Tuesday, January 25, 2005
Hans Yu, Nielsen//Netratings on internet advertising
With China's online market set to double within three years, Sean Hargrave looks at how advertisers are being drawn to invest - and why it is unique
Monday January 24, 2005
The Guardian
It is often said there are 1.3bn reasons for western brands to sell to China. Now online advertising and marketing agencies are discovering there are 100m reasons to enter a web market that is poised to become the largest in the world. While official Chinese government figures have always fuelled optimism about the size and future potential for its internet market, the first independent figures were compiled at the end of last year by the international web auditor, Nielsen//NetRatings. It found that in one week alone 100 million people were logging on to China's top four portals.
This confirmed official statistics that had put the size of the market, at the start of 2004, at around 90 million. This means China's online population is larger than Europe's and four times that of the UK. With growth expected to cause the Chinese market to double within three years, according to researchers at Gartner, the country is due to overtake America (with its current 137 million regular net users) in 2007 or possibly as early as next year.
The team at NetRatings is privately hinting this number one spot could come much sooner than the widely anticipated 2007 date. While conducting their research they found that when one looks beyond people who surf every week on China's top portals, there are a total of 150 million online in China. "People have always wondered why some portals claim to have more users for their site than are officially accepted for the country," Hans Yu, managing director of Nielsen//NetRatings in China, points out. "It's normally put down to accountancy problems but we're finding that the market is actually far bigger than people think when you start to include people who only surf every now and then, perhaps on a friend's PC or at a cyber cafe."
It is little surprise, then, that Western advertising, marketing and PR firms have been drawn to China. The advertising market is set to enjoy a growth rate of 18% this year, according to investment bank JP Morgan, which is more than double the average for Asia, and the result of 9% annual growth in the Chinese economy that the government is struggling to prevent from going double digit.
China is no longer the "factory of Asia" but has become the world's fourth largest market for luxury goods, accounting for 12% of global demand, according to investment bank Goldman Sachs. While the huge growth in traditional advertising and marketing that accompanies this surge in demand has largely been identified, the emerging opportunity is online. According to Connecting with China, a report published last week, web advertising revenue growth is running at 40% per year (more than double traditional advertising) and search marketing is expanding at 60%. Two out of the top three Chinese portals, Sohu and Netease.com, are reporting increases of 70% and 60% respectively in advertising income for 2004.
Besides the attraction of an online audience expected to be the biggest in the world soon, this is also due to weaknesses elsewhere in Chinese advertising and marketing. Most notably, the Chinese government brought in a law at the start of 2004 to restrict the proportion of air time television channels could fill with advertising. Hence the cost of slots immediately rose by a third, prompting many advertisers, including Nestle and Unilever, to band together and petition stations over rate hikes.
"Television has become so expensive now," says Stephen Drummond, head of the advertising agency Lowe in China. "They've always been able to claim that a quarter of the world watches Chinese television so it's got a stranglehold. Print is very fractured between one area and another and there's a strong concern over state control for some titles.
"That's why online is causing so much excitement. It is seen as independent, young and hip and it's so much more cost-effective than television because the main areas it's going to reach are the developed regions, like Shanghai and the eastern seaboard, that are so expensive to target on television."
Even though the recently published growth figures are cause for optimism, they are, of course, calculated from a low base. In 2004 only 1% of all advertising was placed online. However, Goldman Sachs's research is showing that the market will have increased ten times between 2002 and 2008 to a point where online accounts for 3% of total ad spend (itself growing at 18% per year), the same proportion as the UK at the moment.
"It is a low starting point," says Chris Reitermann, head of Ogilvy One. "But you still can't get away from the fact that it is absolutely massive growth. As the traditional media are finding that their audiences are getting older, the net has the distinct advantage that it's very young and it's where the main audience that the brands want to be attracting can be found." Indeed, the Connecting With China report estimates that 90% of the country's 100 million web surfers are under 40. Given the expense of buying a PC, or renting time at a cyber cafe, it is not surprising to find that two in three users earn or exceed the average urban wage of $50 per month.
Official surveys also show that Chinese consumers on the web are open to western brands and the marketing and advertising machines they bring with them because, after years of more hardline communist rule, they are enjoying the wider choice and better quality they bring. In a recent government survey, for example, 85% said they find foreign brands a "positive step that has forced domestic brands to improve".
Christine Straathof, director of Investor Relations at Chinese portal Netease.com, says Chinese consumers are only just getting used to advertising since China signed up to the WTO in the 1990s and opened the door to western businesses. Shops packed with luxury goods and their advertising campaigns are hence seen by the young as a sign the country is moving forwards.
"Ten years ago there was no advertising, so it's been seen as exciting and different," she says. "Of course, people have started to become a bit bored of it now because you can't move without seeing adverts everywhere. The net's not tainted with that because there's still a high level of curiosity about it. We find the most popular aspects are adverts and marketing surveys that offer a prize. It's not just the prize that's popular, it's because people are being asked about their buying habits for the first time. The Chinese are so new to being consumers, they find it fascinating."
Treating China as a unique market, as well as a huge opportunity, is advice that William Makower, owner of the digital marketing agency Panlogic, cannot stress enough. He has recently formed an online marketing joint venture with a Chinese partner and claims that western new media executives need to apply their experiences to a new arena, rather than expect China to progress along exactly the same lines as the West.
"In the UK we pushed e-commerce from day one and we're now running branding campaigns online. China is the opposite. As paying online is not always easy, or even possible, and people are worried about paying for goods they haven't seen, we're finding the big brands are starting off with branding campaigns and then expect to move in to direct response campaigns later."
· More information on the Connecting With China report can be found at www.panlogic.co.uk/china
Saturday, January 15, 2005
Demand a Raise
How to Ask for a Raise
By Max Owens, Special to Gannett
Judy has been working as a sales assistant for a large service company for four years. Each year she receives a standard raise based on cost of living increase, but she knows that others have received additional increases besides the usual annual increase.
July believes that she should receive a "real" raise based on her work performance. Discussions with her friends at work have provided some suggestions on how to approach her boss, but she just does not feel comfortable approaching him directly.
So what should she do to get a "real" raise?
Human resource managers agree that there's no single best approach to this type of problem. Discussions with employees and managers, including Bruce Goodwin, President of Stealth Staffing in Brentwood, Tennessee, provide insight and a viable framework on obtaining a raise.
Different situations and different bosses dictate that an evaluation process must take place before approaching your boss.
The following things should be considered:
-The employer's personnel culture -- what is acceptable and what is not?
-Your relationship with your boss -- are you personal friends or do you rarely talk?
-Your boss's reaction to your request -- will he be defensive, open to discussion or will he avoid the subject?
-The normal compensation for your job -- are you underpaid, and if not how can you justify an increase? Can you be easily replaced?
-What others are making at your company or agency -- how do they compare to your compensation?
-The company's current status -- has your employer given others raises recently or are they in a cutback mode?
-Your skills -- have you made any significant contributions to your employer? How recent are your accomplishments? Did your boss and others recognize them?
Once you have completed the evaluation, devise an approach that you feel comfortable with pursuing. Take note of information that will help your case and use it in discussions.
Timing is important. If the time is right, set up an appointment, or if appropriate, go on in and meet with your boss informally.
If things don't go well, or if you are not comfortable asking for a raise at this time, develop a long-term strategy. Asking for a raise should not be a one-time affair. It should be a concerted effort on your part to show your employer what you are capable of doing all the time.
Here are some things to do to develop and carry out a long-term strategy:
-Ask your boss what areas you need to improve. Use your annual evaluation if it is the most appropriate time.
-Ask what actions you should take to make improvements.
-Show your boss in day-to-day situations you are working to improve your weaknesses.
-Continue with informal follow-up conversations on your work when appropriate.
-Show you are a team player.
-Show through your actions and words you are loyal to the employer and your boss.
-Do the little things bosses look for from outstanding employees.
- Be to work and meetings on time.
- Don't take unnecessary sick days.
- Respond quickly and in a positive manner to employee and other departments' requests.
- Leave personal problems at home.
- Don't complain around the office.
There are things not to do in front of your boss when requesting a raise.
- Don't be overly aggressive.
- Don't give ultimatums.
- Never threaten to quit.
- Don't argue.
You may not always agree with your boss's performance evaluation, but always discuss it in a positive manner. Show him through actions and words you are working on making improvements. He may not be aware of what you are doing, so it is up to you to bring it to his attention.
Remember the key to success in the workplace is performance and a positive can-do attitude and image. Make sure your boss is always cognizant of your accomplishments and hard work. This is the best way to get a raise and maybe even a promotion.
Max Owens is a career consulant, writer and speaker with over 25 years of experience in employment. He has worked as an economist and executive in international trade and transportation within government and private business.
By Max Owens, Special to Gannett
Judy has been working as a sales assistant for a large service company for four years. Each year she receives a standard raise based on cost of living increase, but she knows that others have received additional increases besides the usual annual increase.
July believes that she should receive a "real" raise based on her work performance. Discussions with her friends at work have provided some suggestions on how to approach her boss, but she just does not feel comfortable approaching him directly.
So what should she do to get a "real" raise?
Human resource managers agree that there's no single best approach to this type of problem. Discussions with employees and managers, including Bruce Goodwin, President of Stealth Staffing in Brentwood, Tennessee, provide insight and a viable framework on obtaining a raise.
Different situations and different bosses dictate that an evaluation process must take place before approaching your boss.
The following things should be considered:
-The employer's personnel culture -- what is acceptable and what is not?
-Your relationship with your boss -- are you personal friends or do you rarely talk?
-Your boss's reaction to your request -- will he be defensive, open to discussion or will he avoid the subject?
-The normal compensation for your job -- are you underpaid, and if not how can you justify an increase? Can you be easily replaced?
-What others are making at your company or agency -- how do they compare to your compensation?
-The company's current status -- has your employer given others raises recently or are they in a cutback mode?
-Your skills -- have you made any significant contributions to your employer? How recent are your accomplishments? Did your boss and others recognize them?
Once you have completed the evaluation, devise an approach that you feel comfortable with pursuing. Take note of information that will help your case and use it in discussions.
Timing is important. If the time is right, set up an appointment, or if appropriate, go on in and meet with your boss informally.
If things don't go well, or if you are not comfortable asking for a raise at this time, develop a long-term strategy. Asking for a raise should not be a one-time affair. It should be a concerted effort on your part to show your employer what you are capable of doing all the time.
Here are some things to do to develop and carry out a long-term strategy:
-Ask your boss what areas you need to improve. Use your annual evaluation if it is the most appropriate time.
-Ask what actions you should take to make improvements.
-Show your boss in day-to-day situations you are working to improve your weaknesses.
-Continue with informal follow-up conversations on your work when appropriate.
-Show you are a team player.
-Show through your actions and words you are loyal to the employer and your boss.
-Do the little things bosses look for from outstanding employees.
- Be to work and meetings on time.
- Don't take unnecessary sick days.
- Respond quickly and in a positive manner to employee and other departments' requests.
- Leave personal problems at home.
- Don't complain around the office.
There are things not to do in front of your boss when requesting a raise.
- Don't be overly aggressive.
- Don't give ultimatums.
- Never threaten to quit.
- Don't argue.
You may not always agree with your boss's performance evaluation, but always discuss it in a positive manner. Show him through actions and words you are working on making improvements. He may not be aware of what you are doing, so it is up to you to bring it to his attention.
Remember the key to success in the workplace is performance and a positive can-do attitude and image. Make sure your boss is always cognizant of your accomplishments and hard work. This is the best way to get a raise and maybe even a promotion.
Max Owens is a career consulant, writer and speaker with over 25 years of experience in employment. He has worked as an economist and executive in international trade and transportation within government and private business.
Friday, January 14, 2005
Prediction: India, China will be economic giants (Part I)
Prediction: India, China will be economic giants
Fri Jan 14, 6:26 AM ET
Add to My Yahoo!
Top Stories - USATODAY.com
By John Diamond, USA TODAY
By the year 2020, China and India will be vying with the United States for global economic supremacy, the nation's top intelligence analysts predict, and al-Qaeda will have withered away - only to be replaced by smaller, more splintered but equally deadly groups of terrorists.
The National Intelligence Council issued its once-every-five-year look at the future of the globe Thursday, contrasting optimism about dramatic global economic growth with concern that the same cyberpathways fueling economic development are also hastening the spread of violent, radical Islam.
"It's going to be a very bumpy ride," council Vice Chairman David Gordon said.
Headquartered at the CIA (news - web sites) in Langley, Va., but independent of the spy agency, the council coordinates the production of intelligence reports that combine the views of all 15 of the nation's intelligence agencies. In 2002, the council, then with a different membership, concluded in a National Intelligence Estimate, now largely discredited, that Iraq (news - web sites) had weapons of mass destruction.
Rather than locking itself into a single prediction of what the world will look like in 2020, the council considered four hypothetical scenarios:
• A world dominated by Asian economic expansion;
• A world in which the United States shapes and organizes global change;
• The rise of a new Islamic Caliphate - an international Islamic authority capable of challenging Western norms and values;
• A "cycle of fear" scenario in which aggressive responses to terror threats lead to increasingly intrusive security measures, "possibly introducing an Orwellian world."
Much of the council's outlook for the world in 15 years is optimistic, however.
"What we tried to avoid is what you often get from the intelligence community, which is nothing but gloom and doom," council Chairman Robert Hutchings said.
The world economy will likely be 80% larger in 2020 than it was in 2000, and average income will be 50% higher. While the United States will retain its role as the world's dominant economy and military power, China and India, the world's two most populous countries, will see their clout grow substantially, the council predicts.
"In the same way that commentators refer to the 1900s as the 'American Century,' the 21st century may be seen as a time when Asia, led by China and India, comes into its own," the council writes in its report, Mapping the Global Future. "A combination of sustained high economic growth, expanding military capabilities, and large populations will be at the root of the expected rapid rise in economic and military power for both countries."
Along with that growth will come increasing dangers as China's and India's military power expands. The report cites the India-Pakistan conflict and tension between China and Taiwan as two areas where miscalculation could lead to costly wars. In general, the council says the risk of great-power conflict is lower than at any time in the past century, but that as China, India and other growing powers improve their weaponry, the world's most powerful nations may be increasingly tempted to engage in pre-emptive war.
Rapid growth and the ease of international travel and communication will make security threats much harder for U.S. intelligence to spot, the council warns.
The council, whose members have access to the most sensitive intelligence data, predicts that by 2020, al-Qaeda will be superseded by smaller but equally violent Islamic groups. The same information-technology boom contributing to growth in China and India will help spread radical Islamic ideology, the council warns, and "enable the terrorist threat to become increasingly decentralized."
The council deliberately timed the release of its report to come after the presidential election, and the group avoided implying approval or disapproval of any current U.S. policy. The council agrees with the Bush administration that democracy will likely spread in "key Middle Eastern countries" now under repressive regimes. But the report warns that the advance of democracy in Southeast Asia and some former Soviet states could be "partially reversed."
Fri Jan 14, 6:26 AM ET
Add to My Yahoo!
Top Stories - USATODAY.com
By John Diamond, USA TODAY
By the year 2020, China and India will be vying with the United States for global economic supremacy, the nation's top intelligence analysts predict, and al-Qaeda will have withered away - only to be replaced by smaller, more splintered but equally deadly groups of terrorists.
The National Intelligence Council issued its once-every-five-year look at the future of the globe Thursday, contrasting optimism about dramatic global economic growth with concern that the same cyberpathways fueling economic development are also hastening the spread of violent, radical Islam.
"It's going to be a very bumpy ride," council Vice Chairman David Gordon said.
Headquartered at the CIA (news - web sites) in Langley, Va., but independent of the spy agency, the council coordinates the production of intelligence reports that combine the views of all 15 of the nation's intelligence agencies. In 2002, the council, then with a different membership, concluded in a National Intelligence Estimate, now largely discredited, that Iraq (news - web sites) had weapons of mass destruction.
Rather than locking itself into a single prediction of what the world will look like in 2020, the council considered four hypothetical scenarios:
• A world dominated by Asian economic expansion;
• A world in which the United States shapes and organizes global change;
• The rise of a new Islamic Caliphate - an international Islamic authority capable of challenging Western norms and values;
• A "cycle of fear" scenario in which aggressive responses to terror threats lead to increasingly intrusive security measures, "possibly introducing an Orwellian world."
Much of the council's outlook for the world in 15 years is optimistic, however.
"What we tried to avoid is what you often get from the intelligence community, which is nothing but gloom and doom," council Chairman Robert Hutchings said.
The world economy will likely be 80% larger in 2020 than it was in 2000, and average income will be 50% higher. While the United States will retain its role as the world's dominant economy and military power, China and India, the world's two most populous countries, will see their clout grow substantially, the council predicts.
"In the same way that commentators refer to the 1900s as the 'American Century,' the 21st century may be seen as a time when Asia, led by China and India, comes into its own," the council writes in its report, Mapping the Global Future. "A combination of sustained high economic growth, expanding military capabilities, and large populations will be at the root of the expected rapid rise in economic and military power for both countries."
Along with that growth will come increasing dangers as China's and India's military power expands. The report cites the India-Pakistan conflict and tension between China and Taiwan as two areas where miscalculation could lead to costly wars. In general, the council says the risk of great-power conflict is lower than at any time in the past century, but that as China, India and other growing powers improve their weaponry, the world's most powerful nations may be increasingly tempted to engage in pre-emptive war.
Rapid growth and the ease of international travel and communication will make security threats much harder for U.S. intelligence to spot, the council warns.
The council, whose members have access to the most sensitive intelligence data, predicts that by 2020, al-Qaeda will be superseded by smaller but equally violent Islamic groups. The same information-technology boom contributing to growth in China and India will help spread radical Islamic ideology, the council warns, and "enable the terrorist threat to become increasingly decentralized."
The council deliberately timed the release of its report to come after the presidential election, and the group avoided implying approval or disapproval of any current U.S. policy. The council agrees with the Bush administration that democracy will likely spread in "key Middle Eastern countries" now under repressive regimes. But the report warns that the advance of democracy in Southeast Asia and some former Soviet states could be "partially reversed."
Thursday, January 13, 2005
Caribbean pirates, the real deal
Exploits of Caribbean pirates highlighted by museum
Wed Jan 12, 1:55 AM ET
KEY WEST, United States (AFP) - An original pirate banner and a treasure chest that belonged to Thomas Tew are the crown jewels of Pirate Soul, a new museum that opened recently in Key West and is dedicated to those hated brigands or heroes, depending on which point of view one prefers.
"Welcome to Port Royal" are words that greet those who enter the museum located in an old British Caribbean-style building.
Located in southeastern Jamaica, Port Royal was the epicenter of golden-age pirate activity that fell on the second half of the 17th century and the beginning of the 18th century and was dominated by legendary captain Henry Morgan.
Other prominent pirates that belong to that era and have been immortalized in books and movies include captain Kidd, Black Beard, as well as Roberts and Thomas Tew.
The Caribbean pirates settled in Port Royal after fleeing the famed island of Tortuga, north of Haiti, in the face of a threatened Spanish invasion.
During those turbulent years, France, Britain and Holland disputed Spain's control of the Caribbean and attacked its ships carrying fabulous treasures.
Pirate Soul was created by Pat Croce, a former millionaire owner of the Philadelphia 76ers, an NBA team, who has now become a motivational speaker and television celebrity.
"I probably started about 20 years ago, and as I started making more money and better money I started going into the biggest auction houses and I just started buying from private collectors," recalls Croce, who says he was fascinated by pirates and their adventures as a kid.
In his young days, he says, pirates were considered bandits and assassins. Now, he is certain he has managed to assemble the best collection of pirate artifacts in the world.
The passion was fed by a collection of books about pirates that Croce acquired about 30 years ago.
"There's and old Time-Life series of books, I had the Time-Life series, maybe 30 years ago," he points out. "It's called the Seafarers, and it's about the Vikings, the Tall Ships, but one of the books is called Pirates, and when you open that book the first page has this treasure chest on it."
This chest is now the most precious part of his collection. It belonged to Thomas Tew, a North American pirate who operated out of Madagascar and died in 1695 in the Red Sea, a cannon ball in his stomach.
Another jewel of the collection is a real "Jolly Roger", a classic pirate banner with a scull and crossed bones.
According to Croce, only two authentic banners of this kind exist in the world: one in his museum and one in a museum in Finland.
"I know because the representatives from Helsinki were here last week to see it," Croce assures.
Albeit small, the pirate museum cost 10 million dollars to create, an investment that has allowed the owner to equip it with the latest interactive technology.
A visit begins with a virtual tour of Port Royal and its shops that offered guns, sabres and surgical instruments for amputations at sea.
Then, there is a recreation of a tavern, a pirate ship with its deck and interior compartments where stolen treasures were kept.
The exhibit also contains original maps and documents, including a 1696 bounty offer for the head of Henry Every, a pirate who operated in the Indian Ocean.
A binnacle of the HMS Advice, which was used in 1699 to carry captain William Kidd to London for trial and subsequent execution, is also on display.
The first valuable item acquired by Croce for his collection was the book "The Bucaneers of America," the first memoir about pirates written by Dutchman Alexander Exquemelin, a surgeon who accompanied captain Morgan.
Morgan accused Exquemelin of libel, and the dispute resulted in a new and more "impartial" version of the book.
Are there artifacts that Croce still would like to acquire for his exhibit?
"I'm funding an expedition off Haiti, for Captain Morgan's ship," he responds. "It's off the island of Ile-la-Vache, in the southwestern portion of Haiti. So we're working with the government to try to get an exclusive contract, because no one has Captain Morgan's artifacts ... When you think of pirates you think of Captain Morgan".
Wed Jan 12, 1:55 AM ET
KEY WEST, United States (AFP) - An original pirate banner and a treasure chest that belonged to Thomas Tew are the crown jewels of Pirate Soul, a new museum that opened recently in Key West and is dedicated to those hated brigands or heroes, depending on which point of view one prefers.
"Welcome to Port Royal" are words that greet those who enter the museum located in an old British Caribbean-style building.
Located in southeastern Jamaica, Port Royal was the epicenter of golden-age pirate activity that fell on the second half of the 17th century and the beginning of the 18th century and was dominated by legendary captain Henry Morgan.
Other prominent pirates that belong to that era and have been immortalized in books and movies include captain Kidd, Black Beard, as well as Roberts and Thomas Tew.
The Caribbean pirates settled in Port Royal after fleeing the famed island of Tortuga, north of Haiti, in the face of a threatened Spanish invasion.
During those turbulent years, France, Britain and Holland disputed Spain's control of the Caribbean and attacked its ships carrying fabulous treasures.
Pirate Soul was created by Pat Croce, a former millionaire owner of the Philadelphia 76ers, an NBA team, who has now become a motivational speaker and television celebrity.
"I probably started about 20 years ago, and as I started making more money and better money I started going into the biggest auction houses and I just started buying from private collectors," recalls Croce, who says he was fascinated by pirates and their adventures as a kid.
In his young days, he says, pirates were considered bandits and assassins. Now, he is certain he has managed to assemble the best collection of pirate artifacts in the world.
The passion was fed by a collection of books about pirates that Croce acquired about 30 years ago.
"There's and old Time-Life series of books, I had the Time-Life series, maybe 30 years ago," he points out. "It's called the Seafarers, and it's about the Vikings, the Tall Ships, but one of the books is called Pirates, and when you open that book the first page has this treasure chest on it."
This chest is now the most precious part of his collection. It belonged to Thomas Tew, a North American pirate who operated out of Madagascar and died in 1695 in the Red Sea, a cannon ball in his stomach.
Another jewel of the collection is a real "Jolly Roger", a classic pirate banner with a scull and crossed bones.
According to Croce, only two authentic banners of this kind exist in the world: one in his museum and one in a museum in Finland.
"I know because the representatives from Helsinki were here last week to see it," Croce assures.
Albeit small, the pirate museum cost 10 million dollars to create, an investment that has allowed the owner to equip it with the latest interactive technology.
A visit begins with a virtual tour of Port Royal and its shops that offered guns, sabres and surgical instruments for amputations at sea.
Then, there is a recreation of a tavern, a pirate ship with its deck and interior compartments where stolen treasures were kept.
The exhibit also contains original maps and documents, including a 1696 bounty offer for the head of Henry Every, a pirate who operated in the Indian Ocean.
A binnacle of the HMS Advice, which was used in 1699 to carry captain William Kidd to London for trial and subsequent execution, is also on display.
The first valuable item acquired by Croce for his collection was the book "The Bucaneers of America," the first memoir about pirates written by Dutchman Alexander Exquemelin, a surgeon who accompanied captain Morgan.
Morgan accused Exquemelin of libel, and the dispute resulted in a new and more "impartial" version of the book.
Are there artifacts that Croce still would like to acquire for his exhibit?
"I'm funding an expedition off Haiti, for Captain Morgan's ship," he responds. "It's off the island of Ile-la-Vache, in the southwestern portion of Haiti. So we're working with the government to try to get an exclusive contract, because no one has Captain Morgan's artifacts ... When you think of pirates you think of Captain Morgan".
Tuesday, January 11, 2005
buckle-up those seat belts
DEREK KIEPER: Individual rights buckle under seat belt laws
September 17, 2004
I’m from the school of thought where everyone should have the right to do as they please as long as they are not infringing on the rights of other people. This comes from the political philosophy that inspired our founders and freedoms.
The duty of government is nothing more than to make sure everyone’s rights are protected and not infringed upon. Uncle Sam is not here to regulate every facet of life no matter the consequences.
No law, or set of laws, has made the government more intrusive and ridiculous than seat belt legislation. Nothing is a bigger affront to the ideas of freedom, liberty, yada, yada, yada. Whether you are a pinko liberal or a right-wing whack job, there are plenty of reasons for just saying to hell with seat belt laws.
Democrats and Republicans alike should stand together to stop these laws that are incongruous with the ideals of both parties.
For Republicans, seat belt laws represent an enormous cost to the federal government. Perhaps the amount of money we spend on safety belts pails in comparison to our defense budget, but it still seems to be a ton of money to make a choice for a person.
The government budgets $13.4 million to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration through the U.S. Department of Transportation for educating the public about safety belt laws.
Remember the “Click It or Ticket” commercials you saw on TV this summer during the tourist season? Well, the government wasted millions on those ads to make sure you knew officer Joe Friendly was going to be pulling you over for not wearing your seat belt.
The government also dispenses $25 million in grants to local law enforcement to increase the usage rate of seat belts. Even the Lincoln Police Department got a grant to help enforce the safety belt laws – lucky us.
Most ridiculous, though, is the $100 million doled out to states that have primary seat belt laws – these are the laws that say you can be pulled over for simply not wearing your seat belt.
If one is doing the math, that is more than $138 million spent on seat belt laws. But the kicker is this: It is estimated, by researchers for Congress, that only 6,100 lives are saved per year because of new seat belt wearers. Moreover, the increase in the percentage of those who wear seat belts has leveled off.
As laws become increasingly strict for seat belts, fewer people will respond positively by buckling up in response to the laws. There seems to be a die-hard group of non-wearers out there who simply do not wish to buckle up no matter what the government does. I belong to this group.
For the states’ righters of the right, this legislation represents another attempt by the federal government to step on the toes of the states. Not only does the federal government currently fund grants to increase usage, but bills are being debated that would punish those states that did not have seat belt laws, by withholding funding – usurping the right of the state to decide its own safety laws.
What frightens me more about safety belt laws is the intrusion they represent to Americans. Democrats should take notice. Choice is an important aspect of freedom – choice to do as I see fit with my body and being.
Yet, the government has decided that I do not have the choice to drive around without my seat belt. It is my choice what type of safety precautions I take. It is ridiculous to legislate actions that have no immediate effect on other individuals.
Telling me to wear my seat belt is the same as making sure I have some sort of proper education before diving into a swimming pool. If I want to dive in without knowing how to swim, that is my right. And if I want to be the jerk that flirts with death and rides around with my seat belt off, I should be able to do that, too.
If we regulate decisions that are personal and deal with safety, we very soon may be confronted with a slippery slope of legislation. What is next? Helmet laws for walkers? Kneepad regulations for office government interns? Or perhaps some sort of mandate for protective headgear for golfers will hit the law books in the future.
What should be most scary for those who love freedom and privacy is the government’s consideration of a bill to punish all states that do not have primary seat belt laws.
Officers have enough reasons to pull us over in the first place. This just allows them to pull people over and give us citizens a good shakedown whenever we want. Does anyone else see a problem?
I’m sure college students would love to be pulled over and asked by the cops why they were not wearing their safety belt, and then maybe the police can catch a whiff of something – that may or may not be there – and searching ensues.
I can see now officers not being able to see your buckled belt as they pass you at night – because it is dark – so they pull you over to make sure. Simple enough, police do not need another reason to pull anyone over; they do it enough as it is.
All those who want the choice not to click have a few options. One is exempt with a doctor’s note, or if pregnant. Or you can move to New Hampshire, the only state without a seat belt law. New Hampshire might be my bastion of choice some day, but for now I am stuck in Nebraska.
I just wish we could keep the government out of our pocketbooks and out of our personal decisions.
September 17, 2004
I’m from the school of thought where everyone should have the right to do as they please as long as they are not infringing on the rights of other people. This comes from the political philosophy that inspired our founders and freedoms.
The duty of government is nothing more than to make sure everyone’s rights are protected and not infringed upon. Uncle Sam is not here to regulate every facet of life no matter the consequences.
No law, or set of laws, has made the government more intrusive and ridiculous than seat belt legislation. Nothing is a bigger affront to the ideas of freedom, liberty, yada, yada, yada. Whether you are a pinko liberal or a right-wing whack job, there are plenty of reasons for just saying to hell with seat belt laws.
Democrats and Republicans alike should stand together to stop these laws that are incongruous with the ideals of both parties.
For Republicans, seat belt laws represent an enormous cost to the federal government. Perhaps the amount of money we spend on safety belts pails in comparison to our defense budget, but it still seems to be a ton of money to make a choice for a person.
The government budgets $13.4 million to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration through the U.S. Department of Transportation for educating the public about safety belt laws.
Remember the “Click It or Ticket” commercials you saw on TV this summer during the tourist season? Well, the government wasted millions on those ads to make sure you knew officer Joe Friendly was going to be pulling you over for not wearing your seat belt.
The government also dispenses $25 million in grants to local law enforcement to increase the usage rate of seat belts. Even the Lincoln Police Department got a grant to help enforce the safety belt laws – lucky us.
Most ridiculous, though, is the $100 million doled out to states that have primary seat belt laws – these are the laws that say you can be pulled over for simply not wearing your seat belt.
If one is doing the math, that is more than $138 million spent on seat belt laws. But the kicker is this: It is estimated, by researchers for Congress, that only 6,100 lives are saved per year because of new seat belt wearers. Moreover, the increase in the percentage of those who wear seat belts has leveled off.
As laws become increasingly strict for seat belts, fewer people will respond positively by buckling up in response to the laws. There seems to be a die-hard group of non-wearers out there who simply do not wish to buckle up no matter what the government does. I belong to this group.
For the states’ righters of the right, this legislation represents another attempt by the federal government to step on the toes of the states. Not only does the federal government currently fund grants to increase usage, but bills are being debated that would punish those states that did not have seat belt laws, by withholding funding – usurping the right of the state to decide its own safety laws.
What frightens me more about safety belt laws is the intrusion they represent to Americans. Democrats should take notice. Choice is an important aspect of freedom – choice to do as I see fit with my body and being.
Yet, the government has decided that I do not have the choice to drive around without my seat belt. It is my choice what type of safety precautions I take. It is ridiculous to legislate actions that have no immediate effect on other individuals.
Telling me to wear my seat belt is the same as making sure I have some sort of proper education before diving into a swimming pool. If I want to dive in without knowing how to swim, that is my right. And if I want to be the jerk that flirts with death and rides around with my seat belt off, I should be able to do that, too.
If we regulate decisions that are personal and deal with safety, we very soon may be confronted with a slippery slope of legislation. What is next? Helmet laws for walkers? Kneepad regulations for office government interns? Or perhaps some sort of mandate for protective headgear for golfers will hit the law books in the future.
What should be most scary for those who love freedom and privacy is the government’s consideration of a bill to punish all states that do not have primary seat belt laws.
Officers have enough reasons to pull us over in the first place. This just allows them to pull people over and give us citizens a good shakedown whenever we want. Does anyone else see a problem?
I’m sure college students would love to be pulled over and asked by the cops why they were not wearing their safety belt, and then maybe the police can catch a whiff of something – that may or may not be there – and searching ensues.
I can see now officers not being able to see your buckled belt as they pass you at night – because it is dark – so they pull you over to make sure. Simple enough, police do not need another reason to pull anyone over; they do it enough as it is.
All those who want the choice not to click have a few options. One is exempt with a doctor’s note, or if pregnant. Or you can move to New Hampshire, the only state without a seat belt law. New Hampshire might be my bastion of choice some day, but for now I am stuck in Nebraska.
I just wish we could keep the government out of our pocketbooks and out of our personal decisions.
Sunday, January 09, 2005
one man's reading list
Kill Bill, not a bad femanistic flix
a Love of Torture
Xah Lee, 2003-12
Recently i went to watch the movie Kill Bill. On the most popular movie site the Internet Movie Database imdb.com , it is rated 8.2 out of 10, climbing fastly into and among the top 100 movies of all times. The movie is about one female assasin's revenge over her colleagues, and that's about all the story line there is. The movie's popularity can be attributed simply to the realistic depiction of gruesome decapitation and mayhem by good looking female at good looking female.
Torture, watching torture, decapitation, or execution, are timeless innate pleasures of human animals. This pleasure development began when in a survival conflict, either one die or one kills his enemy. Of course, the winner who kills, passes on his genes to his offspring. Over time, those who survive tends to be those who enjoy killings. Mundanely speaking, killing and torturing is a pleasurable activity, and watching someone else suffer from safety is also pleasurable innately. Throughout centuries, human animals have killing shows. The damned is tortured or executed publicly, sometimes with the audience's participance. The method of torture and execution has also advanced with science, with much creativity and fanfare. Hanging, burning, drowning, stabbing, clubbing, burying alive, are classics. Decapitation with sword arrived the scene with sharp wares. Guillotin is of French machinery. Pillory is popular at least in the brattish America of recent century. Quartering and drawing comes with the play of horses. Disembowelment, harakiri are lurid ways that has become a cultural element in Japan. Gas champer and medical experimentation is of Germany fame. Electrocution and lethal injection is of USA ingenuity.
Torturing and execution is a spectacle before modern times. Back to BC ages, we have Amphitheater of Rome for example, where slave were fed to non-human primitive carnivore in the name of Warrior pits Beast. Or slaves are mutually pitted to death. Boiling oil or roasting are also common, both recorded in ancient China and biblical West. Chinese, ever technologically inventive of days yore, have Death Of Thousand Cuts, which is like live body sculpture, often the subject is later sprinkled with some liquid substance that can cause sharp sensations. Then there's flaying, one of the oldest practice of human animals, derived apparently from skinning other animals of practicality. In the Occidental society, they have a few ways pecular to their own. For example, they have this thing called "the wheel", which basically ties a person onto a wooden wheel, crush all the bones of the limbs and wrap them around the wheel rim, then raise the wheel high for birds. They also have small cage, so that victim is rendered immovable and hung in front of churches, till death do them dead. If you have ever experienced back pain from prolonged bad posture, you'd be able to guess the pain. The Christian religion are forerunners of inventiveness of the subject matter, famously associated with the word "Inquisition" and "Witchhunt". Of their credit is the Rack that can stretch and dislocate joints of human animal. Water cell is of origin of the Orient i think. Water cell, where a body is doused in water permanently, i suppose would rot the man but the progress or pain is hard to visualize. Primitives tribes, for example, would stick a head on a stick, also as a warning sign to neighboring human animal communities. The displaying of heads is not limited to primitives or barbarians. The need to display the head is a major contribution to decapitation, and has been imbued into the human animal culture so much that it has been recorded as a gift, in art, in myths, in plays, in movies, in children's stories.
Due to the biology, sexuality, and sociology of male and female, the weaker sex ultimatly became a dominant subject as the death victim that excite folks. Due to the male anatomy there's uniquely castration. The female anatomy creates mastectomy and various other ways dealing with their sex. Among which, is the Western invention called a "pear". It is a dilation device that can be inserted into any orifice, and upon rotation of a screw it can slowly expand to beyond the expandibility of the orifice. The non-torturing varient is called speculum.
The above things one can watch in movies of American produce. They are abundant, and getting more and more realistic and focused as technology progresses and understanding of truth progresses. (Kill Bill is a prime example) Obvious genre to pick would be horror like "Friday The Thirteenth", "Halloween", "Buffy (the vampire slayer)"... and plethora ad infinitum. These typify the torturing and murdering of youthful and beautiful females. Americans in particular love this genre.
Some Film examples:
- * sever the neck or chopping head in half is in Sleepy Hollow (1999), Kill Bill, Nagisa Oshima's taboo (1999), Underworld (2003), Serpent And The Rainbow (1988), the Last Samurai (2003), ...
- * maiming of a arm is in Kill Bill
- * Bisection of body in Sleepy Hollow (1999)
- * multi-section by laser beam, in Resident Evil (2002)
- * Bury alive is in Casino (1995), The Vanishing (1988).
- * Cutting off of fingers (in sequence), in Bound (1996), Black Rain (1989)
- * Chopping off of hands, Titus (1999)
- * slitting the throat, Titus (1999), Elizabeth (1998)
- * Burning alive in i think Elizabeth (the English queen) and others, probably Joan of Arc for sure.
- * flaying is in China's Hong gao liang (1987),and implicit in Silence of the Lambs...
- * autopsy alive is in Village Of The Damned (1995)
- * Crushed (fast or slow), in one of Jackie Chan's gongfu movie, and Star Wars
- * strangle (slowly) in Copycat (1995) and countless crime movies, e.g. god fellas, Casino (1995)
- * pussy torture in Death and the Maiden (1994), and probably The Devils (1971)
- * Eating the brain, alive, in Hannibal (2001)
- * water cell in various Vietnam war movies or some Chinese gongfu movies.
- * death and torture by gun is in countless movies.
- * Eaten alive, in Star Wars, Gladiator, 007, and lots others
- * lobatimize, in Brazil (1985)
- * frozen alive (as a sculpture) in Star Wars, Logan's Run (1976), ...
- * feeding man to a twig chewer in one of Jackie Chan's American film (rumble in brownx?)
- * crushing a man's skull slowly: in Casino (1995), Halloween, Blade Runner (1982).
- * castration in many movies
- * mastectomy in Tears of the Sun (2003)...
- * gouge a eyeball, in Kill Bill ...
- * drill a skull in ...
- * Pure pain machine, Star Trek, Princess Bride (1995)
These death ways or slow death elements are central element in attracting audiences. One internationally popular spy movie series, 007, is filled with creative deaths, from falling into a press, to falling into a propeller, to suffocation by squeeze, to suffucation of the skin by gold painting, to instantaneous petrification by liquid nitrogen, to death by compressed air and on the other hand vacuum, to laser treatment, to space shuttle exchaust treatment, to food for shark, or shock by electric eel or poison by exotic octupus.
You love it, i love it, everybody loves it. But human beings do not love it as of 2003 according to the mainstream, ranging from educational institutions to religious institutions to political institutions. Each has its own propaganda and agenda. I think the uncesorable and grass-roots internet has yet to totally undermine these beautiful, sinister facades.
Wouldn't you love to see your enemy sitting on a pole, helpless and suffering?
related essays
* the glorification of females with limblessness
* the Rise of Feminism
* body and mind modification
* Dolls of Age
* Barbie
Page created: 2003-12
© copyright 2003 by Xah Lee. (xah@xahlee.org) (excluding mirrored pages or images.)
Friday, January 07, 2005
Cheap wages of Chinese laborers
With Japan aging, Toyota to staff factories with robots
Thu Jan 6, 1:36 AM ET Top Stories - AFP
TOKYO (AFP) - Toyota Motor will introduce robots which can work as well or better than humans at all 12 of its factories in Japan to cut costs and deal with a looming labor shortage as the country ages, according to a press report.
The robots would be able to carry out multiple tasks simultaneously with their two arms, achieving efficiency unseen in human workers and matching the cheap wages of Chinese laborers, the Nihon Keizai Shimbun said.
Japan's top automaker currently uses 3,000 to 4,000 less advanced robots at its domestic factories but their use has been confined mostly to welding, painting and other potentially hazardous tasks, the economic daily said.
The new robots would also be used in finishing work, such as installation of seats and car interior fixtures, that have been too complex for conventional robots up to now, the daily said.
Toyota plans to become the first in the automobile industry to use the advanced robots in all production processes in the future, it said without giving the timeframe.
"We aim to reduce production costs to the levels in China," the daily quoted an unnamed company official as saying.
Toyota also took into account the looming labor shortage in Japan due to a declining birthrate, the report said.
Japan's population is forecast to peak by 2006 with the average number of children a woman has during her lifetime standing at a post-World War II low of 1.29, according to the latest government data.
Japan has so far rejected calls to open up to large numbers of unskilled immigrants, fearing the effects on the country's social framework.
Toyota has been increasingly turning to robot development and plans to welcome visitors to its pavillion at the World Expo in Japan in March with humanoid robots jamming in a brass ensemble and performing hip-hop.
Thu Jan 6, 1:36 AM ET Top Stories - AFP
TOKYO (AFP) - Toyota Motor will introduce robots which can work as well or better than humans at all 12 of its factories in Japan to cut costs and deal with a looming labor shortage as the country ages, according to a press report.
The robots would be able to carry out multiple tasks simultaneously with their two arms, achieving efficiency unseen in human workers and matching the cheap wages of Chinese laborers, the Nihon Keizai Shimbun said.
Japan's top automaker currently uses 3,000 to 4,000 less advanced robots at its domestic factories but their use has been confined mostly to welding, painting and other potentially hazardous tasks, the economic daily said.
The new robots would also be used in finishing work, such as installation of seats and car interior fixtures, that have been too complex for conventional robots up to now, the daily said.
Toyota plans to become the first in the automobile industry to use the advanced robots in all production processes in the future, it said without giving the timeframe.
"We aim to reduce production costs to the levels in China," the daily quoted an unnamed company official as saying.
Toyota also took into account the looming labor shortage in Japan due to a declining birthrate, the report said.
Japan's population is forecast to peak by 2006 with the average number of children a woman has during her lifetime standing at a post-World War II low of 1.29, according to the latest government data.
Japan has so far rejected calls to open up to large numbers of unskilled immigrants, fearing the effects on the country's social framework.
Toyota has been increasingly turning to robot development and plans to welcome visitors to its pavillion at the World Expo in Japan in March with humanoid robots jamming in a brass ensemble and performing hip-hop.
Tuesday, January 04, 2005
Will Dow record of 11,722.98 fall in 2005
Will Dow record of 11,722.98 fall in 2005
Mon Jan 3, 6:32 AM ET
By Adam Shell, USA TODAY
It might be hard to believe, but just 27 months after the nation's oldest and most recognizable stock barometer set a bear market low of 7286, the Dow is within striking distance of taking out its high notched at the height of the stock market bubble.
To make history, the Dow, which ended 2004 at 10,783, must climb an additional 940 points, or 8.7%.
If the Dow recoups the rest of its 37.8% bear market loss sometime in 2005 - an accomplishment most pundits would have viewed as a long shot a few years back - it would be a huge psychological boost for investors scarred by the worst decline since the 1929 stock market crash ushered in the Great Depression.
"A new high for the Dow would have huge significance," says Neil Hennessy, president of the Hennessy Funds. Indeed, scaling a new peak in the face of war, terrorism, record-high oil prices, rising interest rates, a weakening dollar and the most scandalous period in memory for U.S. companies would serve as the latest proof of the market's remarkable resiliency and uncanny ability to overcome stubborn headwinds.
Granted, investors who had the bulk of their money invested in the technology-packed Nasdaq composite, which is still 57% below its high, or the Standard & Poor's 500 index, 21% off its peak, will have to wait longer to get back to even.
Reaching a new high won't be a slam-dunk even for the Dow, especially in a year when most Wall Street gurus expect moderate gains for stocks. But don't count out the nearly 109-year-old Dow just yet.
There are plenty of people on Wall Street who say the blue-chip barometer, which gained 3.1% in 2004 despite blowups in stocks such as pharmaceutical giant Merck and insurer American International Group, has the pedigree to do it:
• Abby Joseph Cohen, the top strategist at Goldman Sachs and the most influential Wall Street bull in the '90s, pegs the Dow at 11,800 by year-end 2005.
• Hennessy, the mutual fund manager who made headlines in late 2003 when he predicted the Dow would reach 15,000 by year-end 2008, is looking for Dow 12,100 in 2005.
• Chuck Carlson, contributing editor of the Dow Theory Forecasts, says the Dow has a "viable" shot at setting a new high.
Of course, there are any number of roadblocks that could derail the 30-stock Dow from its hoped-for date with history, less optimistic forecasters say.
Gains might peter out in 2005 amid the less-than-bullish equation of rising interest rates and slowing earnings growth. A terrorist strike on U.S. soil could upset markets, as would a major, unexpected setback in Iraq (news - web sites) or a 1970's-style oil shock. The dollar, which was in free fall most of last year, could lose even more of its value in the months ahead, which could spark a faster-than-expected rise in U.S. interest rates. And the USA's mushrooming budget and trade deficits could spook foreign investors enough to prompt them to sell their investments in U.S. stocks and bonds.
There are other potential negatives. The bull market is entering its third year and is just three months shy of the median length of 2.6 years for bulls over the past 100 years. What's more, gains normally shrink as bull markets age. The first year of a presidential term is often a rocky one for the stock market. History has also shown that the closer an index gets to a new high, the greater the nervousness and cautiousness on the part of investors.
"From Dow 10,000, the first 900-point gain is much easier than the second 900 points will be," says James Stack, president of InvesTech Research.
No question, a few key things would need to fall into place if the Dow is to become the first of the three major U.S. stock indexes to attain fresh, post-bubble highs. Potential catalysts include:
•Healthier drug stocks. The Vioxx recall at Merck and the subsequent fallout from Pfizer's admission that painkiller Celebrex could cause a greater risk of heart attacks resulted in sharp stock declines for both drugmakers, which weighed heavily on the Dow. The companies both made Morningstar's Top 10 list of "Value Destroyers," losing more than $100 billion in market capitalization combined in 2004.
"We need to see a rebound in these drug components that lost favor," Stack says.
Many of Wall Street's top strategists, including Tobias Levkovich of Smith Barney, Brian Belski of Piper Jaffray and Abhijit Chakrabortti of J.P. Morgan, expect beaten-down shares of big pharmaceutical companies to rebound in 2005. Pfizer is one of J.P. Morgan's top picks.
One view on Wall Street is that Merck and Pfizer have been hit so hard - Merck fell 30.4% in 2004; Pfizer lost 23.9% - that it's unlikely they'll fall much further. The odds favor these stocks rising over the next 12 months. The dissenting view is that the two stocks will remain dead money for a while as painkiller problems persist.
•A more even tech revival. The Dow needs a good performance from all of its Big Four tech components, Microsoft, Intel, Hewlett-Packard and IBM, Carlson says. Computer services powerhouse IBM had a decent performance in 2004, rising 6.4%. Counting a $3 a share special dividend, Microsoft investors gained 8.5%. But chipmaker Intel cratered 27.0%, and Hewlett-Packard fell 8.7%. A continued rise in IBM is particularly important because it trades for almost $100 a share. The Dow is a price-weighted index, so higher-priced stocks have a larger impact on its performance. "What really helps is IBM," Carlson says.
•Resurgence of battered blue chips. Dow icons such as General Motors and Coca-Cola must bounce back from off years.
Disappointing sales at GM in 2004 because of stiff competition from Japanese competitors reduced the automaker's market share to a record low of 24.8% and knocked its stock down 25.0%.
Coke shares declined 18.0%. Business was hurt by a backlash against U.S. foreign policy, by the SARS (news - web sites) outbreak in Asia and by solid execution from rival PepsiCo. But Morningstar analyst Matthew Reilly has a price target of $54 on the stock, which is 30% higher than its current level.
•Scandal stocks must rebound. It's not only Merck and Pfizer that must regain favor with investors. AIG must also overcome a battered image caused by its ties to the insurance industry's bid-rigging scandal. Don't rule out a rebound, Hennessy says. "These companies have had disasters, but they are resilient. As long as they stabilize, the Dow is in good shape."
•Old-line stalwarts must keep rising. China's white-hot growth translated into big gains for industrial companies in the Dow that export heavy machinery, chemicals and commodities to the world's biggest economic engine in 2004. Stocks such as Caterpillar, up 17.5% last year; DuPont, up 6.9%; and Honeywell, up 5.9%, must continue to chug along.
The global reach of these companies should help if the dollar's weakness continues because it makes U.S. products less expensive abroad. However, prices of these stocks have already made big gains, so they're more expensive relative to earnings than they once were.
Whether the Dow can break out to new highs in 2005 could depend on how the broader market fares, because a market that is trending higher boosts confidence.
Hersh Cohen, chief investment officer for Citigroup Asset Management, says stocks will continue to climb the proverbial wall of worry. Despite two consecutive years of gains, skepticism still abounds. "No one wants to believe it," he says, referring to the rally. There are times to be defensive, he says. But now is not one of those times. Stocks are not in a mania, earnings are not slowing enough to result in a recession, and interest rates are nowhere near high enough to threaten stocks. As a result, the market is more likely to enjoy an "upside" surprise rather than a decline, Cohen says.
Stocks should also benefit from President Bush (news - web sites)'s re-election and the continuation of favorable tax treatment for dividends and capital gains, says Brian Rogers, chief investment officer at T. Rowe Price. "The dividend winds and tax-code winds are at our backs, not in our faces."
He says many of the large-company stocks in the Dow will also benefit as assets shift away from smaller stocks into bigger stocks. "All of a sudden, stocks like Johnson & Johnson will look a lot better," he says.
The laggard Dow may turn out to be the contrarian play of 2005.
Last year was a unique one for the Dow, says Carlson of Dow Theory Forecasts. "Five of the 30 stocks blew up, showing the vulnerability of a concentrated index of just 30 stocks. Now, there is certainly an underdog feel to the Dow."
And on Wall Street, just when you think a stock, sector or index is dead, it often springs back to life.
Mon Jan 3, 6:32 AM ET
By Adam Shell, USA TODAY
It might be hard to believe, but just 27 months after the nation's oldest and most recognizable stock barometer set a bear market low of 7286, the Dow is within striking distance of taking out its high notched at the height of the stock market bubble.
To make history, the Dow, which ended 2004 at 10,783, must climb an additional 940 points, or 8.7%.
If the Dow recoups the rest of its 37.8% bear market loss sometime in 2005 - an accomplishment most pundits would have viewed as a long shot a few years back - it would be a huge psychological boost for investors scarred by the worst decline since the 1929 stock market crash ushered in the Great Depression.
"A new high for the Dow would have huge significance," says Neil Hennessy, president of the Hennessy Funds. Indeed, scaling a new peak in the face of war, terrorism, record-high oil prices, rising interest rates, a weakening dollar and the most scandalous period in memory for U.S. companies would serve as the latest proof of the market's remarkable resiliency and uncanny ability to overcome stubborn headwinds.
Granted, investors who had the bulk of their money invested in the technology-packed Nasdaq composite, which is still 57% below its high, or the Standard & Poor's 500 index, 21% off its peak, will have to wait longer to get back to even.
Reaching a new high won't be a slam-dunk even for the Dow, especially in a year when most Wall Street gurus expect moderate gains for stocks. But don't count out the nearly 109-year-old Dow just yet.
There are plenty of people on Wall Street who say the blue-chip barometer, which gained 3.1% in 2004 despite blowups in stocks such as pharmaceutical giant Merck and insurer American International Group, has the pedigree to do it:
• Abby Joseph Cohen, the top strategist at Goldman Sachs and the most influential Wall Street bull in the '90s, pegs the Dow at 11,800 by year-end 2005.
• Hennessy, the mutual fund manager who made headlines in late 2003 when he predicted the Dow would reach 15,000 by year-end 2008, is looking for Dow 12,100 in 2005.
• Chuck Carlson, contributing editor of the Dow Theory Forecasts, says the Dow has a "viable" shot at setting a new high.
Of course, there are any number of roadblocks that could derail the 30-stock Dow from its hoped-for date with history, less optimistic forecasters say.
Gains might peter out in 2005 amid the less-than-bullish equation of rising interest rates and slowing earnings growth. A terrorist strike on U.S. soil could upset markets, as would a major, unexpected setback in Iraq (news - web sites) or a 1970's-style oil shock. The dollar, which was in free fall most of last year, could lose even more of its value in the months ahead, which could spark a faster-than-expected rise in U.S. interest rates. And the USA's mushrooming budget and trade deficits could spook foreign investors enough to prompt them to sell their investments in U.S. stocks and bonds.
There are other potential negatives. The bull market is entering its third year and is just three months shy of the median length of 2.6 years for bulls over the past 100 years. What's more, gains normally shrink as bull markets age. The first year of a presidential term is often a rocky one for the stock market. History has also shown that the closer an index gets to a new high, the greater the nervousness and cautiousness on the part of investors.
"From Dow 10,000, the first 900-point gain is much easier than the second 900 points will be," says James Stack, president of InvesTech Research.
No question, a few key things would need to fall into place if the Dow is to become the first of the three major U.S. stock indexes to attain fresh, post-bubble highs. Potential catalysts include:
•Healthier drug stocks. The Vioxx recall at Merck and the subsequent fallout from Pfizer's admission that painkiller Celebrex could cause a greater risk of heart attacks resulted in sharp stock declines for both drugmakers, which weighed heavily on the Dow. The companies both made Morningstar's Top 10 list of "Value Destroyers," losing more than $100 billion in market capitalization combined in 2004.
"We need to see a rebound in these drug components that lost favor," Stack says.
Many of Wall Street's top strategists, including Tobias Levkovich of Smith Barney, Brian Belski of Piper Jaffray and Abhijit Chakrabortti of J.P. Morgan, expect beaten-down shares of big pharmaceutical companies to rebound in 2005. Pfizer is one of J.P. Morgan's top picks.
One view on Wall Street is that Merck and Pfizer have been hit so hard - Merck fell 30.4% in 2004; Pfizer lost 23.9% - that it's unlikely they'll fall much further. The odds favor these stocks rising over the next 12 months. The dissenting view is that the two stocks will remain dead money for a while as painkiller problems persist.
•A more even tech revival. The Dow needs a good performance from all of its Big Four tech components, Microsoft, Intel, Hewlett-Packard and IBM, Carlson says. Computer services powerhouse IBM had a decent performance in 2004, rising 6.4%. Counting a $3 a share special dividend, Microsoft investors gained 8.5%. But chipmaker Intel cratered 27.0%, and Hewlett-Packard fell 8.7%. A continued rise in IBM is particularly important because it trades for almost $100 a share. The Dow is a price-weighted index, so higher-priced stocks have a larger impact on its performance. "What really helps is IBM," Carlson says.
•Resurgence of battered blue chips. Dow icons such as General Motors and Coca-Cola must bounce back from off years.
Disappointing sales at GM in 2004 because of stiff competition from Japanese competitors reduced the automaker's market share to a record low of 24.8% and knocked its stock down 25.0%.
Coke shares declined 18.0%. Business was hurt by a backlash against U.S. foreign policy, by the SARS (news - web sites) outbreak in Asia and by solid execution from rival PepsiCo. But Morningstar analyst Matthew Reilly has a price target of $54 on the stock, which is 30% higher than its current level.
•Scandal stocks must rebound. It's not only Merck and Pfizer that must regain favor with investors. AIG must also overcome a battered image caused by its ties to the insurance industry's bid-rigging scandal. Don't rule out a rebound, Hennessy says. "These companies have had disasters, but they are resilient. As long as they stabilize, the Dow is in good shape."
•Old-line stalwarts must keep rising. China's white-hot growth translated into big gains for industrial companies in the Dow that export heavy machinery, chemicals and commodities to the world's biggest economic engine in 2004. Stocks such as Caterpillar, up 17.5% last year; DuPont, up 6.9%; and Honeywell, up 5.9%, must continue to chug along.
The global reach of these companies should help if the dollar's weakness continues because it makes U.S. products less expensive abroad. However, prices of these stocks have already made big gains, so they're more expensive relative to earnings than they once were.
Whether the Dow can break out to new highs in 2005 could depend on how the broader market fares, because a market that is trending higher boosts confidence.
Hersh Cohen, chief investment officer for Citigroup Asset Management, says stocks will continue to climb the proverbial wall of worry. Despite two consecutive years of gains, skepticism still abounds. "No one wants to believe it," he says, referring to the rally. There are times to be defensive, he says. But now is not one of those times. Stocks are not in a mania, earnings are not slowing enough to result in a recession, and interest rates are nowhere near high enough to threaten stocks. As a result, the market is more likely to enjoy an "upside" surprise rather than a decline, Cohen says.
Stocks should also benefit from President Bush (news - web sites)'s re-election and the continuation of favorable tax treatment for dividends and capital gains, says Brian Rogers, chief investment officer at T. Rowe Price. "The dividend winds and tax-code winds are at our backs, not in our faces."
He says many of the large-company stocks in the Dow will also benefit as assets shift away from smaller stocks into bigger stocks. "All of a sudden, stocks like Johnson & Johnson will look a lot better," he says.
The laggard Dow may turn out to be the contrarian play of 2005.
Last year was a unique one for the Dow, says Carlson of Dow Theory Forecasts. "Five of the 30 stocks blew up, showing the vulnerability of a concentrated index of just 30 stocks. Now, there is certainly an underdog feel to the Dow."
And on Wall Street, just when you think a stock, sector or index is dead, it often springs back to life.
Saturday, January 01, 2005
toast to a drunkard
Magazine Toasts Unabashed Alcoholism
Sat Jan 1, 7:55 AM ET
By David Kelly Times Staff Writer
DENVER — Every hour is happy hour at Modern Drunkard magazine.
It's barely 3 p.m., and Frank Kelly Rich, who edits the bimonthly homage to getting soused, is draining his gin and tonic and eyeing a whiskey bottle on the top shelf. Moments later, he's drinking that as well.
A huge bar dominates the office, the fridge is stocked with beer and the handful of employees is invited to drink. Smoking is OK too.
As the booze flows, Rich, 41, extols the virtues of alcohol, calling it a boon to mankind while claiming that drunks are an "oppressed minority."
Nothing can knock him off message.
What about cirrhosis of the liver? "There's a tidal wave of new evidence that drinking is actually good for you," he insists.
What of alcohol's effect on families? "I think drinking is conducive to a happy family life," he counters.
Rich lights a cigarette and smiles as the ice melts in his cocktail. His downtown Denver office is decorated with posters of Dean Martin, Jackie Gleason and other famous tipplers of yesteryear.
"The most accomplished people have been drinkers. Hemingway was a great literary drunk, and I think a lot of teetotalers would trade their lives for his in a second," he said. "Alcohol is the great socializer. Can you imagine a world without it? Well, I guess you can — it's called the Middle East."
Modern Drunkard is an irreverent, 50,000-circulation glossy magazine full of pinup girls and macho men alongside articles on drinking, getting drunk and hiding a hangover from "the Man," i.e., the boss. It also includes serious examinations of liquor, biographies of history's great drunks and selected odes to the drinking life. The magazine sells for $4.50 in bookstores across the U.S. and Europe, and free copies are available in many bars.
A recent issue included the feature "You know you're a drunkard when … (you fall down a well and send Lassie to the liquor store)"; a dictionary of bar slang: "pal tax n. — the act of covertly ordering a drink on a friend's tab"; and a story titled "Booze is My Copilot," on how drinking cured one man's fear of flying.
Rich revels in the retrograde excess of his magazine. The way he sees it, reality is so awful, why not get drunk?
"People always say, 'If you drink, your problems will still be there in the morning,' " he said. "That's like telling a guy going to the Bahamas that in a week, he'll be right back where he started. Well, for a week, he'll be gone."
Those in the business of battling alcohol abuse find such sentiments appalling.
"Drinking at the level they promote and saying it's good for you is baloney," said Sam Zakhari of the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism in Bethesda, Md. "Some people benefit from moderate drinking — one drink a day for a woman, two for a man — but you can achieve the same result through good nutrition and exercise."
Rich shrugs off the naysayers and routinely savages groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving, whom he sees as neo-prohibitionist killjoys secretly bent on banning alcohol.
"We don't advocate drinking and driving; that's a dumb thing to do," he said. "But they have gone too far."
MADD National President Wendy Hamilton says her group is anti-drunk driving, not anti-alcohol. She calls Modern Drunkard "just plain stupid."
"We don't preach abstinence from alcohol unless you are under 21," said Hamilton, whose sister and nephew were killed by a drunk driver. "If our role in life is to make a better world, then I cannot figure out how this magazine makes the world a better place to live."
Raised in Las Vegas, where his dad drove a cab, Rich says he started drinking while in the Army. After being discharged, he headed to Europe — seeking a romantic life of writing and drinking. He spent four years in pub-friendly London. "If you want to learn about a new culture," he advised, "don't go to museums, go to the bars."
Rich returned to the United States and wrote "Jake Strait Bogeyman." He lived out of his Pinto in Los Angeles, trying to sell the futuristic action novel.
"When you're homeless under foreign skies, you feel like Hemingway; when you're homeless in your own country, you feel like a loser," he said.
The book spawned a four-part series and eventually earned him $150,000. He took the money and drove around the country before ending up in Denver eight years ago.
"I immediately recognized it as a great drinking town," he said.
In fact, Men's Health magazine this year listed the city as the most "intoxicated" in the country — based on numbers of alcohol-related accidents and deaths due to alcoholism. Denver Mayor John W. Hickenlooper owns seven bars, and Republican Pete Coors, whose beer factory sprawls just outside the city, made an unsuccessful run for the Senate in November.
Rich wanted to start a magazine, and he wanted it to be about the subject he knew best.
"The magazine was going to be about drinking and only about drinking — and not just drinking, but heavy drinking," he said, pouring another whiskey. "I was going to distill every bit of alcoholic knowledge in the world and put it in one magazine."
He published his first edition in 1996 for about $500, inserting fake ads from beer companies to make it look professional. He paid alcoholics living on the streets $20 for boozing advice.
With the magazine now making money thanks to copious bar and club ads, he's hired five staffers and 20 part-time contributors. Rich is also writing "The Modern Drunkard Manifesto" coming out in November, published by Riverhead Books. A Modern Drunkard convention is planned for Denver in May.
His wife Christa, 27, is a bartender who helps edit the magazine. They have no children.
"When you find your calling, you have to go with it," she said of her husband's career. "I get e-mails all the time from people in Alcoholics Anonymous who say they want a subscription because it lets them remember what life was like when they drank."
Rich freely admits he's an alcoholic and frequently blacks out. Regular exercise and vitamins, he said, keep him fit.
"I drink about eight drinks a day and maybe 30 on a heavy day," he said cheerfully. "But as long as I remain healthy and happy, I have no intention of slowing down. I mean, when you have something good going, you stick with it, right?"
Sat Jan 1, 7:55 AM ET
By David Kelly Times Staff Writer
DENVER — Every hour is happy hour at Modern Drunkard magazine.
It's barely 3 p.m., and Frank Kelly Rich, who edits the bimonthly homage to getting soused, is draining his gin and tonic and eyeing a whiskey bottle on the top shelf. Moments later, he's drinking that as well.
A huge bar dominates the office, the fridge is stocked with beer and the handful of employees is invited to drink. Smoking is OK too.
As the booze flows, Rich, 41, extols the virtues of alcohol, calling it a boon to mankind while claiming that drunks are an "oppressed minority."
Nothing can knock him off message.
What about cirrhosis of the liver? "There's a tidal wave of new evidence that drinking is actually good for you," he insists.
What of alcohol's effect on families? "I think drinking is conducive to a happy family life," he counters.
Rich lights a cigarette and smiles as the ice melts in his cocktail. His downtown Denver office is decorated with posters of Dean Martin, Jackie Gleason and other famous tipplers of yesteryear.
"The most accomplished people have been drinkers. Hemingway was a great literary drunk, and I think a lot of teetotalers would trade their lives for his in a second," he said. "Alcohol is the great socializer. Can you imagine a world without it? Well, I guess you can — it's called the Middle East."
Modern Drunkard is an irreverent, 50,000-circulation glossy magazine full of pinup girls and macho men alongside articles on drinking, getting drunk and hiding a hangover from "the Man," i.e., the boss. It also includes serious examinations of liquor, biographies of history's great drunks and selected odes to the drinking life. The magazine sells for $4.50 in bookstores across the U.S. and Europe, and free copies are available in many bars.
A recent issue included the feature "You know you're a drunkard when … (you fall down a well and send Lassie to the liquor store)"; a dictionary of bar slang: "pal tax n. — the act of covertly ordering a drink on a friend's tab"; and a story titled "Booze is My Copilot," on how drinking cured one man's fear of flying.
Rich revels in the retrograde excess of his magazine. The way he sees it, reality is so awful, why not get drunk?
"People always say, 'If you drink, your problems will still be there in the morning,' " he said. "That's like telling a guy going to the Bahamas that in a week, he'll be right back where he started. Well, for a week, he'll be gone."
Those in the business of battling alcohol abuse find such sentiments appalling.
"Drinking at the level they promote and saying it's good for you is baloney," said Sam Zakhari of the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism in Bethesda, Md. "Some people benefit from moderate drinking — one drink a day for a woman, two for a man — but you can achieve the same result through good nutrition and exercise."
Rich shrugs off the naysayers and routinely savages groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving, whom he sees as neo-prohibitionist killjoys secretly bent on banning alcohol.
"We don't advocate drinking and driving; that's a dumb thing to do," he said. "But they have gone too far."
MADD National President Wendy Hamilton says her group is anti-drunk driving, not anti-alcohol. She calls Modern Drunkard "just plain stupid."
"We don't preach abstinence from alcohol unless you are under 21," said Hamilton, whose sister and nephew were killed by a drunk driver. "If our role in life is to make a better world, then I cannot figure out how this magazine makes the world a better place to live."
Raised in Las Vegas, where his dad drove a cab, Rich says he started drinking while in the Army. After being discharged, he headed to Europe — seeking a romantic life of writing and drinking. He spent four years in pub-friendly London. "If you want to learn about a new culture," he advised, "don't go to museums, go to the bars."
Rich returned to the United States and wrote "Jake Strait Bogeyman." He lived out of his Pinto in Los Angeles, trying to sell the futuristic action novel.
"When you're homeless under foreign skies, you feel like Hemingway; when you're homeless in your own country, you feel like a loser," he said.
The book spawned a four-part series and eventually earned him $150,000. He took the money and drove around the country before ending up in Denver eight years ago.
"I immediately recognized it as a great drinking town," he said.
In fact, Men's Health magazine this year listed the city as the most "intoxicated" in the country — based on numbers of alcohol-related accidents and deaths due to alcoholism. Denver Mayor John W. Hickenlooper owns seven bars, and Republican Pete Coors, whose beer factory sprawls just outside the city, made an unsuccessful run for the Senate in November.
Rich wanted to start a magazine, and he wanted it to be about the subject he knew best.
"The magazine was going to be about drinking and only about drinking — and not just drinking, but heavy drinking," he said, pouring another whiskey. "I was going to distill every bit of alcoholic knowledge in the world and put it in one magazine."
He published his first edition in 1996 for about $500, inserting fake ads from beer companies to make it look professional. He paid alcoholics living on the streets $20 for boozing advice.
With the magazine now making money thanks to copious bar and club ads, he's hired five staffers and 20 part-time contributors. Rich is also writing "The Modern Drunkard Manifesto" coming out in November, published by Riverhead Books. A Modern Drunkard convention is planned for Denver in May.
His wife Christa, 27, is a bartender who helps edit the magazine. They have no children.
"When you find your calling, you have to go with it," she said of her husband's career. "I get e-mails all the time from people in Alcoholics Anonymous who say they want a subscription because it lets them remember what life was like when they drank."
Rich freely admits he's an alcoholic and frequently blacks out. Regular exercise and vitamins, he said, keep him fit.
"I drink about eight drinks a day and maybe 30 on a heavy day," he said cheerfully. "But as long as I remain healthy and happy, I have no intention of slowing down. I mean, when you have something good going, you stick with it, right?"
