Category: Investment

Desperate Ken and market realities

Adam Smith’s invisible hand of the market is giving some people a nasty slap over the head.

Ken Slamet has a problem, his in-laws are trying to sell the family house and no-one will give them the price they want.

The house at 228 Warrimoo Ave has been on the market through an agent for more than 100 days, pulling in ridiculously low offers, Mr Slamet said.

Depending on the deposit, Mr Slamet is seeking between $1.5 million and $1.6 million for the house his wife grew up in.

One would argue that those “ridiculously low offers” are actually Mr Market giving Ken and his in-laws a slap of reality. They are simply asking for too much money.

St Ives, a suburb on Sydney’s Upper North Shore, is going through demographic change. In 1960s and 70s St Ives was the suburb for successful stock brokers and bankers, however in the 1980s and 90s that demographic decided they wanted to live closer to the city and Harbour and suburbs like Mosman and Clontarf became their areas of choice.

For Ken’s in-laws and their neighbours, this is bad news as few other people can afford 1970s mansions on large blocks within 30km of Sydney. Those who do manage to sell often find the buyers are developers who sub-divide to build townhouses or apartment blocks, madness in a congested, car-dependent suburb with poor public transport links.

Adam Smith’s invisible hand of the market is giving those holding properties that were attractive to stockbrokers in 1972 a nasty slap over the head in 2012.

Ken though has a solution for his problem – he’s offering a rent to buy scheme at a mere snip of $2297 per week. An amount 70% higher than the average Sydneysider’s gross income and a whopping four and half times the city’s average rent of $500.

Good luck with that.

The real problem is that Ken’s in-laws are stuck with expectations higher than the market reality. Like many of us in the Western world, they believe their assets are worth more than they really are.

As the global economy deleverages there will be many more people like Ken’s family. For many the transition to a less wealthy lifestyle is going to be tough.

Similar posts:

Tech’s tough days

Apple and Amazon’s quarterly reports steal the attention from Microsoft’s Windows 8 launch

Today sees another tough day for tech stocks with both Apple and Amazon missing their projected earnings which again finds Microsoft being stood up at their own party.

For Amazon, along with the costs involved with a new range of Kindles, there’s a huge write down in their Living Social investment, another indicator that the group buying bubble has passed into history alongside tulips, 19th Century Argentinian railway bonds and South Sea investments.

It’s worrying that while Amazon’s quarterly sales have increased by 23% over last year’s figures to $11.546 billion dollars, their cost of sales has also gone up 23% from $8.325 to $10.319 billion. This is a trend to watch closely over the next few quarters.

Unlike Amazon, Apple still made a fat profit with income going up to $8.2 billion for the quarter, an increase of 24%. This missed many Wall Street analysts’ estimates.

Apple’s missed earnings were put down to supply chain constraints and development costs, but what jumps out looking at the cash flow is the six billion turnaround in the company’s Accounts Receivable. One assumes this is the value of pending invoices on the new ranges of iPhones, iMacs and iPads sent out to their sales channel.

If that’s right, Apple are looking at a big boost in their cashflow next month, although there’s few companies who would like to have five billion dollars in outstanding invoices in today’s economic climate.

Once again though, Apple have managed to steal Microsoft’s thunder. Despite the glitz and glamour of the Windows 8 launch in New York, Microsoft’s announcement has been muted by the tech and business press’ reaction to the earnings reports.

What is clear from all three companies though is that hand held devices – the Apple iPad, Amazon Kindle and Microsoft Surface – are going dominate the tech and financial coverage of all three companies for the rest of the year.

Similar posts:

Building new technological Jerusalems

Britain’s hopes of building a new technology hub are similar to those of Harold Wilson – how much do they owe the ideology of our times?

A Telegraph profile of Joanna Shields, the incoming Chief Executive of London’s Tech City Investment Organisation, is an interesting view of how we see economic development and the route to building the industrial centres of the future. Much of that view is distorted by the ideologies of our times.

London’s Tech City is a brave project and somewhat reminiscent of future British Prime Minister Harold Wilson’s 1963 proclamation about the UK’s future lying in harnessing the “white heat of technology.” From Dictionary.com;

“We are redefining and we are restating our socialism in terms of the scientific revolution…. The Britain that is going to be forged in the white heat of this revolution will be no place for restrictive practices or outdated methods on either side of industry.”

Fifty years later a notable part of Wilson’s speech is the use of the word “socialism” – the very thought of a mainstream politician using the “s-word” today and being elected shortly afterwards is unthinkable.

Today the ideology is somewhat different – much of Tech City’s objectives are around aping the models of Ireland and Silicon Valley – which in itself is accepting the failed beliefs of our times.

Based around London’s “Silicon Roundabout” – a term reminding those of us of a certain age of a childhood TV series – the heart of the Tech City strategy lies the tax incentives used by the Irish to build the “Celtic Tiger” of the 1990s and government investment funds to create an entrepreneurial hub similar to Silicon Valley, something also done in Dublin with the Digital Hub.

It’s hard not to think that copying these models is a flawed strategy – Silicon Valley is the result of four generations of technology investment by the United States military which is beyond the resources of the British government, and probably beyond today’s cash strapped US government, while the Celtic Tiger today lies wounded in the rubble of Ireland’s over leveraged economy.

At the core of both Silicon Valley’s startup culture and Ireland’s corporate incentives are the ideologies of the 1980s which celebrates a hairy-chested Ayn Rand type individualism while at the same time perversely relying upon government spending. Ultimately failure is not an option as governments will step in to guarantee investment returns and management bonuses.

Just up the M1 and M6 from London’s Silicon Roundabout are the remains of what were the Silicon Valleys of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.

The manufacturing industries of the English Midlands or the woollen mills of Yorkshire revolutionised the global societies of their times. These were built by individuals and investors who knew they could be ruined by a poor investment and managers who retired to the parlour with a pistol if the enterprise they were trusted to run failed.

Today’s investment attraction ideologies – tax discounts to big corporations and grants to entrepreneurs – are in a touching way not dissimilar to Harold Wilson’s 1960s belief in socialism.

At the time of Wilson’s 1963 speech China and much of the communist world were showing that socialism, with its failed Five Year Plans and Great Leaps Forward of the 1950s, was not the answer for countries wanting to harness the “white heat of technology.”

Similarly today’s Corporatist model of massive government support of ‘too big to fail’ corporations is just as much a failed ideology, like the socialists of the mid 1960s had their world views had been framed in the depression of the 193os, today’s leaders are blinded by their beliefs that were shaped by the freewheeling 1980s.

Whether the next Silicon Valley will be in London, or somewhere like Nairobi or Tashkent, it probably won’t be born out of a centrally planned government initiative born out of the certainties of Margaret Thatcher or Ronald Reagan anymore than the 1960s technological revolution was born out of Karl Marx or Josef Engels.

Silicon Valley itself was the happy unintended consequence of the Cold War and the Space Race, which we reap the benefits of today.

Every ideology creates its own set of unintended consequences, those created by today’s beliefs will be just as surprising to us as punk rockers were to the aging Harold Wilson.

Maybe Tech City will help Britain will do better at this attempt to regain its position as global economic powerhouse, but you can’t help thinking that economic salvation might come from some West Indian or Sikh kid working out of a storage unit in Warrington than a bunch of white middle class guys celebrating a government grant over a glass of Bolly in Shoreditch.

Similar posts:

Walking the floor

Getting out of the office and seeing what your customers and staff are doing is a neglected management fundamental.

“He walks the site three times a day,” said awed contractors about a construction project manager – who we’ll call Rob – that I encountered as a cadet Engineer in the building industry. Getting out of his site office and seeing what was going on made sure dodgy contractors or inexperienced trainees like me couldn’t slow down his projects.

Slate Magazine’s story of how the Wendy’s hamburger chain changed the US fast food industry recalls how Rob would successfully run his projects and the importance of hands on management.

Jim Near was recruited as president by his friend and Wendy’s founder Dave Thomas to get the business on track after over-extending in the mid 1980s. Slate says of Jim’s hands-on management style;

Near liked to stalk through the dining areas of his stores examining people’s trays. If customers were leaving fries, he’d go harass the fryers: Were they serving the potatoes too hot? Too cold? Not using enough shortening? And he would sit in his car in the parking lot, surveilling the activity at the drive-thru window.

That obsession sounds like Steve Jobs and its no-coincidence; Jobs, Jim Near and Rob the project manager gave a damn about the product that was being delivered. Rather than sitting in an office obsessing over paperwork and meeting artificial KPIs, these effective leaders got out and saw what the realities were in their business.

Probably the best example of this “management by walking the floor” ethos was Bob Ansett who built up the Australian Budget Rent-A-Car business in the 1970s. Every senior manager was required to spend a couple of days a month working on one of Budget’s rental desk dealing with customers.

That policy forced Budget’s executives to understand the business, just as Jim Near was described as ““a ketchup-in-his-veins type of guy” through working at every level in the fast food industry.

One of the many conceits in modern management is the idea that everything – from building high rise towers, running car rental companies or operating a hamburger chain – is like selling soap. This philosophy ignores that every industry has its own characteristics and even selling soap has its own unique challenges in different markets.

It’s easy to think everything works as described in a 1980s business school textbook when you have artificially constructed KPIs and layers of managers to deflect responsibility.

Over the last quarter of the Twentieth Century we saw customer service become disdained in the Corporatist business culture which favours accountants and lawyers as managers who rely on marketing people and lobbyists to protect them from the reality that they aren’t really very good at running their companies.

Now that era has come to an end and the times now suit those who listen to customers and the marketplace. Walking the floor and paying attention to what the public are saying about us on new media are competitive advantages.

While the corporatists lobby their friends in government for subsidies and protection, entrepreneurs and genuine business builders like Dave Thomas, Jim Near, Steve Jobs and Bob Ansett have the opportunity to seize the markets that are being neglected.

There’s never been an excuse for not listening to the customer and today it’s more important than ever.

Similar posts:

Google for entrepreneurs

A global research for entrepreneurs and business people from Google

This is an interesting project – Google have pulled together all their entrepreneurial resources into one page at Google For Entrepreneurs.

As well as being a handy resource for anyone building a business, it’s a great overview of the various programs Google and their partners are running around the world.

If you are looking at setting up a business or have a fast growing enterprise it might be worthwhile having a look at the resources Google have pulled together.

Similar posts:

Squandering a reprieve

How did media companies miss the opportunities of the tech wreck?

ABC Radio National’s Background Briefing has a terrific story on the struggles of the Fairfax newspaper empire during the early days of the Internet.

One of the major themes that jumps out is how Fairfax, like many media and retail organisations, squandered the opportunity presented by the tech wreck.

The tech wreck was an opportunity for incumbents to claim their spaces in the online world, instead they saw the failure of many of the dot com boom’s over-hyped online businesses as vindication of their view the Internet was all hype.

As former Sydney Morning Herald editor Peter Fray said “In florid moments you could even think this internet webby thing would go away”.

For Fairfax the profits from the traditional print based business were compelling. According to Greg Hywood the current CEO, for every dollar earned by the company, 70c were profits – a profit margin of 233%.

The Internet threatened those “rivers of gold” and media companies, understandably, did nothing to jeopardise those returns.

Another problem for Fairfax was the massive investment in digital printing presses in the 1990s. These behemoths revolutionised the way newspapers were printed as pages could be laid out on computer screens and sent directly from the newsroom to the press itself which printed out pages in glorious colour rather than with smudgy black and white images.

Moreover these machines were fantastic for printing glossy coloured supplements and the advertising revenue from those high end inserts kept the dollars rolling in.

When the tech wreck happened, the massive investments in printing presses were vindicated as the rivers of gold continued to flow while the smart Internet kids went broke.

Fairfax’s management weren’t alone in this hubris – most media companies around the world made the same missteps while retail companies continued to build stores catering for the last echos of the 20th Century consumer boom.

In 2008, the hubris caught up with the retailers and newspapers. As the great credit boom came to an end, the wheels fell off the established business models and the cost of not experimenting with online models is costing them dearly.

Value still lies in those mastheads though as more people are reading Fairfax’s publications than ever before.

Readers still want to read these publications, one loyal reader is quoted in the story that Sydney Morning Herald should aspire to “being a serious international paper.”

That isn’t going to happen while management is focused on cutting costs to their core business instead of focusing on new revenue streams.

Somebody will find that model, had the incumbent retail and media organisations explored and invested in online businesses a decade ago they may well have found that secret sauce.

Now many of them won’t survive with their horse and buggy ways of doing business.

Similar posts:

Legacy people

Virgin America shows how quickly legacy operations are falling behind their younger competitors

“The problem with legacy businesses is legacy people” said David Cush, the CEO of Virgin America at the Dreamforce conference.

For many organisations this is indeed the problem; that managements, workforces and shareholders are locked into a way of doing business that has worked for them in the past, so when change arrives they are ill-equipped to deal with it.

One of the key take aways from the Dreamforce conference is that the rate of business change is accelerating as technologies like cloud computing and the Internet mature.

For the legacy businesses locked into old ways this means they are going backwards faster than they could imagine.

A good example of this is when Virgin America showed their vision of how customer service works in a connected, social world.

The problem for companies like United and the other legacy carriers with their older aircraft and lumbering IT systems is they simply don’t have the infrastructure to provide these services if they wanted to.

One of the characteristics of 1980s management thinking is under-investing in equipment. ‘working your assets’ by flogging them way past their replacement dates is a handy way to increase profits and management bonuses, but it leaves a business exposed when newer technologies come along.

That’s the problem the legacy businesses, whether they are airlines, banks, telcos or in any other sector. Those who are nimble and those who have invested in new systems can take advantage of the change.

For some of these businesses even if they had the wits, and cash, to make those investments it’s dubious whether they could make the tools work properly.

‘Getting it’ is more than just understanding how to turn on an iPhone or send a tweet, it’s about how these tools can be used in a business.

If you don’t know how to use these tools, or understand the consequences of using them, then the investment is wasted.

For those organisations who are falling behind, they have to start moving quickly or their legacy is the only trace there will be of their existence.

Similar posts: