Ramanisblog

Tag: Corporations

  • Obama presses ‘fat-cat bankers’ to lend, but has no real leverage

    It would have been better if he had also advised them to lend based on performance and repayment capacity of the loan seekers to avoid another bail out.
    President Obama summoned the nation’s top financial executives to the White House today for a little jaw-boning on how they can help rebuild the economy.

    The day before, in an interview on “60 Minutes,” Mr. Obama called them “fat-cat bankers.” On Monday, they were at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue – or most of the 12 were, as three were fogged in in New York and had to participate via conference call.

    Obama’s point: We bailed you out, now you do your job. Specifically, he wants these financial institutions to boost lending to small businesses, a key engine of economic recovery.

    Obama put it this way after the session: “My main message in today’s meeting was very simple: that America’s banks received extraordinary assistance from American taxpayers to rebuild their industry – and now that they’re back on their feet, we expect an extraordinary commitment from them to help rebuild our economy.”

    Earlier in the day, Citigroup announced that it would repay $20 billion in aid and leave the government’s financial protection program.

    Obama says he called on the bankers to find “ways to help creditworthy small and medium-size businesses get the loans that they need to open their doors, grow their operations, and create new jobs.”

    But bankers, according to Obama, say they “face a shortage of creditworthy individuals and businesses.”

    So did the meeting advance the ball at all on the nation’s credit issues? Obama called it a “candid and productive meeting,” but he did not come forth with any concrete deliverables. There were hints that the assembled men were telling the president what he wanted to hear – such as when they said they supported financial regulatory reform.

    But, as Obama went on to note, “there’s a gap between “what I’m hearing here in the White House and the activities of lobbyists on behalf of these institutions or associations of which they’re a member up on Capitol Hill.”

    Obama added that he “urged them to close that gap, and they assured me that they would make every effort to do so.”

    Ultimately, the session may have been in a vein similar to the jobs summit held at the White House Dec. 3, a high-profile effort to show the public the administration is doing something about high unemployment and the challenges homeowners face in refinancing their homes.

    Peter Morici, a business professor at the University of Maryland, College Park, argues that the banks – actually, the regional banks, which sell their loans to the big banks – will start lending again anyway, and the situation will sort itself out.

    “They’re going to return to lending anyway, and the president is going to declare victory,” says Mr. Morici. “Today was a show.”

    At least the bankers traveled (or tried to travel) on commercial airlines, not private jets, the New York Daily News pointed out.

    Last year, the CEOs of the big three US automakers flew to Washington in private jets to ask for taxpayer money. That didn’t play well with Congress or the public.
    http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2009/1214/Obama-presses-fat-cat-bankers-to-lend-but-has-no-real-leverage
    —

  • Junk food reigns in ads on Web sites for kids

    Junk food manufacturers must remember that they also have kids.Money earned by spoiling children’s ( for that matter any one’s) health is Sin Money.
    True, parents can not monitor mouse click of children.Solution lies with the Government, which could block this ads or penalize the companies, journalists/media and most importantly with the manufacturers with a conscience.

    Amy Norton
    Tue Dec 15, 2009 9:40am EST
    NEW YORK (Reuters Health) – Advertisements for junk food may be cluttering many of the Web sites most popular with children, a new study suggests.

    When researchers examined 28 of the Web sites most frequented by children, they found that the majority of food products advertised there met experts’ criteria for “foods to avoid.”

    Ads for sugar-laden cereals, candy, soda or fast food populated a majority of the Web sites, which included sites one would not readily associate with food, like those run by Nickelodeon and the Cartoon Network, among others, noted Dr. Lori Dorfman, director of the Berkeley Media Studies Group in California and one of the researchers on the study.

    In contrast, of the 77 advertised products across all the Web sites, only five were foods that children should be encouraged to consume, the researchers report in the American Journal of Public Health.

    Cartoon Network declined to comment on the study, and calls to Nickelodeon were not immediately returned. But a spokesperson for PBS Kids — cited for having “fast food brands represented” on its Web site — said that its representation in the study is “misleading.”

    PBS Kids does not accept advertising, and “it does not market food products to children,” said Lesli Rotenberg, senior vice-president of children’s media.

    Instead, the site carries, at the bottom of some pages, the logos of various PBS sponsors — which include fast-food restaurants like McDonald’s and Chick-fil-A. “Children will never see an image of a food product,” Rotenberg said.

    She also noted that PBS Kids has Web pages — Fizzy’s Lunch Lab and Don’t Buy It — designed to teach kids about healthy eating and avoiding media influences, respectively.

    When it comes to the issue of media influences on children, TV ads have long been under fire for marketing junk food to children and teenagers.

    But the Internet has provided a whole new outlet for advertisers — and companies are expected to keep increasing the proportion of their spending devoted to online marketing, according to Dorfman’s team.

    “The public health implications are serious,” Dorfman told Reuters Health in an email, “because digital marketing such as what we found on Web sites popular with kids is much different than TV advertising, which caused the alarm in the first place.”

    “Digital marketing,” she argued, “is immersive, interactive and incessant — rather than 30 seconds watching a TV commercial, children are spending 20 minutes deeply engaged with the brand.”

    A recent study found that food manufacturers’ use of “advergames” — online games that companies use to boost traffic to their Web sites and promote their brands — may indeed influence kids’ eating choices.

    When researchers had children play advergames that focused on cookies and chips, the kids wanted those same foods afterward. But when the games featured fruit and orange juice, the children tended to want those foods for a post-game snack.

    For the current study, Dorfman and her colleagues assessed the nutritional quality of foods and beverages advertised on the 28 top children’s Web sites between July and August of 2007.

    Of the 77 products they found, 49 met the “foods to avoid” criteria set by the Institute of Medicine (IOM), an advisory body to the federal government. Another 23 products fell into the neutral category because they were neither junk foods nor nutritious enough to be encouraged; such products included lower-sugar cereals and certain baked snack foods.

    Only five of the advertised products — including oatmeal, milk and pure fruit juice — were foods that the IOM encourages children to eat.

    “Parents should be concerned because much digital marketing flies under their radar,” Dorfman said.

    But she also asserted that parents should not be given the job of monitoring the ads their kids see online.

    “The online environment is not like watching TV, something a family might do together,” Dorfman said. “It’s unreasonable, and unfair,” she added, “to think that parents could monitor every mouse click children make.”

    Instead, Dorfman argued, “food marketers and children’s media companies need to adhere to higher nutrition standards for the foods they market to children, especially when they do it out of earshot of parents.”

    SOURCE: American Journal of Public Health, November 2009.

  • Citi’s Internal Memo on Repaying Bailout Money.

    Touching memo,but syrupy corporate mumbojumbo.Serving customers for their needs sound altruistic.But do they really do it, with hidden financial charges and heavy penal interests for delayed payment?.Nor does the memo say any where that the Bank shall follow sound financial practice of lending to those who are in need and also who are capable of repaying.Emphasis seems to be more on catching with competitors than with sound financial management..What about the perks of their executives?Are they going to follow Goldman Sachs with bonuses?
    They should be penalized for having mismanaged to the extent of making the Federal govt. loan Citi to tide over their incompetency, though they have made arrangements to repay..
    Time that these corporates are made accountable.Mere expression of gratitude will not suffice.

    Citigroup announced Monday that it has struck a deal to repay $20 billion in federal bailout funds, capping a frenzied effort to free itself from government control and catch up to its healthier rivals.

    In an internal memorandum obtained by DealBook, Citi’s chief executive, Vikram S. Pandit, told employees that the firm still faces challenges as it seeks to recuperate from last fall’s financial crisis. He also said that Citi owes taxpayers and the government “a debt of gratitude for their extraordinary assistance.”

    Read the full memo after the jump.

    Dear Colleagues,

    Today, we announced a series of transactions to repay the $20 billion of TARP outstanding and terminate the asset guarantee we received from the U.S. government. The Treasury also announced its intention to sell its ownership in Citi stock in the coming months. These actions bring us closer to ending a very difficult period for our company, and we owe the U.S. taxpayers and the government a debt of gratitude for their extraordinary assistance.

    That we are here is a testament to your hard work and accomplishments in getting our house in order. Today we are strongly capitalized, efficient, focused on our clients with a clear strategy for the future. With your commitment and dedication, we have created a strong foundation for the future.

    Our goals near-term are clear: to achieve sustained profitability and to promote economic recovery by lending, keeping people in their homes, and helping clients with their needs. There are still economic challenges ahead that require your continued focus on clients and disciplined execution.

    Over the past few months, I have visited many of you in the U.S. and around the world. I am continually impressed by the depth and breadth of talent we have at Citi. I am also very touched by your efforts to help customers and families in need and the communities of which we are a part. Thank you for all you do every day for our clients, customers, communities and Citi. I am very proud of your accomplishments.

    Vikram

    http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/14/citis-internal-memo-on-repaying-bailout-money/#comment-343905

  • 10 Companies to Avoid This Holiday Season-IBM included!-Alertnet.

    Yes, there’s Wal-Mart, but also a bunch of surprises, too.
    Air America put together a list of companies that you should think twice about before handing them your money. Their research is based on descriptions from The Blue Pages: A Directory of Companies Rated By Their Politics And Practices. This is a super handy little book that tells you about companies’ environmental, human rights and labor practices and also which political parties they give money to and how much. There are probably hundreds of ‘10 worst’ (or best) lists you could come up with from the book, but Air America at least got the ball rolling.

    Here’s a little info on what they found. You can read the whole thing on their website and you should, there’s lots more there. Also check out the book. It’s handy to take along shopping. Or maybe it will just be an iPhone app soon anyway (or maybe it is?).

    1. Children’s Place: “It gets its products from places with human rights and labor violations and had to pay $1.5 million in a settlement alleging that they violated the Securities Act.

    2. Hanes: “…went the extra step to be cited for ‘egregious labor violations.’” Oh, and they have not even an attempt at an anti-discrimination policy for sexual orientation and gender identity.

    3. JC Penny: “D- on Green America’s scorecard and D+ from the NAACP.”

    4. Limited Brands (this includes Victoria’s Secret and Bath & Body Works): “The now scarily common ‘sourced from countries with widespread, well-documented human and labor rights abuses’ rears its head here…”

    5. IBM: “It’s been sued for improperly converting employee pension plans and for exposing them to toxic chemicals.” Oh and also for “aiding and abetting South Africa’s apartheid regime.”

    6. Albertsons: The gamut of really bad labor stuff — “Unpaid overtime, punishing employees for opposing discrimination policies … intimidates workers into refusing unions …” and the list unfortunately goes on.

    7. Chiquita: This is a good summary: “Everything is contaminated.”

    8. L’Oreal: Still getting it for their lack of policy on animal testing (oh, and using banned chemicals).

    9. Target: Bad on the environment, racial discrimination and of course ‘‘sourced from countries with widespread, well-documented human and labor rights abuses.’”

    10. Wal-Mart: Obvi!

    Sadly, this is just a few of the companies out there that you should avoid. I’m sure we can come up with more, but better yet, what are the 10 companies that deserve our cash?

    http://www.alternet.org/blogs/rights/144358/10_companies_to_avoid_this_holiday_season

  • France to impose tax on bank bonuses

    Still better would be to tax the recipient 75% of the bonus.
    President Nicolas Sarkozy is to follow Britain’s lead and impose a one-off tax on bonus pay-outs by banks operating in France.

    The French government is still working out the details, but intends to bring Paris in line with London by forcing banks to pay 50 per cent in tax on bonus pay-outs for 2009 above €27,000.
    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/05b1bb70-e570-11de-81b4-00144feab49a.html