SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : Trend Setters and Range Riders -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: kendall harmon who wrote (19868)7/1/2002 10:52:51 PM
From: Susan G  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 26752
 
Kendall, have you seen this chart? One of the few that looks good left around.

Wondering if Bob knows these restaurants, all down South.

siliconinvestor.com

HCOW, another that is still looking good

siliconinvestor.com



To: kendall harmon who wrote (19868)7/2/2002 7:23:34 PM
From: Susan G  Respond to of 26752
 
from last week, but worth the read

House of Mirrors

Stephen Roach (New York)

morganstanley.com

Lest I be accused of piling on, read no further if you’re looking for the next WorldCom. I don’t have a clue. But I do know that Corporate America is not alone in cooking its books. Washington statisticians seem poised to join the restatement sweepstakes with a stunning rewrite of the recent performance of the US economy. So much for the boom!

Each July, when many of us head to the beach, the guys with the green eyeshades are hard at work in Washington. They are compiling the so-called benchmark revision of the national economic statistics -- an annual restatement of recent economic history based largely on more complete (and presumably more accurate) samples of underlying activity. This particular benchmark revision is slated to be released on 31 July. Mark that day on your calendar.

There are already some important straws in the wind that hint at what can be expected in the upcoming benchmark revision of the national statistics -- a significant downward adjustment to GDP growth over the three-year revision period, 1999-2001. The government actually pre-releases some of the source data that form the basis of this statistical exercise. Based on this intelligence, downward revisions are likely on three fronts -- capital spending, foreign trade in services, and personal income. The reworking of capital spending seems likely in light of a downward revision to shipments of nondefense capital goods, as recently reported in the 2000 Survey of Manufacturers. The lowering of the surplus in services trade was telegraphed by the just-released revisions of the US Census Bureau. And the downward revisions in personal income come from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics’ so-called ES-202 survey -- the primary benchmark for wage and salary disbursements.

Rest assured of one thing -- these downward revisions are not likely to be trivial. For example, shipments of nondefense capital goods are now estimated to have increased only 5% in 2000, half the previously estimated 10% gain. In addition, the surplus in services trade for 2001 was lowered by more than 10%, from $79 billion to $69. Moreover, the reductions in private wage and salary disbursements could be at least $100 billion in 2000, enough to slice more than one percentage point off the growth rate of total personal income. The precise magnitude of the revisions, insofar as their impact on overall GDP growth is concerned, is hard to determine at this point. The real GDP growth rates of record currently stand at 4.1% for both 1999 and 2000. Based on back-of-the-envelope calculations, it wouldn’t surprise me at all if aggregate growth were lowered by at least one percentage point in either or both of these years.

Of equal importance is what the prospective revisions are likely to say about the character of the US economy as it neared the end of the now-fabled boom. The income revisions hint at a downward adjustment to the already anemic level of personal saving. Dick Berner informs me there is some possibility that a downward adjustment in retail sales may imply an offsetting reduction in personal consumption. That may well be true, but my experience tells me that income revisions typically outweigh those on the spending side of the equation -- especially since the retail sales sample has had such a difficult time measuring the rapidly growing e-commerce portion of consumption. As it currently stands, the personal saving rate is estimated at a near rock-bottom 1.6% in 2001, up fractionally from the record low of 1.0% in 2000. I wouldn’t be surprised to see both numbers pruned significantly.

The foreign trade revisions could up the ante on America’s current-account conundrum -- a key point of tension in the US and global economy that I have been stressing for some time. That would dovetail nicely with the likely downward revision in personal saving. After all, a saving-short US economy has no choice but to rely on foreign capital to close its saving-investment gap. A wider current-account deficit implies an even greater capital-account surplus than we had previously been led to believe -- underscoring the distinct possibility that America has been even more dependent on foreign capital inflows than we had previously thought. Little wonder the dollar is now under such pressure, as foreign investors reconsider their once seemingly voracious appetite for dollar-denominated assets.

Finally, there’s the Holy Grail of the recent bubble to consider -- productivity growth. Lower GDP growth likely reduces the numerator in the productivity equation -- the output portion of output-per-hour. As currently estimated, productivity growth averaged 2.6% over the 2000-01 period. Inasmuch as one of those years (2001) is still considered a recession year, this increase has been widely judged as nothing short as astonishing. I’ve never been too sympathetic to that argument -- mainly because the so-called recession was the shortest and mildest on record (see my 21 February 2002 dispatch, "Productivity Noise"). But that’s really beside the basic point: A downward adjustment is probably in the works for the recent productivity trend. The accompanying reduction of capital spending fits this revisionist script quite nicely. To the extent that the recent productivity bonanza was nothing more than the arithmetic by-product of "capital deepening," there should be a close correspondence between a reduced pace of capital spending and lower growth in output-per-hour. And so another key building block of the New Economy gets called into serious question.

The US accounting profession has a lot of egg in its face right now. As the numbers get restated, the great earnings bonanza of recent years is being questioned as never before. While the government’s national income accountants are hardly in the same boat as those at Arthur Andersen, both groups of professionals appear to be guilty of having overstated much of what was supposedly so glorious about the New Economy. We have a saying in America, "What goes around, comes around." Sadly, the numbers we were all told to trust have simply turned out to be wrong -- wrong for companies, wrong for the economy at large, and wrong in the eyes of financial markets. I guess the words of Benjamin Disraeli will always haunt me, "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." Such are the painful excesses of any bubble. WorldCom is not the end of this saga.



To: kendall harmon who wrote (19868)7/3/2002 9:50:37 AM
From: H James Morris  Respond to of 26752
 
Kendall, while you're in the UK check out LMIN : LASTMINUTE.COM PLC ADS (NASDAQ).
Everyone knows the Brits use travel packages.



To: kendall harmon who wrote (19868)7/6/2002 11:59:18 AM
From: Susan G  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 26752
 
Kendall, an interesting article from Business Week on homeowner's insurance

BUSINESSWEEK INVESTOR

JUNE 24, 2002

Keeping the House Covered

Insurers are raising premiums and dropping more homeowners' policies

Have you been hit with a big increase in your homeowner's insurance premium? No surprise there, if yes. After years in which homeowner's rates have remained relatively flat, they're rising at a projected 6% clip this year, following a 6% gain in 2001. In Texas, California, and Florida, the hikes have been higher, averaging over 15%. And insurers are dropping a growing number of policyholders--not because they don't pay their bills, but because they file too many claims. "The rule of thumb is, if you have three claims in a two-year period, you're gone," says Iris Lynch, personal insurance manager at CAL Insurance & Associates, an independent agency in San Francisco.

Prices will likely keep rising, too. After years of losing money in a bid to boost market share, insurers are scrambling to restore profitability. Insurers decided they could no longer afford the red ink after industry losses more than doubled, to an estimated $8.9 billion, in 2001. The causes include increased payouts for damage from natural disasters, such as tornadoes, and costly lawsuits over mold damage in Texas and other states. If you've been notified of a premium hike, don't accept it as a fait accompli. Instead, try to soften the blow by shopping around or altering your policy or home to qualify for discounts.

Whether your rates are going up or not, it's always a good idea to look for a better deal. Your first stop should be at your state insurance department's Web site. You'll find a link to it at www.naic.org. Here you can find out which companies sell homeowner's insurance in your state and, often, their average premiums. Also, check for consumer complaints and see how financially secure a prospect is.

At Web sites including www.insure.com, www.insurance.com, and www.quotesmith.com, you can compare price quotes on some homeowner's policies. But since these sites offer only a limited sampling, you'll need to hit the phones.

You may find other insurers don't welcome your business. If you have filed a claim recently--or just notified your carrier of damage--don't be surprised if you have trouble finding a reasonably priced new policy. "When I went to shop around, I was told no company would touch me because I had a water leak," says Jim Davis, who lives in West Lake Hills, Tex. Although Davis never filed a formal claim, his premium nearly doubled this year after he notified his insurer that his home had suffered water damage. Many insurers have access to claims information through a national database.

Another downside to switching carriers is you may forfeit discounts reserved for long-term customers. If you file a claim soon after moving to a new company, watch out. You may put yourself at risk of cancellation when your policy is up for renewal. That's because insurers are more tolerant of claims from long-term customers with clean histories than they are of new clients.

Before signing on the dotted line, ask your agent or insurer how many claims you can file before raising a red flag. State Farm, the nation's largest home insurer, says it may reexamine policies in the mid-Atlantic states for possible termination when two claims are filed in three years. Companies are particularly unforgiving of claims that arise due to negligence--for example, a leaky washing machine hose--as opposed to, say, the weather, agents say.

Whether you switch or stay put, a good way to save money is to raise your deductible. For example, State Farm clients can save about 11% by increasing their out-of-pocket payments to $500, from $250. Agree to cover $1,000 instead of $250, and your premium will fall by about 28%. For a $250,000 home in Prince George's County, Md., moving to a $1,000 deductible will cut your premium from $800 a year to $584. The key is to assess what you're comfortable shelling out if a problem occurs. "I have customers with $10,000 deductibles," says Kelly Overcash, an account executive based in Clearwater, Fla., at Acordia, a national independent agency.

Sure, that means you will have to defray more repair costs. But because insurers often raise rates or drop customers who file multiple claims, it may prove cheaper to take care of small items yourself. "Use the insurance policy for catastrophes only," says Overcash.

If you haven't already done so, consolidate your homeowner's and automobile coverage with one carrier. This can save you as much as 15%. And find out if you qualify for discounts. Often insurers grant them to homeowners who take steps, such as installing an alarm system, that reduce the likelihood of claims (table).

Make sure you're not paying for unnecessary extras. If your home is not prone to water damage, for example, you may want to drop sewer and drain backup coverage, which kicks in when your sump pump or sewer overflows and can cost up to $100 a year, says Tom Schneider, owner of the Schneider Insurance Agency in Gahanna and Newark, Ohio.

Finally, since many insurers consider your credit history when calculating your premium, make sure your credit report is accurate. Indeed, as credit scores fall, it's not unusual to see insurance premiums jump by as much as 50%--or for coverage to be denied, says Robert Hunter, director of insurance at the Consumer Federation of America. Ask your insurer which credit-scoring agency it uses. You are entitled to a free copy of your report if your company cites credit problems as a reason for denying coverage or hiking rates, says Hunter.

If you are among the estimated 6% of homeowners to receive a cancellation notice this year--a level that's about twice the average in recent years--don't hesitate to challenge the decision. Sometimes, you can negotiate a reversal. One tactic is to agree to a higher deductible.

Still, since agents report a low success rate for appeals, shop immediately for new coverage. You will generally have 30 to 60 days before your old policy expires. Don't allow your insurance to lapse, since many carriers reject uninsured applicants, says Mike McCartin, owner of Joseph W. McCartin Insurance in College Park, Md. If you feel your insurer has treated you unfairly, file a complaint with your state insurance department.

Don't get flustered by rising rates--or a policy cancellation. By shopping around or changing your policy's terms, you may be able to save on your homeowner's premium this year.