Tuesday, December 4, 2012

Extra Current event --- Global Shipping Industry’s Troubles Are Threat for Biggest German Banks

The global shipping industry continuously faces weakened demand amid sluggish global economic growth and evolving structural overcapacity. Under the impact of the euro zone debt crisis, the shipping crisis occurs that has already caused a string of bankruptcies around the world, especially in German. The issue is important because the two crises is ongoing and will continue for several years. At the same time, they have many of the same causes which will draw attention all over the world.  Germany is the superpower of container shipping, controlling almost 40pc of the world market. From a financial point of view, Germany has been hit especially hard by the shipping crisis because of the popularity of funds used to finance ship construction, as well as easy credit can be granted by German banks. Nowadays, Germany’s 10 largest banks have 98 billion euros, or $128 billion, in outstanding credit or other risks related to the global shipping industry, according to Moody’s Investors Service. HSH Nordbank in Hamburg, the world’s largest provider of maritime finance, is expected to raise its estimate of potential losses from shipping on Wednesday when it reports fourth quarterly earnings.

For the practicing manager in financing industry and banking industry, they have to notice that the shipping industry is experiencing recession. Some of the companies are on the edge of bankruptcy.  Even if the industry recovers, which will take several more years at least, any revenue that ships generate will go to repay debt. So the managers should consider their strategies regarding load or finance to the shipping companies.


Reference:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/05/business/global/the-next-crisis-for-german-banks-isnt-greece-its-shipping.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/9473476/World-shipping-crisis-threatens-German-dominance-as-Greeks-win-long-game.html

http://www.frohlichcapital.com/2012/08/23/threat-of-bankruptcies-for-german-shipping-industry/

Extra Current-event: Hewlett-Packard's didn't pay off acquisition fee to Autonomy


On Nov. 20th, Hewlett-Packard(HP) claimed that it will take an $8.8 billion write down on the to the Autonomy deal(Aaron Ricadela, 2012). When it come to this event, it should be analyze from one years ago. In 2011, the former HP CEO, Leo Apotheker offered 10.3 billion dollars for take-overing Autonomy, which is an British software maker. This was one of questioning decision he made as HP CEO, as same as shuting down HP touch-pad program and breaking down HP PC business. In fact, according to recent auditing report by KPMG, the Autonomy profit is not reliable as the company claimed. It used aggressive accounting tactic to manage their financial statement. For instance, it recognized one of payment from subscription software product called Zantaz at once rather than recognized when it is actual. 
The HP stock price dropped down 46.06 dollars in NYSE, which is most lowest price in several years. When HP declared the decision, Mike Lynch, former owner of Autonomy wrote a furious letter to HP and demanded HP board immediate explanations" for its "highly damaging allegations" (Arthus, 2012) Then, HP hit back and declared they had ready to deal any British and U.S law enforcement's. However, it is not the more critical issue for HP. They need  explain to their stakeholders about why they bought a problematic company in such high price. Who should be responsible for this case? What the plan to solve this problem?
As a business student, we had learned lots of stories like this:. The ambitious new CEO forced corporation to execute his policy which can made big change to company ,either good or bad. Some of them are good; however, most of them caused the new issue and crisis. We usually named it as agency problem. In their years, we can found hundreds papers in business journals.Also, all the business school will give great attention on this problems in their class schedule. I believed all the HP high level , even middle level managers have business education background. In my view, when this manager think about business issue, they followed their instinct but not the knowledge they learned. For example, why the CEO had offered acquisition before Independent auditing firm got fully auditing reports.As we learned in this semester,even if this case had not involved fraud problem, the most M&A would failed at end. What is the reason that CEO believed he is above the average? I believed the reason is that he may be succeed by breaking from the textbook once or even more, which gave him confidence that he was above the common sense.For business practice, as a manager , we should be skepticism all the time. We must be awarded that some thing made me success not always cause same consequence. We made the right decision before.However, the reason may be that we are lucky guys instead of smartest guys in the room.
Reference:
Aaron Ricadela Why Hewlett-Packard's Impulse Buy Didn't Pay Off Bloomeberg Businessweek , Retreived from:
Peter Svensson, Hewlett-Packard: Company we bought lied about finances November 20, 2012 Retrieved from:
Charles Arthur &Rupert Neate, HP hits back after angry letter from Autonomy boss. The Guardian ,27 November 2012  Retrieved from:

Current Event Extra Credit- "Big Fat Caterpillar Tries to Bulldoze Big Labor: We Should Cheer it on”


The Forbes article “Big Fat Caterpillar Tries to Bulldoze Big Labor: We Should Cheer it on” addresses Porter’s 5 Forces Model the bargaining power of suppliers. In this case, the suppliers are the union labor force for Caterpillar. Caterpillar machinists, specifically the hydraulic component workers in Joliet, Illinois went on strike due to “unfair labor practice complaints” because of contract agreements to freeze highly paid workers and veteran employees pay for 6 years, increase health care premiums, and decrease a one time bonus1,3. Despite the strike, the employees at Caterpillar make 34% above what the market bears for the machinists2. In the last year, Caterpillar created 6000 new jobs in the United States2. The workers claim that Caterpillar has made $4.9 billion in profits last year and executive compensation sharply increased, leaving the workers that actually make the products uncompensated2. Notwithstanding the strike, Caterpillar was able to bring in extra labor force to work during the strike, which allowed production to continue, which showed the companies unwillingness to further negotiate with the employees.
            This article is important as it relates to Porters 5 forces theory of bargaining power of suppliers. For many decades in the United States, unionized labor had a large amount of bargaining power in wages and compensation with companies. As the world becomes more globally competitive there is a lot of pressure to decrease prices to compete with firms that have a cheap non-unionized labor supply. The bargaining power of unions are not longer able to “[bring] the company to its knees by striking this key internal supplier Forbes”1 because firms are able to move operations abroad to decrease costs and competitiveness creating a change in bargaining power for unions. Unions are losing power due to the threat of global labor supply and the changing business environment in which companies are not willing to concede to the big unions anymore. Companies and unions all over the United States are watching to see who surrenders are in the battle between the machinist union and Caterpillar2.  The implications of this battle spread way beyond just the manufacturing industry into any company that has hourly highly unionized labor force. It sets the precedent for upcoming labor union battles possibly decreasing the bargaining power of unions and changing the way the supply of union labor is handled in the United States. Practicing managers should remain very aware of the changing powers of unions and how employees handle dissatisfaction with working conditions and compensation.

4http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20121124/ISSUE01/311249978/unions-have-a-new-enemy-their-own-members