This week Postmedia CEO Paul Godfrey announced another round of sackings in the troubled downward spiral of the one-time media conglomerate, including several publishers at various major titles in the chain.
That means those interns working out of the donut shop are going to have to pull up their pants and tighten their belts even more than before.
Because everybody knows that news gathering, investigative reporting, thought-provoking editorial writing, and newsworthy content don't mean shit if the bond-holders aren't being paid in full on the "equity" they bought for pennies on the dollar.
When Godfrey bails you'll know there's not enough juice left in the old cow to pay his seven-number salary.
And the new CEO will be an unpaid intern working out of a Tim Hortons in Burlington.
Wednesday, May 1, 2013
Legendary stock guru says keep shorting PNC
Postmedia Network Canada is trading in the buck-thirty range today. That's a nice drop from the $2.00 it was at when I made my January short call.
The last four months would give you about a 100% annualized return had you heeded my advice on 8 Jan.
But don't worry; at $1.30 it's still a long way from zero.
Go short, my friends, go short!
The last four months would give you about a 100% annualized return had you heeded my advice on 8 Jan.
But don't worry; at $1.30 it's still a long way from zero.
Go short, my friends, go short!
Happy May Day, chumps!
Canadian workers woke up to news headlines announcing that the Harper gang was taking a "more direct role" in contract negotiations with supposedly arms-length crown corporations.
Treasury Board President Tony Clement announced the initiative would "align public sector compensation and benefits to private sector norms and expectations."
Let me unpack that one for you.
Private sector norms are that at contract time the employer will threaten and intimidate and cajole employees into settling for less by threatening to move your job to Mexico, China, Bangladesh, or one of the "right-to-work-for-less" States.
Private sector expectations are that you will roll over in the face of that threat, because sooner or later your employer will make good on it.
That's the full-on load of shitbaggery that NAFTA brought the North American worker.
Oddly enough, after a generation of that kind of blackmail and intimidation, private sector wages have indeed gone down.
Most public sector employment, in case you haven't noticed, lies in fields not conducive to out-sourcing. You can't use those private-sector intimidation tactics on teachers because it's not readily feasible to send your kids to China for their education.
You can't send your community's snow-plowing and sewer repair contracts to China either, because the snow and the sewers are right here.
Same with cops, by-law enforcement officers, building inspectors, and so on.
But you can wave around the "fact" that compared to private sector workers, the public sector workers have it relatively good.
Well, enough of that!
Let's exploit the resentment of the private sector folks who have been getting a screw-over for the past 30 years by taking their eyes off their screw-over and onto the relatively un-screwed-over public sector workers.
Let's, in the interest of fairness, grind everybody's wages down to the same dismal poverty level!
Happy May Day!
By the way, the reason "Labour Day" was invented for the North American audience was to draw attention from the socialist-inflected May Day. By creating a new celebration of workers that came later in the year, the ruling class ensured that we'd done most of our work before we were allowed to celebrate.
Powerful bit of symbolism in that fact.
Treasury Board President Tony Clement announced the initiative would "align public sector compensation and benefits to private sector norms and expectations."
Let me unpack that one for you.
Private sector norms are that at contract time the employer will threaten and intimidate and cajole employees into settling for less by threatening to move your job to Mexico, China, Bangladesh, or one of the "right-to-work-for-less" States.
Private sector expectations are that you will roll over in the face of that threat, because sooner or later your employer will make good on it.
That's the full-on load of shitbaggery that NAFTA brought the North American worker.
Oddly enough, after a generation of that kind of blackmail and intimidation, private sector wages have indeed gone down.
Most public sector employment, in case you haven't noticed, lies in fields not conducive to out-sourcing. You can't use those private-sector intimidation tactics on teachers because it's not readily feasible to send your kids to China for their education.
You can't send your community's snow-plowing and sewer repair contracts to China either, because the snow and the sewers are right here.
Same with cops, by-law enforcement officers, building inspectors, and so on.
But you can wave around the "fact" that compared to private sector workers, the public sector workers have it relatively good.
Well, enough of that!
Let's exploit the resentment of the private sector folks who have been getting a screw-over for the past 30 years by taking their eyes off their screw-over and onto the relatively un-screwed-over public sector workers.
Let's, in the interest of fairness, grind everybody's wages down to the same dismal poverty level!
Happy May Day!
By the way, the reason "Labour Day" was invented for the North American audience was to draw attention from the socialist-inflected May Day. By creating a new celebration of workers that came later in the year, the ruling class ensured that we'd done most of our work before we were allowed to celebrate.
Powerful bit of symbolism in that fact.
Tuesday, April 30, 2013
Apple leaves tech innovation behind to focus on balance-sheet innovation
What would Steve Jobs think of the Apple bond issue?
Apple's $17 billion bond issue seems like an unnecessarily convoluted method of getting some of the cash horde "into the hands of the shareholders."
Although I suppose the fees earned by Goldman Sachs will quiet some of the squeakiest wheels clamoring for that cash.
Why does Tim Cook think this is a good idea? When you're sitting on 150 billions, you don't need to give a shit what the shareholders think.
Or what the self-dealing opportunists at GS think.
Focus on making great product, not keeping those so-called activist investors placated.
Apple's $17 billion bond issue seems like an unnecessarily convoluted method of getting some of the cash horde "into the hands of the shareholders."
Although I suppose the fees earned by Goldman Sachs will quiet some of the squeakiest wheels clamoring for that cash.
Why does Tim Cook think this is a good idea? When you're sitting on 150 billions, you don't need to give a shit what the shareholders think.
Or what the self-dealing opportunists at GS think.
Focus on making great product, not keeping those so-called activist investors placated.
Monday, April 29, 2013
San Francisco's Gay Shame parade
For a few brief hours the San Francisco Gay Pride Parade stood by an honorable gesture; making Bradley Manning the honorary parade marshal.
Then it all went for a shit.
The weasle-words are coming fast and hard. Manning endangered the men and women in uniform. Manning endangered American security.
Since when is the San Francisco Pride Committee charged with doing PR for the Pentagon?
Shame!
Then it all went for a shit.
The weasle-words are coming fast and hard. Manning endangered the men and women in uniform. Manning endangered American security.
Since when is the San Francisco Pride Committee charged with doing PR for the Pentagon?
Shame!
The Bangladeshi guilt trip; paying one cent more for that five dollar t-shirt will more than double the wage of Bangladeshi garment workers
There is a lot of faux outrage over the deaths of hundreds of garment workers in the collapse of that Dhaka factory.
They die because we're too cheap to pay a proper price for a shirt.
Bullshit!
Here's a look at the economics of t-shirt production. The Bangladeshi garment worker produces 250 t-shirts per hour. In a 60 hour week, that's 15,000 shirts. She gets paid in the range of $50 per month; as low as $37 by some estimates.
If the Western consumer were to pay one cent more for every t-shirt from Bangladesh, and the entirety of that one cent increase went to the sewing machine operator making the shirt, her wage would triple.
Nobody among the consumers would notice an increase of one cent on a t-shirt. They wouldn't notice an increase of 10 cents, and I don't believe an increase of a dollar would cause much notice.
The problem is not with the niggardly spending habits of the Western consumer. The problem lies with a supply chain that is dedicated to driving costs as low as possible while maximizing profits at every level of that chain.
If we were to double the cost of that t-shirt without legislating a forced feed-through of those cost increases to the workers who actually make the shirt, the only result would be that the players in the supply chain would be massively enriched.
The workers would continue to toil in squalid poverty.
That's why the blandishments of the "consumers are too cheap" crowd need to be ignored.
Without proper regulation of the supply chain nothing will change for the garment workers in Bangladesh.
After all, Haiti beckons...
They die because we're too cheap to pay a proper price for a shirt.
Bullshit!
Here's a look at the economics of t-shirt production. The Bangladeshi garment worker produces 250 t-shirts per hour. In a 60 hour week, that's 15,000 shirts. She gets paid in the range of $50 per month; as low as $37 by some estimates.
If the Western consumer were to pay one cent more for every t-shirt from Bangladesh, and the entirety of that one cent increase went to the sewing machine operator making the shirt, her wage would triple.
Nobody among the consumers would notice an increase of one cent on a t-shirt. They wouldn't notice an increase of 10 cents, and I don't believe an increase of a dollar would cause much notice.
The problem is not with the niggardly spending habits of the Western consumer. The problem lies with a supply chain that is dedicated to driving costs as low as possible while maximizing profits at every level of that chain.
If we were to double the cost of that t-shirt without legislating a forced feed-through of those cost increases to the workers who actually make the shirt, the only result would be that the players in the supply chain would be massively enriched.
The workers would continue to toil in squalid poverty.
That's why the blandishments of the "consumers are too cheap" crowd need to be ignored.
Without proper regulation of the supply chain nothing will change for the garment workers in Bangladesh.
After all, Haiti beckons...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)