Much has been speculated about what will work and what will fail expectations in this deal, and much has been trying to find the silver lining on behalf of analysts on either side of the fence, those who lean towards big blue or those who feel it sinking. One perspective interests me and makes the deal in retrospect not at all interesting and very predictable indeed. Looking back at why Creative did not succeed at the digital music player business and why apple owns it today one can learn the lessons Lenovo learnt in it. Creative had the cheaper comparable product with similar quality. What it did not have is the marketing and brand name that apple had. To summarize what it lacked was management skills and not technical skills. Lenovo has a reasonable market share in the Chinese PC market share. It is only natural that it will lose some as the entry of foreign players becomes more and more viable to them economically. The PC market is one which tends to move toward a low entropy situation, where all players are similar and there isn't one big player as there is simply nothing one manufacturer can give that another can't. And since all end up giving the same thing switching and compatibility issues aren't there. The operating system make for instance is so strange that. Apart from Linux, which thrives on compatibility, every other system wants to trap users in it for eternity. if it hadn't been for the selfishness of predecessors of Steve Jobs and Sam Palmisiano things might have been different.
So coming back to Lenovo. No one doubts the Asian management on low cost and fairly reliable manufacturing and assembling. But their record at managing international companies is suspect with the exceptions of Toyota and Sony. Even Nissan, a phoenix of the auto sector, needed French eyes to see the obvious. Lenovo goes on to buy IBM's proven and newly resurgent managerial prowess in this deal and already has wasted no time in shifting its headquarters to new York. To find such foresight in a public sector undertaking of China should scare our Uncle Sam. The Chinese seem to be beating them at their own game. First you had American contractors hire Chinese labor to make the products cheap and sell them below par to get the market in America. So they ended up paying 30% of the cost to china. Now china buys the American manager's brain for a mere percentage of the cost and makes it cheap in china with no government problems of outsourcing to stop it and takes all the money back home. The only things stopping more of this is that not many companies have the kind of money Lenovo has. But isn't this a self catalytic process!
Wednesday, December 29, 2004
Tuesday, December 28, 2004
Kodak's new image by emphasizing ease of use
Ten years ago, Kodak manufactured the first digital camera aimed for sale to retail consumers, the $749 QuickTake 100, sold by Apple Computer. But by 2000, Sony had muscled in as the leading digital camera maker and Kodak was hovering near 5 percent of the market, a dire position, while the film business which it had dominated for a decade was starting to collapse.
Kodak called in anthropologists and other social scientists, who observed camera users in an effort to learn how taking and printing pictures fit into their daily lives. They also followed prospective camera buyers into stores to understand how they chose certain models from the crowded shelves.
The research was part of Kodak's effort to reorganize its digital camera product line by transforming product design, manufacturing and marketing. The company's big decision was to focus on low- priced, easy-to-use cameras that would appeal to women, who take the majority of snapshots, rather than Sony's forte of shiny toys for gadget-loving men.
That strategy paid off as digital cameras moved into the mass market. This year, Kodak's EasyShare brand has almost 19 percent of digital camera sales in the United States, a very close second to Sony and ahead of Canon, according to International Data Corp., a technology research firm.
"Kodak is up because they are really committed to ease of use and they communicate that very well," said Michelle Slaughter, the director of digital photography trends at InfoTrends/CAP Ventures, a market research firm. "Kodak tends to excel at the touchy-feely side of the market that tends to appeal to first-time buyers and mainstream consumers, especially women," she said.
Kodak certainly needed a success. Since selling its pharmaceutical and chemical divisions a decade ago, the company has shed a third of its jobs and has seen its revenue fall to $13 billion last year from $15 billion in 1995. Now it says it expects to eliminate as many as a quarter of its remaining 64,000 jobs over the next three years.
Sales of film and other traditional products were down 20 percent in the third quarter of 2004, even more than expected. But digital products consumer and professional cameras as well as printing systems sold to drugstores and the like were up 39 percent.
The company recently stopped selling reloadable film cameras in the United States.
Profitability in digital products has been harder to achieve than sales. Kodak has said that 2004 would be the first full year in which its digital camera division would be profitable. And it will say only that the line is profitable when its high-margin accessory sales are included.
To the great relief of camera manufacturers, buyers have not yet pressed for lower prices, as they have in some markets, like DVD players. The average price has remained just under $300, but consumers expect that the makers will continuously provide more features especially megapixels of resolution and zoom capacities at those prices. Any maker with a model that does not match up to its rivals is forced to liquidate at a loss.
"The lifetime of digital cameras is measured in months, while the life of a film camera is years," said Elliot Peck, a vice president for sales at Canon. "Someone always has overstocks, and that disrupts the market."
Peck said that Canon's camera business, which has concentrated on more technically sophisticated buyers by offering digital single- lens reflex cameras and the unusually small and sleek Elph line, is also profitable. Sony, which charges a premium for its unusual designs, also makes money in digital cameras, although the company does not break out figures for the business.
Four years ago, it was not so clear that Kodak would have any credibility in the digital world, despite its place as a photography pioneer and its 1,000 digital photography patents. So Kodak's engineers developed a system meant to streamline the process of moving pictures off the camera, onto a computer and then to either a printer, Kodak's Ofoto online printing service or e-mail. This involved new cameras, new software and an optional dock that cradled the camera, allowing it to recharge its batteries and transfer pictures to the computer at the same time.
The working name for the system was "Dock and Go," but Pierre Schaeffer, who had just taken over as marketing director for digital cameras, did not like the phrase. "We had been trying to play catch- up with Sony while we were trying to see what Canon was going to do," he said. "We needed something crisper that we could own and push forward with confidence."
After several brainstorming sessions, he came up with the EasyShare brand, which captures what Kodak hopes differentiates its line from competitors.
One innovation was a "share" button, which allows users to select pictures as they take them that will later be printed or e-mailed as soon as the camera is returned to the dock. "There is an emotional moment at the time of capture," said Gregory Westbrook, Kodak's vice president and general manager of its digital and film imaging systems unit. One of the company's first insights from its research was that its target market was annoyed and sometimes intimidated by the need to use a personal computer in order to print pictures. Many women, the anthropologists found, wanted the center of their picture taking and viewing to be the kitchen rather than the home office.
So in 2003, Kodak introduced what would become the signature technology of its camera line: a printer dock that housed the camera directly no computer needed to print 4-by-6-inch, or 10-by-15- centimeter, glossy photos using a dye sublimation printing process.
Kodak sold a million printer docks in the first year. Printers have the potential to be far more profitable than cameras because customers are locked into years of buying ink and paper. Even more important, Kodak convinced many retailers to put its printers right in the aisle that sold cameras, not in the printer section.
"The dock just resonated with consumers," said Slaughter of InfoTrends/CAP Ventures.
Of course, innovations do not remain exclusive for very long in the electronics world. Canon, for example, added the equivalent of the share button to its Elph line. And Sony, which is promoting its own 4-by-6-inch printer, has been fighting back with a refreshed product line. Sony's T-1 model is even thinner than the Canon Elph and features a 2.5-inch display, larger than those of its rivals.
Still, Sony is losing market share. In the first nine months of the year, Sony had 20.8 percent of the digital camera market in the United States, according to IDC, down from 21.7 for all of 2003. Kodak is up to 18.8 percent of the market from 17.9 percent. Canon is now the No.3 digital camera player, with 15.2 percent.
Kodak called in anthropologists and other social scientists, who observed camera users in an effort to learn how taking and printing pictures fit into their daily lives. They also followed prospective camera buyers into stores to understand how they chose certain models from the crowded shelves.
The research was part of Kodak's effort to reorganize its digital camera product line by transforming product design, manufacturing and marketing. The company's big decision was to focus on low- priced, easy-to-use cameras that would appeal to women, who take the majority of snapshots, rather than Sony's forte of shiny toys for gadget-loving men.
That strategy paid off as digital cameras moved into the mass market. This year, Kodak's EasyShare brand has almost 19 percent of digital camera sales in the United States, a very close second to Sony and ahead of Canon, according to International Data Corp., a technology research firm.
"Kodak is up because they are really committed to ease of use and they communicate that very well," said Michelle Slaughter, the director of digital photography trends at InfoTrends/CAP Ventures, a market research firm. "Kodak tends to excel at the touchy-feely side of the market that tends to appeal to first-time buyers and mainstream consumers, especially women," she said.
Kodak certainly needed a success. Since selling its pharmaceutical and chemical divisions a decade ago, the company has shed a third of its jobs and has seen its revenue fall to $13 billion last year from $15 billion in 1995. Now it says it expects to eliminate as many as a quarter of its remaining 64,000 jobs over the next three years.
Sales of film and other traditional products were down 20 percent in the third quarter of 2004, even more than expected. But digital products consumer and professional cameras as well as printing systems sold to drugstores and the like were up 39 percent.
The company recently stopped selling reloadable film cameras in the United States.
Profitability in digital products has been harder to achieve than sales. Kodak has said that 2004 would be the first full year in which its digital camera division would be profitable. And it will say only that the line is profitable when its high-margin accessory sales are included.
To the great relief of camera manufacturers, buyers have not yet pressed for lower prices, as they have in some markets, like DVD players. The average price has remained just under $300, but consumers expect that the makers will continuously provide more features especially megapixels of resolution and zoom capacities at those prices. Any maker with a model that does not match up to its rivals is forced to liquidate at a loss.
"The lifetime of digital cameras is measured in months, while the life of a film camera is years," said Elliot Peck, a vice president for sales at Canon. "Someone always has overstocks, and that disrupts the market."
Peck said that Canon's camera business, which has concentrated on more technically sophisticated buyers by offering digital single- lens reflex cameras and the unusually small and sleek Elph line, is also profitable. Sony, which charges a premium for its unusual designs, also makes money in digital cameras, although the company does not break out figures for the business.
Four years ago, it was not so clear that Kodak would have any credibility in the digital world, despite its place as a photography pioneer and its 1,000 digital photography patents. So Kodak's engineers developed a system meant to streamline the process of moving pictures off the camera, onto a computer and then to either a printer, Kodak's Ofoto online printing service or e-mail. This involved new cameras, new software and an optional dock that cradled the camera, allowing it to recharge its batteries and transfer pictures to the computer at the same time.
The working name for the system was "Dock and Go," but Pierre Schaeffer, who had just taken over as marketing director for digital cameras, did not like the phrase. "We had been trying to play catch- up with Sony while we were trying to see what Canon was going to do," he said. "We needed something crisper that we could own and push forward with confidence."
After several brainstorming sessions, he came up with the EasyShare brand, which captures what Kodak hopes differentiates its line from competitors.
One innovation was a "share" button, which allows users to select pictures as they take them that will later be printed or e-mailed as soon as the camera is returned to the dock. "There is an emotional moment at the time of capture," said Gregory Westbrook, Kodak's vice president and general manager of its digital and film imaging systems unit. One of the company's first insights from its research was that its target market was annoyed and sometimes intimidated by the need to use a personal computer in order to print pictures. Many women, the anthropologists found, wanted the center of their picture taking and viewing to be the kitchen rather than the home office.
So in 2003, Kodak introduced what would become the signature technology of its camera line: a printer dock that housed the camera directly no computer needed to print 4-by-6-inch, or 10-by-15- centimeter, glossy photos using a dye sublimation printing process.
Kodak sold a million printer docks in the first year. Printers have the potential to be far more profitable than cameras because customers are locked into years of buying ink and paper. Even more important, Kodak convinced many retailers to put its printers right in the aisle that sold cameras, not in the printer section.
"The dock just resonated with consumers," said Slaughter of InfoTrends/CAP Ventures.
Of course, innovations do not remain exclusive for very long in the electronics world. Canon, for example, added the equivalent of the share button to its Elph line. And Sony, which is promoting its own 4-by-6-inch printer, has been fighting back with a refreshed product line. Sony's T-1 model is even thinner than the Canon Elph and features a 2.5-inch display, larger than those of its rivals.
Still, Sony is losing market share. In the first nine months of the year, Sony had 20.8 percent of the digital camera market in the United States, according to IDC, down from 21.7 for all of 2003. Kodak is up to 18.8 percent of the market from 17.9 percent. Canon is now the No.3 digital camera player, with 15.2 percent.
Saturday, December 25, 2004
A look ahead to the 2005 economy
By Marshall Loeb, CBS.MarketWatch.com
Last Update: 5:00 AM ET Dec. 25, 2004
NEW YORK (CBS.MW) -- If you're looking for a formula for your asset allocation as the new year begins, you probably could do worse than follow the advice of Standard & Poor's Investment Policy Committee.
Last Update: 5:00 AM ET Dec. 25, 2004
NEW YORK (CBS.MW) -- If you're looking for a formula for your asset allocation as the new year begins, you probably could do worse than follow the advice of Standard & Poor's Investment Policy Committee.
For a typical balanced investor, it recommends an asset allocation of 45 percent in U.S. equities, 15 percent in foreign stocks, 25 percent short-term bonds and 15 percent cash. Previously, S&P had a somewhat more defensive allocation.
Naturally, if you're younger, more confident about the future and willing to take some chances, you would put relatively more of your assets into stocks. If you're older and more conservative, you would invest relatively more in bonds and cash.
This allocation reflects S&P's forecast for the economy and for the markets in general. It tends to be close to the standard forecast of investment professionals.
The S&P forecast is that real GDP will advance in 2005 by a healthy 3.6 percent, on top of the quite strong 4.4 percent rise in 2004. That would make 2005 a good year, though not a great one.
This forecast also calls for the Consumer Price Index to rise by a noninflationary 2.3 percent. Meanwhile, the yield on the 10-year Treasury note would go up from 4.2 percent to 5 percent, the dollar would continue sliding and oil prices would slip from $45 a barrel now to $39 at next year's end.
Global economic growth rates are projected by S&P to rise 1.8 percent in Japan and 1.9 percent in Europe, 6.2 percent in non-Japan Asia, including a 7 percent advance in China.
A number of astute financial professionals generally agree with this prognosis, or at least major parts of it.
Joe Williams, senior vice president and director of equities of Commerce Trust Co. in Kansas City, is one of those who has a slightly more bullish attitude toward stocks, though he expects the economy's growth to slow to 2.5 to 3 percent.
He notes that the consensus is that 10-year interest rates will go up. "But we've been surprised before," he says. Williams believes that those 10-year rates may remain stable.
"And it may be," says Williams, "that profits will be better than the 6 to 10 percent now forecast. They may come in closer to 10 to 16 percent." Falling oil prices and the reduction of labor costs due to outsourcing may help lift profits.
In any event, he believes that there may be a change in the leadership of the stock market. For the last three or four years, small-cap stocks have performed best, midcap stocks have been somewhere in the middle and large-cap stocks have underperformed. But now, he reckons, large-cap stocks may do remarkably well. That's because their price/earnings ratios, at 18 or 19 times earnings, are roughly equivalent to the p/e ratios of small- and midcap stocks. It is one of those rare times, say Williams, that large-cap stocks are relative bargains.
Meanwhile, Robert Hormats, vice chairman of Goldman Sachs (International), sees a fairly healthy growth rate in most parts of the world. It will be strong enough to enable the Federal Reserve Board to continue to raise interest rates. It will also contribute to modestly higher inflation.
"That means," says Hormats, "that equities are likely to do reasonably well, and bonds are likely to be under pressure in the earlier and middle part of next year."
Hormats admits that there are many risks to this forecast.
One wild card is the dollar. If the dollar declines precipitously, it would push up U.S. inflation and have a very negative effect on the bond market.
Another wild card is oil prices. The odds are that they will stabilize, but there's always the risk that they won't. An actual disruption in oil supplies could be very harmful to the economy.
Hormats believes that "there's a long-term structural bull market in oil, given that there has been an underinvestment in the infrastructure of the industry relative to the [strong] demand we're seeing now."
If he is right, then oil prices are destined to go up, if not next year then sometime in the future.
Tuesday, December 21, 2004
Email dynamics
Email is fast becoming an important and possibly the only universal advertisement portal except the search engine. and considering that my dad still finds using google too unweildy i think email is the only way to get him to buy a play station for example. And the readers of forbes.com being in the spedning segment the following survey clearly shows yahoo's 57% market share of it:
http://www.forbes.com/technology/2004/12/21/cx_js_1221polldujour.html
and hotmail is lost immense ground and is a distant third.
http://www.forbes.com/technology/2004/12/21/cx_js_1221polldujour.html
and hotmail is lost immense ground and is a distant third.
2004: China's coming out party
2004: China's coming out party
Analysis
Mary Hennock
BBC News business reporter
For years, specialist China-watchers have been predicting that the wider world would one day wake up to the country's global economic influence and superpower potential.
2004 was the year when it happened.
The world focused on China's new-found economic strength as never before.
Its thirst for oil, outpouring of cheap exports and status as the world's most energetic economy - with growth topping 9% - all grabbed attention.
China has moved into the mainstream this year, no longer seen as a remote place, but the next big thing.
A sub-titled Mandarin movie - Zhang Yimou's 'Hero' - grossed $49m (£25m) at US box offices in its opening month. And Shanghai hosted its first Grand Prix on a circuit that stunned even the glamorous world of Formula One.
Meanwhile Britain's Silverstone nearly dropped quietly out of F1, too strapped for cash to stay a contender. Events like these confirmed China's arrival on the contemporary cultural stage.
Information industry
One growth industry springing up as a result of China's rip-roaring economy is China forecasting. Economists are churning out China research as never before. Demand is overwhelming.
These days I feel I have to read the business news, and then I turn and read the Chinese business news
Justin Urquhart Stewart, Seven Investment Management
"Everywhere we went, we found that our customers had questions about China," says Carl Weinberg, chief economist at High Frequency Economics in New York.
"Some even suggested that we drop Australia from our research and substitute China."
As a result, Mr Weinberg, who has never been to China, launched into a year of hard study, and began issuing a weekly research bulletin in 2004.
"Bond traders, banks, fund-managers - all sides of the financial community are interested," he says.
His experience is not an isolated one. Justin Urquhart Stewart is a director of Seven Investment Management, a London-based firm advising wealthy private clients.
"These days I feel I have to read the business news, and then I turn and read the Chinese business news," he says.
"I would say almost every discussion I have with a client includes some discussion of China," agrees Bob Parker, vice-chairman of Credit Suisse Asset Management. CAM operates a clutch of China-related investment funds.
Exports and oil
When and how did China move from marginal to mainstream in conversations on Wall Street and in the City of London?
The US presidential election campaign got the ball rolling, as the Bush Administration launched a high-profile assault on China's fixed exchange rate, accusing Chinese factories of undercutting US manufacturing jobs.
Meetings of the IMF and G7 in late 2003 endorsed US complaints.
But perhaps the biggest contributor to pumping up China's profile has been the rising price of oil.
Crude oil prices repeatedly broke records, ending 2004 about 35% higher.
China's appetite for oil raised its imports by more than 100 million tonnes - 34% - over 2003 levels. Other factors pushed up crude prices too - instability in Iraq, hurricanes in the Caribbean and politics in Russia all played a part.
But rising oil prices struck home with Western consumers.
Prices of other raw materials also climbed, such as minerals, cement and steel.
In Mozambique, for instance, sugar farmers complained that China's demand for transport was pushing up shipping costs and hurting their exports.
There was no single moment that made China an essential topic for economists. Rather, they say awareness has snowballed over the last couple of years as China's impact keeps surfacing.
Mr Weinberg's own moment of revelation came at a conference of the North Carolina World Trade Association in 2002.
"I thought I'd find two dozen hog farmers frustrated at trying to sell pork bellies to euro land," he admits.
Instead, China's growing domination of world textile markets brought together an audience of 2000 people "all with an interest in China".
"People from the ports in Norfolk, Virginia, all the way down around the Florida panhandle...wanted to be the gateway city" for imports of Chinese textiles, he says.
Stocks Shanghai-ed
But anyone who thought the world's fastest growing economy was a good place to make a fast buck on the stock market this year was wrong.
China's financial markets have not roared ahead in tandem with its economy.
The Shanghai Composite Index dropped 12% in 2004. In a ranking of 60 stock indexes, only Thailand did worse.
Investors could have got a better return on Cairo's CASE 30, which rose 116%, or Peru's Lima General Index - up 44% - or even in Indonesia, so often viewed as an Asian giant woefully under-fulfilling its potential.
The year's solid performers were Eastern European stocks and funds, bolstered by EU enlargement. Stock markets in Prague and Budapest gained roughly 50%.
"Emerging markets have outperformed developed markets by a very large margin, but Asia has underperformed and China has underperformed," says Mr Parker.
"There's a disconnect between the hype and the reality."
Even stocks in industries stretched by China's growth did not produce gains.
Shares in the giant Baoshan Iron & Steel Co did poorly, while the Shanghai Composite's best performing stock was a liquor company, Kweichou Moutai, from the poverty-stricken Guizhou region.
China's markets have been depressed by worries about whether Beijing could engineer a soft-landing for the overheating economy, and more attractive prospects in Shanghai's property sector.
Some investment analysts argue that the smart money lies in avoiding direct investment in Chinese stocks, in favour of the commodity producers feeding China's economic juggernaut.
Others - like CAM - predict that China-linked funds will do better next year. But despite China's poor return on equity investment, plenty are watching closely, feeling they should be there.
"One feature of world capital markets is the amount of money sitting on the sidelines", says Mr Parker. Much of it, he thinks, is earmarked for China.
And that does nothing to harm the market for China research.
"The quality of research has slowly improved, which is logical because people are putting more resources in," says Mr Parker, a regular visitor to China for more than a decade.
In his view, even the disappointments of 2004 have been "a bit of a wake-up call for investors" by forcing China-watchers to be less gung-ho and more specific.
Analysis
Mary Hennock
BBC News business reporter
For years, specialist China-watchers have been predicting that the wider world would one day wake up to the country's global economic influence and superpower potential.
2004 was the year when it happened.
The world focused on China's new-found economic strength as never before.
Its thirst for oil, outpouring of cheap exports and status as the world's most energetic economy - with growth topping 9% - all grabbed attention.
China has moved into the mainstream this year, no longer seen as a remote place, but the next big thing.
A sub-titled Mandarin movie - Zhang Yimou's 'Hero' - grossed $49m (£25m) at US box offices in its opening month. And Shanghai hosted its first Grand Prix on a circuit that stunned even the glamorous world of Formula One.
Meanwhile Britain's Silverstone nearly dropped quietly out of F1, too strapped for cash to stay a contender. Events like these confirmed China's arrival on the contemporary cultural stage.
Information industry
One growth industry springing up as a result of China's rip-roaring economy is China forecasting. Economists are churning out China research as never before. Demand is overwhelming.
These days I feel I have to read the business news, and then I turn and read the Chinese business news
Justin Urquhart Stewart, Seven Investment Management
"Everywhere we went, we found that our customers had questions about China," says Carl Weinberg, chief economist at High Frequency Economics in New York.
"Some even suggested that we drop Australia from our research and substitute China."
As a result, Mr Weinberg, who has never been to China, launched into a year of hard study, and began issuing a weekly research bulletin in 2004.
"Bond traders, banks, fund-managers - all sides of the financial community are interested," he says.
His experience is not an isolated one. Justin Urquhart Stewart is a director of Seven Investment Management, a London-based firm advising wealthy private clients.
"These days I feel I have to read the business news, and then I turn and read the Chinese business news," he says.
"I would say almost every discussion I have with a client includes some discussion of China," agrees Bob Parker, vice-chairman of Credit Suisse Asset Management. CAM operates a clutch of China-related investment funds.
Exports and oil
When and how did China move from marginal to mainstream in conversations on Wall Street and in the City of London?
The US presidential election campaign got the ball rolling, as the Bush Administration launched a high-profile assault on China's fixed exchange rate, accusing Chinese factories of undercutting US manufacturing jobs.
Meetings of the IMF and G7 in late 2003 endorsed US complaints.
But perhaps the biggest contributor to pumping up China's profile has been the rising price of oil.
Crude oil prices repeatedly broke records, ending 2004 about 35% higher.
China's appetite for oil raised its imports by more than 100 million tonnes - 34% - over 2003 levels. Other factors pushed up crude prices too - instability in Iraq, hurricanes in the Caribbean and politics in Russia all played a part.
But rising oil prices struck home with Western consumers.
Prices of other raw materials also climbed, such as minerals, cement and steel.
In Mozambique, for instance, sugar farmers complained that China's demand for transport was pushing up shipping costs and hurting their exports.
There was no single moment that made China an essential topic for economists. Rather, they say awareness has snowballed over the last couple of years as China's impact keeps surfacing.
Mr Weinberg's own moment of revelation came at a conference of the North Carolina World Trade Association in 2002.
"I thought I'd find two dozen hog farmers frustrated at trying to sell pork bellies to euro land," he admits.
Instead, China's growing domination of world textile markets brought together an audience of 2000 people "all with an interest in China".
"People from the ports in Norfolk, Virginia, all the way down around the Florida panhandle...wanted to be the gateway city" for imports of Chinese textiles, he says.
Stocks Shanghai-ed
But anyone who thought the world's fastest growing economy was a good place to make a fast buck on the stock market this year was wrong.
China's financial markets have not roared ahead in tandem with its economy.
The Shanghai Composite Index dropped 12% in 2004. In a ranking of 60 stock indexes, only Thailand did worse.
Investors could have got a better return on Cairo's CASE 30, which rose 116%, or Peru's Lima General Index - up 44% - or even in Indonesia, so often viewed as an Asian giant woefully under-fulfilling its potential.
The year's solid performers were Eastern European stocks and funds, bolstered by EU enlargement. Stock markets in Prague and Budapest gained roughly 50%.
"Emerging markets have outperformed developed markets by a very large margin, but Asia has underperformed and China has underperformed," says Mr Parker.
"There's a disconnect between the hype and the reality."
Even stocks in industries stretched by China's growth did not produce gains.
Shares in the giant Baoshan Iron & Steel Co did poorly, while the Shanghai Composite's best performing stock was a liquor company, Kweichou Moutai, from the poverty-stricken Guizhou region.
China's markets have been depressed by worries about whether Beijing could engineer a soft-landing for the overheating economy, and more attractive prospects in Shanghai's property sector.
Some investment analysts argue that the smart money lies in avoiding direct investment in Chinese stocks, in favour of the commodity producers feeding China's economic juggernaut.
Others - like CAM - predict that China-linked funds will do better next year. But despite China's poor return on equity investment, plenty are watching closely, feeling they should be there.
"One feature of world capital markets is the amount of money sitting on the sidelines", says Mr Parker. Much of it, he thinks, is earmarked for China.
And that does nothing to harm the market for China research.
"The quality of research has slowly improved, which is logical because people are putting more resources in," says Mr Parker, a regular visitor to China for more than a decade.
In his view, even the disappointments of 2004 have been "a bit of a wake-up call for investors" by forcing China-watchers to be less gung-ho and more specific.
Monday, December 20, 2004
The Technological Rise Of China Was Just the Beginning
The Technological Rise Of China Was Speedy --
And Just the Beginning
--- THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
December 20, 2004; Page B1
XIAMEN, China -- At first blush, the sale of International Business Machines Corp.'s PC unit to China's biggest PC maker, Lenovo Group, this month seemed quite shocking. After all, Lenovo is a Chinese company -- majority government-owned even -- and it's gobbling up a storied asset of the bluest American blue chip.
But the deal shouldn't have come as such a surprise. Lenovo is one of a handful of Chinese companies with the size, management skills and financial strength to attempt such a coup. And the deal helps IBM in China and means it won't have to hand off its baby to a U.S. competitor.
There's good reason, though, to pay attention to the deal and what it means about China. First, China is more advanced in the use of technology than many people know. It passed Japan this year to become the second biggest consumer of PCs after the U.S. It's closing in on 100 million Internet users, placing it second in that area, though it still has only half as many users as the U.S. And 15 million Chinese subscribe to broadband DSL service. That's more than in the U.S., though many Americans get their high-speed connections from a cable company.
In cellphones, China's 250 million users far surpass those of any other country. (Official statistics claim more than 325 million subscriptions, but they overcount business travelers, who get more than one subscription to avoid high roaming fees.) What's more, those 250 million users are still only about one-fifth of China's population.
The second big reason to pay attention to China's technological rise is that it's happening faster here than it did elsewhere in Asia. The transfer of marginal businesses from the U.S. and Europe to lower-cost operators in Asia has been going on for more than a generation, starting with Japan, then South Korea and Taiwan. China's government, companies, partners and investors learned lessons from the country's neighbors. They're also all moving faster because the tools of the trade -- manufacturing equipment, logistics systems and the like -- are all better than ever.
Even the everyday use of e-mail and videoconferencing sets the Chinese apart. Earlier this year, after a rocky first three months together, product managers at Huawei-3Com Co., a data-network-equipment joint venture of China's Huawei Technologies and the U.S.'s 3Com, developed a routine of e-mail, conference calls and face-to-face meetings. "By the second quarter, we adjusted our communication mechanism and we could prioritize items," says Rose Chen, president of international sales. Last week, the venture shipped its first products.
Already in China it's possible to detect regional technology centers and competition for workers, similar to the rivalry between Silicon Valley, Boston and Seattle in the U.S.
Southern China's Guangdong province, dominated by the cities of Guangzhou and Shenzhen, is the center of most TV, stereo and computer assembly. Meanwhile, the city of Suzhou, not far from Shanghai, is home to a lot of notebook PC production, notably many of the operations of Taiwan's giant contract manufacturers.
A group of telecom-equipment makers is based in Hangzhou, which is also along the central coast near Shanghai. The country's biggest homegrown chip maker, Semiconductor Manufacturing International, is farther north in Tianjin, near Beijing, in facilities originally built by Motorola. Meanwhile, both Motorola and Intel are way out in the western city of Chengdu. They're taking advantage of access to engineering universities that for years offered support to the country's military contractors, located there by the government in the belief they would be insulated from attack.
Finally, China's size means that its technological gains could have longer-lasting consequences. For instance, China passed the U.S. in unit consumption of TV sets two years ago as household penetration of TVs passed 90%, closing in on the near ubiquity of TVs in developed countries. If population trends hold, China is unlikely to be challenged as the world's largest market for TVs until the middle of the century, when India is expected to become the most populous country.
And when final figures emerge shortly, we're likely to learn that China passed the U.S. this year as the world's top PC maker, another change unlikely to be challenged for years to come.
A recent study by University of California-Irvine researchers found that most of China's recent PC-industry growth was driven by outside companies, led by the Taiwan-based contract manufacturers. But it's not just them. This year the output from Dell's China factory here in Xiamen, from which the company supplies Japan as well as China, will match production at pre-IBM Lenovo.
Still, Lenovo is China's first company to tackle the complexity of a high-profile, international deal. In the process, it plans to move its headquarters from Beijing to a suburb of New York City and take an IBMer as its CEO. More than 70% of its sales will come from outside China, while 70% of its workers will be inside China.
And the cherry on top: Lenovo's largest shareholder will continue to be an unlisted holding company controlled by the Chinese government.
And Just the Beginning
--- THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
December 20, 2004; Page B1
XIAMEN, China -- At first blush, the sale of International Business Machines Corp.'s PC unit to China's biggest PC maker, Lenovo Group, this month seemed quite shocking. After all, Lenovo is a Chinese company -- majority government-owned even -- and it's gobbling up a storied asset of the bluest American blue chip.
But the deal shouldn't have come as such a surprise. Lenovo is one of a handful of Chinese companies with the size, management skills and financial strength to attempt such a coup. And the deal helps IBM in China and means it won't have to hand off its baby to a U.S. competitor.
There's good reason, though, to pay attention to the deal and what it means about China. First, China is more advanced in the use of technology than many people know. It passed Japan this year to become the second biggest consumer of PCs after the U.S. It's closing in on 100 million Internet users, placing it second in that area, though it still has only half as many users as the U.S. And 15 million Chinese subscribe to broadband DSL service. That's more than in the U.S., though many Americans get their high-speed connections from a cable company.
In cellphones, China's 250 million users far surpass those of any other country. (Official statistics claim more than 325 million subscriptions, but they overcount business travelers, who get more than one subscription to avoid high roaming fees.) What's more, those 250 million users are still only about one-fifth of China's population.
The second big reason to pay attention to China's technological rise is that it's happening faster here than it did elsewhere in Asia. The transfer of marginal businesses from the U.S. and Europe to lower-cost operators in Asia has been going on for more than a generation, starting with Japan, then South Korea and Taiwan. China's government, companies, partners and investors learned lessons from the country's neighbors. They're also all moving faster because the tools of the trade -- manufacturing equipment, logistics systems and the like -- are all better than ever.
Even the everyday use of e-mail and videoconferencing sets the Chinese apart. Earlier this year, after a rocky first three months together, product managers at Huawei-3Com Co., a data-network-equipment joint venture of China's Huawei Technologies and the U.S.'s 3Com, developed a routine of e-mail, conference calls and face-to-face meetings. "By the second quarter, we adjusted our communication mechanism and we could prioritize items," says Rose Chen, president of international sales. Last week, the venture shipped its first products.
Already in China it's possible to detect regional technology centers and competition for workers, similar to the rivalry between Silicon Valley, Boston and Seattle in the U.S.
Southern China's Guangdong province, dominated by the cities of Guangzhou and Shenzhen, is the center of most TV, stereo and computer assembly. Meanwhile, the city of Suzhou, not far from Shanghai, is home to a lot of notebook PC production, notably many of the operations of Taiwan's giant contract manufacturers.
A group of telecom-equipment makers is based in Hangzhou, which is also along the central coast near Shanghai. The country's biggest homegrown chip maker, Semiconductor Manufacturing International, is farther north in Tianjin, near Beijing, in facilities originally built by Motorola. Meanwhile, both Motorola and Intel are way out in the western city of Chengdu. They're taking advantage of access to engineering universities that for years offered support to the country's military contractors, located there by the government in the belief they would be insulated from attack.
Finally, China's size means that its technological gains could have longer-lasting consequences. For instance, China passed the U.S. in unit consumption of TV sets two years ago as household penetration of TVs passed 90%, closing in on the near ubiquity of TVs in developed countries. If population trends hold, China is unlikely to be challenged as the world's largest market for TVs until the middle of the century, when India is expected to become the most populous country.
And when final figures emerge shortly, we're likely to learn that China passed the U.S. this year as the world's top PC maker, another change unlikely to be challenged for years to come.
A recent study by University of California-Irvine researchers found that most of China's recent PC-industry growth was driven by outside companies, led by the Taiwan-based contract manufacturers. But it's not just them. This year the output from Dell's China factory here in Xiamen, from which the company supplies Japan as well as China, will match production at pre-IBM Lenovo.
Still, Lenovo is China's first company to tackle the complexity of a high-profile, international deal. In the process, it plans to move its headquarters from Beijing to a suburb of New York City and take an IBMer as its CEO. More than 70% of its sales will come from outside China, while 70% of its workers will be inside China.
And the cherry on top: Lenovo's largest shareholder will continue to be an unlisted holding company controlled by the Chinese government.
Tuesday, December 14, 2004
India "shines" again as new coalition settles down
NEW DELHI (Reuters) - When a communist-backed government took power in India in May, the question on everybody's lips was: has India's shine dulled?
Markets tumbled after the Congress-led coalition took power and anxiety gripped investors as its communist allies called for the scrapping of a successful privatisation drive.
The government inherited a large budget deficit, but still plans to increase some spending.
Further, a poor monsoon saw growth forecasts cut.
Despite those worries, economic indicators are robust. Stock prices are rallying and foreigners remain keen investors.
"The investment-led recovery that began 18-24 months ago is continuing to gain momentum, services are buoyant and the manufacturing sector will grow strongly for at least three to four years," said Prasenjit Basu, managing director, Robust Economic Analysis.
"The corporate sector has restructured and is profitable. So there is much to be happy about."
"India shining" was the re-election slogan of the Hindu nationalist-led government. It was derided after that government's unexpected defeat in May, and in view of the serious problems facing many people in the agriculture-dependent country.
But the economy seems to have found a solid footing under Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, architect of India's reform drive 14 years ago, reflected in the main Bombay stock exchange index which hit a new high last week.
A government review said on Monday prospects for the year to March remain "reasonably bright", even after the poor monsoon.
Economists see GDP growth of about 6 percent in the year ended March 2005, which is lower than pre-monsoon forecasts of 7.0-8.0 percent and below last year's 8.2 percent.
While the monsoon hurt growth, other indicators are strong. Industrial output rose 10.1 percent in October, its best since 1997, and exports are up 24 percent so far this fiscal year.
"Sentiment continues to improve toward Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's government, after an intensely volatile period," Rajeev Malik, economist with JP Morgan, said in a report.
"Barring an unexpected political shock, India's favourable economic trends in 2005 will probably continue to attract investors' attention, despite the coalition dynamics," he said.
REFORMS DRIVE
Initial concerns about communist influence on policy in the coalition seems to have been overdone.
The coalition has raised the foreign investment limit in private airlines.
Despite strong communist opposition, it also raised freight rates, which had been flat for three years, and petroleum product prices. The government aims to raise investment caps for insurance and telecoms next year.
But Singh faces challenges, particularly a huge fiscal deficit which will widen if the government goes ahead with plans to tap foreign exchange reserves to pay for infrastructure improvements and guarantee jobs for every poor rural family.
"Even this year keeping the deficit at the budgeted level is a challenge, and the challenge will mount next year given the two plans," said Sanjeet Singh, economist with ICICI Securities.
Policy makers have signalled the government plans state pension reforms, cuts to unwieldy subsidies, tax and duty restructuring, and infrastructure improvements in its 2005/2006 budget, which will be released in February.
As for investors, they remain keen on India. Foreign funds have invested almost $8 billion in Indian shares this year, a record since India was opened to foreign investment a decade ago.
Foreign direct investment was $2.38 billion between April and October, up 68 percent from a year earlier, though still less than half of what China gets in a month.
"In the last three to four years, China has been the topic of discussion in global boardrooms," said Kenneth C. Borda, chief executive officer, Asia-Pacific, at Deutsche Bank.
"Discussions now very much focus on India as well."
Markets tumbled after the Congress-led coalition took power and anxiety gripped investors as its communist allies called for the scrapping of a successful privatisation drive.
The government inherited a large budget deficit, but still plans to increase some spending.
Further, a poor monsoon saw growth forecasts cut.
Despite those worries, economic indicators are robust. Stock prices are rallying and foreigners remain keen investors.
"The investment-led recovery that began 18-24 months ago is continuing to gain momentum, services are buoyant and the manufacturing sector will grow strongly for at least three to four years," said Prasenjit Basu, managing director, Robust Economic Analysis.
"The corporate sector has restructured and is profitable. So there is much to be happy about."
"India shining" was the re-election slogan of the Hindu nationalist-led government. It was derided after that government's unexpected defeat in May, and in view of the serious problems facing many people in the agriculture-dependent country.
But the economy seems to have found a solid footing under Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, architect of India's reform drive 14 years ago, reflected in the main Bombay stock exchange index which hit a new high last week.
A government review said on Monday prospects for the year to March remain "reasonably bright", even after the poor monsoon.
Economists see GDP growth of about 6 percent in the year ended March 2005, which is lower than pre-monsoon forecasts of 7.0-8.0 percent and below last year's 8.2 percent.
While the monsoon hurt growth, other indicators are strong. Industrial output rose 10.1 percent in October, its best since 1997, and exports are up 24 percent so far this fiscal year.
"Sentiment continues to improve toward Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's government, after an intensely volatile period," Rajeev Malik, economist with JP Morgan, said in a report.
"Barring an unexpected political shock, India's favourable economic trends in 2005 will probably continue to attract investors' attention, despite the coalition dynamics," he said.
REFORMS DRIVE
Initial concerns about communist influence on policy in the coalition seems to have been overdone.
The coalition has raised the foreign investment limit in private airlines.
Despite strong communist opposition, it also raised freight rates, which had been flat for three years, and petroleum product prices. The government aims to raise investment caps for insurance and telecoms next year.
But Singh faces challenges, particularly a huge fiscal deficit which will widen if the government goes ahead with plans to tap foreign exchange reserves to pay for infrastructure improvements and guarantee jobs for every poor rural family.
"Even this year keeping the deficit at the budgeted level is a challenge, and the challenge will mount next year given the two plans," said Sanjeet Singh, economist with ICICI Securities.
Policy makers have signalled the government plans state pension reforms, cuts to unwieldy subsidies, tax and duty restructuring, and infrastructure improvements in its 2005/2006 budget, which will be released in February.
As for investors, they remain keen on India. Foreign funds have invested almost $8 billion in Indian shares this year, a record since India was opened to foreign investment a decade ago.
Foreign direct investment was $2.38 billion between April and October, up 68 percent from a year earlier, though still less than half of what China gets in a month.
"In the last three to four years, China has been the topic of discussion in global boardrooms," said Kenneth C. Borda, chief executive officer, Asia-Pacific, at Deutsche Bank.
"Discussions now very much focus on India as well."
Thursday, December 09, 2004
The biggest challange for Microsoft, Apple, Sony, Yahoo and Amazon is yet to come: Embedded Shopping
The biggest challange for Microsoft, Apple, Sony, Yahoo and Amazon is yet to come: Embedded Shopping
The battle: The media center. The price: “Embedded Shopping”.
Imagine you watch a film on your TV and after it is finished, not the usual ad with the newest upgrade in washing powder shows up, but the TV, yes the TV, will ask you for your rating of the film. You simply push 9 on your remote and that’s it.
Because your rating was high, your TV will then ask you whether you would like to buy the DVD or the CD with the sound track. You click the green button on your remote and the DVD will be send to you the next day.
This is only a simple example of things to come. Once the convergence of PC, Broadband and TV is truly on its way, there will be very few limits in how and where we will get access to and experience photo, audio, video and how we buy it.
The natural platform for this convergence to take place is the media center. As a result the media center will become the key hub in our “converged” experience.
When we come home and flip on the PC or the TV the first screen will most of the time no longer be the desktop or the last channel we’ve watched but the media center. The Dell Media Experience, a simple scaled down but solid clone of the Microsoft Media Center Edition, has in total only about 15 different setting and one of them is whether the desktop or the media center should show at start-up of the computer.
It will then ask what we want to do through a simple menu of choices. Watch a movie, play a game, listen do music, watch a TV series, surfing or use the desktop. When you choose to watch a movie, it shows all the possible sources: DVD, recorded movie from TiVo or PVR, download, stream or rent one from Netflix, or see what movies have just started or are about to start on television.
You can both browse what is available or search you hard drive, TV listings and DVD collection and your video retailer will make an offer as well. Simply click on the green button on your remote. A mouse will still work as well.
This kind of shopping is not limited to media itself. For instance, when people show a slideshow with photos of their kids, again a simple push on the green button will trigger the photo to be printed and sent. Or when James Bond has new sunglasses, they can be ordered instantly at the end of the film from Amazon or a query on eBay can be started. You can also order it during the the film because the media center can pause the TV, DVD or download for you.
Or when watching an advertisement for new washing powder, again a simple click on the green button can be enough to get it with your groceries.
The buying process will change dramatically over traditional (on-line) shopping. In the traditional model the trigger to buy something and the actual buying process are not connected. This often leads to not buying at all or buying much later from a random supplier.
In the media center driven model, the trigger to buy and the buying process are directly coupled. Also the option to buy from are limited to those offered through the media center. The buying process and options are integrated in the media experience hence the name “Embedded Shopping”. It does not need any explanation why embedded shopping is such a powerful way of selling products, media or non-media.
The battlefield and the contenders.
With embedded shopping such an attractive price to win, the media center will become a tough battlefield with a lot of complexity and players.
Key to its success is to make sure it stays a 1 or 2 button/click process. If this is not the case selling opportunities will go lost. However more importantly the convenience element will otherwise not be high enough for consumer to give up the possibility to shop around and look for alternative preferred or cheaper providers.
This requires a high level of integration between the media center and the multiple sellers/providers.
A linking mechanism between media content and potential product offerings needs to be established. The “owner” of the media center will probably handle all the billing functions. This way a user does not have to register with every partner of the “owner” or every time he or she buys an item
Currently there are lots of players in the market. Some see the full potential but some are in it just to protect their existing business and probably not even aware of the opportunity and the related battlefield ahead.
Microsoft with Windows XP Media Center Edition probably sees it as a way to justify higher prices and another reason for users of Windows to upgrade. It also helps in the fight again Apple that has a reputation in handling media well from a user point of view. Obviously Microsoft also is going to integrate with its online music business and at some time its online video business.
PC Manufactures like Dell and HP see it as a way to support sales of higher spec machines that can handle media well. It also seems that Dell doesn’t like the idea of becoming too dependent on Microsoft with regard to media centers. They probably do not realize it is more then a tool for managing and showing the media available on a PC.
Gateway is selling an interesting line of products that combine TV and PC in one devise and therefore also has developed a media center. A pity Apple hasn’t gone that route with the new iMac G5. All it needed to do was to add a TV tuner and a remote.
Apple does not really have a media center solution but might argue that its complete OS is working like a media center. A nice claim but TV is missing. I think that Apple will soon come out with some sort of media center add-on if only to enable access from a TV with remote control.
Going further, I think that at some point Apple will come with a very integrated wireless streaming concept for TV, computer, on-line video store pulled together by a media center. A sort of iPod / iTunes solution but then for video and integrated with the TV.
Talking about wireless streaming, Philips Electronics is also in this market. Realizing that in order to sell TVs and radios in the future, integration with PCs will become an important buying criteria Philips has developed its line of Streamium products. The idea is that all components can work seamlessly together with no wires and with no set-up issues. To support this they have developed a media center.
Interestingly they partnered with Yahoo to deliver streaming video content (video clips) at the tough of a button. A sign of things to come.
Just as interesting is the fact that Philips recently started selling PCs again. These PCs are also Streamium products of which Philips claim that they work seamlessly with their TVs, radios and MPs players. True or not, their intend is clear. Convergence requires simple and easy solutions.
This is a general trend that they have recognized and that is also supported by their new Sense and Simplicity campaign. Others have already played well to this trend, TiVo and Apple with iPod / iTunes.
Sony has been a laggard so far but probably will come up with something soon. This will suddenly put Apple, Sony and Philips in one ring. Of course each with their own image and following but there will be an audience that generally likes well designed, easy to use, high quality, higher priced branded products that will be looking at all three.
For hardware companies not having a successful media center solution can seriously damage the sales of both TVs and PCs of these manufacturers. They therefore might also choose to partner with companies like Microsoft and give up their change of embedded shopping just to protect their existing business.
Then there are a number of smaller players like Showshifter and Snapstream that have developed media center software including TiVo like features. There are even free solutions available like TVOON all providing more or less the same as Microsoft’s Media Center Edition and even offer integration to P2P networks and add blocking.
Companies like TiVo and Netflix obviously also want to part of this market place. TiVo is on the cutting edge of embedded business. They soon will start showing their own ads while users rewind or forward and have embedded type features to add shows to the recording list with one click. They also automatically start recording programs based on your past behavior. Add Netflix as they plan to do and you have embedded shopping for DVD rentals.
The problem for these small companies is that the technology is not that hard to copy and despite a loyal following their penetration of the total potential market is still low allowing big hitters to catch up quickly.
Big on-line retailers like Amazon and Walmart.com of Wal-Mart will want to partner with those players that have the most interesting media center audience. The media center providers can also enhance the user experience by partnering with the best on-line retailers.
Companies like Yahoo will also want to join in somehow just to keep a high share of the attention to their site.
Cable and satellite companies will also want to join the party as well as the big film studios to assure their products get first rank shelf space on the media center.
And finally maybe even Google can join in with an integrated Google Media search function.
All together in interesting group of contenders in a complex and largely unknown battlefield called media center were for some the price is the media center itself but for the big ones it is the embedded shopping that it enables.
Wednesday, December 08, 2004
Forbes 2000 The World's Leading Companies
2004
The Forbes 2000 is our new comprehensive ranking of the world's biggest companies, measured by a composite of sales, profits, assets and market value. The list spans 51 countries and 27 industries. Collectively, the Forbes 2000 account for a healthy chunk of global business: Aggregate sales are $19 trillion; profits, $760 billion; assets, $68 trillion; market value, $24 trillion; and worldwide employees, 64 million.
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2004/03/24/04f2000land.html
The Forbes 2000 is our new comprehensive ranking of the world's biggest companies, measured by a composite of sales, profits, assets and market value. The list spans 51 countries and 27 industries. Collectively, the Forbes 2000 account for a healthy chunk of global business: Aggregate sales are $19 trillion; profits, $760 billion; assets, $68 trillion; market value, $24 trillion; and worldwide employees, 64 million.
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2004/03/24/04f2000land.html
Monday, December 06, 2004
Google ripe for a fall
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/yhoo/story.asp?source=blq/yhoo&siteid=yhoo&dist=yhoo&guid=%7BD62F9BF0%2DD012%2D4E7A%2D8E12%2DDA25FA07B282%7D
NEW YORK (CBS.MW) -- Once buying stops working, selling usually starts.
It's been less than four months, and the initial public offering of Web search engine Google has recaptured the imagination of those who have been searching for the lost Internet boom.
The $200-plus price targets some analysts have slapped on the stock has reminded many of the $400 price target Merrill Lynch had put on Amazon.com and the $1,000 target the former PaineWebber placed on Qualcomm back in the good ol' days. See Upgrades/Downgrades.
Google shares (GOOG: news, chart, profile) actually made it above $200 in intraday trading (Nov. 3 high of $201.60), but could never actually close above that mark (the high close was $196.03 on Nov. 1). While the stock has pulled back since and still trades above most analysts' price targets, there are some technical indicators that suggest investors are using the dip as an opportunity to buy the stock.
However, there are even more signs that suggest that the buying won't work in the near-term, and that an ever deeper pullback is imminent.
Google's technical storm
Google's stochastics indicator -- a two-line "mathematical" technical indicator that compares the stock's closes relative to its intraday highs and lows -- has been putting in a pattern of higher highs and lows since the stock first pulled back from the $200 level. Read more about mathematical indicators.
After bottoming out at just above 7 on Nov. 8, the slow stochastics ran up to 80 on Nov. 15, fell back to just above 14 on Nov. 22 before climbing to a high of nearly 94 on Nov. 30. See interactive java chart and change a lower indicator to "slow stochastics."
By itself, it might appear bullish since it indicates the stock has been consistently able to close near its intraday highs on up days, a behavior which usually suggests underlying strength by the bulls.
But you also have to see what the stock has actually been doing over the same time period to put the indicator's moves in perspective.
And over the same time, the stock has established a pattern of lower highs and lower lows, which together are necessary and sufficient components of a downtrend.
The stock had bottomed at $165.27 on Nov. 9 before rallying to a high of $189.80 on Nov. 12 (the stochastics reached a high of 80 a day after). It then fell back to a low of $161.31 on Nov. 21 before reaching a high of $183 on Nov. 30 (the stochastics reached 94).
The divergence between the stochastics and the actual stock price is considered bearish, because it suggests the stock is becoming "overbought" and progressively lower levels.
Buyers keep buying, but the stock isn't going up.
There is another technical indicator that is also pointing to weakness.
The relative strength index (RSI), an oscillating indicator that compares up days and down days over a specified time period, has been declining along with the stock price. It reached just over 62 on Nov. 15, but couldn't quite make it to 60 when it topped out on Nov. 30.
Also, the inability of the RSI to get above 60 is also bearish (the RSI isn't considered overbought until it rises to the 75 to 80 level). Prior to Google reaching its high, 60 had been support for the RSI while it made several probes above the 80 level.
This suggests that it has been taking a lot more energy to move to the stock higher than it has to move it lower.
On Friday, the stock closed up $1 at $180.40, but had been down as much as $1.80 at a low of $177.60 in intraday trading. While the bounce might suggest strength, the intraday slide, coupled with weak technical readings, suggests the stock has become vulnerable to a quick strike by the bears.
Finally, Friday's intraday high of $181.06 was below Thursday's high of $181.51. How much longer will bulls be willing to fight without getting anything to show for it?
'Gaps' should cushion any slide
If the stock were to begin to slide, there should be decent support at the opening in the chart between the Nov. 24 low ($172.51) and the Nov. 23 high ($170.83).
These types of upside "gaps," which serve as launching points on the way up, usually provide a cushion when revisited as anyone that sold ahead of them, and were abandoned by the stock's surprise leap higher, may be tempted to cover their open positions when given the chance to escape mostly unscathed.
There should be even stronger support at the gap between the Oct. 22 low ($164.08) and the Oct. 21 high ($150.13). This was the "gap" that changed the stock from one moving steadily higher to one that charged aggressively towards the $200 mark.
Given the recent pattern of lower lows, however, the support at the latter gap is the better bet to become the target for bears.
It would take a close above $183 -- that would break the pattern of lower highs -- as well as a rise in the RSI above 60, to neutralize the short-term outlook.
NEW YORK (CBS.MW) -- Once buying stops working, selling usually starts.
It's been less than four months, and the initial public offering of Web search engine Google has recaptured the imagination of those who have been searching for the lost Internet boom.
The $200-plus price targets some analysts have slapped on the stock has reminded many of the $400 price target Merrill Lynch had put on Amazon.com and the $1,000 target the former PaineWebber placed on Qualcomm back in the good ol' days. See Upgrades/Downgrades.
Google shares (GOOG: news, chart, profile) actually made it above $200 in intraday trading (Nov. 3 high of $201.60), but could never actually close above that mark (the high close was $196.03 on Nov. 1). While the stock has pulled back since and still trades above most analysts' price targets, there are some technical indicators that suggest investors are using the dip as an opportunity to buy the stock.
However, there are even more signs that suggest that the buying won't work in the near-term, and that an ever deeper pullback is imminent.
Google's technical storm
Google's stochastics indicator -- a two-line "mathematical" technical indicator that compares the stock's closes relative to its intraday highs and lows -- has been putting in a pattern of higher highs and lows since the stock first pulled back from the $200 level. Read more about mathematical indicators.
After bottoming out at just above 7 on Nov. 8, the slow stochastics ran up to 80 on Nov. 15, fell back to just above 14 on Nov. 22 before climbing to a high of nearly 94 on Nov. 30. See interactive java chart and change a lower indicator to "slow stochastics."
By itself, it might appear bullish since it indicates the stock has been consistently able to close near its intraday highs on up days, a behavior which usually suggests underlying strength by the bulls.
But you also have to see what the stock has actually been doing over the same time period to put the indicator's moves in perspective.
And over the same time, the stock has established a pattern of lower highs and lower lows, which together are necessary and sufficient components of a downtrend.
The stock had bottomed at $165.27 on Nov. 9 before rallying to a high of $189.80 on Nov. 12 (the stochastics reached a high of 80 a day after). It then fell back to a low of $161.31 on Nov. 21 before reaching a high of $183 on Nov. 30 (the stochastics reached 94).
The divergence between the stochastics and the actual stock price is considered bearish, because it suggests the stock is becoming "overbought" and progressively lower levels.
Buyers keep buying, but the stock isn't going up.
There is another technical indicator that is also pointing to weakness.
The relative strength index (RSI), an oscillating indicator that compares up days and down days over a specified time period, has been declining along with the stock price. It reached just over 62 on Nov. 15, but couldn't quite make it to 60 when it topped out on Nov. 30.
Also, the inability of the RSI to get above 60 is also bearish (the RSI isn't considered overbought until it rises to the 75 to 80 level). Prior to Google reaching its high, 60 had been support for the RSI while it made several probes above the 80 level.
This suggests that it has been taking a lot more energy to move to the stock higher than it has to move it lower.
On Friday, the stock closed up $1 at $180.40, but had been down as much as $1.80 at a low of $177.60 in intraday trading. While the bounce might suggest strength, the intraday slide, coupled with weak technical readings, suggests the stock has become vulnerable to a quick strike by the bears.
Finally, Friday's intraday high of $181.06 was below Thursday's high of $181.51. How much longer will bulls be willing to fight without getting anything to show for it?
'Gaps' should cushion any slide
If the stock were to begin to slide, there should be decent support at the opening in the chart between the Nov. 24 low ($172.51) and the Nov. 23 high ($170.83).
These types of upside "gaps," which serve as launching points on the way up, usually provide a cushion when revisited as anyone that sold ahead of them, and were abandoned by the stock's surprise leap higher, may be tempted to cover their open positions when given the chance to escape mostly unscathed.
There should be even stronger support at the gap between the Oct. 22 low ($164.08) and the Oct. 21 high ($150.13). This was the "gap" that changed the stock from one moving steadily higher to one that charged aggressively towards the $200 mark.
Given the recent pattern of lower lows, however, the support at the latter gap is the better bet to become the target for bears.
It would take a close above $183 -- that would break the pattern of lower highs -- as well as a rise in the RSI above 60, to neutralize the short-term outlook.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
