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 : The New Economy and its Winners -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (44511)9/16/2008 8:19:32 PM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 57684
 
Chambers 'Never' More Comfortable With Cisco Outlook (Update5)

By Vivek Shankar

Sept. 16 (Bloomberg) -- Cisco Systems Inc. Chief Executive Officer John Chambers said he's "never" been more comfortable with his long-term forecast, reassuring investors that network- equipment demand will hold up amid an economic slowdown.

Cisco will meet its target of 12 percent to 17 percent annual revenue growth over the next few years, Chambers told analysts today in San Jose, California. Cisco, which missed that range in the past two quarters, has predicted a sales increase of 8 percent this period and 8.5 percent in the next.

The comments contrast with a prediction today by Dell Inc., the second-largest personal-computer maker, which expects a ``further softening'' in demand. Cisco, the biggest maker of networking devices, will make more money from its TelePresence videoconferencing system, as well as from phone and cable companies expanding networks to handle video, Chambers said.

``We've been conservative over the last few quarters,'' said Chambers, 59. ``When we make very aggressive, bold statements -- if you look back three to five years later -- we've almost always achieved those.''

The company's customers still expect the economy to rebound in the first half of next year, Chambers said, reiterating a previous projection.

Cheaper Startups?

The drought of initial public offerings has made it cheaper to acquire startups, Chambers said, since young companies have fewer options. Startups cost a fourth of what they did a year ago, said Chambers, who didn't say if Cisco was making any acquisitions.

Businesses will respond to Cisco's TelePresence videoconferencing system, which costs as much as $299,000, in the same way that consumers reacted to Apple Inc.'s iPhone, boosting orders, Chambers said. TelePresence sales may reach an annual rate of $1 billion by the second half of 2009, said Senior Vice President Marthin De Beer.

Cisco, based in San Jose, rose 42 cents, or 1.9 percent, to $22.80 at 4 p.m. New York time in Nasdaq Stock Market trading. The stock has declined 16 percent this year.

In August, Cisco reported fourth-quarter profit that beat analysts' estimates by a penny and said sales this quarter and next would be in line with projections. Revenue surpassed $10 billion for the first time.

Economic Pressure

Cisco may continue to see economic challenges for the next few quarters, Chambers said at the time. Last November, he said a ``dramatic'' drop in demand from U.S. financial and auto companies had curbed sales growth.

By 2012, online videoconferencing traffic alone will be five times the amount of Internet data in 2000, Chambers said.

Half of the network capacity used by Cisco's employees comes from use of TelePresence videoconferencing systems, said De Beer, who heads the emerging technologies group. Cisco has 200 TelePresence customers and has orders for 1,000 more systems, he said.

The company is now selling 50 of its CRS-1 routers a week, Chambers said. At its introduction in 2004, some analysts had predicted that the product, which allows telephone companies to provide video applications, wouldn't get more than 50 orders in total, Chambers said. The CRS-1 is Cisco's most expensive router.

Bellwether Company

Investors consider Cisco to be a barometer for the technology industry because it dominates the market for routers and switches, which direct and control the flow of data over networks.

The Standard & Poor's 500 Information Technology Index, which consists of 72 technology stocks, fell 3.6 percent yesterday after Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. filed for bankruptcy and Merrill Lynch & Co. agreed to a merger with Bank of America Corp. The S&P technology index reached an intra-day 52-week low of 317.47 today.

The economy will slow to a 1.2 percent annual growth rate this quarter, or less than half the prior period's pace, according to a Bloomberg survey.

Almost half of big corporations globally have curbed technology budgets for the next year to help cope with the economic slump, Forrester Research Inc. said last week. About 43 percent of businesses have reduced spending plans, with more cuts taking place in the U.S. than in Europe, the Cambridge, Massachusetts-based researcher said.

To contact the reporter on this story: Vivek Shankar in San Francisco at vshankar3@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: September 16, 2008 20:07 EDT



To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (44511)9/16/2008 8:26:53 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 57684
 
Forrester Revises IT Spending Forecast

byteandswitch.com

Storage spending should pick up next year, research firm says

By Paul Travis, September 16, 2008, 2:15 PM

In the wake of the trouble on Wall Street, Forrester Research today released revised U.S. IT spending projections for this year and next.

In short: IT spending overall in 2008 will be better than expected, while 2009 will be worse than expected. But storage spending should begin to pick up next year.

Forrester said it was projecting that overall U.S. IT spending in 2008 will increase 5.4 percent from a year earlier; its original forecast was for only a 3.4 percent increase. But 2009 won't be as good as Forrester expected; it revised its original forecast of a 9.4 percent increase in U.S. IT spending down to 6.1 percent. IT spending should bounce back to 10.1 percent in 2010, Forrester told clients last week.

The research firm said it was releasing the information earlier than it planned because the turmoil in the financial markets had prompted a wave of inquiries about the impact on the tech market and IT spending. The revised forecast was going to be released later this month.

"The timing of the U.S. slowdown has turned out to be different than we expected. We projected a slowdown in the first half of 2008 and it didn't happen," Andrew Bartels, vice president and principal analyst at Forrester Research, told Byte and Switch. The main reasons the slowdown didn't happen in the first half was that the federal government's economic stimulus package worked and U.S. exports were strong because of the weak dollar, he said.

The slowdown is taking place now, he said, and the chaos on Wall Street will contribute to the downturn. "The major impact of the problems on Wall Street will be job losses and more credit tightening. Banks will become more cautious in lending, and that will take away the grease that drives economy. So we are still heading into a recession, and that will pull down tech investment."

He said a review of 60 years of data shows that what happens in the overall economy hits the tech market one or two quarters later. He expects tech investment to fall in the next several quarters and begin to bounce back in the second half of 2009.

As for storage spending, he said there has been little or no growth so far this year -- perhaps 1 percent. "Spending has been very weak in the first two quarters, which is not a surprise. One of the first things CIOs do when the outlook is hazy is delay and defer capital investment."

But Bartels expects storage spending to begin to pick up next year, although he didn't have specific projections for the storage market. "You reach a point when you need to buy," he said. "CIOs like to have storage capacity that is around 150 percent of current needs. When the economy is bad they might take that down to 120 percent. But there is no let up in the flood of information that needs to be stored and when the margin gets thin they will start buying again. We think that will happen next year."



To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (44511)9/17/2008 1:06:17 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 57684
 
Fed’s $85 Billion Loan Rescues Insurer
_______________________________________________________________

By EDMUND L. ANDREWS, MICHAEL J. de la MERCED and MARY WILLIAMS WALSH
THE NEW YORK TIMES
September 17, 2008

WASHINGTON — Fearing a financial crisis worldwide, the Federal Reserve reversed course on Tuesday and agreed to an $85 billion bailout that would give the government control of the troubled insurance giant American International Group.

The decision, only two weeks after the Treasury took over the federally chartered mortgage finance companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, is the most radical intervention in private business in the central bank’s history.

With time running out after A.I.G. failed to get a bank loan to avoid bankruptcy, Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr. and the Fed chairman, Ben S. Bernanke, convened a meeting with House and Senate leaders on Capitol Hill about 6:30 p.m. Tuesday to explain the rescue plan. They emerged just after 7:30 p.m. with Mr. Paulson and Mr. Bernanke looking grim, but with top lawmakers initially expressing support for the plan. But the bailout is likely to prove controversial, because it effectively puts taxpayer money at risk while protecting bad investments made by A.I.G. and other institutions it does business with.

What frightened Fed and Treasury officials was not simply the prospect of another giant corporate bankruptcy, but A.I.G.’s role as an enormous provider of esoteric financial insurance contracts to investors who bought complex debt securities. They effectively required A.I.G. to cover losses suffered by the buyers in the event the securities defaulted. It meant A.I.G. was potentially on the hook for billions of dollars’ worth of risky securities that were once considered safe.

If A.I.G. had collapsed — and been unable to pay all of its insurance claims — institutional investors around the world would have been instantly forced to reappraise the value of those securities, and that in turn would have reduced their own capital and the value of their own debt. Small investors, including anyone who owned money market funds with A.I.G. securities, could have been hurt, too. And some insurance policy holders were worried, even though they have some protections.

“It would have been a chain reaction,” said Uwe Reinhardt, a professor of economics at Princeton University. “The spillover effects could have been incredible.”

Financial markets, which on Monday had plunged over worries about A.I.G.’s possible collapse and the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers, reacted with relief to the news of the bailout. In anticipation of a deal, stocks rose about 1 percent in the United States on Tuesday. Asian stock markets opened with strong gains on Wednesday morning, but the rally lost steam as worries returned about the extent of harm to the global financial system.

Still, the move will likely start an intense political debate during the presidential election campaign over who is to blame for the financial crisis that prompted the rescue.

Representative Barney Frank, Democrat of Massachusetts and chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, said Mr. Paulson and Mr. Bernanke had not requested any new legislative authority for the bailout at Tuesday night’s meeting. “The secretary and the chairman of the Fed, two Bush appointees, came down here and said, ‘We’re from the government, we’re here to help them,’ ” Mr. Frank said. “I mean this is one more affirmation that the lack of regulation has caused serious problems. That the private market screwed itself up and they need the government to come help them unscrew it.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi quickly criticized the rescue, calling the $85 billion a "staggering sum." Ms. Pelosi said the bailout was "just too enormous for the American people to guarantee." Her comments suggested that the Bush administration and the Fed would face sharp questioning in Congressional hearings. President Bush was briefed earlier in the afternoon.

A major concern is that the A.I.G. rescue won’t be the last. At Tuesday night’s meeting. lawmakers asked if there was any way of knowing if this would be the final major government intervention. Mr. Bernanke and Mr. Paulson said there was not. Indeed, the markets remain worried about the financial condition of major regional banks as well as that of Washington Mutual, the nation’s largest thrift.

The decision was a remarkable turnaround by the Bush administration and Mr. Paulson, who had flatly refused over the weekend to risk taxpayer money to prevent the collapse of Lehman Brothers or the distressed sale of Merrill Lynch to Bank of America. Earlier this year, the government bailed out another investment bank, Bear Stearns, by engineering a sale to JPMorgan Chase that left taxpayers on the hook for up to $29 billion of bad investments by Bear Stearns. The government hoped at the time that this unusual step would both calm markets and lead to a recovery by the financial system. But critics warned at the time that it would only encourage others to seek bailouts, and the eventual costs to the government would be staggering.

The decision to rescue A.I.G. came on the same day that the Fed decided to leave its benchmark interest rate unchanged at 2 percent, turning aside hopes by many on Wall Street that the Fed would try to shore up confidence by cutting rates once again.

Fed and Treasury officials initially turned a cold shoulder to A.I.G. when company executives pleaded on Sunday night for the Fed to provide a $40 billion bridge loan to stave off a crippling downgrade of its credit ratings as a result of investment losses that totalled tens of billions of dollars.

But government officials reluctantly backed away from their tough-minded approach after a failed attempt to line up private financing with help from JPMorgan Chase and Goldman Sachs, which told federal officials they simply could not raise the money given both the general turmoil in credit markets and the specific fears of problems with A.I.G. The complexity of A.I.G.’s business, and the fact that it does business with thousands of companies around the globe, make its survival crucial at a time when there is stress throughout the financial system worldwide.

“It’s the interconnectedness and the fear of the unknown,” said Roger Altman, a former Treasury official under President Bill Clinton. “The prospect of the world’s largest insurer failing, together with the interconnectedness and the uncertainty about the collateral damage — that’s why it’s scaring people so much.”

Under the plan, the Fed will make a two-year loan to A.I.G. of up to $85 billion and, in return, will receive warrants that can be converted into common stock giving the government nearly 80 percent ownership of the insurer, if the existing shareholders approve. All of the company’s assets are being pledged to secure the loan. Existing stockholders have already seen the value of their stock drop more than 90 percent in the last year. Now they will suffer even more, although they will not be totally wiped out. The Fed was advised by Morgan Stanley, and A.I.G. by the Blackstone Group.

Fed staffers said that they expected A.I.G. would repay the loan before it comes due in two years, either through the sales of assets or through operations.

Asked why Lehman was allowed to fail, but A.I.G. was not, a Fed staffer said the markets were more prepared for the failure of an investment bank. Robert B. Willumstad, who became A.I.G.’s chief executive in June, will be succeeded by Edward M. Liddy, the former chairman of the Allstate Corporation. Under the terms of his employment contract with A.I.G., Mr. Willumstad could receive an exit package worth as much as $8.7 million if his removal is determined to be “without cause,” according to an analysis by James F. Reda and Associates.

A.I.G. is a sprawling empire built by Maurice R. Greenberg, who acquired hundreds of businesses all over the world until he was ousted amid an accounting scandal in 2005. Many of A.I.G.’s subsidiaries wrote insurance of various types. Others made home loans and leased aircraft. The diverse array of companies were more valuable under a single corporate parent like A.I.G., because their business cycles offset each other, giving A.I.G. a relatively smooth stream of revenue and income.

After Mr. Greenberg’s departure, A.I.G. restated its books over a five-year period and instituted conservative new accounting policies. But before the company could really rebuild itself, it became embroiled in the mortgage crisis. Some of its insurance companies ended up with mortgage-backed securities on their books, but the real trouble involved the insurance that its financial products unit offered investors for complex debt securities.

Its stock tumbled faster this year as first the debt securities lost value, and then the insurance contracts, called credit default swaps, came under a cloud.

The Fed’s extraordinary rescue of A.I.G. underscores how much fear remains about the destructive potential of the complex financial instruments, like credit default swaps, that brought A.I.G. to its knees. The market for such instruments has exploded in recent years, but it is almost entirely unregulated. When A.I.G. began to teeter in the last few days, it became clear that if it defaulted on its commitments under the swaps, it could set off a devastating chain reaction through the financial system.

“We are witnessing a rather unique event in the history of the United States,” said Suresh Sundaresan, the Chase Manhattan Bank professor of economics and finance at Columbia University. He thought the near brush with catastrophe would bring about an acceleration of efforts within the Treasury and the Fed to put safety controls on the use of credit default swaps.

“They’re going to tighten the screws and say, ‘We want some safeguards on this market,’ ” he said of the Fed and the Treasury.

The swaps are not securities and are not regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission. And while they perform the same function as an insurance policy, they are not insurance in the conventional sense, so insurance regulators do not monitor them either.

That situation set the stage for deep losses for all the countless investors and other entities that had entered into A.I.G.’s swap contracts. Of the $441 billion in credit default swaps that A.I.G. listed at midyear, more than three-quarters were held by European banks.

“Suddenly banks would be holding a lot of bondlike instruments that were no longer insured,” Mr. Sundaresan said. “They would have to mark them down. And when they marked them down, they would require more capital. And then they would have to go out and raise capital in these markets, which is very difficult.”

Mr. Sundaresan said that for a new market arrangement to succeed, it would have to create a clearinghouse to track swaps trading, and daily requirements to post collateral, so that a huge counterparty would not suddenly find itself having to come up with billions of dollars overnight, the way A.I.G. did.

-Edmund L. Andrews reported from Washington. Michael J. de la Merced and Mary Williams Walsh reported from New York. David M. Herszenhorn contributed reporting from Washington and Eric Dash from New York.



To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (44511)9/17/2008 2:15:32 AM
From: Elroy  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 57684
 
Any view on WFR down here? It's trading at 6.4x forecast next 12 months earnings, with 21% of its market cap net cash. Revenues expected to grow 29% over the next year. If the forecasts are anywhere near accurate 6.4x PE seems ridiculously low. They might have some trouble in the current Q due to Hurricane Ike, but that should get resolved within a week or so.