SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Shares of Apple Inc (AAPL.O) reached their all-time high on Thursday, as excitement builds over the expected release of its tablet computer. Although Apple itself has never acknowledged the existence of such a device, anticipation is peaking as the company enters the new year. On Wednesday, the Financial Times reported on its blog that the company has rented a stage at a venue in San Francisco and is expected to make a "major product announcement" on January 26. The report, which cited people familiar with the plans, did not say whether Apple planned to introduce the tablet at the event. Apple has declined to comment.
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Shares of Apple Inc (AAPL.O) reached their all-time high on Thursday, as excitement builds over the expected release of its tablet computer.
Although Apple itself has never acknowledged the existence of such a device, anticipation is peaking as the company enters the new year.
On Wednesday, the Financial Times reported on its blog that the company has rented a stage at a venue in San Francisco and is expected to make a "major product announcement" on January 26.
The report, which cited people familiar with the plans, did not say whether Apple planned to introduce the tablet at the event. Apple has declined to comment.
LONDON (Reuters) - Retail bellwether John Lewis posted a 27 percent rise in department store sales so far this week, indicating festive spending was not severely dampened by heavy snow and sub-zero temperatures. The year-on-year increase for the four days to December 23, which follows a rise of 15.5 percent in the week to December 19, will boost prospects that Christmas sales in the UK will surpass those of 2008 after an unexpected fall in November.
LONDON (Reuters) - Retail bellwether John Lewis posted a 27 percent rise in department store sales so far this week, indicating festive spending was not severely dampened by heavy snow and sub-zero temperatures.
The year-on-year increase for the four days to December 23, which follows a rise of 15.5 percent in the week to December 19, will boost prospects that Christmas sales in the UK will surpass those of 2008 after an unexpected fall in November.
Shoppers will have spent £951,000 per minute on Christmas Eve on last-minute shopping, research suggests.Sainsbury's Credit Cards say 19% of the nation's adults intended to do some of their seasonal shopping on Thursday, spending about £1.37bn. More than 13m people were expected to do Christmas Eve shopping, spending the equivalent of £57m an hour. Financial data firm Experian said consumers were making the most of this year's final few shopping days. Major retailers have reported brisk business on high streets and online as people made last-minute purchases.
Shoppers will have spent £951,000 per minute on Christmas Eve on last-minute shopping, research suggests.
Sainsbury's Credit Cards say 19% of the nation's adults intended to do some of their seasonal shopping on Thursday, spending about £1.37bn.
More than 13m people were expected to do Christmas Eve shopping, spending the equivalent of £57m an hour.
Financial data firm Experian said consumers were making the most of this year's final few shopping days.
Major retailers have reported brisk business on high streets and online as people made last-minute purchases.
buy, baby, buy...
i wonder if christmas didn't exist, if people would be just as generous, but spread it evenly over the whole year. ~"When an inner situation is not made conscious, it appears outside as fate." Karl Jung~
London, of all places, is leading the battle against exaggerated banker bonuses. And leaders from all over the world are discussing how they can put an end to the banking practices that caused the global economic crisis. They are also considering ways for banks to compensate for the damage they caused. Josef Ackermann can't let it happen. The CEO of Deutsche Bank, Germany's largest, says what he thinks and refuses to back down from a fight -- or from a faux pax. "In the '90s, the pendulum swung toward economic freedom," Ackermann said last Friday. But today it's swinging back into the other extreme, "toward interventionist policies." If the reforms go too far, he says, the price to be paid will be a drop in growth.
London, of all places, is leading the battle against exaggerated banker bonuses. And leaders from all over the world are discussing how they can put an end to the banking practices that caused the global economic crisis. They are also considering ways for banks to compensate for the damage they caused.
Josef Ackermann can't let it happen. The CEO of Deutsche Bank, Germany's largest, says what he thinks and refuses to back down from a fight -- or from a faux pax.
"In the '90s, the pendulum swung toward economic freedom," Ackermann said last Friday. But today it's swinging back into the other extreme, "toward interventionist policies." If the reforms go too far, he says, the price to be paid will be a drop in growth.
They are saying things, they play with taxation whilst telling the companies well in advance to ensure they have plenty of warning knowing that the UK tax structure is so lax that the money will still go where it's intended.
What they will not do is something that will prevent ridiculous bonuses being paid. keep to the Fen Causeway
2.0 At length corruption, like a general flood, Did deluge all, and avarice creeping on, Spread, like a low-born mist, and hid the sun. Statesmen and patriots plied alike the stocks, Peeress and butler shared alike the box; And judges jobbed, and bishops bit the town, And mighty dukes packed cards for half-a-crown: Britain was sunk in lucre's sordid charms. --Pope. 2.1 THE SOUTH-SEA COMPANY was originated by the celebrated Harley, Earl of Oxford, in the year 1711, with the view of restoring public credit, which had suffered by the dismissal of the Whig ministry, and of providing for the discharge of the army and navy debentures, and other parts of the floating debt, amounting to nearly ten millions sterling. A company of merchants, at that time without a name, took this debt upon themselves, and the government agreed to secure them, for a certain period, the interest of six per cent. To provide for this interest, amounting to 600,000l. per annum, the duties upon wines, vinegar, India goods, wrought silks, tobacco, whale-fins, and some other articles, were rendered permanent. The monopoly of the trade to the South Seas was granted, and the company, being incorporated by Act of Parliament, assumed the title by which it has ever since been known. The minister took great credit to himself for his share in this transaction, and the scheme was always called by his flatterers "the Earl of Oxford's masterpiece." 2.2 Even at this early period of its history, the most visionary ideas were formed by the company and the public of the immense riches of the western coast of South America. Every body had heard of the gold and silver mines of Peru and Mexico; every one believed them to be inexhaustible, and that it was only necessary to send the manufactures of England to the coast, to be repaid a hundredfold in gold and silver ingots by the natives. A report, industriously spread, that Spain was willing to concede four ports, on the coasts of Chili and Peru for the purposes of traffic, increased the general confidence, and for many years the South-Sea Company's stock was in high favour. 2.3 Philip V of Spain, however, never had any intention of admitting the English to a free trade in the ports of Spanish America. Negotiations were set on foot, but their only result was the assiento contract, or the privilege of supplying the colonies with negroes for thirty years, and of sending once a year a vessel, limited both as to tonnage and value of cargo, to trade with Mexico, Peru, or Chili. The latter permission was only granted upon the hard condition, that the King of Spain should enjoy one-fourth of the profits, and a tax of five per cent on the remainder. This was a great disappointment to the Earl of Oxford and his party, who were reminded much oftener than they found agreeable of the "Parturiunt montes, nascitur ridiculus mus." But the public confidence in the South-Sea Company was not shaken. The Earl of Oxford declared that Spain would permit two ships, in addition to the annual ship, to carry out merchandise during the first year; and a list was published, in which all the ports and harbours of these coasts were pompously set forth as open to the trade of Great Britain. The first voyage of the annual ship was not made till the year 1717, and in the following year the trade was suppressed by the rupture with Spain.
At length corruption, like a general flood, Did deluge all, and avarice creeping on, Spread, like a low-born mist, and hid the sun. Statesmen and patriots plied alike the stocks, Peeress and butler shared alike the box; And judges jobbed, and bishops bit the town, And mighty dukes packed cards for half-a-crown: Britain was sunk in lucre's sordid charms. --Pope.
2.1
THE SOUTH-SEA COMPANY was originated by the celebrated Harley, Earl of Oxford, in the year 1711, with the view of restoring public credit, which had suffered by the dismissal of the Whig ministry, and of providing for the discharge of the army and navy debentures, and other parts of the floating debt, amounting to nearly ten millions sterling. A company of merchants, at that time without a name, took this debt upon themselves, and the government agreed to secure them, for a certain period, the interest of six per cent. To provide for this interest, amounting to 600,000l. per annum, the duties upon wines, vinegar, India goods, wrought silks, tobacco, whale-fins, and some other articles, were rendered permanent. The monopoly of the trade to the South Seas was granted, and the company, being incorporated by Act of Parliament, assumed the title by which it has ever since been known. The minister took great credit to himself for his share in this transaction, and the scheme was always called by his flatterers "the Earl of Oxford's masterpiece." 2.2
Even at this early period of its history, the most visionary ideas were formed by the company and the public of the immense riches of the western coast of South America. Every body had heard of the gold and silver mines of Peru and Mexico; every one believed them to be inexhaustible, and that it was only necessary to send the manufactures of England to the coast, to be repaid a hundredfold in gold and silver ingots by the natives. A report, industriously spread, that Spain was willing to concede four ports, on the coasts of Chili and Peru for the purposes of traffic, increased the general confidence, and for many years the South-Sea Company's stock was in high favour. 2.3
Philip V of Spain, however, never had any intention of admitting the English to a free trade in the ports of Spanish America. Negotiations were set on foot, but their only result was the assiento contract, or the privilege of supplying the colonies with negroes for thirty years, and of sending once a year a vessel, limited both as to tonnage and value of cargo, to trade with Mexico, Peru, or Chili. The latter permission was only granted upon the hard condition, that the King of Spain should enjoy one-fourth of the profits, and a tax of five per cent on the remainder. This was a great disappointment to the Earl of Oxford and his party, who were reminded much oftener than they found agreeable of the
"Parturiunt montes, nascitur ridiculus mus."
But the public confidence in the South-Sea Company was not shaken. The Earl of Oxford declared that Spain would permit two ships, in addition to the annual ship, to carry out merchandise during the first year; and a list was published, in which all the ports and harbours of these coasts were pompously set forth as open to the trade of Great Britain. The first voyage of the annual ship was not made till the year 1717, and in the following year the trade was suppressed by the rupture with Spain.
Serial Acquirers You do not need to be a banker to run a major bank these days; in fact very few CEOs of big banks are. Vikram Pandit ran a hedge fund before taking over at Citigroup for Chuck Prince, a former general counsel. He himself was anointed to the job by Sandy Weil, who spent his career buying financial companies with his sidekick Jamie Dimon, who now runs JPM Chase. It is possible that none of these men has ever made a bank loan in their life, and what they know about credit or other banking risks is what people reporting to them have told them. Why don't you need personal experience as a banker to run a bank? What these men all have in common is that they are serial acquirers of other banks. In this respect, they are like Jack Welch or private equity investors. The skill they are purveying is their ability to buy other banks, fire people, and dress themselves up as visionaries and heroes willing to make tough decisions. They bring to the job a narcissistic personality, because they believe themselves to be, and want to be seen, as indispensable to the bank's future. In this age of CEO worship, they are expected to dominate their board of directors, be the ultimate public face of the bank, and reap outlandish personal rewards in the process. It is to these men we owe the concept and the reality of "too big to fail." In their rush to buy other banks, and their desire to be the biggest on the block, they created behemoths that touch almost all areas of the economy. At some point in the last decade, but certainly after 1999 when it was now legal to combine an investment with a commercial bank, all of the big players did just that. This alone produced financial companies so large that their failure would impact millions of Americans, but the real cost of failure showed up in something called systemic risk. This is the risk that the failure of one bank will drag down one or more other banks to default as well, creating a cascade or daisy chain of financial destruction. In the early 1990s, there were probably 75 major banks in the world that dealt regularly with each other, so the daisy chain wasn't as tightly wound. By 2000, thanks to the efforts of the serial acquirers running the banking industry, this number was reduced to 20 major banks. At this point it was too late. The collapse of a bank in Spain could easily drag down a bank in the U.S., Australia or elsewhere.
Serial Acquirers You do not need to be a banker to run a major bank these days; in fact very few CEOs of big banks are. Vikram Pandit ran a hedge fund before taking over at Citigroup for Chuck Prince, a former general counsel. He himself was anointed to the job by Sandy Weil, who spent his career buying financial companies with his sidekick Jamie Dimon, who now runs JPM Chase. It is possible that none of these men has ever made a bank loan in their life, and what they know about credit or other banking risks is what people reporting to them have told them.
Why don't you need personal experience as a banker to run a bank? What these men all have in common is that they are serial acquirers of other banks. In this respect, they are like Jack Welch or private equity investors. The skill they are purveying is their ability to buy other banks, fire people, and dress themselves up as visionaries and heroes willing to make tough decisions. They bring to the job a narcissistic personality, because they believe themselves to be, and want to be seen, as indispensable to the bank's future. In this age of CEO worship, they are expected to dominate their board of directors, be the ultimate public face of the bank, and reap outlandish personal rewards in the process.
It is to these men we owe the concept and the reality of "too big to fail." In their rush to buy other banks, and their desire to be the biggest on the block, they created behemoths that touch almost all areas of the economy. At some point in the last decade, but certainly after 1999 when it was now legal to combine an investment with a commercial bank, all of the big players did just that. This alone produced financial companies so large that their failure would impact millions of Americans, but the real cost of failure showed up in something called systemic risk.
This is the risk that the failure of one bank will drag down one or more other banks to default as well, creating a cascade or daisy chain of financial destruction. In the early 1990s, there were probably 75 major banks in the world that dealt regularly with each other, so the daisy chain wasn't as tightly wound. By 2000, thanks to the efforts of the serial acquirers running the banking industry, this number was reduced to 20 major banks. At this point it was too late. The collapse of a bank in Spain could easily drag down a bank in the U.S., Australia or elsewhere.
this is the clearest narrative i've read yet on the architecture of macrofinance. ~"When an inner situation is not made conscious, it appears outside as fate." Karl Jung~
Courtesy of the US Treasury, Americans were informed on Christmas Day that they had added a whopping big gift under their Christmas tree for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the mortgage giants that are now wards of the state. The gift is truly one that keeps on giving: it has no price tag because the Treasury defines it as an "unlimited" promise to cover any losses these two companies may experience. How big could this gift be? Fannie and Freddie have issued or guaranteed over $6 trillion worth of mortgage securities. If the losses were this big next year, we would have to fork over about 40% of the wealth built up in the US in 2010 to keep Fannie and Freddie solvent. Fortunately, most of the mortgage securities guaranteed by these mortgage companies are the pre-2004, fixed rate varieties that are still performing as required. That is, assuming these homeowners still have a home value greater than the mortgage due. If not, they may be tempted in the next few years to walk away - to "strategically default" - to do a Morgan Stanley - and turn the losses back on to Fannie and Freddie. It makes you think the Treasury is just a little bit worried about the behavior of the American homeowner. What if they started to behave like corporations do, and walk away from their mortgage debts without a moral care in the world? Right now, about 25% of all homes are underwater, with mortgage debt exceeding what the home is worth in the market. If these homeowners strategically defaulted, the Fannie/Freddie losses could easily exceed $2 trillion. I looked to see under what authority you, the taxpayer, through your representatives in Congress, gave the US Treasury to issue unlimited guaranties of any sort.
Courtesy of the US Treasury, Americans were informed on Christmas Day that they had added a whopping big gift under their Christmas tree for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the mortgage giants that are now wards of the state. The gift is truly one that keeps on giving: it has no price tag because the Treasury defines it as an "unlimited" promise to cover any losses these two companies may experience.
How big could this gift be? Fannie and Freddie have issued or guaranteed over $6 trillion worth of mortgage securities. If the losses were this big next year, we would have to fork over about 40% of the wealth built up in the US in 2010 to keep Fannie and Freddie solvent. Fortunately, most of the mortgage securities guaranteed by these mortgage companies are the pre-2004, fixed rate varieties that are still performing as required. That is, assuming these homeowners still have a home value greater than the mortgage due. If not, they may be tempted in the next few years to walk away - to "strategically default" - to do a Morgan Stanley - and turn the losses back on to Fannie and Freddie.
It makes you think the Treasury is just a little bit worried about the behavior of the American homeowner. What if they started to behave like corporations do, and walk away from their mortgage debts without a moral care in the world? Right now, about 25% of all homes are underwater, with mortgage debt exceeding what the home is worth in the market. If these homeowners strategically defaulted, the Fannie/Freddie losses could easily exceed $2 trillion.
I looked to see under what authority you, the taxpayer, through your representatives in Congress, gave the US Treasury to issue unlimited guaranties of any sort.
