Saturday, February 5, 2011

My One Problem with The Godfather


The Godfather is perhaps the all time greatest movie. It's perfect on almost every scale. It has everything you would want from a great movie: a great cast, great acting, great soundtrack, great story, violence, sex, I could go on and on.

My one problem with the movie is Lucy Mancini. She's not hot. Sonny is supposed to cheat on his wife with Lucy? Are we really supposed to believe that? This has been my one qualm with the movie. The casting of Lucy was not done well.

Wednesday, February 2, 2011

The Future of Coal


Recently, Alpha Natural Resources (ANR) acquired Massey Energy Co. (MEE) in a deal that has significant implications in the coal market. This capped an interesting week in the world of coal which saw Rio Tinto’s offer to take over Riversdale backed, Mobil-Exxon predicting natural gas to overtake coal by 2020, and Chevron getting out of coal all together. These news events signal a mixed outlook on the future of coal with some companies looking at alternative resources whereas others are looking to strengthen their position in the coal market. Looking at all these events, it is possible to get an outlook for the future of the coal market.

The Massey Acquisition
Regardless of what the future is, coal is a significant resource today, since it has many uses. Coal has various grades which contribute to its different uses. It is a significant source of electricity; 40 percent of the world’s electricity production comes from coal. The world’s two biggest economies, China and the United States, both consume a large portion of coal for electricity. There is a strong demand for the resource. Coal is also used in the blast furnace for smelting iron, another important mineral commodity to industrialized nations. Furthermore, since coal can be liquefied into gasoline or diesel, it is seen as a backstop technology to limit price escalation in the oil market.

The acquisition of Massey by Alpha Natural Resouces brings America’s third and fourth largest coal producers together. Under the terms of the agreement, Massey stockholders will receive 1.025 shares of ANR stock and $10 for each stock of Massey Common. This represents a 21% premium on Massey’s share price, but the deal should see ANR, with its 5 billion tons in reserves, become the US’s second largest coal producer, leapfrogging Arch Coal, and the third largest producer of coal in the world. The cash and stock deal is valued at $7.1 billion and should help ANR become a significant player in the metallurgical coal market.

Because metallurgical coal is a factor of production for industrial, manufacturing, and steel industries, the deal should put Alpha Natural Resources in a strong position. With emerging markets, like India, China, and Brazil, the demand for steel and other goods should be high. This should help sustain the demand for coal. ANR is putting themselves in a strategically solid position.

Riversdale Takeover
Rio Tinto is one of the world’s largest mining and resources companies, so an attempt to acquire a coal mining company should not be a huge surprise. The large majority of Rio’s coal operations are geared towards thermal coal. With its bauxite refinement and iron ore production, it makes sense for Rio to acquire a company whose resources can contribute directly towards another subsidiary’s factor of production. Perhaps more significant, however, is that magnitude of the resources they are acquiring.

Not only is Rio making an attempt to shift much of its coal holdings from thermal to coking, but they are also adding greatly to their potential production. As of 2008, Rio only produced 153,111 tonnes of coal. The Riversdale acquisition could substantially increase the production numbers, so not only is Rio getting more coking coal resources, but they are increasing their stake in coal mining. This, however, is by no means a done deal.

Just like Rio, there are two steelmakers, who are substantial holdings of Riversdale, with interests in coking coal. India’s Tata Steel owns 24.2 percent and Brazil’s CSN owns 16.29 percent. While the board representative from Tata backed the offer, Riversdale has made it clear that this does not mean that Tata Steel will sell it share of Riversdale. Obtaining Riversdale would be a strategic coup by Rio, both finding a resource to help itself and taking away a resource from a competitor.

Mobil-Exxon Prediction and Chevron’s Exit
Exxon-Mobil has made a bold call by suggesting that natural gas consumption will overtake coal by 2020. To put that in perspective, the International Energy Agency does not see that happening until 2035. As preposterous as it sounds, there is a method to Mobil-Exxon’s madness as trends in the market suggest that they may just be right.

Cheap prices have not discouraged exploration and production companies from raising supply, but the key to gas’s role in the future will be dependent on demand. The thought is that natural gas will make its leap in the power generation market. This sector accounts for 34 percent of US gas demand. While coal dominates this category, tightening environmental regulations could push power companies towards natural gas because it is a much more efficient source of energy. The shift away from coal seems to already taking hold.

Chevron Corp announced that it will be leaving the coal industry, stating that clean coal technology is too far away. This relates directly to Mobil-Exxon’s prediction that companies will look for cleaner energy sources. Clean coal technologies are technological developments aimed at reducing the environmental impact of goal energy generation. Since coal is one of the leading causes of climate change, there has been an initiative in the industry to find ways to limit the environmental impact. Although Chevron only produced 10 million tons of coal last year, it is significant that the energy giant is leaving the industry.

The Future of Coal
The coal market as a whole will be sustained so long as there is a demand from steel, manufacturing, and other industrial industries. However, coal as a source for electricity production might have a less certain future. With growing regulatory burdens, the demand for clean coal technology is at an all time high. How viable is clean coal technology? How long will it take for these technologies to develop? How much more efficient will these technologies be?

These lingering uncertainties must be sorted out in the near future for coal to survive as a source for electricity production. If these technologies do not make substantial reductions in the environmental impact or take too long to develop, these companies will look at alternative sources that are more efficient and less harmful the environment. This will have a spiral effect on the price and supply of coal because as demand goes elsewhere, prices will drop making the extraction of coal reserves uneconomic. A price drop would have a precipituous effect, not just on these coal companies, but the many miners who would lose their jobs.

All of these news events, in a way, suggest this trend away from coal as a source of electricity production. Both of the takeover/mergers seem to be motivated by a desire to further a stake in the coking coal industry that is tied with the steel, manufacturing, and industrial industries. The moves would help the companies strengthen their position in those markets. Exxon-Mobil's shunning of the coal industry and Chevron's departure from the coal industry is an indicator of what the future of the industry might hold.

Saturday, January 29, 2011

Friday, January 28, 2011

Tracy Morgan Is Ridiculous


The title of the post and the video speaks for itself. Whenever Tracy Morgan appears on anything, it's must watch television.

Protests in Photos

Big Picture Protests in the Middle East:

This is Worth Watching

Al Jazeera English: Live Stream - Watch Now - Al Jazeera English

Thursday, January 27, 2011

Tuesday, January 25, 2011

We Awarded The World Cup To This Country?

Really FIFA? Really IOC?

You may have heard how critical I was of the decision when it was made in early December. One of the criticisms of the Russian bid was safety concerns. Russia is hosting two important world events in the next 8 years. How has this happened?

When you have events like this:
But Monday's bombing, which killed 35 people and wounded more than 150, highlighted the persistence of terror attacks in the Russian heartland. Terrorists have struck the capital twice in the past 10 months, breaking a relative lull in attacks there that had lasted for several years.

You're going to put the world's people in the line of fire? I'm not saying that there will be a terrorist attack or a suicide bombing during the games, I hope there isn't one. But why take the risk?

These games are a time where we take a break from the rivalries and the fighting to contest them on the fields, the tracks, the swimming pools. The games are a time of peace. It is up to the host nation to maintain the peace. We've seen the consequences of a lack of peace in the past, in Munich 1972. Who is to say something similar cannot happen in a country where these kinds of events occur regularly?

Oh, that's right...money in your pocket is what's important. Corruption in sport is the worst. I hate it. It's absolutely ridiculous that Russia got the 2018 World Cup when safety was the number one issue and Qatar got the 2022 World Cup which they may move to winter because of weather concerns. It's particularly ridiculous when they beat the likes of England:

Events like these really annoy me because they show a lack of attention. These type of things need to be prevented, not just in Russia, but through out the world. I know that you can just as easily walk into a US airport. May be there should be further securities to prevent these measures. Airport are high capita areas and easy targets as a result. I know flying is a hassle, but what's the cost of a human life?

Monday, January 24, 2011

Women as Referees


Those were the comments by Richard Keys and Andy Gray during the Wolves-Liverpool match. These comments have caused an uproar and Sky Sports subsequently been dropped from Sky's coverage of Monday Night Football. I'm honest enough to admit that when I first heard the comments I chuckled, but then I thought about it more. Female referees are often chastised more openly than male referees because there are so few of them. This means that when they make an error, the reaction is amplified. Everyone knows the names of the female referees because there are so few of them. Fact is though that every referee makes mistakes.

I think the NBA is a good example of this. There is one female referee and her name is Violet Palmer. I will not comment on her credentials as a referee, but if you call her a bad referee, I can name you at least 10 male referees who are just as bad. Going back to football, there was a couple instances in the last two Arsenal games where the male linesman made the wrong call on offsides. The player that the ball was played to was onsides, while another wasn't. The correct call was to play on, but the referee waved his flag for offsides. Where is his criticism?

Fact is that men's sport still has a men's club mentality. There's a certain masculinity that's expected from all aspects and when a female tries to get into the men's club, it's received poorly. This does not make it right, but it's a reality of societal issues in sport. Will this change in the future? I think it's too soon to say. Sky made the right call in dropping Gray and Keys though.

Sunday, January 23, 2011

Cajas: Reform At Last


Following concerns surrounding the financial system, Spain has decided to inject its banks with billions of dollars. The lingering problems with the financial problem have been attributed to the cajas, saving banks, which have struggled in the eye of the financial crisis and the collapse of the housing bubble. Spain attempted to rescue these banks last year, but the attempt to recapitalize and restructure these banks was thwarted by a lack of widespread reform and a desire by the banks to maintain the status quo. A year later, Spain has found itself under scrutiny for its increasing debt issues as well as its struggling economy. This time, Spain has responded with a more proactive plan. Injecting cash into the financial sector to recapitalize these banks has been well received, but the new reform measures have been the key to the positive response since they address the underlying issues which plagued last year’s rescue attempt.

The Spanish financial system is being monitored with a watchful eye by other European countries. Greece and Ireland have already accepted bailouts from the European central bank, so the worry is that, with its growing debts and struggling financial sector, Spain will be the next country to need a bailout. The deficits have hurt investor confidence in Spain, making debt hard to finance. Spain is already estimated to borrow €125 billion this year “just to finance its deficit and roll over maturing debt.” This new infusion of cash financed through debt poses risks and adds stress to an already taxed economy. However, it is a necessary move because the cajas are an important part of Spain’s financial and economic well-being.

The cajas are integral to the interests of Spain because of the large role they play in driving Spain’s economy. The cajas account for €1.3 trillion in assets, which accounts for 42%% of the total bank assets in Spain. The problems with the cajas are two fold. First, they have had trouble raising capital because there is lack of investor confidence. Second, the lack of regulation combined with the complex structures and histories of these banks are part of why these banks are in such dire situations. For example, because of the lack of regulation in lending practices, these banks, like many others around the world, funded a housing boom that went bust, crippled by “bad loans and heavy losses.” The housing spiral has played a huge role in depleting the banks’ funds.

Mortgage or other real estate loans account for nearly half of the cajas assets, therefore the burst of the housing bubble had a considerable effect on these institutions. As the defaults in the housing market began, the cajas were forced to foreclose on the assets and attempt to sell them to recoup the funds. The new influx of real estate for sale further plummeted housing prices, making the underlying assets worth less than the value of the loans. The result was a housing spiral that has seen the cajas suffer great losses. The easy response to fix the depleted capital at these banks is to provide them with more funds. It is not enough just to hand these banks some money; reform measures are necessary to prevent another financial crisis from happening in the future and to satisfy investors.

The idea to inject new funds into these banks is not a new one; Spain injected €11 billion into these banks last year through the Fund for Orderly Bank Restructuring (FORB). While the government had said that that amount put into the fund could rise to €99 billion, the country did not make more money available. A requirement of that rescue attempt was forcing the mergers amongst different cajas, reducing their number from 45 to 17. However, the mergers resulted in “confusing, unwieldy structures” which “scared off investors.” What is more is that they did little to provide transparency in these banks. The politicians who control the cajas used the FORB to create “virtual mergers,” allowing “the banks to keep their own brands, governing bodies and local retail operations while combining treasury and risk-management functions.” This is symptomatic of the political and social issues that go with forcing reform on these banks.
Part of the problem with the cajas is intrinsic with their history and their roots. These banks have “close ties to provincial governments,” which can be traced to the cajas rurales. These rural banks were affiliated with syndicalist, co-operative movements and the Catholic church. While they were absorbed by the savings banks, their ties to political and social interests remained. Because of this, the cajas “face pressure to back projects that may not be profitable.” For example, Bancaja and Caja Granada invested in a theme park, Terra Mitica, in Benidorm, which “went bankrupt in 2004” and” has struggled since reopening in 2006.” Additionally, another bank, CajaSur, which is operated by the Roman Catholic church in Cordoba, mysteriously refused to merge with Unicaja. It exemplified an instance where “politics often trumps rationality” in Spain. As a result, the Bank of Spain had to seize control of it. For Spain to make a real impact on these banks, widespread reform is necessary to usurp these special interests.

The overriding sentiment for reform seems to be that the cajas need to become more “centralized” and “transparent entites,” but in a country with Spain’s history, it might be difficult challenge to overcome. The Franco regime was extremely divisive, and though Spain has done much to repair these division, cultural and lingual values still prevail. For instance, the idea of centralized banks may not resonate well with Basques or Catalans, who were marginalized by the strong, centralized, Madrid-based government of Franco. In instituting this new reform, the hope here would be that the country is far enough removed to accept a decision that affects the health of the overall economy. A strong Spanish economy is beneficial for everyone and reforming the cajas would go a long way in repairing financial uncertainty. These political and social differences which have affected the effectiveness of past attempts to reform the cajas serve as evidence why the new reform has been positively received.

The new plan has shown investors how Spain has learned from previous misgivings and how the country is going to take a more proactive approach towards fixing the caja problem. Last year’s rescue attempt was focused on providing capital for the banks by holding them to lax restrictions. However, the banks took advantage of this through “virtual mergers,” providing access to the capital, but not making the desired changes. This time, Spain is not only providing capital, but also forcing “them to be more open about their lending practices.” By “simplifying their complex structures” and “making them more like traditional banks,” Spain is taking significant steps to usurping the “influence” of “local politicians, union members, clients,” and “Catholic priests” who were “reluctant to relinquish their influence” in the past. With all of these changes, it is easy to see why investors have reacted positively to the announcement.

Under the new plan, the cajas will no longer be complex, enigmatic institutions, but rather more like other banks in Spain. Spain wants to “transform” the cajas into “centralized, transparent entities” that “resemble traditional banks by placing all of their assets into a central holding company and streamlining management.” it is easy to see why the country wants the cajas to be more like traditional banks because Spain’s traditional banks, like Santander and BBVA, are strong. The plan already seems to be shaping the cajas. Cajastur, which merged with three other lenders, has said that it would be “pooling 100% of its assets.” However, the government is going to wait to see the “results of detailed disclosures” before giving an “ultimatum” to the cajas. This should allow the government to assess how bad the situation really is and allow the banks to restructure themselves before necessitating government intervention.

Improving the health of the Spanish economy should be a strong first step towards addressing concerns about Spain’s debt problems. Once these banks are recapitalized and restructured, they can get back to providing loans, stimulating economic growth, and creating new jobs. It should eventually ease the stress on the government, increasing the number of people contributing taxes and reducing the strain of social welfare programs. Spain has been plagued with issues relating to investor confidence because of the cajas for some time; resolving the caja problem should go a long way to addressing these issues.

How Does a Chant at Yost Begin?


So Friday night, I walk into Yost and go to my seat. There's a group of kids, not sure what age they were, but they definitely weren't regulars. This one kid was obsessed with Carl Hagelin. Through out the night, he would yell "give it to Carl" or "Carl's my boy," you know general fanboy fodder. They were just being obnoxious before the game, and I gave them a look. One of the kids asked me "you want in on this." Now I thought they were just drinking or something, but I wouldn't have been surprised if it was something else.

Anyway, these kids were just awful. They were sitting in the student section but had no interest in chanting with the student section. After a while, it sounded like they got bored with Carl, and started chanting "Beat that ass." It was really awkward for us regulars. We all just gave each other looks and rolled our eyes. It was annoying but partially funny.

Well, after one of the goals, one of the kids threw that ball on the ice. Kid tried to take and blow my vuvuzela too, which I snatched before he even took it (this is where I had had enough of this fucktard). The Alaska goalie was hilarious though.

So last night (YES THE THREAD TITLE HAD A POINT), whenever Michigan got into a skirmish, we broke out into chants of "Beat that ass." It was more a hilarious recall to an awkward yet entertaining night. I'm just glad I didn't get into a fight with that kid.

Saturday, January 22, 2011

Browntown


Would you buy this?

Friday, January 21, 2011

Yuan Appreciation!

On Wednesday, Chinese President Hu Jintao will meet with President Obama to discuss the relationship between China and the United States, focusing particularly on issues of trade. This has been a hotly contested issue for sometimes now as the US has pressured China to appreciate their currency, claiming that China has held the exchange rate artificially low so that Chinese businesses can enjoy a trade advantage over their US counterparts. In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, Jintao has fired back at the US saying that “the monetary policy of the Untied States has a major impact on global liquidity and capital flows and therefore, the liquidity of the US dollar should be kept at a reasonable level.” He also suggested that China will consider making the yuan a global currency, while conceding that it “will be a fairly long process.” This is the setting for what should be an intense bilateral discussion between the leaders of the two biggest economies in the world.

The yuan has tremendous potential as a global currency because of China’s continuing emergence as a global economy. Currently, less than 1% of China’s $2.3 trillion imports are done in yuan. According the the Wall Street Journal article “New Move to Make Yuan a Global Currency,” “some analysts have predicted that it will be only a few years before 20% to 30%” of the imports “will be conducted in yuan rather than dollars.” This suggests that there is already a demand for direct yuan exchange in foreign exchange markets.

Trade between the United States and China constitutes a large portion of the United States’ goods deficit and China’s surplus. Of the United States’ $51 billion monthly goods deficit, $26 billion is attributable to China. The trade between the two countries means that both countries have a stake in each other, present and future. The US has helped China build its economy by buying their goods, and as a result of this capital outflow and wealth, China has accumulated US financial assets.

From an economics perspective, it should be understood that both countries can benefit from a yuan as a global currency, one that is subject to appreciation and convertible for direct trade with other countries. The appreciation of the yuan relative to the dollar can help the US industry and trade in a number of ways. However, it can also help China by reducing its exposure to the US, reducing its transaction costs in trade and making foreign resources less expensive. The decision to make the yuan a global currency should have mutually beneficial consequences.

The US has been clamoring for the Chinese government to appreciate their currency for sometime. Because the yuan has been pegged at a fixed rate, China has enjoyed advantageous trade with several countries, but in particular the United States. We know from our stock and flow model that countries neither want to face a trade deficit (because of the marginal cost of debt) nor accumulate foreign financial assets forever (because of the risk of default). Eventually, the demand for a flow of foreign goods and services must shift, leading to an appreciating yuan. An stronger yuan should help the US trade deficit by making its goods cheaper and China’s goods more expensive.

Devaluing currency often is depicted in a negative light because it is usually caused by inflation. Traditionally, inflation has been the primary cause of a depreciating dollar. Additionally, a strong dollar is important for buying foreign foods and for travel. However, it has been detrimental to domestic industry and labor. First, depreciating the dollar relative to the yuan is not a result of inflation but rather a consequence of the market forces; there is a demand to conduct trade directly in yuan rather than in dollars. Second, a strong dollar has hurt the US by making domestic goods less attractive to foreign countries, influencing the balance of trade. It has also made it more attractive to invest in cheaper foreign labor by outsourcing, since domestic labor has been relatively more expensive. As other currencies appreciate relative to the dollar, companies from those other countries will be more attracted to hiring US labor. Having the dollar depreciate relative to other currencies can have a positive impact on the balance of trade and labor without the worry of inflation.

China has been accumulating US financial assets through the influx of dollars from the imbalance in trade. The combination of accumulating US assets as well as the growth in the US budget deficit has made China increasingly exposed to the US default risk. While US bonds have always had the reputation of being a safe asset to hold, the recent financial crisis has reinforced the important of diversification. China has been concerned that the US will “inflate away its debt” “by printing money.” By making the yuan a global currency and relying less on the dollar as a medium of exchange, China will accumulate less dollars which will not necessitate the purchase of US financial assets. Instead, China will be trading in their own currency and accumulating other foreign currencies and financial assets. This will increase their portfolio’s diversification and help stronger relationships with foreign countries. It will make the countries interdependent on China just as the US has been. Diversification will make China less susceptible to fluctuations in the United States, enabling for a more stable economic environment.

Another advantage of opening the yuan to global trade is reducing transaction costs. By using the dollar as a medium of exchange, China is paying a spread, the difference between the price to buy or sell, of the dollar exchange rate. Essentially, for every transaction that China is conducting in dollars, China is paying a tax. They are paying more and getting less than what they would if they had direct exchange through the yuan. While it may only be a small fraction of the transaction, with the magnitude of trade that China is involved in, its sum adds up. If it makes the yuan a global currency, it can trade directly with other countries rather than using the dollar as an intermediary medium of exchange.

As a developing country, China has become a huge player in the commodities industry. Commodities are very much the life blood of industry and commodity production is integral to industrialization. The mark of an industrialized nation is consuming 300 kilogram per capita of steel. Currently, China is producing 426 kilograms per capita. To produce steel, you need coke, which is a product of coal. Additionally, 68.7% of China’s electricity comes from coal. While China is the leading producer of coal, it imports nearly 3 million tons of coal from the United States. This is only one example of China growing demand for resources, but a stronger yuan would make these resources, these factors of production, cheaper.

The bilateral meetings Wednesday should serve as an opportunity to discuss the possibility of opening up the yuan to the world. As Juntao said, it will be a “long process.” As the world’s two largest economies, China and the United States are the leaders of the global economy. For both sides, it is important for them to come to a resolution that is mutually beneficial. A war of words between two countries so interdependent on each other is not a viable solution. Appreciating the yuan can go a long way to better the relationship by helping trade and industry in the US and making trade less costly and risky for the Chinese.

Thursday, November 25, 2010

Happy Thanksgiving Everyone!


Happy Thanksgiving everyone! Thanksgiving is the most American of holidays. I mean, what other holiday has the food, the booze, and the sports like this one? The excessive eating is funny because in a lot of places, they don't have food. In other places, their food sources are limited. Name a country that has a sports day like this? What's impressive is that it's one sport that carries us through the day. The culmination of food, booze, and sports are just unmatched by any other holiday.

We go all out to honor the coming together of the Native Americans (notice I didn't use Indians, that's offensive to us Indians) and the Pilgrims. Or do we? Do we even think of these things? Perhaps not. Perhaps we think of what we're thankful for. Perhaps that's enough, but perhaps we should be thankful for the Native Americans and Pilgrims; we wouldn't have Thanksgiving without them.

Thursday, November 11, 2010

Happy Veteran's Day


I knew we just passed the anniversary of the founding of the Marines, but I was unsure we were close to Veteran's Day. I really don't study the calendar as much as I used to, considering we don't get holidays like this off in college. Lately, I've been seeing more of these poppies, for lack of a better word, popping up. I knew they had some symbolic meaning for the Brits, as I'd seen football managers and commentators wear them. I did not know they were worn in the US too, particularly because I've never seen anyone wear them. It got me curious as to how this tradition or meaning was initiated.

I did a little searching (Google Search) and I found this blog entry:
The red poppy is a familiar emblem of Remembrance Day which began with a poem “In Flanders Field” written by Canadian Physician John McCrae. The poppy emblem was chosen because they were the flower that loomed in their red colour across some of the bloodiest battlefields of Flanders in World War One, making the poppy’s colour symbolic for the bloodshed and despair of trench warfare.
That's really powerful. Well, the poppy seems like a very powerful flower. It's bright and distinctly shaped. It probably has the right colors to symbolized the blood and darkness of war as well. It's just so fitting.

Regardless, this day isn't about poppies or me, it's about our troops, our veterans, and our fallen fathers. It's about the people who fought for our freedom, to help make this country the most powerful nation in the World, politically, socially, and economically.

To all the Armed Forces, thank you.