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.
Politics : Sioux Nation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Sea Otter who wrote (156662)12/22/2008 4:09:54 AM
From: SiouxPal  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 361732
 
That was over the top. Pardon.



To: Sea Otter who wrote (156662)12/22/2008 4:10:38 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 361732
 
Firm Built on Madoff Ties Faces Tough Questions
_______________________________________________________________

By ALEX BERENSON and ERIC KONIGSBERG
The New York Times
December 22, 2008

Since Bernard L. Madoff was arrested 11 days ago in connection with a $50 billion Ponzi scheme, the Fairfield Greenwich Group has portrayed itself as an unwitting victim of the fraud, the biggest of Mr. Madoff’s many losers.

Clients of Fairfield, a secretive hedge fund advisory company based in Connecticut, lost $7.3 billion to Mr. Madoff’s fund. But for Fairfield, working with Mr. Madoff was hugely profitable.

Internal documents from Fairfield show that the firm has taken more than $500 million in fees since 2003 alone from the money it placed with Mr. Madoff. Nearly all those fees went to a handful of Fairfield executives, including Walter M. Noel, Fairfield’s founder, who used the money to build a glamorous life, splitting his time between homes in New York, Connecticut, Florida and the Caribbean.

As it raised money all over the world, Fairfield also made detailed pledges about how it would monitor and track Mr. Madoff’s investments, the documents show. Now, investors and regulators are sure to ask whether Fairfield made good on those promises — or whether it was a facilitator of the Madoff scandal as well as a victim.

Similar questions may arise for the dozens of banks and hedge funds around the world that reaped extraordinary fees for steering investments to Mr. Madoff over the last decade. None of them, however, earned more from their Madoff business than Fairfield did during the firms’ 20-year relationship.

Fairfield promised its investors that money could not be moved from its accounts with Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities without two signatures. It said that it would independently calculate the value of the funds it invested at Mr. Madoff’s firm at least once a week. It promised to reconcile statements from individual trades with Mr. Madoff’s custodial records.

It is not clear what Fairfield did to make good on those pledges.

A spokesman for Fairfield, Thomas Mulligan, offered only a statement characterizing the firm as a victim of Mr. Madoff.

“Fairfield Greenwich Group is in the process of gathering and reviewing all of the factual information relevant to its having been defrauded by Bernard Madoff,” Mr. Mulligan said in a written statement. “It made efforts to verify the information it received from Madoff. Following its review, Fairfield Greenwich expects to be in a position to provide more specifics.”

Mr. Mulligan also said that Fairfield Greenwich, and its partners, had about $60 million invested with Mr. Madoff.

That sum, while significant, is less than 1 percent of the overall amount that the firm placed with Mr. Madoff, and barely 10 percent of the fees that Fairfield reaped since 2003 from its client investments with Mr. Madoff.

Fairfield raised money for Mr. Madoff mainly through a fund called Fairfield Sentry, which supposedly had $7 billion in assets by 2007. As it sought new investors for Fairfield Sentry, Fairfield highlighted its close control over the fund and the protections it would provide investors.

In a “due diligence questionnaire” made available to potential investors in Sentry, Fairfield promised that it calculated the value of Sentry’s assets weekly and monthly. It also said Citco Fund Services, an independent hedge fund administrator based in the Netherlands, separately calculated the value of Sentry’s assets each month.

Further, Fairfield promised that both it and Citco double-checked the monthly statements from Mr. Madoff’s firm it received against records of the assets held in the fund. To prevent unauthorized stock trades or the unauthorized removal of cash from Sentry’s accounts, “the movement of cash among the Fund’s accounts requires two signatures,” Sentry said.

Mr. Mulligan did not respond to questions about whether Mr. Madoff could have moved money or securities out of Fairfield Sentry’s accounts without its approval. Reached Friday afternoon, a manager at Citco Fund Services in Amsterdam asked for questions via e-mail, then did not respond to them.

Another document, this one prepared in 2007 as Fairfield Greenwich considered selling itself in what at the time was a very rich market for hedge-fund advisory companies, shows just how much money it made from its relationship with Mr. Madoff.

According to the document, Fairfield generated $250 million in revenue and $200 million in profit for the year that ended Sep. 30, 2007. Nearly 65 percent of that money came from fees on Sentry, and nearly all the profits were distributed among the firm’s 21 partners. Fairfield’s employees were also lavishly compensated, with at least four receiving more than $5 million in pay.

In early 2008, several private equity and investment firms were approached by Fairfield about purchasing a share of the company. A partner of one that considered buying a stake that he estimated was between one-third and one-half of Fairfield — the firm was valuing itself somewhere between $1 billion and $1.5 billion — said that he was scared off about 20 minutes into his initial meeting with a team of Fairfield managers.

“They were just incredibly squishy and vague even during the warm-up,” said the prospective buyer, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of a non-disclosure agreement with Fairfield. “I asked them to tell me about the manager of the fund Sentry feeds into, and I was told, ‘We don’t really talk about him.’ ”

Like Mr. Madoff’s firm, Fairfield was at least in part a family business. Four of Mr. Noel’s sons-in-law worked at Fairfield. But unlike Mr. Madoff, Fairfield’s partners, led by Mr. Noel, were not shy about spending their money and taking a high profile in wealthy New York society circles.

“The last few years, they really made a play to be a part of that New York-Southampton social axis,” David Patrick Columbia, the editor of NewYorkSocialDiary.com, said of Mr. Noel and his family. “It happened so fast that you really noticed them.”

Mr. Noel, whose primary residence and office remain in Greenwich, has at least five luxury homes. Along with his Greenwich house, whose value has been estimated at $4.2 million, he has homes in Southampton and Palm Beach. And since 2000, the Noels have also maintained a pied-à-terre at 812 Park Avenue. The combined value of those homes is more than $20 million.

Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company



To: Sea Otter who wrote (156662)12/22/2008 4:39:34 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 361732
 
Venture capitalists brace for grim 2009

google.com

SAN FRANCISCO (AFP) — The coming year threatens to challenge the survival skills of startups and venture capital firms alike, but superstars may rise in 2010 from the world's scorched economic landscape.

Such was the sentiment reflected on Wednesday in the results of an annual "predictions survey" of members of the National Venture Capital Association.

A survey of some 400 US venture capitalists (VCs) between November 24 and December 12 revealed that most expect Darwinian forces to be brutal for fledgling businesses and their investors in the coming year.

"We think things will be better in 2010 after a very rotten 2009," said association president Mark Heeson.

"The operative word is 'survive.' Venture capitalists in general think 2010 will be an important year in that there will be many phoenixes rising from the ashes of 2009."

Investors see startups in clean fuel and biotechnology industries poised for starring roles in the evolving global economy.

For the coming year, though, investment in startups is expected to wane as venture capitalists channel more cash to supporting young companies they are already backing.

Venture capitalists typically get returns on their investments, and free up cash to put into new enterprises, when startups go public with stock offerings.

The market for initial public offerings is among the victims of the financial crisis.

Only six US companies have gone public this year as compared with 86 doing so in 2007, according to Heeson.

Ninety-two percent of the surveyed venture capitalists predict investment will slow by 10 percent or more in 2009, dropping from the 30 billion dollar annual figure of recent years to below 27 billion dollars.

More than half of the VCs, however, expect to invest as much next year as they have this year, the survey shows.

Shrewd VCs realize that tough economic times have proven to give birth to winning companies, according to Heeson.

"Entrepreneurs out in a difficult time are not tourists," Heeson said.

"These are driven individuals who believe strongly in their ideas and are extremely disciplined. These folks do get funding. Some of the best companies around are funded at the real low points in our economy."

The consensus among VCs is strong that investment next year will tank in the hard-hit semiconductor, media, and wireless communications industries.

VCs predict the slowdown in investment will be global, with the outlook particularly grim for Europe.

"2009 will be a year of anticipation for the venture capital industry as the economic turmoil will engender a fair amount of Darwinian change," Heeson said.

"The recession and shuttered IPO market will place tremendous pressure on portfolio companies to tighten their belts and re-tool. That said ... there is no recession on innovation and great ideas will still get funded."



To: Sea Otter who wrote (156662)12/23/2008 2:40:35 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 361732
 
Google Said to Replace Cash Gift With Android Phone (Update1)

By Brian Womack and Melita Marie Garza

Dec. 23 (Bloomberg) -- Google Inc., owner of the world’s most-used search engine, is giving employees mobile phones instead of cash gifts this year as it reins in costs during the recession, according to a person familiar with the matter.

About 85 percent of workers will get a handset powered by Google’s Android operating system as a holiday gift, said the person, who asked not to be identified. Google handed out $1,000 cash gifts to most employees last year.

Chief Executive Officer Eric Schmidt said last month that Google is seeking to control expenses and add fewer jobs as the global slump curbs online advertising growth. T-Mobile USA Inc. began marketing the G1 Android phone in October, offering many of the same features as Apple Inc.’s iPhone, including Web browsing. The holiday gift is separate from the performance bonus handed out by the company, the person said.

“The current economic crisis requires us to be more conservative about how we spend our money,” Mountain View, California-based Google said in an internal memo that was posted on technology industry blog Valleywag.

The memo lists 17 countries where the phone won’t work, including Brazil, Russia, India and China. Employees in those countries will receive about $400, the cash value of the phone, Google said in the memo.

Google rose $1.14 to $298.25 at 12:50 p.m. New York time in Nasdaq Stock market trading. The shares had lost 57 percent this year before today.

Krista Bessinger, a Google spokeswoman, didn’t return a call seeking comment.

Ad Spending

Google, which offers employee benefits such as free gourmet lunches and massages, has clamped down on costs as the recession squeezes online ad revenue. Douglas Anmuth, an analyst at Barclays Capital in New York, lowered his forecast for U.S. Internet ad spending last week by 11 percent to $25.1 billion in 2009.

Google added 519 workers in the third quarter, compared with 2,130 in the same period a year earlier. Google said last month it would reduce the use of contract workers. At the end of the quarter, the company had more than 20,000 regular employees, up from almost 11,000 at the end of 2006.

Technology companies throughout Silicon Valley and beyond are grappling with a slowing economy, forcing them to cut workers and roll back other expenses. Printer and computer maker Hewlett-Packard Co. is freezing salaries to lower expenses, people with knowledge of that decision said. Technology services company Unisys Corp. said yesterday it was cutting about 4.5 percent of its workforce and halting some pay raises.

Half of chief information officers are looking to cut consulting-services costs, 35 percent want to reduce computer and server expenses, and 23 percent are seeking savings on software, according to a Goldman Sachs Group Inc. survey.

To contact the reporter on this story: Brian Womack in San Francisco at Bwomack1@bloomberg.net; Melita Marie Garza in New York at mgarza4@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: December 23, 2008 12:51 EST



To: Sea Otter who wrote (156662)12/24/2008 5:59:17 AM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 361732
 
Silicon Valley Braces for Firings as Technology Outlook Worsens

By Rochelle Garner

Dec. 24 (Bloomberg) -- Silicon Valley, the technology mecca once considered immune to fallout from the global financial meltdown, now faces the biggest cutbacks since the dot-com crash.

“Lots of my friends have been laid off,” Peter Raulwing, a project manager for Microsoft Corp., said during lunch at a Starbucks in Palo Alto, California. “I absolutely watch what I spend. I feel lucky I’ve survived, but you never really know.”

He has reason for concern. Global spending on computers and software will slide 8 percent next year in the U.S., Western Europe and Japan, according to Goldman Sachs Group Inc. With a 7 percent unemployment rate, Silicon Valley has about 4,000 fewer jobs today than this time last year, the Center for the Continuing Study of the California Economy said last week.

“The recession finally reached Silicon Valley,” Stephen Levy, the Palo Alto-based research organization’s director, said in an interview. The center based its conclusions on government unemployment data.

Technology companies with headquarters in Silicon Valley -- a corridor of office parks stretching between San Francisco and San Jose -- have announced at least 38,000 job cuts since September. Hewlett-Packard Co., Yahoo! Inc., Adobe Systems Inc., Sun Microsystems Inc. and Palm Inc. are among the firms paring their workforces.

More Pain

The region will probably feel more pain starting next month, said Madeline McMenamin, a senior consultant for workforce consulting firm Watson Wyatt Worldwide Inc.

“People are finishing their forecasts and budgets for the next year, and those will reflect continued downsizing,” McMenamin said in an interview from Santa Clara, California. “We need to brace for tough times.”

Raulwing said he’s put off buying a 42-inch flat-screen television, has postponed vacations, and is dining out less to save money.

“It feels more scary,” said Lutz Haentzschel, a software developer sitting with his laptop at a coffee shop in Palo Alto. He moved to the Bay Area 17 years ago and works for Siemens AG, Europe’s largest engineering company. “I’m waiting for my shares to recover.”

Tighter credit and slumping home prices mean Stephen Johnston can’t get the refinancing he needs to consolidate his loans and save on taxes.

Saving Gas

A software engineer at Microsoft, Johnston and his wife own a house in Fremont and another in Hayward -- across the San Francisco Bay from his Palo Alto office. Johnston said he went further into debt with an eight-month remodel of their Fremont home. To save $4,000 a year on gas and bridge tolls, the two-car family now drives only one, increasing Johnston’s commute time to two-and-a-half hours.

“I leave my house in Fremont, drop off my daughter at day care six miles away, commute with my wife across the bridge to Redwood City, and then drive to Palo Alto,” Johnston said.

While there isn’t much optimism in Silicon Valley right now, the slowdown will be less severe than the fallout after the dot-com bubble in 2000, said Doug Henton, chief executive officer of Collaborative Economics Inc., a consulting firm in Mountain View, California. About 200,000 jobs disappeared from the region in 2001 and 2002, he said.

“The last time around, whole swaths of the technology market vaporized,” John Challenger, CEO of executive search firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas Inc., said in an interview from Chicago. “We won’t have the same impact this time. This recession is from banks and others dragging technology down with it. And people in the Valley realize how important personal networking is.”

Job Networking

Trip O’Dell is counting on that network. He and 600 colleagues at Adobe, the biggest maker of graphic-design programs, lost their jobs this month. With a 2-year-old daughter and another baby on the way, O’Dell plans to create games for Apple Inc.’s iPhone or develop applications for Facebook Inc.’s social-networking site.

“The benefit of being on the wrong side of a layoff is you have access to all these others with talent who suddenly have a lot of time on their hands,” said O’Dell, 35. There are still opportunities for people who use personal networks to find new jobs and start companies, he said.

Silicon Valley’s workers will have to spend more time networking next year as companies continue to cut jobs, Challenger said.

“The first quarter is going to be rough waters,” Challenger said. “The strength of the workforce lies in their flexibility, and how they use their knowledge of each other.”

To contact the reporter on this story: Rochelle Garner in San Francisco at rgarner4@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: December 24, 2008 00:01 EST