Welated, My Current Project, My Best Yet

In just a few days, I am going to unveil my latest work, Welated, at www.welated.com, which will alert you instantly in real-time if your mate (friend or spouse) cheats on your with anyone at anytime, any place in the world.

The system uses analytical algorithm to follow your mate’s every personal love affair with anyone, anywhere, then it alerts you, so you can make an informed, smart choice.

I am really excited about it and I hope it can help make a difference in your current or future social relationship.

Below is the screen shot for the Welated homepage. Visit the site, sign up, and take a test drive. It’s fun, free, and easy to use. Please let me know what you think about it. I deeply and greatly value your sincere opinion and feedback.

Adam Lambert, the Next American Idol Winner and Best Selling Rocker of His Generation

From the first day Adam Lambert stepped on the stage in the audition room, looking all weird with his colored hair, like a sick, wet bird, I knew there was something real weird about him, but when he opened his mouth and blared out that high pitch note, I instantly knew he was going to sail all the way through.

Most of us have seen his magnificent transformation, from looking like a silly, surly looking, skateboarding homeless kid, to a unique, star in the making. Since Elvis Presley to Freddy Mercury, there has never been any other rocker, who has the charisma, talent, and all the stuff to cement him as the best and genuine male rock singer than Adam Lambert.

Even the American Idol, since its debut in the US, it has never produced anyone, who is as good as Adam Lambert. And, he’s going to be one of the best selling and biggest rockers since the invention of rock music. He’s got everything needed to be a rock star, he’s got the look, attitude, and the best thing about him is that he’s still humble and down to earth.

As the show progressed. I stopped trying to figure out who’s going to be the next American Idol, because my mind has already been set on Adam Lambert. This year, there were lots of contestants, some seemed to have great talent and some are just stagnant frogs made to make Adam Lambert sound even better.

There is no doubt in my mind that Adam Lambert is going to be crowned the next American Idol. And not only that, he’s going to fill concert arenas, and will become the next biggest and best selling artist, and I’d love to record engineering one of his songs.

So, please, just stop the show now, and give Adam Lambert his prize and send him to the studio to record his new single and subsequently, the next best selling CD.

The Most Stupid TV Commercials; Nationwide and Microsoft

For weeks now, Microsoft has been running TV commercials, generally promoting the PC. The commercial usually starts with an individual, usually has a young, sort of geeky looking person, out to buy a new laptop.

He or she (they have multiple actors) could be a young lady or guy, who starts out describing what kind of a laptop he or she wants and then the voice-over tells him or her that “if he or she finds that kind of laptop under $1,500…, then he or she can keep it”.

Now, the thing is this; it implies as though all the laptops for sale anywhere are more than $1,500 and that, if he or she’s lucky enough to find one under that amount, then he or she can keep it. And then, to make it even sillier, at the end of the commercial, when he or she has found the laptop she or he wanted, then he or she’s given a stack of bills, as though it’s a reward for finding a laptop under $1,500.

So, my question is; does that mean that there are no PC laptops under $1,500, and if I found one under that amount, then I can keep it, and that you’d reward me? Really a stupid commercial.

The second TV commercial that aggravates me, because it’s really stupid, and they keep running it over and over, it’s by Nationwide. The commercial starts with a woman (a black woman) who talks like she’s running diarrhea. She doesn’t talk like she’s scripted, which may be a good thing, as an indication that Nationwide uses real people, not actors, who say what they really feel about their auto insurance.

Now, this lady goes on, explaining and slowly stating that; “Nationwide has a forgiveness program…, which means, if you have an accident, then Nationwide will forgive you… they will not raise your premium based on your first accident…, because Nationwide….

Didn’t she just say that Nationwide has a forgiveness program at the beginning? Why does she have to repeat and explain her silly-line?

Geico and Safe Auto have some of the coolest, eye-and-ear-catching phrases, TV commercials. Microsoft and Nationwide should may be look up to them and may be, learn from them.

The New Welated Logo, Unveiled

Today, I am excited to announce the new logo for Welated, my latest startup. Here it is;

This is my best startup yet. Check it out at www.welated.com, still a work in progress, but sign up, it’s free and easy, and feel free to play around with all the fun social networking tools on Welated.

More logos

About Welated

Welated is a premier social venue for friends, family, and co-workers to connect, share and explore each other’s personal dating history, activities and interests in order to help each other make informed choices.

Welated is developing online innovations that will enable people from all walks of life to efficiently discover and learn more about their current and future mates, everything from their dating history and activities, infidelity, marriages, divorces, child support and alimony payment, moral behavior, to deadbeat parents, all individually collected and algorithmically compiled in one powerful and user-friendly interface platform, the Welated Dativity.

More at www.welated.com

WP.com, Washington Post or WordPress?

Most large companies have already snapped domain names that either directly or indirectly reflect their company or brand names.

I never thought that giant publishing companies such as The Washington Post would not have done the same thing with the domain, WP.com.

To my surprise today, I only stumbled upon WP.com, as was displayed on the WordPress Homepage platform, yes, as you can see, I use WordPress.com for my blog, but who would have guessed that WordPress.com actualy owns the domain WP.com, and not The Washington Post?

So, that means if I want to go to The Washington Post web site, I have to type in washingtonpost.com? That’s too long. How about The New York Times, at least they own NYT.com, that makes it easy.

If you are large company as you claim to be, get the domain, all of the domain names, that either directly or indirectly reflect your company name or brand name. Make it easier for us, the consumers, to easily find you.

Making the Best Out of the Worst, Especially Right Now

Someone once told me that the start is always the easiest but is the end that counts the most. So, whatever it is that you are doing, people will always appreciate how you start, but will always remember how you finish.

Well, for me, it’s been a long journey trying to find my pitch, my niche, and I believe I found it now. Since August 2008, I’ve embarked on a project that seemed nearly impossible, in a crowded market economy. But I’ve always believed in myself, and the power of being creative, to find the best out of the worst, even when most of us may seem to be out of luck due to our current economy. But I believe the best is yet to come. I think I can truly say so, because being an economics student here at OSU, and in Spring 2010, I hope to start my PhD program in Economics, I strongly believe that our economy will turn around sooner than we think, and no matter where you are or whatever you are doing, you can make the best out of anything, especially right now.

I am a strong believer, always have been. I believe that each and every one of us have certain God given, unalienable gifts and talents, and it’s up to each and everyone of us to go all the way and explore how to maximize our potential in order to make our dreams come true.

In August 2008, my team and I started working on my new project, Welated (www.welated.com), and it seemed almost impossible making it and developing it to become an actual, viable entity with an actual business model that doesn’t just depend on paid ads like other social networking sites, and I have to say that, with God’s help, I think finally made it happen. Welated is now done, fully functional, and I am very excited about it. We started testing it on January 2009, under a certain code name, and over 8,000 people signed up within just two months, and that was amazing.

We’re now migrating the site from the testing alpha to beta mode, it is a combination of Facebook, MySpace, and Hi5.com, all in one. We combined all the cool tools you’ll find on most of your favorite social networking sites and place them in one easy-to-use Welated platform.

However, Welated has a creative twist to it, that’s, instead of simply offering traditional social networking tools, Welated offers an innovative platform that allows users to keep track of what their lovers are doing at any given time. That’s, a Welated user can instantly know if her or his wife/husband/boyfriend/girlfriend is being unfaithful and more, anywhere. I purposely founded Welated to help people learn more about each other’s dating history, interests, and activities, so that no one can ever say; I wish I only knew.

Please, take some time and check out Welated at www.welated.com, sign up, it’s free, and take a tour of the site, experiment with the tools on the site, and please let me know what you think. You can always delete your account at any time if you decide not to stay registered, and feel free to search for my name on the site and connect with me.

Feel free to Welated me at; http://www.welated.com/profile.php?user=simon

Who Should We Blame for All the Impact of the Current World-wide Recession?

Today, in the U.S., whether you are a blue or white collar worker and if you still have a job, any kind of job, and have not been laid off or threatened to be laid off, then you are either just lucky, your laid off time hasn’t ticked in yet, your employer’s industry has not been immensely affected by the current economic crisis, or maybe you are simply just too good at what you do, that your employer values your job performance more than your already laid off colleagues. Most U.S. companies have been cutting down on their manpower, closing down some plants, or outsourcing their production operations to certain developing countries, such as China, India or Mexico, where labor is relatively cheaper.

According to CNNMoney.com, the U.S. economy continued to hemorrhage jobs in February 2009, bringing total job losses over the last six months to more than 3.3 million, and taking the unemployment rate to its highest level in 25 years. While the U.S. Department of Labor and Statistics reported in the first week of March that employers slashed 651,000 jobs in February 2009, down from a revised loss of 655,000 jobs in January 2009. December 2008’s loss was also revised higher to a loss of 681,000 jobs, a 59-year high for losses in one month.

In this document, we are going to core analyze some of the primary issues that might have contributed to trigger the current global financial crisis, which is deemed to be the primary cause of the fast rising unemployment rate in the U.S., and its impact in other parts of the world. The views of the author expressed herein may be politically aligned, and depending on you, the reader’s political opinions and belief; that you may or may not agree with these views. It’s not the author’s intention to align to the left or right in analyzing the current global financial crisis. However, it’s fair to note that these issues might have occurred under a politically elected president, which some may say that these issues all originated under a watch-less eye of President Bill Clinton or because of the carelessness of President George W. Bush, and some may even say that it is all because of President Barack Obama that we are currently in a recession.

History tells us that almost every last year of the president’s term, leading up to the presidency’s power transference, there is generally an economic cyclical; with the stock market either going up or down, depending on how the market perceives the incoming new administration. In December 1999, the Dow Jones closed at 11,497, but in February 2000, just a month after Bush took the office, the Dow closed at 10,940, that’s 557 points drop (Yahoo! Finance). In fact, some analysts believe that: “He (Bush) became president 300 days into a bear market that began on March 24, 2000 (AllFinancialMatters), and then just 9 months later, the US experienced the worst act of terrorism on September 11, 2001, which created a long lasting significant economic impact on the United States and world markets, with the Dow falling to 684 points, or 7.1%, to 8921, a one-day record setting in points decline. “Wall Street suffered its biggest one-day fall yesterday since the immediate aftermath of the September 11 terrorist attacks, as a day of hefty stock market falls around the world culminated in a late panic sell-off in New York” (Guardian.co.uk).

Most analysts believe that the U.S. stock market never really recovered from the nine-eleven terrorist attacks. Some even suggest that the current financial crisis is a ripple effect from the terrorist attack. But, let’s go back a bit to the Clinton era, as the majority claim it is where all began. As we all know, some may disagree, that when Clinton was in the office, the market was climbing, the majority of the American people had jobs, owned more than one car, and it seemed, then, like everyone was jolly and merry. However, as the stock market was all bullish for nearly 7 years, the Fed relaxed its regulatory body, allowed the market to control itself, at the same time Clinton encouraged and passed a bill that enabled more people to buy homes. “We should also give poor families more help to move into homes of their own. And we should use tax cuts to spur the construction of more low-income housing” (President Bill Clinton’s 1998 State Of The Union Address Part 2).

Generally, when one has a good paying job for over a longer period of time, one can easily foresee the necessity of buying and owning a house, regardless of his or her race or color of skin. In addition, who could have imagined that a few years later, economic downturn will force companies to lay off nearly everyone? Thus, the majority of Americans started buying homes. However, some continue to argue that it was all because of some poor black families, who literary knew that they could not afford to buy houses, but they did so any way. While others scream at mortgage loan officers who they feel like they acted more like predators, preying on consumers by approving them for mortgage loans even when they literary knew that the borrowers may not be able to afford making payment on their mortgage loans.

Most mortgage loan officers may not have explained to the consumers the difference between fixed interest rates and adjustable rates. And, even if they might have explained to them the difference, the interest rates during those years around 1998 were low plus most people had jobs, good paying jobs. Thus, the majority of mortgage loan applicants opted to adjustable interest rate mortgages, hoping that if the interest rates go down, then that may lower their monthly payment. However, some even lied on their applications in order to get mortgage loans, even when they actually knew that they couldn’t afford them. “As his team analyzed the individual loan files, Zimmer said he was struck by evidence of fraud, such as doctored bank statements. “Fraudulent loans were a big part of the subprime mess,” he said. Mortgage brokers forged borrowers’ signatures and pumped up their income, he said. People seeking to buy and sell a home for a quick profit lied that they were going to live in the home — qualifying for a lower interest rate. But People’s Choice calculated that it would have been too complicated and expensive to go after fraud, Zimmer said.” (Washingtonpost.com).

A mortgage company that has just approved the loan to a consumer, which it knowingly know or did not know, because may be his or her financial statement was doctored, and then sells it to another bank. In the end, most banks ended up with billions of dollars worth of mortgage loan accounts that were just nothing but aired balloons, ready to pop at anytime due to their owner’s inability to make mortgage payment. “More and more borrowers were falling behind on their monthly payments almost as soon as they moved into their new homes, indicating that some of them never really had the money to begin with. “Nobody had models for that,” said David E. Zimmer, then one of the executives at People’s Choice, a subprime lender based in Irvine. ‘Nobody had predicted people going into default in their first three mortgage payments.’” (Washingtonpost.com).

As more and more banks bought these mortgage accounts, that they eventually traded them based on their assets, as asset backed-securities, whose cash flows are backed by the principal and interest payments of a set of mortgage loans. As more homeowners fail on making their mortgage loans payment, those banks whose balance sheets were loaded with worthless receivable mortgage accounts, eventually; it all came crashing nearly at the very same time. Notably in September 2008, the balloons have popped, and everyone was in a panic mode. We can go back a little back, to July 2007, when the U.S. tasted the initial financial crisis as rippled by the credit crisis. After all, many Americans have bought many cars, houses, and have had many credit cards and store merchant accounts. Affected by the 2001 economic recession, many people lost their jobs and were unable to make payment on their credit accounts. “The roots of the credit crisis stretch back to another notable boom-and-bust: the tech bubble of the late 1990’s. When the stock market began a steep decline in 2000 and the nation slipped into recession the next year, the Federal Reserve sharply lowered interest rates to limit the economic damage” (NYTimes.com).

Banks continued to decline in lending, not only to consumers, but among themselves. They couldn’t trust each other’s balance sheets, they feared that they may also fail, even though the Fed tried to lower the Fund rates, banks were not lending, businesses were not able to meet their operating costs such as payroll and short run expenses since most banks stopped lending to businesses. The entire market has come to a standstill. On September 14, 2008, Lehman Brothers surprisingly announced a bankruptcy filing after the Federal Reserve Bank declined to create them a lifeline financial support. “In one of the most dramatic days in Wall Street’s history, Merrill Lynch agreed to sell itself on Sunday to Bank of America for roughly $50 billion to avert a deepening financial crisis, while another prominent securities firm, Lehman Brothers, filed for bankruptcy protection and hurtled toward liquidation after it failed to find a buyer” (NYTimes.com).

Nearly at the same time, another financial powerhouse, American International Group, Inc. (AIG) collapsed. “American International Group was the largest insurance company in the United States before it suddenly collapsed in September 2008 under the weight of bad bets it made insuring mortgage-backed securities. The company was bailed out by the Federal Reserve, but even after that $85 billion infusion, losses continued to mount and in November the Treasury announced a new rescue package that brought the total cost to $150 billion” (NYTimes.com). Today, more than 25 banks in the U.S. have failed and some have collapsed. From there on, the U.S. financial crisis has spilled into the global marketplace, causing many governments in Europe and Asia to tighten their belts, while creating financial lifelines for their banking systems.

In the UK, the government rushed to put a package together worth of $692 billion, aimed at rescuing its banking industry. “It will initially make extra capital available to eight of the UK’s largest banks and building societies in return for preference shares in them” (BBC News). Other global governments issued similar rescue packages, with China cutting its interest rates for the first time since 2002, Australia injected more than $1.5 billion in its banking systems, India infused over $1.32 billion in its banking industry, and many other European countries followed similar platform, all aimed at curbing the financial crisis. “Less than 24 hours after leaders of the European Union’s four largest countries gathered in Paris Saturday to pledge a collective defense in the global financial crisis, the strategy crumbled in the face of a still worsening credit crisis in Europe’s banks. German Chancellor Angela Merkel, faced with the breakdown of a government-brokered deal with German banks to save one of Germany’s biggest mortgage lenders, announced that all German bank deposits would be guaranteed by the government, causing consternation and anger among her European neighbors, many of whom felt compelled to follow suit” (Time Magazine).

In the U.S. in the same month, September 2008, President Bush asked for and received $700 billion for a rescue plan to bail out banks and the auto industry. “The Bush administration on Saturday formally proposed a vast bailout of financial institutions in the United States, requesting unfettered authority for the Treasury Department to buy up to $700 billion in distressed mortgage-related assets from the private firms” (NYTimes.com). Most of this money went to AIG, which continued to ask for more money from the federal government. And as of February 2009, the U.S. government has injected more than $150 billion in AIG aid, with the government owning now nearly 80% of the company. “The government restructured its bailout of American International Group Inc, raising the package to a record $150 billion with easier terms, after a smaller rescue plan failed to stabilize the ailing insurance giant” (Reuters).

Financial institutions are not the only ones that need to be rescued; American auto industry is also on life support, with GM, Ford, and Chrysler, receiving a sizeable of more than $30 billion in government bailout. Still, Chrysler is hanging on a tiny thread. “This year, everything was different. Instead of a waterfall that spelled out Jeep, there was a curtain of electric cords signifying the company’s electric car offerings” (NPR), while GM is now looming for possibility of filing for a bankruptcy protection.

This global crisis has rippled to nearly every country in the world. According to International Monetary Fund, many developing countries especially in Africa, are scrambling for cash, as their export revenues have fallen to the lowest in years, due to a decline in the U.S. market and global market demand for especially raw materials. China’s GDP has shrunk due to a similar decline in export markets. “Collapsing exports to the west caused China’s GDP growth to slide to just 6.8% in the final quarter of 2008, underlining the rising economic giant’s vulnerability to the global downturn” (Guardian.co.uk). While Japan is just a few steps behind the U.S.’s economic recession. “To be sure, Japan has been affected by the global economic downturn, with its economy threatened by recession. And its stock market gyrated and declined this week. But in an era dominated by globalization, where seemingly unrelated events can affect the lives of people half a world away, Tokyo has so far floated above the anguish gripping New York and London” (NYTimes.com).

The newly sworn in U.S. President Obama has been vocal on his plan to turn the market around, a $787 billion stimulus package aimed at rescuing, not only the banking and auto industries but most of other industries in the U.S., such as healthcare, education, and energy. On February 17, 2009, Mr. Obama signed The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (”Stimulus Bill”) whose aim is to once-and-for-all put an end to this financial crisis. Global financial powerhouses such as Japan are also considering passing similar stimulus bills to help curb the global financial crisis. For Obama, the idea is to inject billions of dollars in certain industries such as constructions, healthcare, education, and energy. And in doing so; it may help provide employment for millions of Americans. “The plan would spend at least 75 percent of the total cost — or more than $600 billion — within the first 18 months, providing a massive infusion of cash to the struggling economy, either through bricks-and-shovels projects favored by Democrats or tax cuts that Republicans have pushed” (MSNBC.com).

However, not everyone is jolly and merry about Mr. Obama’s stimulus bill. No single member of the Republican’s House of Representatives voted for it, and only three Republican senators voted for it. “Without a single Republican vote, President Obama won House approval on Wednesday for an $819 billion economic recovery plan as Congressional Democrats sought to temper their own differences over the enormous package of tax cuts and spending” (NYTimes.com).

Obama’s plan is to get the economy moving again, by enabling a creation of more jobs. The Stimulus Bill hopes to help create more than 3.3 million jobs for the American people within the next two years. “The White House has officially pared its own projection to 3.5 million jobs in recognition of the bill’s smaller size. But Christina Romer, who leads Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers, said the administration remains convinced that the package of tax cuts and spending initiatives has sufficient power to boost the sagging economy toward recovery by year’s end” (Washingtonpost.com).

The idea is to put Americans back to work. A ripple effect from a single contract payment may work like this; hypothetically, well this may be an economic 101 to some. Well, suppose that the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) receives $1.5 billion from the Stimulus Bill to build and construct more roads and bridges. Because ODOT doesn’t do the construction work for roads and bridges itself, it would contract a local construction company, who in turn would hire more people. In addition, the construction company may need additional construction materials from a firm let’s say in New York. Furthermore, the newly hired employees now have more income to spend in local grocery stores, buy more cars, and renovate their homes. The firm in New York may hire more people, and or order raw material from a company let’s say in Alabama, so the process repeats itself.

In all of this, the money from the Ohio Department of Transportation is shared among several communities and industries. In turn, the economy may move ahead again. Now, imagine all of this stimulus bill money injected in various industries, of course, the wheel will start to turn forward again, and the market will start to run again. “Everybody says this is going to create a lot of jobs. We feel strongly that it’s going to be in the three to four million range,” Romer said in an interview. “In my mind, the worst that can happen is the jobs aren’t created as fast as we wanted” (Washingtonpost.com). However, as more money is poured in the economy, the price of manufactured goods may rise, but how fast could it rise, that depends on how much money is flooded in the market. That’s why we have to be careful not to trigger inflationary price.

However, opponents of the stimulus bill believe that this is all a waste of money, by Democrats who simply want a larger government with wasteful spending. “Most analysts of the stimulus package have come with broad disclaimers. “The macroeconomic impacts of any economic stimulus program are very uncertain,” Douglas Elmendorf, director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, wrote in a recent memo to lawmakers. “Some economists remain skeptical that there would be any significant effects, while others expect very large ones.” (Washingtonpost.com).

Now, here is a political suicide for the Republican Party, if this stimulus package works, then no current Republican member in the house of representative or senator will have a platform to run on in the upcoming national election, except the three republican senators who voted for the stimulus bill. However, if the stimulus bill fails to live up to its much lauded vision, then that would be the end of the Democratic Party, except the 21 Democrats who voted against it. “”What kills a skunk is the publicity it gives itself,” Schock said, quoting a previous occupant of his House seat — Abraham Lincoln” (Washingtonpost.com).

Everyone wants to blame the other. Bernanke wants to blame Greenspan; Bush is blaming Clinton, while Obama is blaming everybody else. The entire global financial market is a wait game; no one knows exactly what would happen. It’s all about theorizing. No one is wrong and everyone seems to be right. Future research is a must to completely determine what might happen. But everyone around the world hopes the market to rebound, to bring more jobs not only to the American people, but to all other workers around the world who have been left in dire destitute, because of this financial crisis. The world’s market economy is now interconnected, and when one sneezes, is not only one that catches a cold, but everybody else does. Thus, instead of working individually, everyone should work collectively for the good of humanity.

References

Isidore, Chris (March 6, 2009). “Unemployment hits 25-year high.” CNNMoney.com. Retrieved on March 8, 2009, from http://money.cnn.com/2009/03/06/news/economy/jobs_february/index.htm?postversion=2009030608

Paradis, Tim (January 20, 2009). “Stock Market falls as Obama Takes Office.” ABCNews.com Retrieved on March 6, 2009, from http://abcnews.go.com/Business/MarketTalk/Story?id=6690598&page=1

JLP (February 11, 2008). “Looking at the Clinton and Bush Presidencies and the Stock Market”. AllFinancialMatters.com. Retrieved on March 9, 2009, from http://allfinancialmatters.com/2008/02/11/looking-at-the-clinton-and-bush-presidencies-and-the-stock-market/

Elliott, Larry (February 27, 2008). “Wall Street suffers biggest fall since 9/11″. The Guardian. Retrieved on March 8, 2009, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2007/feb/28/china.frontpagenews

C-SPAN-3. “President Bill Clinton’s State of the Union Address Part 2.” Retrieved on March 8, 2009, from http://www.c-span.org/executive/transcript.asp?cat=current_event&code=bush_admin&year=1993

Goldfarb, Zachary A. and Klein, Alec (June 16, 2008). “The Bubble”. The Washington Post. Retrieved on March 8, 2009, from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/06/16/ST2008061600096.html

The New York Times. “Credit Crisis — The Essentials”. Retrieved on March 4, 2009, from http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/subjects/c/credit_crisis/

The New York Times. “American International Group Inc.” Retrieved on March 8, 2009, from http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/news/business/companies/american_international_group/index.html

BBC News (October 8, 2008). “Rescue plan for UK banks unveiled”. Retrieved on March 6, 2009, from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7658277.stm

Crumley, Bruce (October 6, 2008). “Europe Scrambles as the Credit Crisis Goes Global.”Time Magazine, Paris. Retrieved on March 8, 2009, from http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1847433,00.html

Felsenthal, Mark and Zuill, Lilla (November 10, 2008). “AIG gets $150 billion government bailout; posts huge loss”. Reuters Small Business. Retrieved on March 9, 2009, from http://www.reuters.com/article/ousiv/idUSTRE4A92FM20081110

Latest Update: GoDaddy.com’s Shady and Unethical Domain Names’ Renewal Process

The following is my latest update on my two previous posts regarding GoDaddy.com’s possible unethical European domain name expiration and renewal procedures.

Since my last update here, I have had numerous email exchanges with an executive from GoDaddy.com, trying to amicably negotiate with GoDaddy.com in regard to their European domain name unethical expiration, renewal, and cancellation procedure. And, after numerous email exchanges, GoDaddy.com finally agreed to give me back, two of my domain names, Rentersq.co.uk, and Tipmart.co.uk, by renewing them for additional two years at no cost to me. But there are other .DE domain names that I have lost because of their renewal procedure.

The way GoDaddy.com registers and manages European domain names, such as .co.uk, .de, etc., it’s like having a retail store that you own and manage, and your livelihood depends on your retail store’s revenue. However, your retail store’s landlord, who after you’ve signed a one-year lease, always comes to your store, once a year, at least 60 – 90 days before the end of your lease agreement, asking you to pay for the lease term, and if you decide to wait until the actual due date of your lease agreement, then your landlord instantly locks up your retail store, closes it down, and redirects your customers to the landlord’s store elsewhere, leaving you to lose business as your customers are redirected elsewhere.

And, that’s exactly how GoDaddy.com operates when coming to registering and managing the European domain names as I have it explained here. Also, you may want to read here what other customers are saying about similar problem with GoDaddy.com.

I have written to GoDaddy.com several times, but with no amicable solution. And some of my requests are for GoDaddy;

- To instantly change its policies and procedures for its European domain names’ expiration procedures, invoicing and renewal process, and not to ever redirect expiring domain names for any customer to the GoDaddy’s parking pages with paid advertisement.

- To stop cancelling domain names from its customers account prior to the actual expiration dates.

- To adopt similar industry domain name expiration and renewal standard such as that of Yahoo! Domains’ expiration and renewal procedure, that GoDaddy must only cancel any domain name from any user’s account only after the actual expiration due date. And if for any reason whatsoever, that GoDaddy.com is unable to do so, then it must stop registering European domain names, directly or indirectly.

- Not to deactivate, cancel and then forward or redirect any expiring or expired domain names for any customer to any of the GoDaddy’s parking page with or without any paid and or sponsored advertisement.

- To publicly announce, by whatever form of written public announcement, such as a press release or posting on GoDaddy’s official blog, that GoDaddy.com has agreed to make changes to GoDaddy’s Universal Terms of Services in regard to its expiration, invoicing, and renewal procedures for the European Domain Names, and that GoDaddy will no longer cancel and redirect expiring or expired domain names to GoDaddy’s parking pages with paid or sponsored advertisement.

- To offer a discount price of $9.99 per each European Domain name for any and all of GoDaddy’s past and current customers, who may want to purchase any new European domain name through GoDaddy.com.

I have a long list and I am still collecting names of those, anyone, past or current customer of GoDaddy.com, who have been affected by GoDaddy.com’s European Domain Names’ expiration and renewal procedure as explained above for a possible class action against GoDaddy.com. So, please get in touch with me the soonest.

NAFTA, the Good, the Best, and the Ugly for the Americas

NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement, has been getting a lot of not so favorable, and sometimes, controversial headlines in recent years. Some critics blame it for the current labor shortages in the United States, due to the fact that most U.S. companies have been and continue to outsource and ship jobs overseas. While its proponents have been hailing it as a great success in helping lowering national prices on certain manufactured goods and services and that it has caused to increase wages for certain jobs within the U.S.

In this document, we are going to explore the cons and pros of NAFTA. The author of the document has specifically selected this topic because of a familiar ground. Most of his families and friends have lost their jobs in recent years, and whenever the word ‘NAFTA’ is mentioned, the blame seems to be more placed on NAFTA and Bill Clinton, for causing it to happen, than on the current economic downturn cycle. Before we look deeper on the aforementioned issues, we must first look at what is NAFTA, its causes, advantages and disadvantages.

In 1989, Canada and the United States implemented a bilateral free trade agreement, and in 1993, they included Mexico. On December 8, 1993, the leaders of the governments of Canada, United States, and Mexico signed, then the most anticipated trilateral free trade agreement, known as, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and was implemented on January 1, 1994, for the sole purpose of helping to remove most of the trade and investment barriers, while boosting high economic growth between the tri-bloc neighboring countries.

The Agreement was signed by Bill Clinton, president of the United States, Brian Mulroney of Canada, and Carlos Salinas de Gortari of Mexico. It was hailed as the highest achievement and largest trilateral agreement between the tri-bloc countries in decades. “Under the NAFTA, all non-tariff barriers to agricultural trade between the United States and Mexico were eliminated. In addition, many tariffs were eliminated immediately, with others being phased out over periods of 5 to 15 years.  This allowed for an orderly adjustment to free trade with Mexico, with full implementation beginning January 1, 2008” (United States Department of Agriculture, Foreign Agricultural Service).

Over the years, the partner countries have continued to make certain provisions, adding or removing some, according to economic conditions in order to improve the agreement. Certain provisions were not initially included such as the agricultural provision was not amended until in 1998. Such provisions are necessary as each country tries to improve its international trade relationship with other trade partners. “The agricultural provisions of the U.S.-Canada Free Trade Agreement, in effect since 1989, were incorporated into the NAFTA. Under these provisions, all tariffs affecting agricultural trade between the United States and Canada, with a few exceptions for items covered by tariff-rate quotas, were removed by January 1, 1998. Mexico and Canada reached a separate bilateral NAFTA agreement on market access for agricultural products. The Mexican-Canadian agreement eliminated most tariffs either immediately or over 5, 10, or 15 years. Tariffs between the two countries affecting trade in dairy, poultry, eggs, and sugar are maintained” (United States Department of Agriculture, Foreign Agricultural Service).

Since its implementation, some of the tri-bloc partners seem to have greatly benefited from the trade agreement, with the exception of the United States. According to NAFTAnow.org, its official web site, as of 2007’s NAFTA’s fiscal report indicate that NAFTA members have a combined population of over 439 million, with a combined Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of $16.2 trillion, and the number of jobs created since 1993 are more than 39 million, with a national employment level of 205.8. “In terms of combined purchasing power parity GDP of its members, as of 2007 the trade block is the largest in the world and second largest by nominal GDP comparison. It also is one of the most powerful, wide-reaching treaties in the world” (NaftaNow.org).

On an individual member basis, Canada has a population of 33 million as of July 2007, and achieved a record GDP of $1,425 billion, while its trading with NAFTA partners reached $542.9 billion. Its inward Foreign Direct Investment among NAFTA countries for 2006 was $235.1 million, while the number of jobs created in the U.S. between 1993 and 2007 was 4.1. Its national employment level is 16.9 million. For the United States, its population, as of July 2007, is 301.6 million, with a GDP of $13,844 billion, and $870.2 billion in trade with NAFTA Partners.  As of 2006, the United States achieved over $165.1 billion in inward Foreign Direct Investment among NAFTA countries, while the number of jobs created between 1993 and 2007 reached 25.8 millions, and its national level employment was 140.0 millions. For the third member country, Mexico, its population in July 2007, was 105.2 million, and it reached a record GDP of $886 billion, while its trade with NAFTA partner reached $375.4 billion. In 2006, Mexico reached an inward Foreign Direct Investment of $129.1 billion among NAFTA countries, and the numbers of jobs created in Mexico between 1993 and 2007 were 10.1 million, while its national employment level rose to a record 42.9 million (NAFTANow.org).

Each of the NAFTA’s three-member countries seems to have amassed a great success as a result of international trade, with Mexico and Canada being the most beneficial nations. “Trade liberalization has transformed and modernized Mexico’s vibrant economy by successfully boosting trade and investment flows. Within just a few years, Mexico’s exports have diversified from primarily oil to include an array of manufactured products, making Mexico one of the largest exporters in the world. While, one in five jobs in Canada is linked to international trade, and Canada’s prosperity is built on its openness to international trade and investment. As such, the North American continental partnership is without a doubt an important competitive advantage for Canada. Canada is using this continental platform as a way to help Canadian business embrace commercial opportunities around the world. As for the United States, the largest and most diversified economy in the world, its market economy whose businesses are world leaders in the manufacturing and high-tech sectors, especially computers, medical equipment, and aerospace, and in services, including financial services and telecommunications, and in agriculture, may have benefited equally” (NAFTANow.org).

The data and summation herein provided seem to indicate a huge success in partner trade between the NAFTA country-members, however, many critics are not so merry-and-jolly about the free trade agreement. Most blames the huge loss of jobs, as U.S. companies outsource and ship jobs to Mexico, Latin America and South East Asia as a result of this liberalized trade agreement. “Debate a decade ago over the North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA, drew loud warnings that liberalized trade with Mexico would lead to huge job losses in the U.S. Trade with Mexico has soared since NAFTA’s debut in 1994, but recent studies have concluded that the U.S. did lose more jobs in various industries than it gained because of the pact” (Wall Street Journal, December 8, 2008).

In fact, the issue with NAFTA has been some of the main focus by both candidates during the 2008 U.S. presidential and primaries campaign. The presidential candidates, Obama, McCain, and Clinton, both agreed that NAFTA was a mistake. The main blame was that NAFTA has caused a huge loss of employment to many Americans, as most jobs were shipped overseas to countries who are offering cheap labor, while those who still hold on to their jobs in the U.S., have seen their wages shrinking to the lowest, coupled with huge pay cut, reduced benefits and most times, no medical insurance benefits, all as a result of an increase labor demand versus shortage in labor supply. “Campaigning in Ohio, a formerly industrial state that is rapidly becoming a postindustrial state, both Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama expressed reservations about the trade deal and suggested it might need to be revisited. Clinton tried to make a meal over a report that Obama economic adviser Austan Goolsbee, a University of Chicago professor and an occasional Slate contributor, told Canadians that Obama’s anti-NAFTA rhetoric was just for show and that they should trust in Obama’s free-trade credentials” (Newsweek).

Like the then presidential candidates, most people in the U.S., especially in certain states that have lost most jobs such Ohio, Michigan, and others, NAFTA is not that popular. It’s seen as the devil that snapped away people’s meals and well-being. “Mexico and Canada aren’t really Ohio’s main problems. The last time I visited the state, I went to a steel plant outside Cleveland where one of the furnaces was being dismantled and sent to … China. The state, which has lost large numbers of manufacturing jobs, is currently experiencing the negative aftereffects of an economic boom (high unemployment and foreclosure rates), even though it never felt many of the boom’s benefits. So what accounts for the state’s visceral hostility to NAFTA? The Wall Street Journal yesterday published a poll showing that Democrats in Ohio disapprove of NAFTA by a 59-13 margin. (In Texas, only 40 percent of Democrats disapprove, while 33 percent approve.) As my NEWSWEEK colleague Keith Naughton notes, Mexico holds a special symbolic status for employees of automakers and similar smokestack industries, which used to be large presences in Ohio and which moved big chunks of their production south of the border in the 1980s and ’90s” (Newsweek).

However, in Mexico and Canada, the resentment on NAFTA is not as the same in the U.S. Most people in Mexico deem NAFTA as the blessing in the sky, because it has caused to create more and better paying jobs in most part of the country, in which for years most residents lived on scrapping farm produce for their daily consumption. And, as more and more U.S. companies open up large manufacturing plants in most areas in Mexico, more and more Mexicans found themselves plagued by a huge selection of, better paying employment , which even though most account for less than $2 an hour, still makes a big difference to them. “The fact that Mexican firms now export large quantities of goods to Canada and the United States means they are creating jobs—and incentives—for Mexicans to stay at home. In some ways, NAFTA has been a boon for activists. Just think how much higher the northward flow of work-seeking immigrants from Mexico would have been in the absence of NAFTA” (Newsweek).

Mexico seems to be the one that has most benefited than the other two partners.  A lot has changed in Mexico since NAFTA was implemented to include it as part of the free trade partners. According to the report by Carlos Salas in the Economic Policy Institute: Although Mexico now has a large trade surplus with the U.S., Mexico has also developed a large and growing overall trade deficit with the rest of the world. In fact, Mexico’s net imports from the rest of the world now substantially exceed its net exports to the United States. Official unemployment levels in Mexico are lower now than before NAFTA, but this decline in the official rate simply reflects the absence of unemployment insurance in Mexico. In fact, underemployment and work in low-pay, low-productivity jobs (e.g., unpaid work in family enterprises) actually has grown rapidly since the early 1990s. Furthermore, the normal process of rural-to-urban migration that is typical of developing economies has reversed since the adoption of NAFTA. The rural share of the population increased slightly between 1991 and 1997, as living and working conditions in the cities deteriorated.

As Mexico flourish, the opposite is happening in the US. Forbes magazine recently reported a list of the fastest dying cities in America, and in Ohio, Dayton, Cleveland, and Youngstown are some of many in the US that have been affected, not only by the current economic crisis, but by many of the manufacturing jobs being shipped overseas, while leaving most American jobless. The report indicates that Youngstown is on the blink of completely becoming a ghost town. Most retail stores have moved out, and the City of Youngstown has been on the buying spree, buying up abandoned properties, and dismantles them to clean them up and turn them in to parks instead. Whereas in Mexico, “total employment grew from 33.9 to 39.1 million jobs over the 1995-99 period (3.7% annually), according to officially reported data (INEGI 1995 and 1999). But these data must be used with some caution, because the sample used for the National Employment Survey changed in 1998. Comparing the 1998 and 1999 data provides a more realistic rate of employment growth. Total employment reported for 1998 was 38.6 million jobs, resulting in an actual rate of growth in 1999 of only 1.2%” (Economic Policy Institute).

As for Canada, all else equal, the tri-bloc member country has one specific pressing issue, losing its water to the U.S. as a result of NAFTA. According to Inter Press Service; under the North American Free Trade Agreement, Canada lost control over its energy resources. Now, with “NAFTA-plus”, it could also lose control over its freshwater resources, say experts. Canada’s water is on the trade negotiating table despite widespread public opposition and assurances by Canadian political leaders, said Adèle Hurley, director of the University of Toronto’s Programme on Water Issues at the Munk Centre for International Studies.  “A new report released Sep. 11 by the programme reveals that water transfers from Canada to the United States are emerging as an issue under the auspices of the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP). The SPP — sometimes called “NAFTA-plus” — is a forum set up in 2005 in Cancún, by the three partners, Canada, United States and Mexico”( Inter Press Service).

In addition to Canada being a large supplier of fresh water to the United States, this may be a surprise to some that, Canada is also the largest supplier of crude oil to the United States. “Canada exports more crude oil to the United States than any other nation, including Saudi Arabia. All of that oil, along with a gusher of natural gas, comes free of any kind of export controls or tariffs, courtesy of NAFTA. In fact, the United States consumes almost 100 percent of Canada’s energy exports” (Salon.com).

So, who actually benefit the most from the North American Free Trade Agreement? According to the Office of United State Office of Trade Representative, when NAFTA was implemented 10 years ago, it created the world’s largest free trade area, which now links 426 million people in an area which produces more than $12 trillion worth of goods and services.  During the past decade, NAFTA partners have been conducting business within a framework that is extremely open, governed by clear rules and accessible enforcement mechanisms, with the goal of greater economic integration and cooperation.

“In the first decade of NAFTA, U.S. manufacturing output soared, U.S. employment grew, and U.S. manufacturing wages increased dramatically. Income gains and tax cuts from NAFTA were worth up to $930 each year for the average US household of four. While, for Mexico, wages in export-related industries are 37% higher than the rest of its economy.  Mexican wages and employment tend to be higher in states with higher foreign investment and trade, and migration from those states is lower.  Wages are also higher in sectors with more exposure to imports or exports. Two-way agricultural trade between the United States and Mexico increased more than 125% since NAFTA went into effect, reaching $14.2 billion in 2003 compared to $6.2 billion in 1993. As for Canada, merchandise exports to the United States expanded by 250% since 1989 and account for 87.2% of Canada’s total merchandise exports. Foreign Direct Investment in the finance and insurance industry accounted for 36% of Canadian FDI in Mexico in 2001, while not even registering in 1989” (Office of the U.S. Trade Representative).

All these numbers and reports are good and highly enticing, however, more and more people in the U.S. have lost their jobs. According to the United States Department of Labor, about 600,000 jobs were lost towards the end of January 2009 alone. One can easily blame NAFTA, India, China or other countries offering lower wages that in turn cause to attract many US companies to ship jobs to these countries. I am of the opinion that from a macro-employment perspective, on a long-term basis, NAFTA is not entirely the only cause of the current high rise of unemployment in the United States. It’s actually true as reported that most U.S. companies have shipped and outsourced jobs overseas, as a result of NAFTA.

However, most of these jobs are low paying jobs that most Americans wouldn’t have wanted in the first place. In a short run, it may be true that NAFTA has caused the high rise of unemployment in the U.S., but looking at the long term, as most companies choose to have their goods and services manufactured in countries with low paying wages, these companies then transfer the goods, as manufactured in foreign countries, and sell them in the United States, at a far cheaper price than if they were manufactured locally. Also, as these companies transfer these goods from their overseas plants to the United States, they are causing to the price labor to increase, meaning that people with more experience and or better education and training are now, in a long run, able to find better and high paying employment. In addition, overseas customers, even for the same low paid labors, are now able to afford to buy American goods and services, even prior to being shipped back to the U.S., and in return, the U.S. companies can then repatriate profits from their foreign operations and reinvest it back within the U.S.

Overall, in doing so, better paying jobs in the U.S. continue to rise, the U.S. GDP continues to grow, and the overall economy may be better off, in the long run. However, there seem to have an empty vacuum between classes of American people; the low income families versus middle income families. As a result of U.S. companies shipping low paying jobs overseas, those with less or no education and in this case, less productive, may end up not having jobs, and those with a college education, special training, expertise or specialization may continue to find better paying employment.

In the process, those who continue to find no better paying employment because of lack of education, special training or specialization, they may end up living on social welfare and in poverty. Whereas, who choose to upgrade themselves with current economic condition may continue to live a better and mostly fulfilled life, as a result of gaining better and high paying employment. “Contrary to what some say, Ohio is benefiting from trade and from NAFTA in extraordinary ways, and no one more than the state’s manufacturers. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, a total of 777,000 Ohioans are employed in manufacturing. These workers produced $36.5 billion worth of exports in 2006. Exports to Canada and Mexico account for about $20 billion in Ohio’s manufacturing output. Do the math. Ohio manufacturers are bringing in export revenue of $25,000 for every factory worker they employ. The average manufacturing worker brings home a salary of about $42,000. How could Ohio manufacturers make their payroll without their huge and growing sales to Canada and Mexico? The short answer is, they couldn’t. Too often, arguments over trade miss the simple fact that “free trade” agreements like NAFTA are all about fair trade. The U.S. average duty on imports is about 2 percent. But countries such as Colombia and South Korea impose an average tariff on U.S. manufactured goods of 11 percent – just as Mexico did before NAFTA.  For the nation as a whole, just 35 percent of exports go to our NAFTA partners. What this means is that Ohio depends more on exports to our NAFTA trading partners than other states. Ohio’s exports to Canada and Mexico have more than doubled since 1994, when NAFTA came into force. Imagine how much more of the international market would have been open to Ohio manufacturers had our national leaders not demagogued free trade agreements with these countries as bad for America” (The Hillsboro Times-Gazette).

NAFTA is a subject with many supporters and opponents, each group with its own views. Until the economy starts to rebound from its current condition, this is a subject that may not be easily resolved. We will continue to debate and write about it, and neither one of us may ever come to an agreement on what is good or bad as a result of NAFTA.

Refereces

Gross, Daniel (Mar 4, 2008). “Trade Talks: The NAFTA Debate is Shorthand for a Broader Policy Problem.”. Newsweek. Retrieved on February 4, 2009, from http://www.newsweek.com/id/118809?tid=relatedcl.

Salas, Carlos (April 2001). NAFTA at Seven. Its Impact on Workers on Three nations. Economic Policy Institute. Retrieved on February 3, 2009, from http://www.epi.org/pages/briefingpapers_nafta01_mx.

Leahy, Stephen (September 22, 2008). “Trade-Canada: Losing Water Through NAFTA”. Inter Press Service. Retried on February 3, 2009, from http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=39365.

Salon.com (February 28, 2008). Retrieved on February 3, 2009, from http://www.salon.com/tech/htww/2008/02/28/canada_nafta_and_obama

Office of the United States Trade Representative. Retrieved on February 4, 2009, from http://www.ustr.gov/Document_Library/Fact_Sheets/2004/NAFTA_A_Decade_of_Success.html.

The Hillsboro Times-Gazette. Retrieved on February 4, 2009, from http://www.timesgazette.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=160605.

Kraft Foods, Inc., An American Made, Globally Inspired

If you order a Big Mac or hamburger with cheese at any of your favorite restaurants, anywhere in the US, then chances are, your cheese is made by Kraft Foods, Inc., (NYSE: KFT), (”Kraft Foods”), the largest branded food and beverage company in the United States and the world’s second largest, only behind Nestlé, based on 2000 pro forma revenue. The company’s fiscal year is December, and as of January 21, 2009, according to the company’s web site, Kraft.com, it has approximately 103,000 employees worldwide and more than 180 manufacturing and processing facilities worldwide.

Based in Northfield, Illinois, Kraft Foods, Inc’s North America unit makes the world’s largest cheese brand (Kraft), owns the cookie and cracker business (Nabisco) and makes the US’s most favorite, Oreos. Its brand products are distributed worldwide through its international business unit. Kraft Foods has one of the world’s most recognizable core brands which are sold in more than 140 countries, and according to A.C. Nielsen, are enjoyed in 99.6% of the households in the United States.

The company’s brands and businesses including; Oscar Mayer, Kraft, Philadelphia, Maxwell House, Nabisco, Oreo, Jacobs, Milka, and LU brands, which together have quarterly revenues of nearly $10 billion (MSN Money). The company was founded in 1767 and in 1988, Kraft, Inc (http://www.kraft.com) became a part of Altria Group, previously known as Philip Morris Companies Inc., which purchased Kraft for $12.9 billion, and operated it as a wholly-own subsidiary until 2007 when it was spun off, amid that the Altria’s tobacco lawsuits, a result of alleged second hand smoke would tarnish Kraft’s image, in terms of consumers.

Prior to going public, Kraft Foods generated 2000 pro forma revenue of $34.7 billion and 2000 pro forma earnings before interest, income taxes, depreciation and amortization of $6.3 billion. The company filed with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) for its long awaited and most anticipated Initial Public Offering (IPO) on March 13, 2001, and went public on June 10, 2001, traded on New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) under the ticker symbol; KFT. Its initial proposed stock price was set at $30.00 to $31.00, but the actual offer price was $31.00. Its stock price on the first day of trading was $31.00, and closed at $31.25 at the market closing time, a net gain of 25 cents. The company’s shares offered at IPO was 280 million shares, with an offering amount of $8.7 billion, making it one of the largest IPO offering, ranked only second behind 2001’s $10 billion-plus offering of stock in AT&T Wireless, which by far, was the richest U.S. initial public offering ever.

The offering price valued Kraft Foods at about $53.8 billion, and as of today, January 21, 2009, 5:00 PM EST, according to Yahoo! Finance, Kraft Foods market capitalization is value at $41.62 billion, a 22.64% drop since its IPO.

“The 280,000,000 Class A shares offered in the IPO represent 16.1% of the combined total of 1,735,000,000 Class A and Class B shares outstanding immediately after the offering. Net proceeds of the offering of approximately $8.4 billion will be used to repay a portion of Kraft’s long-term notes payable to Philip Morris” (AllBusiness.com).  “We will use the net proceeds from this offering to retire a portion of an $11.0 billion 7.75% note payable to Philip Morris, due in December 2002, incurred in connection with the Nabisco acquisition” (Edgar Online).

The company’s shares outstanding at IPO were 555 million, but its post IPO offering were 1,735 billion shares. Today, January 21, 2009, Kraft Foods stock closed at $28.33, its highest traded price was on May 28, 2002, at $43.01, that’s a drop of 65.56% since May 28, 2002, and its lowest trading since it went public was when it closed at $26.56 on November 17, 2008.

“Kraft Foods’ IPO was underwritten by several underwriters including; Credit Suisse First Boston, Salomon Smith Barney, Deutsche Banc Alex. Brown, J.P. Morgan Securities, Inc., Morgan Stanley Dean Witter, UBS Warburg LLC, BNP Paribas Group, HSBC Securities, Inc., Lehman Brothers Incorporated, Blaylock & Partners, L.P., Dresdner Kleinwort Benson, Prudential Securities, Inc., Ramirez & Co., Inc., Sanford C. Bernstein & Co., Inc., and Utendahl Capital Partners, L.P” (Edgar Online).

On November 15, 2007, Kraft Foods agreed to merge its Post cereals business into Ralcorp Holdings, Inc., and on June 25, 2008, “Kraft commenced its exchange offer related to the split-off transaction of its Post cereals business. Kraft will provide indicative calculated per share values and exchange ratios for each of the trading days that the exchange offer is open. The final exchange ratio will be calculated using the volume weighted average stock prices (VWAP) of Kraft and Ralcorp on July 30, July 31 and August 1, 2008, and will be announced by 4:30 pm ET on August 1. The exchange offer will expire at 8:00 am ET on August 4, 2008, unless extended” (Edgar Online).

The lowest drop in its stock price on November 17, 2008, was probably the result of its Post merge with Ralcorp Holdings, Inc. According to its balance sheet for the quarter ended on September 30, 2008; the company had a cash and cash equivalents of $737 million, while its total current assets are capped at $11.3 billion, total assets of $66.9 billion. Its total current liabilities are $10.3 billion, with total liabilities of $40.5 billion. The net tangible assets are (-$15.7 billion), while its long term debts are $18.9 billion. The company’s account payable is $6.09 billion. (Yahoo! Finance).

Today, amid the current US economic crisis and the recession, Kraft Foods, Inc. is still strong, its stock performance is relatively steady, part of the Dow 30, and is one of the world’s most actively traded companies on Wall Street.

Disclosure

I am currently not an investor nor do I have an immediate investment interest in Kraft Foods, Inc. I have not been compensated by anyone, in any way, shape or form, to write and publish this article anywhere.
 
References

MSN Money. “Kraft Foods Inc”.  IPO Center. Retrieved on Wednesday, January 21, 2009, from http://premium.hoovers.com/global/msn/factsheet.xhtml?ID=103392.

US Security and Exchange Commission. Edgar Online. Retrieved on Wednesday, January 21, 2009, from http://www.sec.gov/edgar/searchedgar/companysearch.html.

Yahoo! Finance. Kraft Foods Inc. (KFT). Retrieved on Wednesday, January 21, 2009, from http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=KFT.

Kraft, Inc. Official Corporate Web site. Investor Center. Retrieved on Wednesday, January 21, 2009, from http://www.kraft.com/default.htm.