… harm disclosure. “Unless implemented properly, Section 13(q) could also undermine many years of progress on international transparency,” the group wrote. Or, disclosure could confuse people: “We also note that overly detailed reporting could harm investors, reduce competition, and impair efficiency by confusing investors with voluminous amounts of immaterial information and causing companies to incur substantial additional compliance costs.” Or, disclosure could get employees killed: “There are situations where the public disclosure of detailed payment information could jeopardize the safety and security of our member companies’ operations and employees.” The API’s solutions? Allow the disclosures to be fudged “by allowing issuers to aggregate data from multiple agreements relating to the same resource.” Or keep the data hidden from the public altogether: “An exemption for commercially sensitive information could be implemented consistent with long-standing practice under the Freedom of Information Act.” In an opinion column for The Hill , Misty McGowen, director of federal relations for the API, tried to draw a parallel between the new requirement and a British museum that got a guard dog to protect its rare teddy bears. “[L]ike the museum’s Doberman, Section 1504 could lead to unintended and unwelcome consequences,” she warned. (The dog ate them .) But it’s always a mistake not to take the API seriously, and its most ardent request, echoed by its member companies, is that the SEC allow an exemption to the disclosure requirement in cases when the host country prohibits such disclosures by law. Advocates of the measure say there’s no evidence that any such laws exist yet. But they also agree that if such an exemption was approved, then the countries that don’t want disclosure — precisely the countries the law is intended to affect — would simply declare it illegal going forward. “From our perspective, the legal arguments aren’t there,” said Munilla, the disclosure advocate from Publish What You Pay. “They’re saying kind of crazy stuff. It doesn’t really pass the stress test.” DEALS WITH DICTATORS One possible reason the industry is having such a hard time making a persuasive argument is that it can’t publicly acknowledge why all this really matters: Although bribery is already outlawed by the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act , disclosure could put an end to sweetheart deals with dictators, made on the condition that no one knows how much money is involved. The Nation ‘s Daphne Eviatar traveled to Angola in 2004 “to try to understand how a country so rich in the most coveted resource of our time–oil–can fall to the bottom of almost every scale of human development.” “It’s no secret that Angola’s leaders are siphoning off huge amounts of state money,” she wrote. “But lurking beneath the sinister statistics and corrosive corruption is the murky involvement of Western governments and multinational oil companies.” Now a senior associate at Human Rights First, Eviatar tells HuffPost that disclosure is an important lever “where you have major corporations dealing with notoriously corrupt governments who then hide the amount of money they take in from those contracts, and spend very little of it for the benefit of their own populations.” The multinationals “know perfectly well who they’re dealing with in those countries,” she said. And a recent New York Times article about how Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi extracted billions from major Western companies — including a $1 billion “signing bonus” from California’s Occidental Petroleum — makes the problem particularly timely. THE ENDGAME It is the industry’s request for exemptions — which would inevitably be used precisely in the countries the legislation is aimed at — that is the primary battleground as the SEC goes forward with the final rulemaking. The industry has found champions within the Republican Party, including Reps. Spencer Bachus (R-Ala.), the new chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, and Gary Miller (R-Calif.). They wrote, in their comment to the SEC , that the entire measure, “is highly problematic and almost certainly would not have survived in its enacted form through regular order consideration in either body.” (It was, in fact, added at the last minute .) The congressmen urged the SEC to define key terms narrowly, and to “provide an exemption for reporting payments when a disclosure would cause a company to violate foreign laws.” Otherwise, they warned, the provision will cost U.S. companies business and “will further constrain U.S. job creation and undermine economic growth.” But Sen. Cardin, who co-wrote the measure, disagrees: “The language of Sec. 1504 is very clear: there should be no exemptions for confidentiality or for host-country restrictions.” “It would be too easy for countries who want to avoid disclosures to simply pass their own law against disclosure,” Cardin wrote in his SEC comment . “The purpose of Sec. 1504 is to not allow for exemptions for confidentiality or other reasons that undermine the principle of transparency and full disclosure.” Bugala, the Calvert analyst, notes that there aren’t any exemptions in the SEC’s proposed rules — and that there shouldn’t be, despite corporate America’s pleas. “At the end of the day, that’s the essence of reform,” he said. “That’s the sign of a good reform, that it’s causing pain where it should.” ************************* Dan Froomkin is senior Washington correspondent for the Huffington Post. You can send him an e-mail , bookmark his page ; subscribe to his RSS feed , follow him on Twitter , friend him on Facebook , and/or become a fan and get e-mail alerts when he writes.

Read the full article →

What Larry Page Must Tackle As Google CEO

April 4, 2011

As Google’s Larry Page becomes CEO for a second time on Monday, analysts say the co-founder must help the Silicon Valley giant, which has been hit by lawsuits, government inquiries, and failed acquisition attempts, regain its lost luster and startup speed in order to fend off increasingly powerful rivals. Pointing to some of the company’s more recent public flops, such as social media services Google Wave and Google Buzz , analysts say the company has stumbled during Eric Schmidt’s tenure as CEO and is failing to compete with social networking sites like Facebook, which recently overtook Google as the most popular website in the U.S. One of the biggest challenges Page will face as CEO is helping the company streamline its development process and regain a startup feel in order to better compete with more nimble rivals, even as it grapples with over 20,000 employees in more than 40 different countries. “There’s a sense that they’re turned into fast followers instead of innovators,” said Greg Sterling, Internet analyst at Opus Research, adding that many recent innovations seemed like “me too” products lagging behind social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter. “With Google failing to buy Yelp , then creating Yelp-like products, with Google failing to buy Groupon , and now testing a Groupon-like offers product, maybe ideas coming out of Google are not quite as innovative as they once were.” In addition to these “me too” offerings, Google has also become home to a host of products that overlap and the new CEO will have to distinguish between the solutions that can thrive in the market–and deserve added investment and development–from the ones that duplicate efforts. “When you think about just the location solutions from Google, they have Latitude, Hotpot, Places and Maps. Is that a good use of resources when you have three or four solutions focused on one market?” said Kerry Rice, an analyst at Wedbush Securities. Analysts concur that Page must trim the fat when it comes to Google’s ever-increasing number of products. In addition, one of Larry Page’s key challenges as the new CEO will be to prioritize the company’s efforts, separating what Google does well from what the company can’t do at all, and focusing on the former. “Close to 60 percent of the research and development projects at Google could be shut down,” said Trip Chowdhry, senior analyst at Global Equities Research, arguing that many of the projects in development were no closer to fruition, and were not contributing to revenue. “Many stupid, hobby-type projects are getting the management attention and the resources, and the problem was the old CEO never took a hard look at these projects.” Even as it struggles to compete with and out-innovate its rivals, Google also faces a host of regulatory challenges in the U.S. and overseas. Last month, Google agreed to a landmark settlement with the Federal Trade Commission over charges that the company used “deceptive tactics” and violated user privacy when it launched Google Buzz in 2010. Google was again buffeted in Europe when Microsoft accused the company of being an Internet bully that abuses its dominance of online search and advertising, in an attempt to encourage the European Commission to dig deeper into an investigation opened four months ago into Google’s business practices. The Wall Street Journal reported there are signs that Page is already planning to respond to these challenges, actively reviewing the number of projects in development, and refocusing efforts on the more lucrative Google products and services, like online advertising, YouTube and Android software.

Read the full article →

Video: Balls Says Pimco `Sceptical’ ECB Can Deliver Rate Rises

April 1, 2011

April 1 (Bloomberg) — Andrew Balls, the London-based head of European portfolio management at Pacific Investment Management Co., talks about European sovereign debt strategy and European Central Bank interest rates. He speaks with Francine Lacqua on Bloomberg Television’s “On The Move.”

Read the full article →

Robert Lenzner: Turning Dirty Coal in China Into Clean Natural Gas

March 31, 2011

The future of a technology that converts dirty cheap coal into clean natural gas for transportation fuel was underscored last night by a Chinese investment in Synthesis Energy Systems (SYMX,NASDAQ), a small Houston company that holds a valuable license for this transforming technology. The transaction is significant because it comes to fruition in the wake of crisis over nuclear energy signified by damage to the Japanese nuclear plant sending radioactive particles to China, and at a time of political unrest in the Middle East, when crude oil is priced well above $100 a barrel. And it underscores the crucial need to utilize an abundance of dirty coal in China and Mongolia as a clean energy source for the fastest growing economy in the world. The investment by China Energy and its investment arm Zhongjinuan Investment Management, a private company in Beijing, can be leveraged into $3.0 billion capital investments in new gasification plants with financing from some later-to-be identified state-owned companies, according to Robert Rigdon, SYMX chief executive officer, calling from Beijing last night. “The current energy landscape supports the use of low quality coal,” Rigdon emphasized last night. The $83.5 million is being raised from private Chinese investors, in a transaction that is unique for the manner in which Chinese investors will now be on the way to controlling a technology in gasification of coal that was originated in the US. The deal for 43.5% of SYMX at $2.25 a share can be increased to 60% in 8 years, giving the Chinese ultimate control of the U.S. company and a valuable hold on a technology that is held by the Gas Technological Institute. SYMX stock has been trading at a volume multiple its usual activity the last several days. The transaction will undoubtedly be seen as a model for other such strategies that could help the Chinese slow down their plans to build dozens of new nuclear power plants. SES(SYMX) has a 10 year exclusive license to the technology, which can be extended further. It already has a plant producing methanol in China and has plans to produce both methanol and and glycol in another facility. Methanol and glycol are used as blending agents for gasoline fuel, according to Rigdon.

Read the full article →

Video: Papp Says China to Tone Down Criticism of U.S. at G-20

March 30, 2011

March 30 (Bloomberg) — Jeff Papp, a senior analyst at Oberweis Asset Management Inc., talks about the outlook for the meeting of the Group of 20 finance ministers in Nanjing, China, which starts Thursday. Europe’s debt crisis and Japan’s disaster are expected to take precedence at the meeting. Papp speaks with Mark Crumpton on Bloomberg Television’s “Bottom Line.” (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

Video: BNP’s Freris Says Portugal `Makes Greece Look Fantastic’

March 29, 2011

March 29 (Bloomberg) — Andrew Freris, a senior investment strategist for Asia at BNP Paribas Wealth Management, discusses the sovereign debt crisis in peripheral European nations. He talks with Linzie Janis from Hong Kong on Bloomberg Television’s “Global Connection.”

Read the full article →