Hello? All?
How is everybody doing? In this blog, i am going to post my first ever blog essay that i've done. I am going to let you discover it, i will not spoil the surprise. Enjoy!
Seed Cannot Outgrow Its Soil
There is a Chinese old saying, “Seed cannot outgrow its soil,” it means until we change the culture, environment, or the setting the nature of result cannot be altered. To put it into perspective, let’s take the global financial crisis of 2008 as an example. Unless we change the culture of global financial market, the global financial crisis of 2008 is likely to happen again in the future. To address this issue, we must dig deeper to find the possible cause and
contributions, and try to mend and fix it so that it doesn’t happen again.
In 2008’s global financial crisis, the U.S played the major role, thus, it is logical to start from the U.S to make the sufficient changes to improve global financial system. According to Steve Forbes’, CEO, president and editor-in-chief of Forbes magazine, article “How Capitalism Will Save Us,” global financial crisis ignited as the Federal Government and the Treasury Department of the U.S’ miscalculation and misinterpretation of the U.S dollar value being “strong” they pumped excessive dollar to the market in 2004. It leaded to commodities prices to hike, and started housing market bubble which is made possible by packaged subprime mortgage loans from investment institutions. However, the housing bubble bursted in 2008 dragging the investment institutions along with it, and global financial crisis ensued. Thus, fixing has to go to the Federal Government and the Treasury Department.
However, some might argue that consumers who purchased the subprime mortgages were the ones who should be blamed because they encouraged the trend that was set by investment institutions. But, the consumers usually don’t have the necessary information and knowledge to distinguish between good deal in the long run and the deal that could add up to something disastrous, which in our case was the housing bubble burst.
Others could argue that investment institutions are the faulty bunch, but that is partially true. Investment companies are profit driven, and only there to satisfy the shareholders, but in order them to be successful the comfortable situation must be created, and in our case the feds and treasury department provided them with customers with incentives and environment where investment institutions can take advantage of. Hence, the real blame must go to the feds and treasury department because they created environment for middle man (investment institutions) to create not-so-good deal (subprime mortgages) and watched it unfold without any interference. As Steve Forbes suggested, having a stable, protected, secured and sound global financial market the federal government and treasury department has to be separated and have their few major goals to be set as priorities. The Federal Government should be responsible for regulatory role of financial market and the Treasury Department should be true monetary guardian of the financial market in the U.S. Once we accomplish those goals in the U.S the global financial situation would be in much better position.
However, the well being of global finance is dependent on all aspects regarding global community of each member states. One possibility to improve the whole global finance is to set or arrange ways to make global communities to communicate well with one another. They must interact efficiently, faster, and without any disruption of global financial flow as John J. Mack, former CEO and current chairman of Morgan Stanley-Smith Barney suggested. The governments, government agencies, institutions and third party companies that are overseeing the financial markets all over the world must connect and exchange information with one another to prevent future global financial crisis.
Critics might argue that these information exchange activities might get breached and become fraudulent, or turned into one way to make money out of them by whoever that has information, but if we can monitor the activities that they involved the result can be tremendous.
Also, some might say that activities such as information exchanges might slow down the market flow, but we could assign people, agencies, and institutions to overlook those transactions, thus making things smooth and easier for all parties that are involved in the transaction. After all, worst we could get is something that is different than what we have now which is failing us.
Some might say keep the faith in the financial market by let the “invisible hand” take care of it, but we just don’t want another global financial crisis because we haven’t fully covered from the last one yet.
Lastly, I suggest that the time has come for change, it is well overdue for soil change, hence making significant improvement on our global financial system; to do that we need to change regulation, monetary control, and efficient, secure exchanging of informations throughout the world.
If you have any question,feeling, concern, please feel free to channel them in the comment, thanks.
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Sunday, May 1, 2011
Last Thought on Global Financial Crisis
Hello? How is your weekend going? I hope, you're having a nice weekend.
In this blog, i will be giving few last thoughts on global financial crisis.
I have done reading and watched videos, now i am ready to conclude.
I felt this last global financial crisis of 2008 needed an explanation.
People blamed others for the fault of this 2008 global financial crisis, but when i looked into it i discovered most of the accusations surrounding the blame game is from frustration of not understanding the situations, not knowing what other side has gone through, and unable to tell the uncertainty of the crisis caused people to point fingers at each other. Therefore, i would like to share videos that regard the inside view of what happened in 2008 global financial crisis.
First video is former-CEO of Morgan Stanley's John Mack's personal recollection of events during global financial crisis of 2008. Morgan Stanley was an investment firm(they sold subprime mortgage loans) before and during crisis, however, it turned to become a traditional bank after crisis.
Please sit tight because this video is 26 mins long, however, if you want to skip to the critical part then go to directly aroung 18:18 secs. Around 18-19 mins John Mack gives his view on what he thinks the Federal Government and the Treasury Department of the U.S was doing during the crisis(hint: whether he blames them for doing their job or not, you find out). But, i highly recommend you to watch whole duration of this video because this video really gives you the insider view of the global financial crisis in first person perspective. To me it was an eye-opener. Enjoy!
http://www.youtube.com/embed/R9sQtmPAYO0
Also to give you different point of view, i selected CEO of CitiGroup which is an universal bank during global financial crisis of 2008 to share his view on the crisis that happened in 2008. This one is pretty explanatory, so enjoy!
http://www.youtube.com/embed/98oR4iYYAsM
In this blog, i will be giving few last thoughts on global financial crisis.
I have done reading and watched videos, now i am ready to conclude.
I felt this last global financial crisis of 2008 needed an explanation.
People blamed others for the fault of this 2008 global financial crisis, but when i looked into it i discovered most of the accusations surrounding the blame game is from frustration of not understanding the situations, not knowing what other side has gone through, and unable to tell the uncertainty of the crisis caused people to point fingers at each other. Therefore, i would like to share videos that regard the inside view of what happened in 2008 global financial crisis.
First video is former-CEO of Morgan Stanley's John Mack's personal recollection of events during global financial crisis of 2008. Morgan Stanley was an investment firm(they sold subprime mortgage loans) before and during crisis, however, it turned to become a traditional bank after crisis.
Please sit tight because this video is 26 mins long, however, if you want to skip to the critical part then go to directly aroung 18:18 secs. Around 18-19 mins John Mack gives his view on what he thinks the Federal Government and the Treasury Department of the U.S was doing during the crisis(hint: whether he blames them for doing their job or not, you find out). But, i highly recommend you to watch whole duration of this video because this video really gives you the insider view of the global financial crisis in first person perspective. To me it was an eye-opener. Enjoy!
http://www.youtube.com/embed/R9sQtmPAYO0
Also to give you different point of view, i selected CEO of CitiGroup which is an universal bank during global financial crisis of 2008 to share his view on the crisis that happened in 2008. This one is pretty explanatory, so enjoy!
http://www.youtube.com/embed/98oR4iYYAsM
Friday, April 29, 2011
Extra Credit
Alright, how is everybody doing?
This blog is for my English 1A class' extra credit. It has two parts! Enjoy !
FYI- this video blog may be subject to change.
Part 1.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0nERTFo-Sk&feature=channel_video_title
Econstories.tv is a place to learn about the economic way of thinking through the eyes of creative director John Papola and creative economist Russ Roberts.
In Fear the Boom and Bust, John Maynard Keynes and F. A. Hayek, two of the great economists of the 20th century, come back to life to attend an economics conference on the economic crisis. Before the conference begins, and at the insistence of Lord Keynes, they go out for a night on the town and sing about why there's a "boom and bust" cycle in modern economies and good reason to fear it.
Music was produced by Jack Bradley at Blackboard3 Music and Sound Design. It was composed and performed by Richard Royston Jacobs.
http://www.youtube.com/embed/d0nERTFo-Sk
Plus, to see and hear more from the stars of Fear the Boom and Bust, Billy Scafuri and Adam Lustick, visit their site: http://www.billyandadam.com
Part 2.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTQnarzmTOc&feature=channel_video_title
According to the National Bureau of Economic Research, the Great Recession ended almost two years ago, in the summer of 2009. Yet we're all uneasy. Job growth has been disappointing. The recovery seems fragile. Where should we head from here? Is that question even meaningful? Can the government steer the economy or have past attempts helped create the mess we're still in?
In "Fight of the Century", Keynes and Hayek weigh in on these central questions. Do we need more government spending or less? What's the evidence that government spending promotes prosperity in troubled times? Can war or natural disasters paradoxically be good for an economy in a slump? Should more spending come from the top down or from the bottom up? What are the ultimate sources of prosperity?
Keynes and Hayek never agreed on the answers to these questions and they still don't. Let's listen to the greats. See Keynes and Hayek throwing down in "Fight of the Century"!
http://www.youtube.com/embed/GTQnarzmTOc
This blog is for my English 1A class' extra credit. It has two parts! Enjoy !
FYI- this video blog may be subject to change.
Part 1.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0nERTFo-Sk&feature=channel_video_title
Econstories.tv is a place to learn about the economic way of thinking through the eyes of creative director John Papola and creative economist Russ Roberts.
In Fear the Boom and Bust, John Maynard Keynes and F. A. Hayek, two of the great economists of the 20th century, come back to life to attend an economics conference on the economic crisis. Before the conference begins, and at the insistence of Lord Keynes, they go out for a night on the town and sing about why there's a "boom and bust" cycle in modern economies and good reason to fear it.
Music was produced by Jack Bradley at Blackboard3 Music and Sound Design. It was composed and performed by Richard Royston Jacobs.
http://www.youtube.com/embed/d0nERTFo-Sk
Plus, to see and hear more from the stars of Fear the Boom and Bust, Billy Scafuri and Adam Lustick, visit their site: http://www.billyandadam.com
Part 2.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTQnarzmTOc&feature=channel_video_title
According to the National Bureau of Economic Research, the Great Recession ended almost two years ago, in the summer of 2009. Yet we're all uneasy. Job growth has been disappointing. The recovery seems fragile. Where should we head from here? Is that question even meaningful? Can the government steer the economy or have past attempts helped create the mess we're still in?
In "Fight of the Century", Keynes and Hayek weigh in on these central questions. Do we need more government spending or less? What's the evidence that government spending promotes prosperity in troubled times? Can war or natural disasters paradoxically be good for an economy in a slump? Should more spending come from the top down or from the bottom up? What are the ultimate sources of prosperity?
Keynes and Hayek never agreed on the answers to these questions and they still don't. Let's listen to the greats. See Keynes and Hayek throwing down in "Fight of the Century"!
http://www.youtube.com/embed/GTQnarzmTOc
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
Profile about former CEO John Mack of Morgan Stanley who was in charge between 2005-2009.
This video was on February 11, 2009 from From Capitol Hill: Morgan Stanley CEO John Mack of Morgan Stanley Addresses House Financial Services Committee (Market Pulse), after receiving $10 billion TARP money from federal government. Refer to the url as his biography and some information regarding him shows up on screen.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbv0FYEjAYY
According to the Morgan Stanley official website's Corporate Governance Board of Directors as of January 1, 2011, John J. Mack's biography consists of : Mr. Mack has been executive Chairman of the Board of Morgan Stanley since June 2005. He was Chief Executive Officer of Morgan Stanley from June 2005 to December 2009. He previously had spent nearly 30 years at the Firm in various positions, including as President, Chief Operating Officer and a Director. Before rejoining Morgan Stanley, Mr. Mack served as co-Chief Executive Officer of Credit Suisse Group and Chief Executive Officer of Credit Suisse First Boston. Mr. Mack is a graduate of Duke University, where he is a member of the Board of Trustees. He also serves as Chairman of the Board of Trustees of New York-Presbyterian Hospital and the University Hospital of both Columbia and Cornell, a board member of the Bloomberg Family Foundation, a Director of IMG, and a member of the Business Council and the Business Roundtable. Mr. Mack is also on the advisory board for China Investment Corporation, the International Business Leaders Advisory Council for the Mayor of Beijing, the International Advisory Panel of The Monetary Authority of Singapore and the Executive Committee of the Partnership for New York City. Additionally, he is a member of the International Business Council of the World Economic Forum, the NYC Financial Services Advisory Committee and the Shanghai International Financial Advisory Council.(1)
According to the World Economic Forum, John Mack's biography consists of his positions past and present are Graduate, Duke University. Formerly: Co-Chief Executive Officer, Credit Suisse Group; Chief Executive Officer, Credit Suisse First Boston. Over 30 years with Morgan Stanley including: President, Chief Operating Officer and Member of the Board; 2005-09, Chief Executive Officer. Member of the Board of Trustees, Duke University. Chairman of the Board of Trustees: New York-Presbyterian Hospital, the university hospital of Columbia and Cornell. Member, Advisory Council, Mayor of Beijing.(2)
According to Morgan Stanley's press release on June 30th, 2005, John Mack has been announced as new CEO and Chairman of the Board, effective immediately.
Miles Marsh, who at the time the lead director of the board said, "John has nearly thirty years at Morgan Stanley working with its people and culture. He knows the business. He knows what we must do to meet the challenges transforming the global financial services industry. He also brings to Morgan Stanley close relationships with clients worldwide as well as the trust and respect of employees, investors, and industry leaders," and he also mentioned "The Board has agreed unanimously that John Mack is uniquely qualified to become Morgan Stanley's new Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. He has the singular combination of experience, strategic insight and leadership ability needed to bring together the people of Morgan Stanley and improve profitability across the Firm. Throughout his career, John Mack has forged cohesive teams that deliver substantial results for shareholders." Also in that press release it introduces the background information about John Mack, "Mr. Mack is returning to a firm at which he spent nearly 30 years, most recently as President, Chief Operating Officer and a Director. He had joined Pequot Capital Management as Chairman earlier this year and served before that as Co-Chief Executive Officer of Credit Suisse Group and Chief Executive Officer of Credit Suisse First Boston. Mr. Mack is a graduate of Duke University, where he is a member of the Board of Trustees. He also serves as Chairman of the Board of Trustees of New York-Presbyterian Hospital, the University Hospital of both Columbia and Cornell, as a Trustee of the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, and as a Director of Cousins Properties Incorporated." (3)
Now lets get down to the dirty business :
According to equilar.com, John Mack has total accumulated wealth of $53,705,904. Equity holding of $43,599,716, Pension balance of $4,067,424, Deferred comp. balance of $6,038,624. His 2008 annual comp. was $1,235,097. Base salary of $800,000 and other $435,097.(4)
This is youtube video URL when John Mack announced to step down as CEO of Morgan Stanley. However, Mr. Mack will stay as active chairman of Morgan Stanley.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERbpUXeTv3U
According to Forbes magazine's July 26, 2006 article, "SEC Wants Mack," John Mack is accused of tipping off Pequot Capital which he used to work for about a 2001 merger deal. Before this accusation there was another attempt to John Mack and Pequot Capital's inside trading rumor and former SEC investigator Gary Aguirre tried to build up case against John Mack and Pequot, however, as Mr. Aguirre puts it John Mack was well-connected, thus before things get ready the senior SEC officials blocked the interview and investigation about John Mack, and Aguirre got fired from the SEC investagor position. According to Aguirre's Senate Judiciary Hearing June of 2006 testimony, John Mack tipped of his friend and Pequot chief Art Samberg to a July 2001 merger deal between GE Capital and Heller Financial which made $18 million out of it. GE has been advised by Morgan Stanley in that $5 billion deal and Heller was advised by Credit Suisse First Boston and Lehman. Mr. Mack has been president and COO of Morgan Stanley that year, but quit in March, and became CEO of Credit Suisse in July of that same year. Mack left Credit Suisse in June 2004 and worked for a couple of weeks as chairman of Pequot Capital in June 2005. But at the end of that month, he was hired by Morgan Stanley to take over. The accusations on the article from Forbes magazine didn't conclude any decision or verdict regarding the accusations.(5)
Lastly, this is John Mack's view on possibly the new financial system overhaul.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJ7kK9Q3cn4
URLs to the links of sources :
1. http://www.morganstanley.com/company/governance/board.html
2. http://www.weforum.org/s?s=john+mack
3. http://www.morganstanley.com/about/press/articles/3685.html
4. http://www.equilar.com/CEO_Compensation/Morgan_Stanley_John_J._Mack.php
5. http://www.forbes.com/2006/07/21/mack-ubs-sec-fund-cx_lm_0721mack.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbv0FYEjAYY
According to the Morgan Stanley official website's Corporate Governance Board of Directors as of January 1, 2011, John J. Mack's biography consists of : Mr. Mack has been executive Chairman of the Board of Morgan Stanley since June 2005. He was Chief Executive Officer of Morgan Stanley from June 2005 to December 2009. He previously had spent nearly 30 years at the Firm in various positions, including as President, Chief Operating Officer and a Director. Before rejoining Morgan Stanley, Mr. Mack served as co-Chief Executive Officer of Credit Suisse Group and Chief Executive Officer of Credit Suisse First Boston. Mr. Mack is a graduate of Duke University, where he is a member of the Board of Trustees. He also serves as Chairman of the Board of Trustees of New York-Presbyterian Hospital and the University Hospital of both Columbia and Cornell, a board member of the Bloomberg Family Foundation, a Director of IMG, and a member of the Business Council and the Business Roundtable. Mr. Mack is also on the advisory board for China Investment Corporation, the International Business Leaders Advisory Council for the Mayor of Beijing, the International Advisory Panel of The Monetary Authority of Singapore and the Executive Committee of the Partnership for New York City. Additionally, he is a member of the International Business Council of the World Economic Forum, the NYC Financial Services Advisory Committee and the Shanghai International Financial Advisory Council.(1)
According to the World Economic Forum, John Mack's biography consists of his positions past and present are Graduate, Duke University. Formerly: Co-Chief Executive Officer, Credit Suisse Group; Chief Executive Officer, Credit Suisse First Boston. Over 30 years with Morgan Stanley including: President, Chief Operating Officer and Member of the Board; 2005-09, Chief Executive Officer. Member of the Board of Trustees, Duke University. Chairman of the Board of Trustees: New York-Presbyterian Hospital, the university hospital of Columbia and Cornell. Member, Advisory Council, Mayor of Beijing.(2)
According to Morgan Stanley's press release on June 30th, 2005, John Mack has been announced as new CEO and Chairman of the Board, effective immediately.
Miles Marsh, who at the time the lead director of the board said, "John has nearly thirty years at Morgan Stanley working with its people and culture. He knows the business. He knows what we must do to meet the challenges transforming the global financial services industry. He also brings to Morgan Stanley close relationships with clients worldwide as well as the trust and respect of employees, investors, and industry leaders," and he also mentioned "The Board has agreed unanimously that John Mack is uniquely qualified to become Morgan Stanley's new Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. He has the singular combination of experience, strategic insight and leadership ability needed to bring together the people of Morgan Stanley and improve profitability across the Firm. Throughout his career, John Mack has forged cohesive teams that deliver substantial results for shareholders." Also in that press release it introduces the background information about John Mack, "Mr. Mack is returning to a firm at which he spent nearly 30 years, most recently as President, Chief Operating Officer and a Director. He had joined Pequot Capital Management as Chairman earlier this year and served before that as Co-Chief Executive Officer of Credit Suisse Group and Chief Executive Officer of Credit Suisse First Boston. Mr. Mack is a graduate of Duke University, where he is a member of the Board of Trustees. He also serves as Chairman of the Board of Trustees of New York-Presbyterian Hospital, the University Hospital of both Columbia and Cornell, as a Trustee of the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, and as a Director of Cousins Properties Incorporated." (3)
Now lets get down to the dirty business :
According to equilar.com, John Mack has total accumulated wealth of $53,705,904. Equity holding of $43,599,716, Pension balance of $4,067,424, Deferred comp. balance of $6,038,624. His 2008 annual comp. was $1,235,097. Base salary of $800,000 and other $435,097.(4)
This is youtube video URL when John Mack announced to step down as CEO of Morgan Stanley. However, Mr. Mack will stay as active chairman of Morgan Stanley.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERbpUXeTv3U
According to Forbes magazine's July 26, 2006 article, "SEC Wants Mack," John Mack is accused of tipping off Pequot Capital which he used to work for about a 2001 merger deal. Before this accusation there was another attempt to John Mack and Pequot Capital's inside trading rumor and former SEC investigator Gary Aguirre tried to build up case against John Mack and Pequot, however, as Mr. Aguirre puts it John Mack was well-connected, thus before things get ready the senior SEC officials blocked the interview and investigation about John Mack, and Aguirre got fired from the SEC investagor position. According to Aguirre's Senate Judiciary Hearing June of 2006 testimony, John Mack tipped of his friend and Pequot chief Art Samberg to a July 2001 merger deal between GE Capital and Heller Financial which made $18 million out of it. GE has been advised by Morgan Stanley in that $5 billion deal and Heller was advised by Credit Suisse First Boston and Lehman. Mr. Mack has been president and COO of Morgan Stanley that year, but quit in March, and became CEO of Credit Suisse in July of that same year. Mack left Credit Suisse in June 2004 and worked for a couple of weeks as chairman of Pequot Capital in June 2005. But at the end of that month, he was hired by Morgan Stanley to take over. The accusations on the article from Forbes magazine didn't conclude any decision or verdict regarding the accusations.(5)
Lastly, this is John Mack's view on possibly the new financial system overhaul.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJ7kK9Q3cn4
URLs to the links of sources :
1. http://www.morganstanley.com/company/governance/board.html
2. http://www.weforum.org/s?s=john+mack
3. http://www.morganstanley.com/about/press/articles/3685.html
4. http://www.equilar.com/CEO_Compensation/Morgan_Stanley_John_J._Mack.php
5. http://www.forbes.com/2006/07/21/mack-ubs-sec-fund-cx_lm_0721mack.html
Monday, April 25, 2011
Research on Financial Institution
Hi? All?
I've done research on then financial institution Morgan Stanley(securities firm), now Morgan Stanley Smith Barney (bank holding company) to find out their financial portfolio, if you will, here to display and make some point from my own view based on those findings.
From my findings then Morgan Stanley's MS common stock closing price on NYSE as of February 29, 2008 was US$42.12 (1).
One month ended December 31, 2008, the book value per common share of Morgan Stanley was $27.53 (2).
According to other source, on September 17, 2008, the British evening-news analysis program Newsnight reported that Morgan Stanley had its share price dropped 42%.
When the Financial Crisis happened during 2008 year, the Morgan Stanley received $10 billion from the Federal Government (the U.S Federal Government) (3).
For Morgan Stanley the net income from their cash flows from operating activities of fiscal 2008 was $1.7 billion and for 2010 the net income was $4.7 billion (2).
For profit, Morgan Stanley made in fiscal 2008 for earning applicable to their shareholder $ 1.495 billion, and in 2010 $3.594 billion (2).
Also, i have found out that Morgan Stanley did involved into subprime mortgage business.
Since Morgan Stanley was a firm that help manage investors to make smart investments, and it is involved into several fields besides subprime mortgage the shockwave of financial crisis or the influence of financial crisis of 2008 was not detrimental. However, i must admit that this firm is very competitive and attentive in their field of business, and that helped them. I have to applaud that the management of this firm made good decisions when the financial crisis happened, thus, the firm has been saved unlike the long time rival Lehman Brothers which were in the same business as Morgan Stanley, or at least that is what i come to understand from the information that i have read.
The surprising information that i have come across during the search of information regarding Morgan Stanley was that this firm has problem with their finding of right leadership/management team which is surprising as a firm that is very competitive, yet the leadership position is not being filled properly and that concerns the well-being of this firm.
Another fact that i discovered was that Morgan Stanley in 2008 announced with approval from the U.S Federal Reserve Board of Governors that this securities firm is now becoming a traditional bank holding company regulated by Federal Reserve, at the same time as Goldman Sachs has become a traditional bank holding.However, in Morgan Stanley's website i found that the way Morgan Stanley explained the fact that they are now changing into a traditional bank holding company means that "The Firm's status as a Federal Bank Holding Company also provides Morgan Stanley ongoing access to the Federal Reserve Bank Discount Window and expanded opportunities for funding, " And, further it says "nor does the Firm expect there to be limitations on its activities that would have a material impact on Morgan Stanley's overall business."(4) and i would translate those statements as now that Morgan Stanley has access to Federal Reserve and get funded by Federal Reserve next time if they make mess not only Morgan Stanley's money got into that play but also the Federal Reserve would be in jeopardy. And, the activities of the bank as of now wouldn't be altered by or tethered by the new title as traditional bank. I sensed alarm here. Morgan Stanley must be very careful with dealings involving Federal Reserve and Federal Reserve fund because those are tax-payers money.
URL's to the sources :
1. http://classic-web.archive.org/web/20080321044634/http://www.morganstanley.com/about/company/index.html
2. http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/895421/000119312511050049/d10k.htm
3. http://www.morganstanley.com/about/press/articles/580e1eb2-54f3-11de-96f6-3f25a44c9933.html and http://www.morganstanley.com/about/press/articles/b7cf5f77-5b47-11de-96f6-3f25a44c9933.html
4. http://www.morganstanley.com/about/press/articles/6933.html
What do you think? Put your words in the comment section.
I've done research on then financial institution Morgan Stanley(securities firm), now Morgan Stanley Smith Barney (bank holding company) to find out their financial portfolio, if you will, here to display and make some point from my own view based on those findings.
From my findings then Morgan Stanley's MS common stock closing price on NYSE as of February 29, 2008 was US$42.12 (1).
One month ended December 31, 2008, the book value per common share of Morgan Stanley was $27.53 (2).
According to other source, on September 17, 2008, the British evening-news analysis program Newsnight reported that Morgan Stanley had its share price dropped 42%.
When the Financial Crisis happened during 2008 year, the Morgan Stanley received $10 billion from the Federal Government (the U.S Federal Government) (3).
For Morgan Stanley the net income from their cash flows from operating activities of fiscal 2008 was $1.7 billion and for 2010 the net income was $4.7 billion (2).
For profit, Morgan Stanley made in fiscal 2008 for earning applicable to their shareholder $ 1.495 billion, and in 2010 $3.594 billion (2).
Also, i have found out that Morgan Stanley did involved into subprime mortgage business.
Since Morgan Stanley was a firm that help manage investors to make smart investments, and it is involved into several fields besides subprime mortgage the shockwave of financial crisis or the influence of financial crisis of 2008 was not detrimental. However, i must admit that this firm is very competitive and attentive in their field of business, and that helped them. I have to applaud that the management of this firm made good decisions when the financial crisis happened, thus, the firm has been saved unlike the long time rival Lehman Brothers which were in the same business as Morgan Stanley, or at least that is what i come to understand from the information that i have read.
The surprising information that i have come across during the search of information regarding Morgan Stanley was that this firm has problem with their finding of right leadership/management team which is surprising as a firm that is very competitive, yet the leadership position is not being filled properly and that concerns the well-being of this firm.
Another fact that i discovered was that Morgan Stanley in 2008 announced with approval from the U.S Federal Reserve Board of Governors that this securities firm is now becoming a traditional bank holding company regulated by Federal Reserve, at the same time as Goldman Sachs has become a traditional bank holding.However, in Morgan Stanley's website i found that the way Morgan Stanley explained the fact that they are now changing into a traditional bank holding company means that "The Firm's status as a Federal Bank Holding Company also provides Morgan Stanley ongoing access to the Federal Reserve Bank Discount Window and expanded opportunities for funding, " And, further it says "nor does the Firm expect there to be limitations on its activities that would have a material impact on Morgan Stanley's overall business."(4) and i would translate those statements as now that Morgan Stanley has access to Federal Reserve and get funded by Federal Reserve next time if they make mess not only Morgan Stanley's money got into that play but also the Federal Reserve would be in jeopardy. And, the activities of the bank as of now wouldn't be altered by or tethered by the new title as traditional bank. I sensed alarm here. Morgan Stanley must be very careful with dealings involving Federal Reserve and Federal Reserve fund because those are tax-payers money.
URL's to the sources :
1. http://classic-web.archive.org/web/20080321044634/http://www.morganstanley.com/about/company/index.html
2. http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/895421/000119312511050049/d10k.htm
3. http://www.morganstanley.com/about/press/articles/580e1eb2-54f3-11de-96f6-3f25a44c9933.html and http://www.morganstanley.com/about/press/articles/b7cf5f77-5b47-11de-96f6-3f25a44c9933.html
4. http://www.morganstanley.com/about/press/articles/6933.html
What do you think? Put your words in the comment section.
Thursday, April 21, 2011
Cheap consumer goods, and sweatshops around the world affecting the U.S workers?
Hello?People?
Today, i am gonna write about the possible effects on the U.S workers when we have cheap goods from imports and cheap labor outside the U.S.
First of all, the cheap goods outside the U.S affect the workers in the U.S by starting competition with the companies in the U.S who make same product. The U.S workers and their company has to offer good deal on their products to attract consumers either by lowering their costs, or guaranteed quality. However, most consumers like their goods to be cheap as possible, thus, it makes the competititon more fierce than it should be. In consequence, the U.S company usually look for other ways to cut cost of their production by laying off workers from their factories and company floor, and workers in the U.S, as a result, end up without jobs because of the cheap goods from outside.
Secondly, the cheap labor outside the U.S or the sweatshops offer the U.S companies good incentive to move their production line to more cheaper labor possible market. Thus, leaving the U.S workers without jobs. In the midst of all this we must remember that the U.S companies outsource their production when they are successful as a business. In other words, the U.S companies move their production outside the U.S and leave workers in the U.S without job when they make profit because in order to move their production the company need large sum of money to set up their new production line.
Lastly, i am worried that if this trend continue in the long run the advantage which is buying goods cheap here in the U.S might hurt the U.S workers because no company would want, as long as they can keep cost of production down, to build their manufacturing line in the U.S. However, there are exceptions to this, the upper or higher level products with expensive tag on them might still make the products in the U.S, for the sake of proximity and convenience, but those items tend to be made in fewer numbers, for example the designer collection items, and handmade, or custom made products for few people who are willing to pay extra money on them.
If you have question, comment, or analysis, please feel free to share.
Ganaa
Today, i am gonna write about the possible effects on the U.S workers when we have cheap goods from imports and cheap labor outside the U.S.
First of all, the cheap goods outside the U.S affect the workers in the U.S by starting competition with the companies in the U.S who make same product. The U.S workers and their company has to offer good deal on their products to attract consumers either by lowering their costs, or guaranteed quality. However, most consumers like their goods to be cheap as possible, thus, it makes the competititon more fierce than it should be. In consequence, the U.S company usually look for other ways to cut cost of their production by laying off workers from their factories and company floor, and workers in the U.S, as a result, end up without jobs because of the cheap goods from outside.
Secondly, the cheap labor outside the U.S or the sweatshops offer the U.S companies good incentive to move their production line to more cheaper labor possible market. Thus, leaving the U.S workers without jobs. In the midst of all this we must remember that the U.S companies outsource their production when they are successful as a business. In other words, the U.S companies move their production outside the U.S and leave workers in the U.S without job when they make profit because in order to move their production the company need large sum of money to set up their new production line.
Lastly, i am worried that if this trend continue in the long run the advantage which is buying goods cheap here in the U.S might hurt the U.S workers because no company would want, as long as they can keep cost of production down, to build their manufacturing line in the U.S. However, there are exceptions to this, the upper or higher level products with expensive tag on them might still make the products in the U.S, for the sake of proximity and convenience, but those items tend to be made in fewer numbers, for example the designer collection items, and handmade, or custom made products for few people who are willing to pay extra money on them.
If you have question, comment, or analysis, please feel free to share.
Ganaa
Monday, April 18, 2011
My opinion on sweatshop conditions
Globalization and free trade automatically adopts the sweatshops of the countries that are trying to lead the consumer market shares into their country; but to me, the globalization and free trade's purpose was to exploit other country's weak spots and vulnerable places. For example, China's cheap labor cost and unregulated working conditions of the sweatshops were nice waving flags for the corporations that are looking for their outsourcing to be cheap and manipulative, so that they can make products faster, cheaper and without hassling with the rules and regulations. But, one has to understand that the sweatshops were not created by globalization and free trade, at least to my understanding. And it could have been something similar in concept, they were existed before corporations encouraged them by taking them into their end of the market and used them and gave them chance to be prolific. In my opinion, the sweatshop will never be eliminated from the face of the earth as long as there are people who are poor enough that they would rather work grueling long hours to get few cheated money than die from starvation and famine.
As for my spending habit associated with sweatshops around the world, i think from now on i would rather sleep on the idea of purchasing consumer products before i buy them. I realized that it is almost impossible for me to change my habit of buying goods that are not made by sweatshops because almost all goods that i owned and would likely to own are being made by sweatshops around the world.
Also, i have found out that some workers in those sweatshops actually use the sweatshop to get ahead, they don't feel like their lives are any worse than it could have been by working in the sweatshop, thus i believe me buying goods from their factory made company outlet is actually deed that is promoting the well being of those sweatshop workers.
As for my spending habit associated with sweatshops around the world, i think from now on i would rather sleep on the idea of purchasing consumer products before i buy them. I realized that it is almost impossible for me to change my habit of buying goods that are not made by sweatshops because almost all goods that i owned and would likely to own are being made by sweatshops around the world.
Also, i have found out that some workers in those sweatshops actually use the sweatshop to get ahead, they don't feel like their lives are any worse than it could have been by working in the sweatshop, thus i believe me buying goods from their factory made company outlet is actually deed that is promoting the well being of those sweatshop workers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)