By Hibah Yousuf CNNMoney
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- House lawmakers on Thursday approved a $6 billion measure that aims to provide rebates to homeowners who invest in energy efficiency improvements -- but not without a fight from Republicans.
The bill, officially known as the Home Star Energy Retrofit Act but better known as "cash for caulkers," has been touted by President Obama since December as one of the signature pieces of his administration's larger job-creation strategy.
The act "is a common-sense bill that will create jobs, save consumers money, and strengthen our economy," President Obama said after the House passed the measure. "We have workers eager to do new installations and renovations, and factories ready to produce new energy-efficient building supplies."
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., estimates that the legislation will create nearly 168,000 jobs in construction, manufacturing, and retail.
The House vote of 246-161 went through with support from the Democrats and overwhelming rejection from the Republicans. The vote simply authorizes the creation of the program; it does not appropriate the funds needed to run it.
The Senate is expected to take up the legislation this summer and determine how to pay for the program, which is likely to be controversial.
How will homeowners cash in?
The bill would fund rebates of as much as 50%, up to $3,000, for energy-saving efforts such as insulation improvements and the replacement of windows, doors, heating and cooling systems. The installations will have to be completed by qualified contractors.
Homeowners that choose to make improvements on their own will receive rebates of up to 50%, to a maximum of $250, on air sealing and insulation products.
The bill also includes reimbursements for those who conduct comprehensive energy audits and reduce their home's total consumption. Homeowners who trim their energy usage by at least 20% can receive up to $8,000 in rebates.
Pelosi said that the bill will cut energy bills by up to $500 a year for some 3 million families.
The bill will also distribute $600 million to states for grants to help mobile homeowners replace pre-1976 models with energy-efficient ones.
Political wrangling
Through a motion to recommit, a political maneuver used by lawmakers to send a bill back to the committee that drafted it, House Republicans added their own conditions to the legislation.
They incorporated language that forbids the program's financing from expanding the federal deficit and bars the bill's funds from being allocated to contractors who have sex offenders as employees.
The Republican stipulations also disqualify from the program homeowners with an annual income of more than $250,000 from the program and require that the rebates be sent directly to homeowners instead of being provided through stores, contractors or other parties.
House Energy and Commerce committee Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., accepted the changes so that the bill can move forward for a vote in the Senate.
Pelosi called the Republican changes a "poison pill" and said House members would "work with the Senate to fix this flawed language."
vineri, 7 mai 2010
AIG Posts $1.45 Billion Profit as Writedowns Narrow (Update1)
By Hugh Son Bloomberg
May 7 (Bloomberg) -- American International Group Inc., the insurer rescued by the U.S., posted profit for the third time in the past four quarters as writedowns narrowed and investment income climbed. The stock advanced in early trading.
First-quarter net income of $1.45 billion, or $2.16 a share, compares with a loss of $4.35 billion, or $39.67 a year earlier, AIG said today in a statement. Profit excluding some investment results was $1.21 a share, beating the average 48- cent estimate of two analysts surveyed by Bloomberg. AIG opted for the time in four quarters against extending the period in which it is committed to supporting plane-leasing and consumer- lending units, citing their renewed access to private funding.
Chief Executive Officer Robert Benmosche has said AIG is “now on a path” to repaying loans in the insurer’s $182.3 billion rescue after announcing deals in March to sell two life divisions for about $51 billion. Results have stabilized at remaining insurance units and the company may recover by year- end from junk status assigned to its stand-alone credit, Standard & Poor’s said last month.
“The underlying fundamentals are improving,” said Bill Bergman, an analyst at Morningstar Inc. in Chicago. “There’s a little more confidence in their public message, which is worth respecting.”
LBO, Hedge Funds
Writedowns on securities narrowed to $309 million from about $3.7 billion a year earlier, the company said in a regulatory filing. Investment income surged as alternative assets, including private-equity and hedge-fund investments generated $384 million, compared with a loss of about $1 billion a year earlier.
The insurer advanced 3.4 percent to $38 at 7:35 a.m. in New York. AIG climbed about 23 percent this year through yesterday on the New York Stock Exchange, rewarding investors betting on a rebound, including Bruce Berkowitz, who runs Fairholme Capital Management. Fairholme owned about 15 million shares as of March 31, the biggest stake after the U.S. government. The insurer slipped 4.5 percent in 2009 and plunged 97 percent in 2008.
AIG said today it “intends to provide support” to plane lessor International Lease Finance Corp. and consumer lender American General Finance Corp. through Feb. 28, 2011, the same date the company gave in its annual report 10 weeks ago. “At the current time AIG believes that any further extension of such support will not be necessary,” the insurer said in the regulatory filing.
Bailed Out
AIG, once the world’s largest insurer by assets, needed a bailout in 2008 after losses from soured housing bets sapped the parent company of cash. The rescue includes a $60 billion Federal Reserve credit line, a Treasury Department investment of as much as $69.8 billion and up to $52.5 billion to buy mortgage-linked assets owned or backed by the company.
Treasury is considering a plan to convert AIG preferred shares into common stock and sell the holdings on the open market over two years, a person with knowledge of talks with the insurer said last month. If AIG consents to the strategy and there is sufficient investor demand, the sales could be announced as early as the fourth quarter, the person said.
Donald H. Layton, the former CEO of E*Trade Financial Corp., and Ronald A. Rittenmeyer, the retired chairman and CEO of Electronic Data Systems Corp., were named to AIG’s board last month. Treasury selected the directors after AIG missed four dividend payments. Henry Miller, co-founder of investment bank Miller Buckfire & Co., was elected to the board after Dennis Dammerman resigned for health reasons.
AIG is under the jurisdiction of Kenneth Feinberg, the Obama administration’s special master for executive compensation, who instituted a $500,000 salary cap for most managers. Feinberg may have put AIG at a “competitive disadvantage,” by shifting more executive compensation to stock rather than cash, the insurer said last month in a regulatory filing.
May 7 (Bloomberg) -- American International Group Inc., the insurer rescued by the U.S., posted profit for the third time in the past four quarters as writedowns narrowed and investment income climbed. The stock advanced in early trading.
First-quarter net income of $1.45 billion, or $2.16 a share, compares with a loss of $4.35 billion, or $39.67 a year earlier, AIG said today in a statement. Profit excluding some investment results was $1.21 a share, beating the average 48- cent estimate of two analysts surveyed by Bloomberg. AIG opted for the time in four quarters against extending the period in which it is committed to supporting plane-leasing and consumer- lending units, citing their renewed access to private funding.
Chief Executive Officer Robert Benmosche has said AIG is “now on a path” to repaying loans in the insurer’s $182.3 billion rescue after announcing deals in March to sell two life divisions for about $51 billion. Results have stabilized at remaining insurance units and the company may recover by year- end from junk status assigned to its stand-alone credit, Standard & Poor’s said last month.
“The underlying fundamentals are improving,” said Bill Bergman, an analyst at Morningstar Inc. in Chicago. “There’s a little more confidence in their public message, which is worth respecting.”
LBO, Hedge Funds
Writedowns on securities narrowed to $309 million from about $3.7 billion a year earlier, the company said in a regulatory filing. Investment income surged as alternative assets, including private-equity and hedge-fund investments generated $384 million, compared with a loss of about $1 billion a year earlier.
The insurer advanced 3.4 percent to $38 at 7:35 a.m. in New York. AIG climbed about 23 percent this year through yesterday on the New York Stock Exchange, rewarding investors betting on a rebound, including Bruce Berkowitz, who runs Fairholme Capital Management. Fairholme owned about 15 million shares as of March 31, the biggest stake after the U.S. government. The insurer slipped 4.5 percent in 2009 and plunged 97 percent in 2008.
AIG said today it “intends to provide support” to plane lessor International Lease Finance Corp. and consumer lender American General Finance Corp. through Feb. 28, 2011, the same date the company gave in its annual report 10 weeks ago. “At the current time AIG believes that any further extension of such support will not be necessary,” the insurer said in the regulatory filing.
Bailed Out
AIG, once the world’s largest insurer by assets, needed a bailout in 2008 after losses from soured housing bets sapped the parent company of cash. The rescue includes a $60 billion Federal Reserve credit line, a Treasury Department investment of as much as $69.8 billion and up to $52.5 billion to buy mortgage-linked assets owned or backed by the company.
Treasury is considering a plan to convert AIG preferred shares into common stock and sell the holdings on the open market over two years, a person with knowledge of talks with the insurer said last month. If AIG consents to the strategy and there is sufficient investor demand, the sales could be announced as early as the fourth quarter, the person said.
Donald H. Layton, the former CEO of E*Trade Financial Corp., and Ronald A. Rittenmeyer, the retired chairman and CEO of Electronic Data Systems Corp., were named to AIG’s board last month. Treasury selected the directors after AIG missed four dividend payments. Henry Miller, co-founder of investment bank Miller Buckfire & Co., was elected to the board after Dennis Dammerman resigned for health reasons.
AIG is under the jurisdiction of Kenneth Feinberg, the Obama administration’s special master for executive compensation, who instituted a $500,000 salary cap for most managers. Feinberg may have put AIG at a “competitive disadvantage,” by shifting more executive compensation to stock rather than cash, the insurer said last month in a regulatory filing.
joi, 6 mai 2010
America's Green Innovation Problem
By Rob Atkinson and Devon Swezey Businessweek
As clean energy technology has globalized, innovation has followed. Government officials need to pay attention
As has been widely reported, U.S. company Applied Materials (AMAT), the world's biggest manufacturer of equipment used to make solar cells, recently decided to construct the world's largest, most advanced nongovernment solar energy research and development facility in Xian, China. Applied Materials also relocated its chief technology officer, Mark Pinto, to China—the first such case of a top U.S. technology executive moving there.
According to Pinto, researchers in the U.S. and Europe must be willing to move to China if they want to do cutting-edge work on solar manufacturing research. Thus, unlike most R&D in developing markets—adapting products to meet local needs—China's growing clean energy market is cultivating the sector's most advanced R&D.
Applied Materials is not alone. IBM (IBM) has announced it will invest $40 million to create the company's first "energy-and-utilities-solution lab" to develop innovative new technologies for smart grid and other applications. The new lab will also be located in China. These decisions suggest that investment is starting to flow not just to low-cost manufacturing in China, but to high-value R&D as well, threatening the U.S.'s historical "comparative advantage" in innovation.
We shouldn't be surprised at these developments. They represent a trend that has been going on for at least a decade. Such other U.S. companies as GM, Dow Chemical (DOW), and Intel (INTC), have constructed high-tech research labs in China. According to Chinese government statistics, there are now 750 foreign-funded R&D centers in China—up from 50 in 1997. In comparison, the decade from 1995 saw the share of corporate R&D sites in the U.S. decline from 59 percent to 52 percent, with the share in China and India increasing from 8 percent, to 18 percent, according to a 2006 report by Booz Allen Hamilton and INSEAD.Overall, as we pointed out in the February 2009 Information Technology & Innovation Foundation report "The Atlantic Century," the U.S. no longer leads the world in innovation-based competitiveness. The country ranks sixth—behind such nations as Singapore, South Korea, and Sweden—and it ranked last among 40 nations in progress on innovation and competitiveness in the most recent decade. China placed first.
Innovation is Globalizing, too
Even as the U.S. continues to slip further behind economic rivals in the production and deployment of clean energy technologies, many commentators still cling to the comforting belief that, as New York Times columnist Tom Friedman has written, America will "specialize in research and innovation."
Yet it is clear that we are moving into an era in which the supposed choice between locating for low-cost manufacturing and locating for innovation is revealed as a false one. As clean energy technology has globalized, innovation has followed manufacturing and markets, something that many in the U.S. have yet to appreciate fully. The globalization of innovation has led many multinationals to become truly global in their R&D, manufacturing, and marketing as they increasingly collaborate with foreign companies and governments.
That's not happening by chance. The Chinese government has aggressively employed a comprehensive technology-based investment strategy to attract private investment and encourage leading companies to locate high-value research operations in the country. They have also erected a host of global welfare-reducing mercantilist policies to spur green-industry production and exports. These include turning a blind eye to intellectual-property theft, making access to Chinese markets contingent on U.S. firms expanding R&D activities in China, and blatantly manipulating currency values so as to subsidize exports of green products.
China offers low wages, high science
China's policies are working. Major government investment has allowed China to attract more private investment in clean energy than any other nation. According to a recent Pew study, China attracted $34.6 billion in private capital in 2009. The U.S. came in a distant second, attracting a little more than half as much.
China doesn't need to develop strong domestic companies to have a more innovation-based economy as long as the country manages to attract innovation-based activities from abroad. Low wages (supplemented by an artificially low currency and significant other subsidies) and high science are a powerful combination.
These new developments are particularly troubling because they suggest, as Brookings' Mark Muro writes, "the impending lock-in of a powerful feedback loop of market creation, production, and innovation." Cleantech clusters are being created in China, but not in the U.S. That's why U.S. government officials who are supporting the importation of heavily subsidized Chinese cleantech products need to recognize that this Chinese "gift" is actually a Trojan horse—cheaper products now, dramatically fewer high-wage U.S. jobs later.
As such, the federal government must start the important work of facilitating the development of its own clusters of clean energy innovation in the U.S. To succeed, the U.S. must do two key things. First, it should prioritize major public investments in clean energy innovation, advanced manufacturing, and market creation, something it has been unwilling to do in any of the climate and energy bills currently before Congress. Second, it needs to significantly step up efforts to challenge Chinese mercantilism, whether in green industries or any high value-added industry critical to the country's future.
As clean energy technology has globalized, innovation has followed. Government officials need to pay attention
As has been widely reported, U.S. company Applied Materials (AMAT), the world's biggest manufacturer of equipment used to make solar cells, recently decided to construct the world's largest, most advanced nongovernment solar energy research and development facility in Xian, China. Applied Materials also relocated its chief technology officer, Mark Pinto, to China—the first such case of a top U.S. technology executive moving there.
According to Pinto, researchers in the U.S. and Europe must be willing to move to China if they want to do cutting-edge work on solar manufacturing research. Thus, unlike most R&D in developing markets—adapting products to meet local needs—China's growing clean energy market is cultivating the sector's most advanced R&D.
Applied Materials is not alone. IBM (IBM) has announced it will invest $40 million to create the company's first "energy-and-utilities-solution lab" to develop innovative new technologies for smart grid and other applications. The new lab will also be located in China. These decisions suggest that investment is starting to flow not just to low-cost manufacturing in China, but to high-value R&D as well, threatening the U.S.'s historical "comparative advantage" in innovation.
We shouldn't be surprised at these developments. They represent a trend that has been going on for at least a decade. Such other U.S. companies as GM, Dow Chemical (DOW), and Intel (INTC), have constructed high-tech research labs in China. According to Chinese government statistics, there are now 750 foreign-funded R&D centers in China—up from 50 in 1997. In comparison, the decade from 1995 saw the share of corporate R&D sites in the U.S. decline from 59 percent to 52 percent, with the share in China and India increasing from 8 percent, to 18 percent, according to a 2006 report by Booz Allen Hamilton and INSEAD.Overall, as we pointed out in the February 2009 Information Technology & Innovation Foundation report "The Atlantic Century," the U.S. no longer leads the world in innovation-based competitiveness. The country ranks sixth—behind such nations as Singapore, South Korea, and Sweden—and it ranked last among 40 nations in progress on innovation and competitiveness in the most recent decade. China placed first.
Innovation is Globalizing, too
Even as the U.S. continues to slip further behind economic rivals in the production and deployment of clean energy technologies, many commentators still cling to the comforting belief that, as New York Times columnist Tom Friedman has written, America will "specialize in research and innovation."
Yet it is clear that we are moving into an era in which the supposed choice between locating for low-cost manufacturing and locating for innovation is revealed as a false one. As clean energy technology has globalized, innovation has followed manufacturing and markets, something that many in the U.S. have yet to appreciate fully. The globalization of innovation has led many multinationals to become truly global in their R&D, manufacturing, and marketing as they increasingly collaborate with foreign companies and governments.
That's not happening by chance. The Chinese government has aggressively employed a comprehensive technology-based investment strategy to attract private investment and encourage leading companies to locate high-value research operations in the country. They have also erected a host of global welfare-reducing mercantilist policies to spur green-industry production and exports. These include turning a blind eye to intellectual-property theft, making access to Chinese markets contingent on U.S. firms expanding R&D activities in China, and blatantly manipulating currency values so as to subsidize exports of green products.
China offers low wages, high science
China's policies are working. Major government investment has allowed China to attract more private investment in clean energy than any other nation. According to a recent Pew study, China attracted $34.6 billion in private capital in 2009. The U.S. came in a distant second, attracting a little more than half as much.
China doesn't need to develop strong domestic companies to have a more innovation-based economy as long as the country manages to attract innovation-based activities from abroad. Low wages (supplemented by an artificially low currency and significant other subsidies) and high science are a powerful combination.
These new developments are particularly troubling because they suggest, as Brookings' Mark Muro writes, "the impending lock-in of a powerful feedback loop of market creation, production, and innovation." Cleantech clusters are being created in China, but not in the U.S. That's why U.S. government officials who are supporting the importation of heavily subsidized Chinese cleantech products need to recognize that this Chinese "gift" is actually a Trojan horse—cheaper products now, dramatically fewer high-wage U.S. jobs later.
As such, the federal government must start the important work of facilitating the development of its own clusters of clean energy innovation in the U.S. To succeed, the U.S. must do two key things. First, it should prioritize major public investments in clean energy innovation, advanced manufacturing, and market creation, something it has been unwilling to do in any of the climate and energy bills currently before Congress. Second, it needs to significantly step up efforts to challenge Chinese mercantilism, whether in green industries or any high value-added industry critical to the country's future.
RBS First Quarter Loss Narrows on Lower Bad Debts (Update1)
By Andrew MacAskill and Jon Menon Bloomberg
May 7 (Bloomberg) -- Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc, Britain’s biggest government-owned bank, reported a narrower first-quarter loss on lower bad debt charges as the economy emerged from recession.
The net loss was 248 million pounds ($363 million), compared with 902 million pounds in the year-earlier period, the Edinburgh-based lender said today in an e-mailed statement. Impairments dropped to 2.68 billion pounds in the period from 3.1 billion pounds in the last quarter of 2009. “Economic recovery is benefiting our customers and thereby ourselves,” Chief Executive Officer Stephen Hester said. “We remain conscious of the economic imbalances still to be tackled globally and of the risk of specific events -- such as those affecting Greece -- with the associated danger of contagion.”
RBS is the only publicly traded British bank still reporting a loss after Lloyds Banking Group Plc said last month it returned to profit. The U.K. government, which owns 83 percent of the bank, has a 1.5 billion-pound paper loss on its 45.5 billion pound investment in the bank after providing bailout funds
May 7 (Bloomberg) -- Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc, Britain’s biggest government-owned bank, reported a narrower first-quarter loss on lower bad debt charges as the economy emerged from recession.
The net loss was 248 million pounds ($363 million), compared with 902 million pounds in the year-earlier period, the Edinburgh-based lender said today in an e-mailed statement. Impairments dropped to 2.68 billion pounds in the period from 3.1 billion pounds in the last quarter of 2009. “Economic recovery is benefiting our customers and thereby ourselves,” Chief Executive Officer Stephen Hester said. “We remain conscious of the economic imbalances still to be tackled globally and of the risk of specific events -- such as those affecting Greece -- with the associated danger of contagion.”
RBS is the only publicly traded British bank still reporting a loss after Lloyds Banking Group Plc said last month it returned to profit. The U.K. government, which owns 83 percent of the bank, has a 1.5 billion-pound paper loss on its 45.5 billion pound investment in the bank after providing bailout funds
Ethanol Report on Oil Spill Response
Posted by Cindy Zimmerman
Addressing the tragedy hitting the Gulf of Mexico and coastal areas requires both an aggressive short term response and an equally aggressive long term energy and environmental strategy. Renewable Fuels Association President and CEO Bob Dinneen is asking the Obama administration to take action to help increase the use of ethanol, starting with immediately allowing up to 12 percent ethanol in gasoline. This edition of “The Ethanol Report” features Dinneen’s comments on actions to promote increased ethanol production and use that could be taken in response to the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.
In this edition of “The Ethanol Report,” Renewable Fuels Association Vice President for Research Geoff Cooper talks about the current price differential between gasoline and ethanol and how much could be saved if the blend level were higher than the current ten percent.
Fundrasing Consultant today business startup project
Hi everyone my name is Seit Eren and today I'll present you Fundrasing consultant business starup project,let see what you need for start this business.
Use your sales and financial experience to be a fundraising consultant.
Fundrasing Consultant
Startup costs 50 000-100 000 euro
Home Bassed: Can be operated from home
Parte time: Can be operated part -time
Business Overview
Acting on behalf of charities as a fundraising consultant can earn you as much as $100,000 per year, of course providing you have the skills and abilities to raise funds for the charities that your service represents. The first step required for establishing a fundraising service is to build alliances with local or national charities to represent the charities as a fundraising specialist. The next step is to establish a fundraising program for the charity, similar to a business plan. The plan or program should outline how the funds will be raised, as well as the fee you will charge for your service. Typically, fundraising consultants charge a commission for services based on a percentage of the total amount of money raised, and the commission rate will range from 10 percent on amounts in excess of $100,000 to percentages as high as 50 percent for amounts under $1,000. As lucrative as the business sounds, remember the cost to establish, advertise, and manage the fundraising program comes directly from the fees charged for providing the service.
Use your sales and financial experience to be a fundraising consultant.
Fundrasing Consultant
Startup costs 50 000-100 000 euro
Home Bassed: Can be operated from home
Parte time: Can be operated part -time
Business Overview
Acting on behalf of charities as a fundraising consultant can earn you as much as $100,000 per year, of course providing you have the skills and abilities to raise funds for the charities that your service represents. The first step required for establishing a fundraising service is to build alliances with local or national charities to represent the charities as a fundraising specialist. The next step is to establish a fundraising program for the charity, similar to a business plan. The plan or program should outline how the funds will be raised, as well as the fee you will charge for your service. Typically, fundraising consultants charge a commission for services based on a percentage of the total amount of money raised, and the commission rate will range from 10 percent on amounts in excess of $100,000 to percentages as high as 50 percent for amounts under $1,000. As lucrative as the business sounds, remember the cost to establish, advertise, and manage the fundraising program comes directly from the fees charged for providing the service.
Facebook Privacy Policies Draw Criticism by 15 Consumer Groups
By Douglas MacMillan Businessnews
May 6 (Bloomberg) -- Facebook Inc., the largest social networking site, is facing renewed criticism from consumer groups that it’s not doing enough to protect information after a security flaw exposed private messages between friends.
Recent changes at Facebook “violate user expectations, diminish user privacy, and contradict Facebook’s own representations,” said Marc Rotenberg, who runs the Electronic Privacy Information Center, one of 15 groups that complained about Facebook in a filing with the Federal Trade Commission late yesterday.
Signers urged the FTC to investigate Facebook’s privacy practices and force it to take steps to better guard against security breaches. The complaint follows an effort led by New York Democratic Senator Charles Schumer last week to get the FTC to review how the social network deals with user data.
Consumer groups stepped up criticism of Facebook earlier this month after the company added features that let users tell their friends about products and other Web sites they favor. The program builds on an existing feature that lets people click “like” when a friend posts a status update, photo or Web link.
While adding those tools, Palo Alto, California-based Facebook altered how a user’s profile information is classified and disclosed, according to the complaint. The result, EPIC says, is that “Facebook now discloses personal information to the public that Facebook users previously restricted.”
Facebook spokesman Andrew Noyes said the company wouldn’t be able to comment until after it reviewed the complaint to the FTC. A message left after regular business hours with the FTC’s office of public affairs wasn’t immediately returned, nor was a call to FTC spokeswoman Claudia Bourne-Farrell.
Shutting Down Chat
Earlier in the day, Facebook temporarily shut down its “chat” feature after discovering a security flaw that let users see friends’ messages that were not meant to be shared.
The software error, reported initially by technology blog TechCrunch, exposed the chat conversations and friend requests of people within a user’s network when they clicked on an option in the site’s settings.
“When we received reports of the problem, our engineers promptly diagnosed it and temporarily disabled the chat function,” Facebook spokeswoman Malorie Lucich said in a statement.
After Schumer’s public remarks last week, company officials met with representatives of the senator and agreed that Facebook users should control public access to personal information and that the company should explain how to accomplish that, Elliot Schrage, Facebook’s vice president of global communications and public policy, said at the time.
miercuri, 5 mai 2010
BP CEO Hayward tested by Gulf of Mexico spill
By JANE WARDELL
LONDON – Tony Hayward promised to focus "like a laser" on safety when he landed BP's top job three years ago, heralding a new era for the company after a series of accidents — including the 2005 Texas City refinery explosion that killed 15 people.
But the baby-faced geologist may find his words haunt him.
Promoted precisely to restore BP's tarnished reputation, Hayward now finds himself dealing with the company's biggest disaster yet. His handling of the Gulf of Mexico crisis — and investigations into how the London-based company let it happen — could determine his future, and that of the oil giant.
The 52-year-old CEO and company "lifer" has flown out to Louisiana to personally head up the damage limitation exercise, declaring in the wake of criticism from President Barack Obama that his company was "absolutely responsible" for the spill.
He has made a string of U.S. TV appearances in a bid to tame the backlash against Britain's second biggest company, promising the public that BP will do all it can to limit the damage from an accident that threatens the shores of five states.
His response to CNN when asked about his initial reaction to the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon rig that caused the oil spill and killed 11 workers — "How the hell could this happen?" — was characteristic of his straightforward, down-to-earth nature. But it is also a question being asked by many critics of both the company and its leader.
"Hayward may have personally done much to turn around the fortunes of a company accused of putting profits before safety after a blast at a Texas oil refinery. But he evidently had not done enough," the Guardian newspaper wrote in an editorial on Tuesday.
The company has remained at the forefront of lobbying against a tighter regulatory framework in the United States, advocating voluntary compliance instead.
As well as suggestions that Hayward underestimated the risk involved with drilling at the Deepwater rig, he has also been accused of a slow reaction to the disaster after initially failing to take on board its extent.
Hayward countered those criticisms — somewhat belatedly in the eyes of some — by arranging for an "armada" of ships and a "small airforce" of aircraft to try stop the slick from reaching the shore. He also sent 2,500 BP staffers to fight the fallout, both onshore and off.
Chris Skrebowski, director of Peak Oil Consulting and consulting editor at Petroleum Review, said that Hayward has "done pretty well. He's surprised most people by being more effective than they expected him to be.
"It's quite a hard balancing act to come over as suitably concerned without looking as though you've lost control, and equally not to look complacent about what is a threat to people's livelihoods," Skrebowski added.
Hayward was promoted to the chief executive's chair in May 2007, replacing former boss and mentor John Browne more than a year earlier than initially envisioned under the company's succession plan.
Browne was anointed the Sun King — a reference to the company's blazing solar emblem — for taking the company from minor player to global energy giant in his 12 years at the helm and moving "beyond petroleum," to other, greener energy sources.
But he ended his tenure in ignominy, irrevocably tarnished by events including the Texas City explosion and a major Alaska pipeline spill in 2006. He fell further from grace after admitting to perjury while giving evidence to a court to prevent a newspaper revealing details of his private life.
Hayward, then the head of exploration and production, was chosen from a shortlist of potential successors, all internal candidates.
The eldest son of a family of seven, Hayward had a far less privileged upbringing than his privately educated predecessor. He worked his way through the ranks after joining BP in 1982 as a rig geologist in Aberdeen, Scotland, immediately after graduating with a geology degree from Birmingham University and a PhD from Edinburgh University.
Spotted by Browne as a potential protege at a meeting in 1990, he was groomed from being a smart geologist to boardroom-ready executive. He then moved through a range of positions at the company, including president of BP's operations in Venezuela and group treasurer.
Hayward was instrumental in BP's expansion into the United States, which involved a number of takeovers, including the 1998 merger with Amoco and the subsequent acquisitions of Arco and Castrol.
Peter Sutherland, the former BP chairman who chose Hayward to lead the company in 2007, has stood by his man, saying last week that he has "been a superb chief executive by common consent, in terms of internal and external perception. That doesn't change because of this accident."
As BP's share price and reputation continues takes a battering — wiping more than $23 billion off the value of the company in a week — external watchers say the jury is still out.
"There are still considerable uncertainties over the impact of this oil spill, as much will depend on how quickly the company is able to bring this well under control and how the winds will drive this spill," Peter Hitchens, an oil industry analyst at Panmure Gordon, said in a research note Wednesday.
Big Banks' Small-Business Lending Promises
By John Tozzi
They said they would increase credit to small businesses in 2010. Here's a look at how some of the biggest fared in the first quarter
Are banks lending more to small businesses? It's hard to say. What's called "small business lending" cuts across several business lines at most banks, from real estate to credit cards, and few lenders report separate figures for small businesses. Still, late last year, under pressure from the White House to increase credit to Main Street, several of the nation's largest lenders—including Wells Fargo (WFC), Bank of America (BAC), and JPMorgan Chase (JPM)—made big promises to expand small business lending in 2010. We asked four that set concrete targets to boost small business lending in 2010 how well they met those goals in the first quarter—two appear to be making progress; figures aren't available yet on the others.
Wells Fargo extended $2.9 billion in new loans to small businesses in the first quarter, according to spokeswoman Sarah Toffoli. That's 18% of the bank's goal to lend $16 billion in 2010 to companies with less than $20 million in revenue—an increase from $13 billion in 2009. (Both figures include lending by Wachovia, which Wells Fargo acquired at the end of 2008.) "Based on the seasonality of business lending and the anticipation of an improved economy, we hope to meet our commitment by the end of 2010," Toffoli says in an e-mail. Chairman John Stumpf announced plans to increase new small business lending to $16 billion in the company's annual report. Small-business lending figures for the first quarter of 2009 and previous years are not available, Toffoli says.
• JPMorgan Chase made $2.1 billion in new loans to small businesses in the first quarter, the company reported in its first-quarter earnings release, or 21% of its goal to extend $10 billion in new credit to companies with under $20 million in revenue. That goal, announced Nov.9, 2009, is an increase from $6 billion last year. Chase's first-quarter lending to small businesses is a 31% increase over the first quarter of 2009, according to spokesman Tom Kelly. He says the bank doesn't have comparable numbers from previous years.
Chase has also hired 235 new small business bankers since Nov. 9, Kelly says. The bank's goal is to hire 325 by the end of 2010. In addition, Chase made $110 million in "second-look loans," which are small business loans approved after borrowers who were initially turned down asked for further review of their applications.
Bank of America loaned $19.4 billion to small and midsize businesses (those with less than $50 million in revenue) in the first quarter, the bank said in an Apr. 27 report. Excluding midsize businesses, the bank loaned $3.4 billion during the first quarter to small companies with less than $20 million in revenue.
At a Dec. 14 meeting with President Obama, then-CEO Kenneth Lewis announced plans to increase lending to small and midsize companies by $5 billion in 2010. The bank hasn't released the total amount of lending in this category in 2009, however, so there's no way to tell what percentage increase it is or how much progress BofA has made toward the goal. Spokesman Jefferson George says the bank is still running those numbers and hopes to make them available soon.
• Huntington National Bank, a regional bank based in Columbus, Ohio, and serving the Midwest, set a goal in February to increase small business lending by $1.2 billion in 2010. The bank, which defines small businesses as companies with under $15 million in revenue, said specific figures for progress toward that goal were not available yet. Huntington spokeswoman LuJean Smith said the bank has hired more than half of the 150 new bankers it plans on adding.
luni, 3 mai 2010
Fannie Mae to make qualifying for interest-only loans tougher
By Les Christie CNNMoney
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Fannie Mae, the government-backed mortgage giant, announced Friday that it will tighten lending requirements for the interest-only loans and adjustable rate mortgages (ARMs) it backs.
To get a Fannie Mae-backed interest-only mortgage, for example, homebuyers will have to make down payments of 30% of the sale price.
For adjustable rate mortgages, Fannie will only buy those underwritten to ensure that borrowers could still afford payments even if their interest rates reset to the higher of either 1) the loan's initial interest rate plus two percentage points or 2) the maximum the interest rate the loan can rise to, known in the industry as the cap rate.
For a loan with a beginning rate of 5% and a cap rate of 6%, for example, borrowers would have to demonstrate they could still keep up payments even if the rate rose to 7%. If the cap rate is 8%, borrowers would have to be able to afford an 8% loan.
"Our goal is to make sure consumers can sustain their mortgages and remain in their homes over the long term, while helping our lender partners offer a range of mortgage products for qualified borrowers," said Marianne Sullivan, Senior Vice President of Single Family Credit Policy and Risk Management at Fannie Mae, in a prepared release.
"These policy changes reflect our intention to continue providing liquidity to different market segments by ensuring that support for ARM products remains in appropriate circumstances," Sullivan said.
Fannie does not issue mortgages itself; it buys them from lenders. But few lenders will issue loans these days unless they can sell them to Fannie Mae.
Fannie Mae (FNM, Fortune 500) will also demand that borrowers of interest-only loans have credit scores of at least 720 and sufficient cash cushions to be able to continue mortgage payments and other housing expenses for 24 months.
Meanwhile, Fannie says it will stop funding so-called balloon mortgages. With these, borrowers pay at a rate lower initially than the nominal interest rate on their mortgages. The difference between the two builds up every month and has to be repaid with one huge payment at a specified date.
Many borrowers saw those balloons swell to unmanageable proportions and lost their homes when they couldn't afford or refinance the balloon payment.
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Fannie Mae, the government-backed mortgage giant, announced Friday that it will tighten lending requirements for the interest-only loans and adjustable rate mortgages (ARMs) it backs.
To get a Fannie Mae-backed interest-only mortgage, for example, homebuyers will have to make down payments of 30% of the sale price.
For adjustable rate mortgages, Fannie will only buy those underwritten to ensure that borrowers could still afford payments even if their interest rates reset to the higher of either 1) the loan's initial interest rate plus two percentage points or 2) the maximum the interest rate the loan can rise to, known in the industry as the cap rate.
For a loan with a beginning rate of 5% and a cap rate of 6%, for example, borrowers would have to demonstrate they could still keep up payments even if the rate rose to 7%. If the cap rate is 8%, borrowers would have to be able to afford an 8% loan.
"Our goal is to make sure consumers can sustain their mortgages and remain in their homes over the long term, while helping our lender partners offer a range of mortgage products for qualified borrowers," said Marianne Sullivan, Senior Vice President of Single Family Credit Policy and Risk Management at Fannie Mae, in a prepared release.
"These policy changes reflect our intention to continue providing liquidity to different market segments by ensuring that support for ARM products remains in appropriate circumstances," Sullivan said.
Fannie does not issue mortgages itself; it buys them from lenders. But few lenders will issue loans these days unless they can sell them to Fannie Mae.
Fannie Mae (FNM, Fortune 500) will also demand that borrowers of interest-only loans have credit scores of at least 720 and sufficient cash cushions to be able to continue mortgage payments and other housing expenses for 24 months.
Meanwhile, Fannie says it will stop funding so-called balloon mortgages. With these, borrowers pay at a rate lower initially than the nominal interest rate on their mortgages. The difference between the two builds up every month and has to be repaid with one huge payment at a specified date.
Many borrowers saw those balloons swell to unmanageable proportions and lost their homes when they couldn't afford or refinance the balloon payment.
Buffett Wouldn't Want to Fix U.K. Deficit
By Stephen Foley
Warren Buffett, the Oracle of Omaha, says he won't envy the winner of the May 6 general election in Britain for having to tackle "unpopular" budget cuts
Warren Buffett, the billionaire investor known as the Oracle of Omaha, said he doesn't envy the winner of the UK general election, who will be faced with the need to make "politically very unpopular" decisions to cut the deficit. Speaking after the annual shareholder meeting of Berkshire Hathaway (BRK-B), at which he dispensed nuggets of business wit and wisdom to a crowd of 40,000 faithful, Mr Buffett warned the next occupant of No 10 to fear the bond market, which could turn against the UK if public spending is not brought back into balance over the long term.
"The UK is facing the same or tougher problems than the US," he told reporters last night. "The deficits are huge and, if sustained over time, they have to have important consequences. Those consequences can start to create their own dynamic and then you are getting into the unknown.
"I would not want to be put in charge of tackling that debt."
His comments about Britain echoed those he had made about growing government debt across the Western world, the result of the economic stimulus measures put in place to prevent a much worse recession after the financial panic of 2008.
But he distinguished the situation in Britain from the present problems of Greece. The UK can print its own currency, he said – something that is "a wonderful asset."
And Charlie Munger, Mr Buffett's long-time business partner, said that it was important not to overstate the difficulties facing the UK. Britain is "not totally failing", he said. The US "copied from Britain" the best way to restore the financial system in 2008, "so your government is not as bad as you may think."
The Buffet and Munger double act has been the highlight of Berkshire's annual meeting for decades, as the two dispense investment advice and thoughts on the world in nuggets of high comedy. When Mr Buffett expressed concern about the state of government finances in the West and the increased prospects for significant inflation, the 86-year-old Mr Munger added: "If I can be optimistic, and I'm nearly dead, surely the rest of you can handle a little inflation.
"Thousands of Berkshire shareholders descend on the modest Midwestern city of Omaha each year for the company's meeting, which was again bigger than ever this time, thanks to the addition of new shareholders due to Mr Buffett's acquisition of railway company Burlington Northern.
He spent six hours taking questions in a packed sports arena, while many more shareholders watched in overflow rooms and on the floor of an adjacent exhibition centre, where Berkshire's eclectic mix of subsidiaries hawk wares ranging from chocolates and T-shirts to jewellery and mobile homes.
Mr Buffett, a long-time critic of Wall Street excess, surprised many by beginning Saturday's meeting with a full-throated defence of Goldman Sachs (GS), saying he didn't believe that the investment bank was guilty of the fraud charges levelled against them last month.
In a theme that the billionaire returned to again and again, he described the errors of banks, derivatives traders and rating agencies as being caused by group-think."It is very hard to think contrary to the crowd," he said, when asked about the performance of the credit rating agencies, which disastrously certified mortgage-related bonds as being as safe as government debt. "They couldn't see a world where residential housing countrywide would collapse. They succumbed to the same mania that prevailed throughout the investment world."
Mr Munger pointed his own finger of blame at the mathematical models that Wall Street players have been taught – and which turned out to be highly misleading as the crisis developed. "I'm yet to hear a single apology from business academia for its contribution to our present difficulties," he said, to huge applause.
Is Glycerin from Biodiesel Kosher?
Posted by John Davis
An interesting issue has come up with a by-product of biodiesel and whether it meets strict Jewish dietary laws.
Glycerin, made plentiful from what used to be ramped-up biodiesel production, is now being used in a variety of foods. Sweet, natural glycerin is being used in many food products. And Autobloggreen says the fact that the glycerin could be coming from either plant or animal sources is causing some concern for those rabbis verifying how kosher that glycerin is:
This is not easy to figure out, especially if the biodiesel was made from waste restaurant fats – one important question: “was the oil used to fry pork?” – or if the glycerin is a blend of many biodiesel production streams. Over time, the rabbis have worked with biodiesel production facilities to track the fat source in order to verify just what is in the glycerin and, thus, can confidently say whether the resulting foods are kosher or not.
The best news is, biodiesel is always kosher to use in your diesel engine … and you don’t even have to cut off the end of your tailpipe
An interesting issue has come up with a by-product of biodiesel and whether it meets strict Jewish dietary laws.
Glycerin, made plentiful from what used to be ramped-up biodiesel production, is now being used in a variety of foods. Sweet, natural glycerin is being used in many food products. And Autobloggreen says the fact that the glycerin could be coming from either plant or animal sources is causing some concern for those rabbis verifying how kosher that glycerin is:
This is not easy to figure out, especially if the biodiesel was made from waste restaurant fats – one important question: “was the oil used to fry pork?” – or if the glycerin is a blend of many biodiesel production streams. Over time, the rabbis have worked with biodiesel production facilities to track the fat source in order to verify just what is in the glycerin and, thus, can confidently say whether the resulting foods are kosher or not.
The best news is, biodiesel is always kosher to use in your diesel engine … and you don’t even have to cut off the end of your tailpipe
duminică, 2 mai 2010
VCs Push StartUp Visa Act
By Douglas MacMillan Businessweek
A group of investors is in Washington to push for passage of a bill that they say would make it easier for foreign entrepreneurs to stay—and create jobs—in the U.S.
During recent travels abroad, Shervin Pishevar says he witnessed flourishing tech communities in places like Russia, Argentina, and Jordan. "There's a tremendous amount of talent out there," says Pishevar, an Iranian-born entrepreneur and angel investor now based in Silicon Valley. He wants to ensure global talent can take root in his adopted country, too.
So on Mar. 3, Pishevar joined a group of more than a dozen other investors and tech luminaries on a three-day trip to Capitol Hill. Talking point No. 1: the StartUp Visa Act of 2010, a bill introduced by Senators John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) in late February that would create a new type of visa for foreign entrepreneurs looking to start businesses in the U.S.
Pishevar and other proponents say the legislation would help the country compete for talent and create new companies that would employ American workers at a time when joblessness is rampant. "This bill is a small down payment on a cure to global competitiveness," Senator Kerry says in an e-mail to Bloomberg BusinessWeek.
In 2009, the percentage of U.S. residents creating new domestic companies fell to 8% from 12.4% in 2005, according to the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor, a research collaboration of the London Business School and Babson College. Over the same period, the percentage of residents in foreign countries tracked by the group who are creating new companies rose to 11% from 8.7%. "You see entrepreneurs in China and India regularly starting up ventures," Kerry writes. "We want to bring those strong ideas to the United States to create jobs here at home."
Foreign Founders
The StartUp Visa would help keep foreign founders in the U.S., says Paul Graham, co-founder of Mountain View (Calif.)-based startup incubator Y Combinator. "We've funded a number of startups where the founders had to go back to their countries" because they couldn't obtain visas, he says. In April, Graham wrote an online essay arguing for the creation of a "founder visa." The post prompted tech influencers including Foundry Group Managing Director Brad Feld and Founders Fund startup investor Dave McClure to push the idea in investing circles and Washington. When Senators Kerry and Lugar introduced their bill on Feb. 24, they were supported by a list of more than 160 venture capitalists and other investors.
The StartUp Visa Act would create a new type of two-year visa, called an EB-6, available to any immigrant entrepreneur who has secured at least $250,000 in capital from accredited venture capitalists or angel investors. After two years, the person would become a permanent U.S. resident if his or her business has met one of three criteria: created five full-time jobs in the U.S., raised an additional $1 million from investors, or achieved $1 million in revenue.
Venture capitalists sometimes shy away from even compelling pitches from overseas startups in part because of visa-related hassles, says Jeff Clavier, a San Francisco-based angel investor. Of the 72 startups he's funded in the past six years, four have had foreign chief executives, he says.
Candidates for a StartUp Visa are legion, says Vivek Wadhwa, executive-in-residence at the Pratt School of Engineering at Duke University, who is also a columnist for BusinessWeek.com. "There is pent-up demand," he says. If the bill were to become law, Clavier says he would give more favorable consideration to foreign startups. He mentors the two Dutch founders of Newcope, a social gaming startup. "Their likelihood of success in the Netherlands is close to zero" because much investing in social gaming is in Silicon Valley, home to such companies as Facebook and Zynga. The Foundry Group's Feld, who is based in Boulder, Colo., says he is "regularly solicited by foreign entrepreneurs, including a meaningful percentage who are interested in moving to the U.S. and starting their business here."
Bill's Prospects
Getting the bill passed is not a foregone conclusion, says Demetrios Papademetriou, president of the Washington think tank Migration Policy Institute. "Introducing a bill into the U.S. Congress is the easiest thing to do," he says. "Getting it to see the light of day is the hardest."
Critics of immigration reform are likely to point out potential loopholes in the new bill that might grant citizenship to immigrants who are not successful entrepreneurs. Kim Berry, head of the IT trade group Programmers Guild, questions what will happen to EB-6 visa holders whose businesses fail. "The entrepreneur is permitted to remain in the country even if the terms are not met and the venture fails" except under limited circumstances, Berry says. The Programmers Guild does not have lobbyists in Washington and is "not opposed to the concept," Berry says. "We're opposed to the loopholes."
How much the U.S. economy could benefit from StartUp Visas is also a matter of debate. Proponents say it could attract thousands of new startups in a few years, and tens of thousands of jobs. Ron Hira, professor of public policy at the Rochester Institute of Technology, says the backers of the StartUp Visa have not done enough research to show that there is widespread demand for it.
Another point of contention is whether the bill would force U.S. entrepreneurs to compete with foreigners for essentially the same pool of funds. Last year, venture capitalists invested $17.7 billion in U.S. firms, according to data compiled by the National Venture Capital Assn. and PricewaterhouseCoopers, from a peak of $100.5 billion in 2000. Kerry and VCs say the StartUp Visa would help add to—rather than take from—this total. "I'm sure it would increase" the total VC investments, says Ron Conway, an early investor in Google (GOOG) and PayPal who now runs the SV Angel fund. Kerry agrees: "Once the program catches on, we expect that it would lead to the funding of more startup businesses here than would be the case without it."
A group of investors is in Washington to push for passage of a bill that they say would make it easier for foreign entrepreneurs to stay—and create jobs—in the U.S.
During recent travels abroad, Shervin Pishevar says he witnessed flourishing tech communities in places like Russia, Argentina, and Jordan. "There's a tremendous amount of talent out there," says Pishevar, an Iranian-born entrepreneur and angel investor now based in Silicon Valley. He wants to ensure global talent can take root in his adopted country, too.
So on Mar. 3, Pishevar joined a group of more than a dozen other investors and tech luminaries on a three-day trip to Capitol Hill. Talking point No. 1: the StartUp Visa Act of 2010, a bill introduced by Senators John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) in late February that would create a new type of visa for foreign entrepreneurs looking to start businesses in the U.S.
Pishevar and other proponents say the legislation would help the country compete for talent and create new companies that would employ American workers at a time when joblessness is rampant. "This bill is a small down payment on a cure to global competitiveness," Senator Kerry says in an e-mail to Bloomberg BusinessWeek.
In 2009, the percentage of U.S. residents creating new domestic companies fell to 8% from 12.4% in 2005, according to the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor, a research collaboration of the London Business School and Babson College. Over the same period, the percentage of residents in foreign countries tracked by the group who are creating new companies rose to 11% from 8.7%. "You see entrepreneurs in China and India regularly starting up ventures," Kerry writes. "We want to bring those strong ideas to the United States to create jobs here at home."
Foreign Founders
The StartUp Visa would help keep foreign founders in the U.S., says Paul Graham, co-founder of Mountain View (Calif.)-based startup incubator Y Combinator. "We've funded a number of startups where the founders had to go back to their countries" because they couldn't obtain visas, he says. In April, Graham wrote an online essay arguing for the creation of a "founder visa." The post prompted tech influencers including Foundry Group Managing Director Brad Feld and Founders Fund startup investor Dave McClure to push the idea in investing circles and Washington. When Senators Kerry and Lugar introduced their bill on Feb. 24, they were supported by a list of more than 160 venture capitalists and other investors.
The StartUp Visa Act would create a new type of two-year visa, called an EB-6, available to any immigrant entrepreneur who has secured at least $250,000 in capital from accredited venture capitalists or angel investors. After two years, the person would become a permanent U.S. resident if his or her business has met one of three criteria: created five full-time jobs in the U.S., raised an additional $1 million from investors, or achieved $1 million in revenue.
Venture capitalists sometimes shy away from even compelling pitches from overseas startups in part because of visa-related hassles, says Jeff Clavier, a San Francisco-based angel investor. Of the 72 startups he's funded in the past six years, four have had foreign chief executives, he says.
Candidates for a StartUp Visa are legion, says Vivek Wadhwa, executive-in-residence at the Pratt School of Engineering at Duke University, who is also a columnist for BusinessWeek.com. "There is pent-up demand," he says. If the bill were to become law, Clavier says he would give more favorable consideration to foreign startups. He mentors the two Dutch founders of Newcope, a social gaming startup. "Their likelihood of success in the Netherlands is close to zero" because much investing in social gaming is in Silicon Valley, home to such companies as Facebook and Zynga. The Foundry Group's Feld, who is based in Boulder, Colo., says he is "regularly solicited by foreign entrepreneurs, including a meaningful percentage who are interested in moving to the U.S. and starting their business here."
Bill's Prospects
Getting the bill passed is not a foregone conclusion, says Demetrios Papademetriou, president of the Washington think tank Migration Policy Institute. "Introducing a bill into the U.S. Congress is the easiest thing to do," he says. "Getting it to see the light of day is the hardest."
Critics of immigration reform are likely to point out potential loopholes in the new bill that might grant citizenship to immigrants who are not successful entrepreneurs. Kim Berry, head of the IT trade group Programmers Guild, questions what will happen to EB-6 visa holders whose businesses fail. "The entrepreneur is permitted to remain in the country even if the terms are not met and the venture fails" except under limited circumstances, Berry says. The Programmers Guild does not have lobbyists in Washington and is "not opposed to the concept," Berry says. "We're opposed to the loopholes."
How much the U.S. economy could benefit from StartUp Visas is also a matter of debate. Proponents say it could attract thousands of new startups in a few years, and tens of thousands of jobs. Ron Hira, professor of public policy at the Rochester Institute of Technology, says the backers of the StartUp Visa have not done enough research to show that there is widespread demand for it.
Another point of contention is whether the bill would force U.S. entrepreneurs to compete with foreigners for essentially the same pool of funds. Last year, venture capitalists invested $17.7 billion in U.S. firms, according to data compiled by the National Venture Capital Assn. and PricewaterhouseCoopers, from a peak of $100.5 billion in 2000. Kerry and VCs say the StartUp Visa would help add to—rather than take from—this total. "I'm sure it would increase" the total VC investments, says Ron Conway, an early investor in Google (GOOG) and PayPal who now runs the SV Angel fund. Kerry agrees: "Once the program catches on, we expect that it would lead to the funding of more startup businesses here than would be the case without it."
Oil hovers at $86 as traders eye Gulf crude spill
By ALEX KENNEDY, Associated Press
SINGAPORE – Oil prices hovered near $86 a barrel Monday in Asia as traders eyed whether a massive crude spill in the Gulf of Mexico would slow imports to the U.S.
Benchmark crude for June delivery was down 9 cents to $86.06 a barrel at midday Singapore time in electronic trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange. The contract rose 98 cents to settle at $86.15 on Friday.
Some analysts expect the 30-mile (48-kilometer) oil slick caused by as much as 210,000 gallons (795,000 liters) of crude gushing into the Gulf each day could undermine imports to key Louisiana terminals, helping to lower crude inventories and boost prices.
U.S. authorities have said imports have not yet been affected.
"The potential disruption of oil tanker traffic in the Gulf of Mexico is already having an impact on oil prices." Goldman Sachs said in a report. "Traffic of oil service boats and oil tankers through the Gulf will likely be slowed."
Oil is near an 18-month high of $87, last touched in early April.
Investors are also mulling a recent jump of U.S. crude supplies, a sign demand hasn't rebounded along with the overall economic recovery.
"The past two weeks have brought weak U.S. oil inventory data that puts into question the much stronger macroeconomic data," Goldman said.
Goldman said it expects prices to rise to $94.50 a barrel in three months and to $99 a year from now.
In other Nymex trading in May contracts, heating oil fell 0.27 cent to $2.312 a gallon, and gasoline slipped 0.57 cent to $2.3937 a gallon. Natural gas jumped 2.0 cents to $3.940 per 1,000 cubic feet.
In London, Brent crude was down 8 cents at $87.36 on the ICE futures exchange.
Abonați-vă la:
Postări (Atom)