The Right Kind of Bailout. Finally heard about One Today !

I am not sure whether you are tired of hearing the word bailout, but I sure am !

Airline Industry, The Banking Industry, The Auto Industry and even countries now !

However, today as I heard Robert Reich, Professor of Public Policy at the University of California, Berkeley on Marketplace on NPR, for the first time I really felt , he talked about a bailout, that made sense, hopefully someone is listening:

The argument was simple : Robert Reich's Quote "Financial capital moves instantly around the globe to wherever it can earn the best return. Human capital -- the skills and insights of our people -- is the one resource that's uniquely American, on which our future living standards uniquely depend." UnQuote

For full commentary visit : http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2010/03/10/pm-reich-commentary/

My understanding in simple terms: We should not let the budget short falls of state and local government impact our school and universities, so we should bail them out to ensure education at all levels is affordable. This kind of bailout will create the human capital needed for a sustainable economy in the long run.

My Take: I whole heartedly agree with Robert Reich. His commentary reminded me of my first blog : Wake Up - If you did not already know you should, which was all about our ability drive value. I truly, can say today I heard about a bailout that made sense and hence decided to blog it.

Thanks
Nagesh

The views represented in this blog are my personal views and are not a reflection of or opinions of any of the institutions I am associated with or have worked for.

Follow up Post on "Economists/Intellectuals - Are we hurting our children?"

Recently, I posted an blog entry titled : "Economists/Intellectuals - Are we hurting our children?"

The post argued how programs like - "Cash for Clunkers", "Hiring more Govt Services Staff using borrowed (Stimulus) money leads to inter-generational transfers i.e. in simple terms - burdening our children with debt of our consumption. Interestingly today I read the following articles on Yahoo! Finance

1. Cash for Clunkers under budget with 690,000 sales
2. "Artificially Sweetened" Market Could Face "Seismic Readjustment," Harrison Says
3. It's Hard to Worry About a Deficit 10 Years Out

Correlating the articles - In US, We just bought a many "Corolla’s and other Small Cars", most of them are not even Innovative (potentially clunkers themselves). The subsidy of $3 Billion therefore will only benefit the manufacturer and buyer at the cost of the some "current or future" tax payer and can in no terms be qualified as something that will benefit the future generation, on the other hand Article 2 clearly equates that a lot of current debt accumulation will have to be repaid by our Kids - inherently lowering the standard of living for them and finally the last article argues how each one us or a future taxpayer will pay for this in the form of higher taxes.

I always believed and still do; that my parents strived for better living for me - and I want my kids to think the same of me when they grow up. I am not sure they will, given our generations lack of fiscal control and amount of debt we are piling on to them. Hopefully I am proven wrong.

Your feedback or comments on this post are welcome.

Thanks

Nagesh

The views represented in this blog are my personal views and are not a "reflection of" or "opinions of" any of the institutions I am associated with or have worked for.

Cloud Computing - Why should Enterprises Care?

Recently, I wrote a blog entry analyzing the results and what they mean - in most cases I concluded that most executives were more confidant on controlling costs than they were on growth. Links to the post: http://kunamneni.blogspot.com/2009/07/ramblings-on-economy-is-it-all-good-now.html.

This brings attention to why are the executives not confidant on growth. Innovation is key to growth, and every executive is talking about it however their immediate actions are related to cost cutting. There may be many reasons; one reason that is probably obvious is that they are not confidant bringing their investments in Innovation fast enough to the market or another reason could be that they try too few ideas and cannot reliably predict the impact on revenue due to high risk that failure of any single idea may cause deviation that will not be accepted by the markets

This then truly raises the question, is the company’s innovation process scalable and whether the costs of scaling innovation process is truly linear to number of Ideas being pursued. Should every organization not take a closer look at their “Process of Innovation” as their future may very well depend on efficiency of the “Innovation Engine”. In simple terms - if a company typically tries 5 - 10 ideas at any time, then it is probably time to ask the question - how can the company scale this 10 fold - without increasing costs linearly, decreasing quality of product and at the same time improving time to market (bringing ideas to market faster).

So what is the answer from my vantage point:- (My take)

If we assume that today’s enterprises rely heavily on technology and analytics to foster innovation; then cloud computing has the potential to provide solution to scaling of the Enterprises "Innovation processes".

Cloud computing promises to lower Innovation costs by

1. Eliminating Upfront Investment Costs by allowing “Pay for Use” and thereby avoiding the lengthy, costly and cumbersome CAPEX processes.


2. Eliminating the need to plan complex deployment processes, by inducing highly efficient scaling and provisioning processes


3. Standardizing the Management Framework to enable complete visibility to all business processes.

In summary, if the future growth of your enterprise is based on engine of rapid innovation, then it is time to analyze the innovation process and how to scale it to try new ideas in a highly efficient manner.

Thank you your for taking the time to read. Your opinions and comments are welcome.

Thanks

Nagesh
The views represented in this blog are my personal views and are not a "reflection of" or "opinions of" any of the institutions I am associated with or have worked for

Economists/Intellectuals - Are we hurting our children?

I took my economics class from Prof. Michael Brandl at the McCombs School of Business. Many a time in the he mentioned. (may not be the same words but this my interpretation of the essence).

"Not all government borrowing is the same. It depends on how the proceeds from the borrowing are spent. If the government borrows today and spends the money in a way that benefits the next generation, then that spending makes it easier for the next generation to repay the debt that has been created. But, if the government borrows today simple to increase current consumption, then the current generation is passing the bill for their spending onto the next generation. That is called a negative intergenerational transfer.".

To be honest, It did not fully sink into me the seriousness of the subject, until I started hearing and questioning myself on how the Stimulus money is going to be spent.

Today's news on "Cash for Clunkers" that the house rushes to approve 2B additional dollars really put me over the edge. I am really happy for the consumers who are taking advantage of the program to buy new vehicles. However, when buying the car, I am wondering if even one of them thought for moment - who is going to pay for the $4,500 that Gov't has convieniently agreed to pay these auto makers?

I guess, each one said or figured: "Not Me"; If it is not the guy who is buying the car, not the person who is actually selling the car, then who is? - Simple answer - That some body else is none other than our children or the collective us.

To a certain extent, shame on the "collective us" - the politicians who want to be populist, the citizens who just want to pass the buck or play ignorant, and the companies who lobby for incentives that benefits them at the cost to society.

So next time when you hear - We are going get the economy going by re-paving a road or putting more government officers on the streets - Question yourself - aren't these like paying for the maintenance your car, or paying for security system to protect your home; then why is it that we are borrowing money to pay for these, shouldn't they be paid for by current income ? To me this is classic Negative Intergenerational Transfer.

Going forward, when you hear an announcement about stimulus/borrowing - Think Again, Question it, Validate that it leads to a future benefit - if not we are just cheating ourselves and passing the pain to our children.

Thanks
Nagesh
The views represented in this blog are my personal views and are not a "reflection of" or "opinions of" any of the institutions I am associated with or have worked for

Ramblings on Economy - Is it all good now ?

Link to Previous Post : My Views on Business and Technology: Ramblings on Economy - Is it all good now ?

Continuing ramblings on economy from yesterday, it is more of the same today

Exxon quarterly profit tumbles 66 percent, shares fall - (Recession - lower demand)

Motorola posts unexpected 2Q profit and says rest of year will see improvement - However on lower sales (missed revenue target), heavy cost cutting (over 8000 layoffs)

Colgate-Palmolive profit tops expectations - Again on Lower Sales and better cost management; Sales lower by 5.5%, volume of goods sold down by 1.5% - Lower consumption

Sony, Sharp post losses, Nintendo loses steam - Folks are not even buying a WII - that hurts

Eastman Kodak moves to 2Q loss as sales slide - Not sure this has anything to do with economy; this iconic company probably has lots of other issues, Still 29% lower sales - ouch

Kellogg profit rises 13 percent in 2Q - Reaping the benefits of downturn - I guess all of us have eat, it is better to eat at home than go out for breakfast. This is a direct result of consumers cutting spending.

Goodyear posts 2Q loss of $221 million, sales drop - Sales 25% lower

When you read more, it is apparent that most companies are giving good guidance on profit expectation for next quarter, however not much on sales guidance. This also makes me believe the companies are still focused on reducing costs aggressively to meet profit expectation and kind of shows the lack of confidence on projecting sales or growth. I feel this feeling of mine is again substantiated by report this morning that - New jobless claims raised more than expected.

As I said in the previous post - if we truly are waiting for stability in housing and homeowners, I feel this this trend has to change. At some point, we have start seeing growth from companies that actually produce goods and services that drive and consume labor.

Thanks

Nagesh

The views represented in this blog are my personal views and are not a "reflection of" or "opinions of" any of the institutions I am associated with or have worked for

Ramblings on Economy - Is it all good now ?

This earnings season, I started paying attention to what was being said while companies are releasing their earlier. My curiosity was directed to understanding whether we are headed in the direction where an average citizen can actually come back after a hard day of work and not fear if he going to have a job next day.

My motivation behind this was basically simple - pretty much the pundits have tied recovery in housing sector to recovery of economy and in my opinion the recovery of housing is based on whether we can safely bet the home owners will pay for mortages without defaulting, which then relies on the simple fact that homeowner responsible for mortage will stay gainfully employed and the unemployed homeowners have a reason to believe that jobs are getting created and are on the way;

Find below some Headlines Unfiltered, on which I am going base my opinions

Drugmaker Pfizer's 2Q profit plunges 19 percent
Boeing profit climbs in 2Q on strong defense sales
Delta reports $257 million 2Q loss (double digit revenue drop)
PepsiCo 2Q profit falls 2 pct on sales drop
Wells Fargo profit rises; credit losses up
Morgan Stanley posts 2Q loss of more than $1.2B
Dominos 2Q profit plummets 22 percent
Glaxo profits up 11 percent on emerging markets
Altria Group 2Q profit rises, boosts forecast (Lower Expenses offset dip in sales)
Eli Lilly 2Q profit rises 21 percent
Apple 3Q beats forecasts despite recession
Yahoo 2Q profit rises 8 pct despite weak ad sales
AK Steel posts $47M loss for 2Q as demand falls
Coca-Cola 2nd-quarter profit rises 43 percent (rapid overseas growth offsets falling domestic demand)
Caterpillar 2Q profit falls 66 pct on weak demand
DuPont 2Q profit plunges on sales drop, charges
Lockheed Martin 2Q profit down 17 percent
United Technologies 2Q profit falls 24 percent
Texas Instruments 2Q profit falls 56 percent
Bank of America posts 2Q profit, surpasses Street
Google's slowing 2Q ad sales overshadow earnings
Sony Ericsson posts another loss in 2Q
Electrolux 2Q profit jumps six-fold
Nokia posts 66 pct fall in Q2 profits, shares drop
JPMorgan earns whopping $2.7 billion
Goldman Sachs' Q2 Smashes Forecasts On Trading Revenue

Analysis:

1. Companies in Financial Sector (Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Bank of America etc. ) -made a killing ( Lots of Money ) : I am not sure I can call this extortion from the poor tax payer using government support, but sure seems like one. Thanks to government, In the guise of helping the economy, they are actually helping the bank executives look like hero's. So this should really not count in the +ves for the average consumer/homeowner


2. All brick and mortar companies who actually produce some thing useful - Dupont, Caterpillar, AK Steel, Texas Instruments, Delta Airlines, Dominos (pizza) etc. (sample of a wide cross-section of great companies across multiple industries) show dismal performance - revenues are down, profits are down. The implications to the economy -> we are having a tough time. Thanks to pretty smart people at wall street, the managed to set such low expectation that the these dismal earning's look good). However for the average consumer/homeowner the results probably mean that they are not looking to add any new work force and are probably still looking to cut costs.


3. The notable exceptions to the trend of lower sales and lower earnings in the brick and mortar space are Coca-Cola, Glaxo and Apple. Apple currently has really cool products, whereas Coca-Cola and Glaxo did very well due to focus on emerging markets not domestic markets. This really does not count as trend, as Apple is truly an exception to the trend and Management at Coca-Cola and Glaxo really focussed on where they could sell. (My recent post on this subject: Consumer Spending: Are we looking at the right consumer)
4. Some companies like yahoo!, Altria and IBM post better profits on lower sales, that is primarily due to cost cutting; which again does not look good from an employment perspective.
5. Finally, Google also showed stress on revenue (ad sales) - A darling of wall street also showing some cracks.

My Take
Net Net, looking at these results, I am not sure I see the average consumer/homeowner being confidant of paying the mortgage or being comfortable with their financial future as companies that need to thrive without any Government Support and produce real goods are really struggling, where as those that seem to support from government (unfairly??) seem to be raking in the dow (money). Finally, today's report on durable goods, which are down again by 2.5% clearly show the average consumer/homeowner's reluctance to spend and backs my belief.

One thing I have not done and will probably look into later this week is to correlate the earning's data to typical business cycles. That may shed some more light in why the market/analysts are considering every bit of news - good or bad as +ve. For now, My take is that we are really not out of the woods yet. May be the next earnings season will show results that we can all look into and feel comfortable that -- it is all good now !

Thank you reading, appreciate your feedback and comments. Additionally, if you do understand typical business cycles, would appreciate your thoughts on correlation of current economic data to typical business cycles.

Thanks

Nagesh

The views represented in this blog are my personal views and are not a "reflection of" or "Opinions of" any of the institutions I am associated with or have worked for

Animal Spirits - What are they?

In my recent post on Hope, I made a suggestion to what "John Maynard Keynes" may have have meant by "Animal Spirits of Business People" when he first coined it way back.


Today, driving to work , I was listening to MarketPlace Morning Report on NPR. Guess what the subject was - A new book titled "Animal Spirits: How Human Psychology Drives the Economy, and Why It Matters for Global Capitalism" by Dr. George Akerlof and Dr. Robert Shiller.


The link to the report : http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2009/03/24/am_animal_spirits/


Though, I have not read the book, from what I heard on NPR today, I felt they were kind of saying the same thing I said in my blog and that is:-"Hope in GOOD TIMES combined with uncertainty and availability of good imagery that is easily accessible leads to “Irrational Exuberance” whereas in BAD TIMES the same hope, combined with uncertainty and availability of bad imagery that is easily accessible leads to “Irrational Pessimism” and staying on sidelines in the hope of an even better opportunity." So Government should respond differently based on the situation. In good times it should respond with more scrutiny and in bad times it should respond with real support. However the Authors contend though the government is on the right track, the real support offered so far (greater than 1 trillion) is not big enough.


My take: I concur with all of what was said by the authors on market place except on the comment that the real support was not big enough. I am not sure the current issue is the size of the real support, my gut tells me that it is ambiguity around the support that is causing the issue and may eventually render the size of the support smaller than needed. So for e.g yesterday when a plan was put forward on how to deal with Toxic Assets, it produced some certainity, thereby a positive response and Hope. Hence, In my opinion, What we need at this time is "CERTANITY" more than anything else. The certainity will then lead to real expectation of the need/support needed that can be offered by government/private or a combination of both.

Happy listening and reading.

Thanks
Nagesh
Note: The views represented in this blog are my personal views and are not a reflection of or opinions of any of the institutions I am associated with or have worked for.

Follow up to my earlier post on "Hope"

Three days ago, I published a blog entry "Hope - is it not a positive thing anymore?". Today, I was surprised to the "Image and Story" of Rikki on how she is overcame her "lay-off" on the front page of "USA Today". Follow the link to read further.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2009-03-12-economy-american-dream_N.htm

Though the overall news is not really good, the imagery of success and how Rikki did it; is inspiring and provides "Hope". This is was one the key points I was trying to make earlier my earlier post (http://kunamneni.blogspot.com/2009/03/all-my-life-i-have-associated-hope-to.html) and glad to see it starting to happen.

Thanks
Nagesh

Note: The views represented in this blog are my personal views and are not a reflection of or opinions of any of the institutions I am associated with or have worked for.

Hope - Is it not a positive thing anymore?

All my life I have associated "Hope" to be a word that inspires positive thinking and feelings. Of-late I have started questioning it. Especially, when I listen to experts providing opinions on Marketplace (NPR), Yahoo! Finance etc. related to business, technology, economy and our future and the outcomes these statements are leading to.

So today, I went to my favorite dictionary "Wikipedia" to check the definition of "Hope". Here it is (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hope):

"Hope is a belief in a positive outcome related to events and circumstances in one's life. Hope is the feeling that what is wanted can be had or that events will turn out for the best. [1] To hope is to wish for something with the expectation of the wish being fulfilled, a key condition in unrequited love. [2] Hopefulness is somewhat different from optimism in that hope is an emotional state, whereas optimism is a conclusion reached through a deliberate thought pattern that leads to a positive attitude."

I read this over 10 times, and there was nothing negative about it. So why is my brain questioning the positivity of "Hope"?
Let's dive further...
Let’s analyze couple of common statements made which in my opinion were related to raising “Hope”, see what they mean and my take on those

1. “We are probably nearing a bottom”: This is statement that is supposed “Signal” the pain is almost over, however given where we are, the interpretation is: More Uncertainty, Market will go lower before it gets better. If the goal of this statement to provide hope to those in sidelines to get back in or for those who are in to not get out. --> It fails to achieve both.
   My Take: The reason experts like to make this statement, is that it does not commit them to one way or the other and hence the statement has no value. What we do not need is more uncertainty. Good or Bad, We need certainty. Hats off to folks like Warren Buffet, who took a definitive position, hopefully more of these experts do take a position than causing more uncertainty – Hopefully they realize “definitive opinions” is what they are paid to provide. Just as much as they believe bank executives have not done their job in the past, I believe these experts are not doing it today and that their opinions are worthless and more importantly by adding uncertainty they are causing more damage to economy than what the bank executives caused .
2. “Job loss was dismal (651,000 - Source: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm) but not as catastrophic as expected”: This statement is supposed to positive and provide hope that things look better than anticipated. However every imagery that surrounded the jobs reports was a Negative – A person with extra-ordinary needs loses a job, A factory shutting down, Companies Laying Off etc.
   My Take: This imagery destroys the positivity of any hope created by better than expected performance as our brain can easily remember and retrieve the image of person losing job or being laid off than the fact the numbers were better than expected. If the proven “Availability Heuristic” teaches us something, the imagery should have been of a person who actually found a job against all odds, inspiring us all to believe in Hope. Believe it or not, I was talking to colleague, whose son took up a sales job based where remuneration is 100% commission based. Hats off to him accept that job rather become 651,001. These are extra-ordinary circumstances we need stories which embody – “When the going gets tough, the tough get going”.

I am sure I can go-on with more examples but these two should provide view into my drift. So where did I Start “Hope – is it not a positive thing anymore?”

My Conclusion: There is nothing wrong with Hope. Hope is still all about “Positive Outcomes” and “Optimism”. However, In Hope in GOOD TIMES combined with uncertainty and availability of good imagery that is easily accessible lead to “Irrational Exuberance” whereas in BAD TIMES the same hope, combined with uncertainty and availability of bad imagery that is easily accessible leads to “Irrational Pessimism” and staying on sidelines in the hope of an even better opportunity. I guess this is what John Maynard Keynes referred to as “Animal Spirits” of Business People.

Thank you for taking the time to read.

Nagesh

Note: The views represented in this blog are my personal views and are not a reflection of or opinions of any of the institutions I am associated with or have worked for.