Strategies & Market Trends | The Financial Collapse of 2001 and Beyond


Previous 10 | Next 10 
To: Haim R. Branisteanu who wrote (89913)5/8/2012 10:43:24 AM
From: dvdw©   of 100671
 
haim noticed your awareness does not extend to the best financial journalism in the last 20 years....let me help by providing the basis for consideration of the multi valued reference space that is the market.

http://www.deepcapture.com/the-miscreants-global-bust-out-chapter-1-was-the-united-states-attacked-by-financial-terrorists/

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)

To: dvdw© who wrote (89918)5/8/2012 10:50:30 AM
From: Brasco One   of 100671
 
did you order those barf bags? you gonna need it heading into summer.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: The Jack of Hearts who wrote (89917)5/8/2012 10:53:53 AM
From: elmatador2 Recommendations   of 100671
 

All Chinese companies must be banned from construction work in Canada because of their questionable track record here and around the world

Made in China? More like Destroyed by China
Posted: 05/ 2/2012 11:29 am






All Chinese companies must be banned from construction work in Canada because of their questionable track record here and around the world.


It was shocking that Enbridge Inc.'s Pat Daniel said his company was willing to allow a Chinese company to buy a piece of, and to bid for the construction, of the proposed Northern Gateway oil sands line.

Not only should China be banned from construction or bidding, but Investment Canada should ban Chinese companies from buying resource companies, or related assets.

China's strategy around the world is to buy resources, then low-ball to get construction contracts by using Chinese labourers and materials. This is not only damaging to the domestic economy, and unnecessary, but in some cases laws and obligations have been flouted, and people and host governments damaged.

In 2007, Sinopec Shanghai Engineering Company brought in 132 Chinese workers to an oil sands site to assemble their storage tanks, and do other work. Two workers were killed and several others injured. The remaining Chinese workforce was moved immediately out of Alberta, and work stopped.

The Alberta government charged Sinopec, its subsidiary, and their oil sands client with 53 safety charges. Sinopec and its branch plant have refused to appear in court. They say they have not been served papers because they are in China where they cannot be served papers to appear in court. Instead of acceding to Canadian law, they have not appeared.

In November, an Alberta Court of Appeal ruled the company must stand trial on these serious charges. In February, Sinopec said it wants the Supreme Court of Canada to overturn this ruling because it should be exempt.

It gets worse. Sinopec also did not pay these workers. The 132 Chinese workers were not paid an estimated $3.17 million by their Chinese employer even though they worked four months before the accident. They were transported out immediately after the deaths. Alberta employment standards spokesman Barrie Harrison said that the prime contractor, the Canadian oil sands project client, put the $3.17 million in wages, and benefits in trust even though it had no obligation to do so.

In an interview last year, Harrison said: "We are still trying to determine the best, most secure method of returning these funds to the workers, who are now either back in China, or working at other sites around the world. We've had nothing new to report on this file for quite sometime."

The Canadian embassy in Beijing has been involved in trying to right this wrong, at taxpayer expense.

This outrageous behavior by China and its companies should be reason enough to ban Chinese construction bidding, or workforces in Canada. After all, a major corporation has no respect for the rule of law here. It has damaged Chinese workers, and its Canadian client. It has cost the taxpayers of Alberta a great deal of money to try and clean up the mess, and prosecute those involved in the wrongdoing; it has cost the taxpayers of Canada, Canada's immigration department, and Canada's justice system as well.

By the way, this deplorable behaviour is nothing new or unique to Canada.

Shoddy work, and broken promises have occurred elsewhere. In Angola, in July 2010, more than 150 patients had to be evacuated from a new Chinese-built hospital in Luanda, after its walls began cracking, and bricks began disintegrating. China Overseas Engineering Group Co. (COVEC) built the hospital for $8 million. Reports began to come out in the local media that many roads, schools, hospitals, and other infrastructures completed by the Chinese were sub-standard or unsafe, and promises to employ Angolans were not kept.

Another example, in a developed nation, occurred in 2010. The Chinese were finally able to penetrate the European Union when COVEC won a bid to build a major highway in Poland by bidding less than half the price of domestic contractors. This caused consternation across the EU because of Chinese tactics around the world. The pattern is well worn: Chinese firms low ball to beat out local competition unfairly then bring in substandard materials, and workers from China.

The Poles, committed to tender bidding for contracts, were stuck with accepting COVEC's basement bid but were wise to their tactics. They stipulated that the company could not import Chinese materials, supplies or labor.

But COVEC flouted this requirement and started to bring in Chinese workers anyway, claiming that Polish workers were not cooperative and would not take pay cuts.

Then they began sourcing supplies from China, claiming that Polish suppliers refused to match Chinese prices.

In June 2011, COVEC stopped work. Poland sued COVEC for $271 million in damages for breach of contract. And the country has had to spend huge amounts to complete the highway in time for the 2012 European Football Champions in Poland this summer. COVEC told China Daily that it was asking for compensation.

For these reasons and more, Canada must ban any bidding or work permits to Chinese workforces. They simply are not acceptable. They are also not the only buyers for oil sands production either. A pipeline can deliver oil to the west coast to Asian and South American markets.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: elmatador who wrote (89894)5/8/2012 10:55:15 AM
From: ggersh   of 100671
 
As much as they're saying it's "Austerity" bringing
down the EZ, I think it's the bank bailouts that's
pissing everyone off.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: elmatador who wrote (89920)5/8/2012 10:58:09 AM
From: The Jack of Hearts   of 100671
 
worse than Quebec construction ?

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: TobagoJack who wrote (89875)5/8/2012 11:02:32 AM
From: elmatador   of 100671
 
The populaces have no stomach for austerity. Will elect anyone who promises to save them from it.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: Haim R. Branisteanu who wrote (89913)5/8/2012 11:10:22 AM
From: 2MAR$   of 100671
 
FOSL what happened today to one of the newest additions to the S&P with so many high expectations (too high) built into this , in clothing watch/accessory dept , of course LULU was just trying to make her move up but that got squashed to day all the way back down

And they lured people into buying these that far up <gg





Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (3)

To: 2MAR$ who wrote (89924)5/8/2012 12:08:45 PM
From: Brasco One   of 100671
 
im having a great day thanks to FOSL here...what price you think this pig is heading to?? i think im holding till 67...you are a better chart guy,,,please advise,,,TIA

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: Brasco One who wrote (89925)5/8/2012 12:18:44 PM
From: Brasco One   of 100671
 
David Einhorn: I got a couple of questions for you, first is how much of the sales that you make in terms of final sales are sold outside the network and how much are consumed within the distributor base?

Des Walsh: David, we have a 70 percent customer rule which effectively says that 70 percent of all products are sold to consumers or actually consumed by distributors for their own personal use. So, obviously what we've seen with Nutrition Clubs is that we now have visibility for the first time to our customers. You know that we reported on this call for the first time the number of commercial clubs around the world which is in excess of 30,000. So that has given us visibility to the tremendous amount of products that are being sold directly through to consumers and we see that as a growing trend in our business.

David Einhorn: What is the percentage that is actually sold to consumers that are not distributors?

Des Walsh: We don't have exact percentage, David, because we don't have visibility to that level of detail.

David Einhorn: Do you have an approximation?

Des Walsh: So again, going back to our 70 percent rule, we believe that it's at 70 percent or potentially in excess of that.

David Einhorn: Okay. What is the incentive for a supervisor to sign somebody up to become a distributor as opposed to – if they are going to consume for themselves, as opposed to just selling them the product for the mark-up? How does the supervisor come out better?

Des Walsh: I think there's two reasons for that. So, we know from our business today that many of our future supervisors and business builders come in as customers and then they become distributors, so the benefit from a supervisor is the ability for greater retention of that customer/distributor, because they are now earning a 25 percent discount. The second issue is that it preserves lineage. So obviously, if I sign you up, David, as a distributor, my hope and my expectation is that based on the tremendous product results that you are going HERBALIFE INTERNATIONAL OF MERICA, INC Moderator: Brett Chapman 05-01-12/11:00 a.m. ET Confirmation # 66116502 Page 18

to achieve, that you will have friends and families go to you and say – Gosh, David, you look great, what are you on? You are going to respond and say I'm on Herbalife and that will encourage you to say, wow, maybe this is a business opportunity I can be interested in. So the benefit for me as your supervisor is one, the discount that you would get and therefore my greater likelihood of retaining you as a permanent customer and secondly the hope that at some stage, you will decide to do the business and therefore that you are already in my lineage and part of my group.

David Einhorn: Just so I understand this clearly, if I sell to a customer, I bought – I'm a supervisor, I buy at a 50 percent discount, I sell to a customer, I make 50 points, if he pays the full price. If he signs up as a distributor and buys it himself, I get– he gets a 25 percent discount and I get 7 points as a royalty? Is that how it works?

Des Walsh: Herbalife No, you would get the other 25 percent.

David Einhorn: I would get 25 percent plus the 7 percent?

Des Walsh: So unless you are in royalties you would simply earn the difference. So you would earn a 50 percent discount, you're selling at 25 percent discount and so the difference between the two is your profit on that sale.

David Einhorn: Right, so if he signs up as a distributor and buys it for himself from Herbalife I still get the 25 percent?

Des Walsh: That is correct.

David Einhorn: Okay, good. One last question, when you had your previous 10-K, you disclosed three groups of distributors at the low end – you called 29 percent self consumers, 57 percent small retailers, and 14 percent potential sales leaders. Then that disclosure did not repeat in the subsequent 10-K, so I have two questions. First of all, how do you track that and how do you characterize and know which ones are which? And second, why did you stop disclosing that in the last 10-K? Is that something that you've stopped tracking or just stopped disclosing? HERBALIFE INTERNATIONAL OF MERICA, INC Moderator: Brett Chapman 05-01-12/11:00 a.m. ET Confirmation # 66116502 Page 19

John DeSimone: David, hi, this is John. The criteria for grouping distributors into different classes was based off of their volume purchases. We're making assumptions that people below a certain volume weren't doing the business, they were buying self consumption. And I don't remember the exact amounts, but I can get it to you after the call. It's how we delineated between the three classes. The reason we took it out of 10-K is a change in CFO, from Rich to me. I didn't view it as valuable information to the business or to the investors. However we can easily provide the exact same breakout going forward, if you'd like. I could email it to you and to our investors. Again, I don't remember the exact delineation between the three classes but I can certainly get it to you. Our objective is to be completely transparent.

David Einhorn: Thanks, I'd appreciate that sort of follow up, that would be helpful. Thanks so much, guys.
---------------------------
...and i just knocked off 30% of your companies valuation by these few questions.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)

To: Brasco One who wrote (89926)5/8/2012 12:35:14 PM
From: Box-By-The-Riviera™   of 100671
 
that's a pyramid.

short it to zero.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)
Previous 10 | Next 10 

Copyright © 1995-2013 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.