Chrysler spin-off?

DaimlerChrysler has opened the door to a total or partial sale of its Detroit-based Chrysler unit, acknowledging the shortcomings of one of the most ambitious transatlantic business mergers. The German carmaker has hired JPMorgan to explore Chrysler’s future. “All options are on the table,” said Dieter Zetsche, chairman. He declined to set a time frame for the review. A person familiar with the matter said the options included an outright sale, spinning off Chrysler to shareholders or continuing with the recent integration between the Detroit company and the Mercedes car group. The latter is the least preferred course of action.

Financial Times

Given the current economic situation, Chrysler is a perfect private equity target. It's cheap, it's about to restructure, and Ford and GM have recently been upgraded to "Buy" by several analysts. Sounds like a good deal to me. Very beneficial to Daimler, obviously. Analysts have waited long for it to begin spinning off stakes in EADS and Chrysler.

Where will Putin retire?

We all know Mr. Putin has promised to leave his post in 2008; and there is a 99.9% chance that he will indeed step down. The remaining uncertainty is always needed for such a turbulent country as Russia. The main question that political analysts are pondering, concerns Mr. Putin's job title after he steps down. A recent article in the FT (Bermuda to liquidate Russian companies) leads us on the probable path.

One of Putin's closest allies in the government, Leonid Reiman, the Minister of Telecommunications, has been involved in many corporate scandals over his tenure. Without going into each of those disputes/scandals (all the relevant information is located at compromat.ru, for those interested) Mr. Reiman is involved with the ownership of the assets of telecommunications giant Megafon, operating in Russia and the CIS. It is also highly probable that a proportion of these assets is owned by Lyudmila Putina. Judging by the overall situation in Russia, it is highly probable that Mrs. Putina has stakes in other assets (we will assume they are fully legal, as no evidence proving otherwise exists).

My point now; Mr. Putin will be financially healthy well after he retires, given the replacement is not as opposed as Mr. Putin once was to Mr. Yeltsin. Thus, the current Russian president will not have a need to be in charge or chair over Gazprom for financial purposes. It also seems illogical for him to chair Gazprom, no matter how powerful it may be. It is an instrument of Russian foreign policy, but not the main one. Nuclear weapons, the accelerating economy, gold reserves, are also highly powerful. Chairing Gazprom, Mr. Putin will maintain status as the default Minister of Energy of Russia. Well below in the ranks of political influence. Neither Mr. Medvedev (in the post of Chairman of Gazprom), nor Mr. Miller (Gazprom CEO) have in their posts much influence on foreign policy. Foreign policy is dictated by the President, his administration and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

I do not see a Mr. Putin reporting to Mr. New-Russian president in 2008. It will just be darn weird. It makes more sense for Mr. Putin to just remain a very influential figure in Russia. Given, Russia becomes even more active in foreign relations, and crisis resolution, I can even see Mr. Putin using his communications skills as a consultant on foreign and internal Russian policy.

Москва потребовала от Вашингтона официальных разъяснений по поводу высказываний главы Пентагона Роберта Гейтса, который фактически причислил Россию к вероятным противникам США. Как заявили вчера Ъ в МИД РФ, высказывания американского министра там расценивают как недружественные и не намерены спускать это дело на тормозах. Вечером на ту же тему высказался и президент РФ Владимир Путин, который выразил негодование по поводу того, что в Вашингтоне используют "несуществующую российскую угрозу для выбивания денег из конгресса США".

КоммерсантЪ

По меньшей мере странными являются два факта. 1) Раздумывание над ответом четыре дня явно не украшает МИД. Но, возможно с заявлением не торопились, так как были осведомлены о грядущей речи Путина в Мюнхене, и не хотели лить масла в огонь до того. Или же, хотели избежать прямой эскалации конфликта, пока сообщение Гейтса плавало в СМИ. На сегодняшний день о нем забыли практически все, кто не особо следит за Российско-Американскими отношениями. И наконец 2) осуждение звучит явно некорректно после агрессивной речи Путина в Мюнхене, где Россия выступила фактически с теми же позициями, что и Гейтс в США, разница лишь в уровне выступавших. И здесь ответ России (МИДа) выглядит бесполезным. Последний год свидетельствует о явном охлаждении отношений. Конфликт идет по сценарию "все или ничего", и у России если она разумно ведет этот дипломатический бой должны быть запасные решения о стабильных отношениях с претендентами на пост президента в США в 2008. Длительную эскалацию отношений с США, Россия не потянет.

Nato Expansion - a threat to Russia?

NATO expansion - a threat to Russia?

The US Defense Secretary claims that it is not. The US has often tied the democratic foundations of Eastern and Central European states with their entry into NATO; and has similarly presented this as a "no-threat" to Russia.

NATO is a military alliance, and military alliances have no reason to be tied up with democratic institutions; a democracy is the rule of the majority taking into account the views of the minority. There is nothing in this statement that concerns the necessity of a democratic state to be a part of NATO or any other military alliance. Being a part of the EU is undoubtedly a version of progressive democracy and economic cooperation. Being a part of NATO is not. NATO was created in the late 1940-s, and we all know the underlying reasons.

In 2007, the time is not ripe for military confrontation or cold-war scenario confrontation, but going back in history, the political and military conditions of the Eastern European states and those of Belarus an Ukraine have been the key determinants and measures of control over Russia. Germany did that in 1918 to the young Soviet State, and later in 1939. Roosevelt and Churchill are still highly criticized for giving up Eastern Europe to the Soviets (for oversight, not occupation).

If the states of Eastern Europe, Ukraine and Belarus become members of NATO, Russia will be limited in the scope of its economic and political influence on the heart of Europe (France, Germany, UK). It will be cut off from direct communication through the Eastern states and especially through Ukraine and Belarus, whose political past does not provide for a calm future. By influence, I mean the ability to promote its interests in the global economy and the decision-making in foreign policy.

NATO is establishing a cushion in the East, and it still exists in Europe to counter not the current might of Russia (nuclear weapons cannot be defended against), but the upcoming; the ability of Russia to force on certain countries its own goals, its own views on foreign policy. In 1999, Russia was promised that the aggressive expansion of NATO would stop; stop it did not. Ukraine will likely be in NATO by 2010-2015.

If Russia can prevent Ukraine from entering NATO, it will at least be able to maintain its own cushion (a backyard).

The role of NATO in the world has not changed, and it cannot change; it can only be dismantled to create a different institution with different goals. This will either happen when Russia will enter NATO, or when Eastern Europe shifts away from NATO. Neither of these will happen in the near future. NATO will continue to pursue expansion, despite the fact that it disintegrates itself.

Putin's Speech on World Affairs

Vladimir Putin threw down the gauntlet to the west in a confrontational speech on Saturday, attacking what he called “illegal” US unilateral military action and arguing it had made the world more dangerous.

In a speech that stunned most of the audience at an annual security conference held in Munich, Mr Putin also railed against US plans to build anti-missile defences in Europe, the expansion of Nato to include countries that were formerly part of the Soviet Union, and a host of other western policies.

...

“If you say that your ABM system is not directed at us, our missiles are not aimed at you,” he said.

Financial Times

One of the most powerful foreign relations speeches Putin has given. This is both a response to the aggressive gestures of the US administration in the past, and a green light for further confrontation

Полная версия от Кремлевской Пресс-Службы:

Кремль

Putin heads out to the Middle East

AS RUSSIA'S president heads to the Middle East this week, the former KGB lieutenant-colonel may relish the fact that, here at least, his country is recouping some of its cold-war losses. Vladimir Putin's Russia is still less of a player than it was. It no longer has a network of Soviet client states. It does not baldly challenge Western interests by backing revolutionary forces and flexing its own military might. But Mr Putin has exploited the decline in American prestige, brought about by, among other things, the Iraqi morass and the poisonous issue of Israel and Palestine. So he may find it easier to reinsert Russia as a counterweight to the lone superpower.

Economist

What can I say. The Economist does not lie. But seriously; it feels good to be back in world affairs after the 1990-s collapse.

LANSING, MI—In another devastating blow to the state's already fragile economy, the Unemployment Insurance Agency of the state of Michigan permanently shuttered its nine branch offices Monday, leaving more than 8,500 unemployment employees unemployed.

The Onion

I love The Onion!

Vegetarians - why?

So i don't get the whole point of people becoming vegetarian on the basis of "I can't eat the meat from animals that have been slaughtered in mass quantities". It doesn't cut it for me. It is in human nature to eat meat (that is how nature made us). If humans did not eat meat from the beginning, we would probably look very much different (more like some rabbits or something; maybe some people appreciate that i don't know). So humans can't eat meat because its cruel how it comes about in the first place. But the way meat is consumed is cruel by nature; tigers rip apart their prey (and that is very cruel, I must say; but it's life).

Some might say: "well we are not animals, our intellect has progressed far from the intellect of animals; so it is wrong to compare us with animals". I personally think we have not gone far from animals; just because we can lay on a couch all day and think about the meaning of life, does not superiorise our intellect in any way. Our intellect is ruining us in many ways. Animals are efficient, they serve a purpose; humans do not.

I am fine with being a human, and fine with the intellectual capabilities of humans eating them up slowly but surely, and I am fine with eating meat.

Russian Police (Militsia)

Mr. Parker

Кстати за зимние каникулы было прочитано несколько книг по моей любимой тематике:

Megargee - Hitler's High Command

Lukacs - June 41

Fall of Berlin (автора забыл)

вскоре надо бы по каждой проехаться, а то потом забуду о чем там. Впрочем на начало января мог перечислить все руковдство немецкого ген штаба и полит верхушки... Я извращенец какой-то; по мне история плачет просто.

Betting on Football

The Super Bowl indicator has been correct in 32 of the 40 games, giving it an accuracy rate of 80%.

A game-day factoid: There have been seven other years when two original NFL teams faced off in the Super Bowl. Six times, the market, as tracked by the Dow Jones Industrial Average, went up.

The Feminine Mystique

When women show more leg, some market seers say the market is destined to show you the money. Shorter skirts are fashion's way of saying that consumers are confident and ready to live it up, while dour ankle-length skirts reflect a dreary market outlook.

This year, female intuition predicts an advance for the Dow. "Hemlines are definitely up," says Elena Castaneda, president of New York Image Consultant.

Another good sign: Women are buying less lipstick.

Leonard Lauder, chairman of Estee Lauder Companies, gets the credit for connecting a spike in lipstick sales to a slump in the economy. Lipstick is a cheap pick-me-up for consumers when they are wary of more extravagant indulgences.

Lipstick sales rose after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and went still higher the following year as the bear market of 2000-to-2002 dragged on. But they've been trending downward ever since.

Wall Street Journal


Bottom line: few people outperform the market five years straight

На любой ваш вопрос, дадим мы ответ,
У нас есть пулемет, а у вас его нет!

Убогий день. Не прошел по 15% барьеру всего-то на одну сотую! 3.37 а надо 3.38. Всецело моя вина.

Роясь среди гор хлама, нашел плакат Путина, купленный мною на Новом Арбате в МДК еще летом 2002 года, и провисевший у меня на стене года до 2005. Потом с переездами он переместился в папку для календаря.

В этом же месте лежал президентский пакет с гербом от путинских часов, подаренных бате. Эта находка чего-то значит наверное. Но вешать его на стену чего-то поздно уже.

И напоследок одна из моих самых любимых песен. Вообще на мой взгляд гимн России должен быть простой, и выражать самые важные черты Руси, России, и тд и тп. Такой гимн, который не недо менять по идеологическим параметрам, потому что он и так объединяет все поколения и взгляды.

1) Русское Поле (Яна Френкеля)

2) Конь - Любэ

Привожу стихи одной из них. Каждый раз берет за душу4 лучше всего в исполнении Ободзинского, чей чертов диск искал сегодня весь день...

Поле, русское поле…
Светит луна или падает снег -
Счастьем и болью связан с тобою,
Нет, не забыть тебя сердцу вовек.
Русское поле, русское поле…
Сколько дорог прошагать мне пришлось!
Ты - моя юность, ты - моя воля.
То, что сбылось, то, что в жизни сбылось!

Не сравнятся с тобой ни леса, ни моря.
Ты со мной, моё поле, студит ветер висок.
Здесь Отчизна моя, и скажу не тая:
"Здравствуй, русское поле,
Я твой тонкий колосок!"

Поле, русское поле…
Пусть я давно человек городской -
Запах полыни, вешние ливни
Вдруг обожгут меня прежней тоской.
Русское поле, русское поле…
Я, как и ты, ожиданьем живу -
Верю молчанью, как обещанью,
Пасмурным днём вижу я синеву!

Не сравнятся с тобой ни леса, ни моря.
Ты со мной, моё поле, студит ветер висок.
Здесь Отчизна моя, и скажу не тая:
"Здравствуй, русское поле,
Я твой тонкий колосок!"

Поле, русское поле…

“Никто не собирается набрасываться на русских, — заявил в той же “Дейли телеграф” Дэниел Фрид. — Россия по-прежнему будет основным поставщиком Европы. Мы пытаемся убедить русских: когда мы говорим об открытых системах (доступных для всех трубопроводов. — “МК”), мы на самом деле имеем это в виду. И они смогут сделать на этом огромные деньги!”
Как это часто бывает в дипломатии, помощник Кондолизы Райс одновременно прав и не прав. “Добивать” Россию никто не собирается. И наши месторождения, и наши трубопроводы при нас же и останутся. Но Запад вполне может довести свои планы в области транспортировки углеводов до логического конца. Тогда с претензиями России на роль геополитического гиганта хотя бы в масштабе Евразии будет покончено. Из самостоятельного игрока мы превратимся в “ручного медведя”.
Кто-то может возразить, что у нас останутся ядерные ракеты. Но в XXI веке этот фактор уже не так важен. Ведь расширение ядерного клуба неизбежно.
Во всем этом, безусловно, есть несправедливость. “Крупнейшие запасы углеводов на Каспии были разведаны еще в советские времена. Но их планировалось разработать позже, сосредоточившись пока на Западной Сибири”, — напоминает Александр Гончаренко. Получается, что сейчас Запад и иже с ним в значительной степени пользуются “дарами” советской власти.

http://mk.ru/numbers/2578/article90916.htm

Одно из фундаментальных правил стратегии/планирования заключается в том, что в цепочке потребитель-транзитер/дистрибьютор-поставщик, каждое звено может быть доминирующим. Нашим стратегам почему-то это последние 15 лет в голову не приходило, и мы считали что де-факто превосходство в цепочке у поставщика, тк у него собственно и ресурс. А ресурс без потребителя не имеет цены.