Friday, February 27, 2009
L&T..hands tied over Styam
The financial investors in Larsen and Toubro the indian pioneer in engineering is facing some restraints from its financial investorsl ike LIC, GIC who have said that L&T should not bid too hight above the offer price for Satyam Bid...Satyam's simple moving average price over last one week is around 46.54 and it is expected that the floor price for bidding could be around 50......L&T hs some room but if the bidding turns into a full fledged bidding war then L&T could have to say that grapes were sour...
UBS set to have nw CEO
UBS, Swiss Banking powerhouse is set to have new CEO in form of Oswal J. Gruebel....he was earlier with Credit Suisse....
RIL-RPL , Sequel
The Directors of RIL would meet on 2 march to consider Amalgamation of RPL in RIL......This could well be the repeat of 2002 when Reliance petroleum limited of that time was merged with RIL.....
Vagaries of the "HEAD"
For those who believe only grey cells set apart leaders from the rest, there is another hair raising observation among corporate America that most of the successful CEOs including Pepsico's Indra Nooyi part their hair to the left, says US business magazine Fortune.
Legendary investor and chief executive of Berkshire Hathaway Warren Buffett and Jamie Dimon of investment bank J P Morgan Chase are among the others joining Nooyi in the club of highly efficient CEOs who comb their hair to the left side.
In recent years, a pseudoscience has emerged around the theory that left-partedness signals leadership potential, while parting on the right suggest something a little off-kilter, Fortune said in a report published in its May 5 issue.
The magazine quotes John Walter, a systems engineer at New York City's Marymount Manhattan College as saying, its difficult for right-parters to be leaders.
Interestingly, a cursory look at the CEOs of Fortune 500 companies reveals only three among them of top 50 firms, part their hair on their right side. They are General Motors Rick Wagoner, AT&Ts Randall Stephenson and Sears interim CEO Bruce Johnson.
According to the magazine, Walter is credited with the theory (of parting hair to left) three decades ago, after he discovered that only a few American presidents parted their hair on the right.
Meanwhile, in the Fortune 500 there are highly successful chief executives who neither part their hair to the left or right. Such names include General Electrics Jeff Immlet, Goldman Sachs Lloyd Blankfein and Exxon Mobils Rex Tillerson.
In the report, the magazine said going by the theory, left-parters attract attention to the left side of their face, which conveys left-brain functions like logic, while right-parters come across as creative but also mysterious.
Describing Buffet as Americas richest man, the report said that he comes across as the classic left-brainer: rational and assertive.
As CEO of the $39-billion consumer giant, the leftie ranks No.1 on Fortunes Most Powerful Women in Business List, the magazine said.
Pointing out that no-parters-often-bald rarely reach the top, Fortune said that those who do, like Immlet, tend to take balanced approaches.
However, the magazine asserted that Walter-nomics is by no means a perfect tool for financial analysis and added that the world is better off with right-parters in it.
Fortune said that GEs founder, Thomas Edison, was one and so are Melinda Gates, Xerox CEO Anne Mulchaly, and John Donahoe, Meg Whitmans successor at eBay.
Hair-part aficionados are abuzz over whether right-parter John McCain stands a chance of winning the 2008 presidential race, the report noted.
(Source-FORTUNE magazine)
Legendary investor and chief executive of Berkshire Hathaway Warren Buffett and Jamie Dimon of investment bank J P Morgan Chase are among the others joining Nooyi in the club of highly efficient CEOs who comb their hair to the left side.
In recent years, a pseudoscience has emerged around the theory that left-partedness signals leadership potential, while parting on the right suggest something a little off-kilter, Fortune said in a report published in its May 5 issue.
The magazine quotes John Walter, a systems engineer at New York City's Marymount Manhattan College as saying, its difficult for right-parters to be leaders.
Interestingly, a cursory look at the CEOs of Fortune 500 companies reveals only three among them of top 50 firms, part their hair on their right side. They are General Motors Rick Wagoner, AT&Ts Randall Stephenson and Sears interim CEO Bruce Johnson.
According to the magazine, Walter is credited with the theory (of parting hair to left) three decades ago, after he discovered that only a few American presidents parted their hair on the right.
Meanwhile, in the Fortune 500 there are highly successful chief executives who neither part their hair to the left or right. Such names include General Electrics Jeff Immlet, Goldman Sachs Lloyd Blankfein and Exxon Mobils Rex Tillerson.
In the report, the magazine said going by the theory, left-parters attract attention to the left side of their face, which conveys left-brain functions like logic, while right-parters come across as creative but also mysterious.
Describing Buffet as Americas richest man, the report said that he comes across as the classic left-brainer: rational and assertive.
As CEO of the $39-billion consumer giant, the leftie ranks No.1 on Fortunes Most Powerful Women in Business List, the magazine said.
Pointing out that no-parters-often-bald rarely reach the top, Fortune said that those who do, like Immlet, tend to take balanced approaches.
However, the magazine asserted that Walter-nomics is by no means a perfect tool for financial analysis and added that the world is better off with right-parters in it.
Fortune said that GEs founder, Thomas Edison, was one and so are Melinda Gates, Xerox CEO Anne Mulchaly, and John Donahoe, Meg Whitmans successor at eBay.
Hair-part aficionados are abuzz over whether right-parter John McCain stands a chance of winning the 2008 presidential race, the report noted.
(Source-FORTUNE magazine)
Amereca's way of handeling the crisis!
Anybody who doubts that the global economy is facing its most serious downturn since the 1930s should take a squint at the latest trade figures from Japan. Exports in January were 46 per cent lower in January than they were a year ago — a phenomenal drop for a country that is so heavily dependent on sales of its industrial products overseas.
Japan has got used to economic setbacks over the past two decades: it has been in and out of recession on a regular basis. But make no mistake, this drop in exports does not mean recession: it means depression.
In the circumstances, comments by analysts that the data was “not good” and “seriously bad” were somewhat otiose. The Office for National Statistics confirmed on Wednesday that the U.K. economy shrank by 1.5 per cent in the final three months of 2008 and is on course for an annual decline in GDP this year of between 2.5 per cent and 3 per cent. But in Japan, things are much, much worse. Maya Bhandar at Lombard Street Research, says that the economy is contracting at an annualised rate of 14-15 per cent in the current quarter. Strong exports have tended to disguise the weakness of Japanese domestic consumption in recent years: now that prop has been kicked away, growth is plummeting.
Why is this happening? Quite simply, the great engine of globalisation has gone into reverse. During the long boom, the U.S. acted as the consumer of last resort: it sucked in exports from China and Japan. As China industrialised, it needed high-grade investment goods from Germany, and as prosperity spread in the world’s most populous country, there was strong demand for Japanese electronics, cars and consumer gizmos. Now that America has stopped spending, Chinese factories have closed. The knock-on effects of that are being felt in Tokyo and Hamburg.
In Japan, all the main industries are reporting decreases in exports of more than 40 per cent. The big car companies — Toyota, Nissan and Honda — are really feeling the pinch: overseas sales by the transport equipment sector were down almost 54 per cent a year ago. What’s more, car sales are slumping everywhere: Japanese exports to North America, Europe and the rest of Asia were all down by more than 50 per cent.
The assumption, since the financial crisis began in the summer of 2007, has been that lessons have been learnt from the Japanese experience in the 1990s. Much comfort was taken from the fact that Ben Bernanke, the chairman of the U.S. Federal Reserve, had produced an erudite paper on how to avoid the deflationary problems suffered by the world’s second biggest economy.
As things stand, that optimism is starting to look a tad misplaced. It is not just that the generalised falls in industrial production over the past few months has been far worse than anything experienced by Japan in the 1990s; it is also that policymakers — including Bernanke — do not seem to have fully assimilated the lessons of the Japanese experience.
Japan’s problem in the 1990s was not that the government failed to act: there were any number of emergency packages and bail-outs for the stricken banks. But nothing Tokyo did got to the heart of the crisis, which was that land prices continued to fall year after year, creating fresh losses for the financial system as quickly as the last batch of toxic waste was cleared up.
Something similar is happening now to Wall Street banks. With real estate prices in freefall, the losses just continue to mount and the pressure on the banks remains acute.
(Source:THE HINDU)
Japan has got used to economic setbacks over the past two decades: it has been in and out of recession on a regular basis. But make no mistake, this drop in exports does not mean recession: it means depression.
In the circumstances, comments by analysts that the data was “not good” and “seriously bad” were somewhat otiose. The Office for National Statistics confirmed on Wednesday that the U.K. economy shrank by 1.5 per cent in the final three months of 2008 and is on course for an annual decline in GDP this year of between 2.5 per cent and 3 per cent. But in Japan, things are much, much worse. Maya Bhandar at Lombard Street Research, says that the economy is contracting at an annualised rate of 14-15 per cent in the current quarter. Strong exports have tended to disguise the weakness of Japanese domestic consumption in recent years: now that prop has been kicked away, growth is plummeting.
Why is this happening? Quite simply, the great engine of globalisation has gone into reverse. During the long boom, the U.S. acted as the consumer of last resort: it sucked in exports from China and Japan. As China industrialised, it needed high-grade investment goods from Germany, and as prosperity spread in the world’s most populous country, there was strong demand for Japanese electronics, cars and consumer gizmos. Now that America has stopped spending, Chinese factories have closed. The knock-on effects of that are being felt in Tokyo and Hamburg.
In Japan, all the main industries are reporting decreases in exports of more than 40 per cent. The big car companies — Toyota, Nissan and Honda — are really feeling the pinch: overseas sales by the transport equipment sector were down almost 54 per cent a year ago. What’s more, car sales are slumping everywhere: Japanese exports to North America, Europe and the rest of Asia were all down by more than 50 per cent.
The assumption, since the financial crisis began in the summer of 2007, has been that lessons have been learnt from the Japanese experience in the 1990s. Much comfort was taken from the fact that Ben Bernanke, the chairman of the U.S. Federal Reserve, had produced an erudite paper on how to avoid the deflationary problems suffered by the world’s second biggest economy.
As things stand, that optimism is starting to look a tad misplaced. It is not just that the generalised falls in industrial production over the past few months has been far worse than anything experienced by Japan in the 1990s; it is also that policymakers — including Bernanke — do not seem to have fully assimilated the lessons of the Japanese experience.
Japan’s problem in the 1990s was not that the government failed to act: there were any number of emergency packages and bail-outs for the stricken banks. But nothing Tokyo did got to the heart of the crisis, which was that land prices continued to fall year after year, creating fresh losses for the financial system as quickly as the last batch of toxic waste was cleared up.
Something similar is happening now to Wall Street banks. With real estate prices in freefall, the losses just continue to mount and the pressure on the banks remains acute.
(Source:THE HINDU)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
