Posts tagged ‘globalization’

Job Losses = Job Creation

Apple Inc. (AAPL) is considered the quintessential innovation company. After all, if you flip over an iPad or an iPhone it will clearly state, “Designed by Apple in California. Assembled in China.” Apple is just too busy innovating to worry about dirtying their hands by assembling products – they can simply outsource that work. Many people have a problem with the millions of manufacturing jobs moving offshore, but if I am the self anointed “Innovation Czar” for the United States, I definitely favor keeping the $120,000 Apple engineering jobs over the low-cost $2 per hour jobs being lost to China (or cheaper developing country). Oh sure, I would prefer keeping both workers, but if push comes to shove, I much rather keep the six-figure job. The bad news is the displaced American iPhone/iPad assembler must find an alternative lower-skilled employment opportunity. The good news is there are plenty of service-based jobs that will NOT get outsourced to the Chinese. If displaced workers are unhappy serving lattes at Starbucks or changing bedpans at the local hospital (or other unglamorous service-based job), then they can choose to retool their skills through education, in order to land higher-paying jobs not getting outsourced.

Bass Ackwards Job Assessment

While I may agree with many points made by Time Magazine’s Fareed Zakaria in his article, The Future of Innovation: Can America Keep Pace?,   I think Zakaria is looking at the job trade-off a little backwards. Here is what says about Apple-created job losses in a CNN blog post:

“Apple has about $70 billion in revenues.  The company that makes Apple’s products called Foxconn is in China.  They have about the same revenue – $70 billion dollars. Apple employees 50,000 people. Foxconn employs 1,000,000 people. So you can have all the innovation you want and tens of thousands of engineers in California benefit, but hundreds of thousands of people benefit in China because the manufacturing has gone there. What does that mean? America needs to innovate even more to keep pace.”

Wow, that’s very altruistic of Apple to create thousands of jobs for Foxconn in Asia, but that $70 billion in Apple revenues likely generates close to 10 times the profits that Foxconn creates (Apple had 24% net profit margins last quarter versus probably a few percent at Foxconn). As Innovation Czar, I’ll gladly take the $20 billion in Apple profits added to the U.S. economy over the last 12 months versus the $2-3 billion profits at Foxconn (my estimate). Let’s be clear, profitable companies add jobs (Apple added over 12,000 employees in fiscal 2010, up +35%) – not weak or uncompetitive companies losing money.

Although the U.S. is losing low-skilled jobs to the likes of Foxconn, guess what those $120k engineering jobs at Apple are creating? Those positions are also generating lots of $12/hour service jobs. When you are paying your workers billions of dollars, like Apple, a lot of those dollars have a way of recirculating through our economy. For instance, if I am a six-figure employee at Apple, I am likely funding leisure jobs in Tahoe for family vacations; supporting jobs at Cheesecake Factory (CAKE) and Chipotle Mexican Grill (CMG) because my demanding schedule at Apple means more take-out meals; and creating jobs for auto workers at Ford (F) thanks to my new SUV purchase.

Margin Surplus Redux

The same arguments I make in the Apple vs. Foxconn comparison are very similar to the case I wrote about in Margin Surplus Retake, which compares the profit and trade deficit dynamics occurring in a $1,000 Toshiba laptop sale. Although Toshiba and its foreign component counterparts may recognize twice the revenues in a common laptop sale as American suppliers (contributing to our country’s massive trade deficit), Intel Corp. (INTC) and Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) generate six times the profits as Toshiba and company. The end result is a massive profit or margin surplus for the Americans – a better barometer to financial reality than stale government trade deficit statistics.

There are obviously no silver bullets or easy answers to resolve these ever-growing economic issues, but as political gridlock grinds innovation to a halt, globalization is accelerating. The rest of the world is racing to narrow the gap of our innovative supremacy, but our sense of entitlement will get us nowhere. Zakaria points out that by 2013, China is expected to overtake the U.S. as the leading scientific research publisher and after we held a three-fold increase in advanced engineering and technology masters degrees in 1995, China surpassed us in 2005 (63,514 in China vs. 53,349 in the U.S.). China may not be home to Facebook or Google Inc. (GOOG), but Baidu Inc. (BIDU) is headquartered in China with a market capitalization of $43 billion and Tencent Holdings is valued at more than $50 billion (not to mention Tencent has roughly the same number of users as Facebook – more than 600 million).

The jobless recovery has been painful for the 14 million unemployed, but there is hope for all, if innovation and education (see Keys to Success) can create more six-figure Apple jobs to offset less valuable jobs lost to outsourcing. In order to narrow the chasm between rich and poor in our country, Americans need to climb the labor ladder of innovation. Contrary to Fareed Zakaria’s assertion, swapping quality job gains with crappy job losses, is an economic trade I would make every day and twice on Sunday. If the country wants to return to the path of economic greatness and sustainable job creation, the country needs to embrace this idea of outsourced creative destruction.

Wade W. Slome, CFA, CFP®

Plan. Invest. Prosper.

www.Sidoxia.com

DISCLOSURE: Performance data from Morningstar.com. Sidoxia Capital Management (SCM) and some of its clients own certain exchange traded funds, AAPL, and GOOG, but at the time of publishing SCM had no direct position in Foxconn, Facebook, MSFT, INTC, CAKE, CMG, F, BIDU, Tencent, Toshiba, or any other security referenced in this article. No information accessed through the Investing Caffeine (IC) website constitutes investment, financial, legal, tax or other advice nor is to be relied on in making an investment or other decision. Please read disclosure language on IC “Contact” page.

June 15, 2011 at 12:41 am 1 comment

Microsoft’s Hand Caught in Google Cookie Jar

Source: Photobucket

The globalized world we live in has become ever-more connected (see Globalization Train), and the recent events in Egypt where mass protests were organized, in large part by Facebook and Twitter, only goes to show the importance technology plays in our daily lives. As a result of our tight global links and the advancement of technology, product cycles have only become shorter and more competitive, raising the stakes for business success. The expanded field of cut-throat competitors in a digital age has also increased the value of intellectual property (IP). Increasingly, lawyers and judges are being forced to decipher the obscure realm of bits and bytes and vigorously defend unique IP from competitors.

If You Can’t Beat Them, Copy Them

Case in point is the current war of code-words between Google Inc. (GOOG) and Microsoft Corp. (MSFT). Google claims they have caught Microsoft’s hand in the corporate espionage cookie jar by watching Microsoft effectively steal Google’s algorithmic search code for the software giant’s Bing search service. How can Google make such harsh and direct accusations? Google claims to have set up “synthetic” searches, which were designed as digital booby traps. Based on Google’s story, Microsoft appears to have taken the bait…hook, line, and sinker.

You be the judge. Here was the synthetic search result for “indoswiftjobinproduction” when entered in Google:

Source: Search Engine Land

This is the response when the same search term “indoswiftjobinproduction” was keyed in on Microsoft’s Bing search service:

Source: Search Engine Land

Coincidence? Perhaps. Likely? No.

Well, maybe lightning just struck with the “indoswiftjobinproduction” search term gibberish – why not try another?

This is what Google’s search results created when “mbzrxpgjys” was entered:

Source: Search Engine Land

When the same “mbzrxpgjys” term was inputted into Microsoft’s Bing, here was the result:

Source: Search Engine Land

Hmmm, I seem to be detecting a pattern here.

Is Microsoft’s apparent copycat behavior illegal? The evidence for the moment doesn’t appear to be clear, thanks mostly to the fine-print legalese of confusing check boxes that nobody reads when downloading or using any internet service. Evidently, many Microsoft Internet Explorer (IE) users have unknowingly provided Google search information typed in through Microsoft’s IE browser, and the Redmond behemoth has been using this information to sharpen their search algorithms.

So if this behavior is not illegal, then should this activity be considered cheating? Here’s what Amit Singhal, a Google executive who oversees the company’s search engine ranking algorithm has to say about the issue:

“It’s cheating to me because we work incredibly hard and have done so for years but they just get there based on our hard work…I don’t know how else to call it but plain and simple cheating. Another analogy is that it’s like running a marathon and carrying someone else on your back, who jumps off just before the finish line.”

 

I’m sure this will not be the last we hear on the subject of technology and corporate cheating. As a matter of fact, in the field of intellectual property crimes, French-Japanese car giant Renault-Nissan recently brought the case of industrial espionage, corruption, theft, stolen goods, and conspiracy against three senior Renault executives. The allegations of selling crucial electric car information to the Chinese raised concerns to a feverish pitch in the tabloids because so much can be gained or lost by those involved in this estimated $2 trillion electric car market.  

The committing of crimes is nothing new, but the types of new crimes are changing. In a globalized world increasingly dominated by technology, perpetrators better think twice about committing these invisible crimes. Cheating may taste sweet, until you get caught with your hand in the cookie jar.

Read More about the GoogleMicrosoft Tiff

Wade W. Slome, CFA, CFP® 

Plan. Invest. Prosper. 

www.Sidoxia.com

DISCLOSURE: Sidoxia Capital Management (SCM) and some of its clients own certain exchange traded funds and GOOG, but at the time of publishing SCM had no direct position in MSFT, Facebook, Twitter, Renault, Nissan, or any other security referenced in this article. No information accessed through the Investing Caffeine (IC) website constitutes investment, financial, legal, tax or other advice nor is to be relied on in making an investment or other decision. Please read disclosure language on IC “Contact” page.

February 5, 2011 at 7:31 pm Leave a comment

Short-Termism & Extremism: The Death Knell of our Future

In recent times, American society has been built on a foundation of instant gratification and immediate attacks, whether we are talking about politics or economics. Often, important issues are simply presented as black or white in a way that distorts the truth and rarely reflects reality, which in most cases is actually a shade of grey. President Obama is discovering the challenges of governing a global superpower in the wake of high unemployment, a fragile economy, and extremist rhetoric from both sides of the political aisle.  Rather than instituting a promise of change, President Obama has left the natives restless, wondering whether a “change for worse” is actually what should be expected in the future.

Massachusetts voters made a bold and brash statement when they elected Republican Senator Scott Brown to replace the vacated Massachusetts Senate seat of late, iconic Democratic Senator Edward Kennedy – a position he held as a Democrat for almost 47 years. Obama’s response to this Democratic body blow and his fledging healthcare reform was to go on a populist rampage against the banks with a tax and break-up proposal. Undoubtedly, financial reform is needed, but the timing and tone of these misguided proposals unfortunately does not attack the heart of the financial crisis causes – excessive leverage, lack of oversight, and irresponsible real estate loans (see also, Investing Caffeine article on the subject).

With that said, I would not write President Obama’s obituary quite yet. President Reagan was left for dead in 1982 before his policies gained traction and he earned a landslide reelection victory two years later. In order for President Obama to reverse his plummeting approval ratings and garner back some of his election campaign mojo, he needs to lead more from the center. Don’t take my word for it, review Pew Research’s data that shows Independents passing up both Republicans and Democrats. The overall sour mood is largely driven by the economic malaise experienced by all in some fashion, and unfortunately has contributed to short-termism and extremism.

Technology has flattened the world and accelerated the exchange of information globally at the speed of light. Any action, recommendation, or gaffe that deviates from the approved script immediately becomes a permanent fixture on someone’s lifetime resume. Our comments and decisions become instant fodder for the worldly court of opinion, thanks to 24/7 news cycles and millions of passionate opinions blasted immediately through cyberspace and around the globe.

Short-termism and extremism can be just as poisonous in the economic world as in the political world. This dynamic became evident in the global financial crisis. Short-termism is just another phrase for short-term profit focus, so when more and more leverage led to more and more profits and higher asset prices, the financial industry became blinded to the long-term consequences of their short-term decisions.

Solutions:

  • Small Bites First: Rather than trying to ram through half-baked, massive proposals laced with endless numbers of wasteful pork barrel projects, why not focus on targeted and surgical legislation first? If education, deficit-reduction, and job creation are areas of common interest for Republicans and Democrats, then start with small legislation in these areas first. More ambitious agendas can be sought out later.
  • Embrace Globalization: Based on the “law of large numbers” and the scale of the United States economy, our slice of the global economic pie is inevitably going to shrink over time. How does the $14 trillion U.S economy manage to grow if its share is declining? Simple. By eschewing protectionist policies, and embracing globalization. Developing country populations are joining modern society on a daily basis as they integrate productivity-enhancing innovations used by developed worlds for decades. In a flat world, the narrowing of the productivity gap is only going to accelerate. The question then becomes, does the U.S. want to participate in this accelerating growth of developing markets or sit idly on the sideline watching our competitors eat our lunch? 
  • Hail Long-Termism and Centrism:  Regulations and incentives need to be instituted in such a fashion that irresponsible behavior occurring in the name of instant short-term profits is replaced with rules that induce sustainable profits and competitive advantages over our economic neighbors. Much of the financial industry is scratching and screaming in the face of any regulatory reform suggestions. The bankers’ usual response to reform is to throw out scare tactics about the inevitable damage caused by reform to the global competitiveness of our banking industry. No doubt, the case of “anti-competiveness” is a valid argument and any reforms passed could have immediate negative impacts on short-term profits. Like the bitter taste of many medicines, I can accept regulatory remedies now, if the long-term improvements outweigh the immediate detrimental aspects.

The focus on short-termism and extremism has created an acidic culture in both Washington and on “Main Street,” making government changes virtually impossible. If President Obama wants to implement the change he campaigned on, then he needs to take a more centrist view that concentrates on enduring benefits – not immediate political gains.

Wade W. Slome, CFA, CFP®

Plan. Invest. Prosper. 

Article first submitted to Alrroya.com before being published on Investing Caffeine.

DISCLOSURE: Sidoxia Capital Management (SCM) and some of its clients own certain exchange traded funds but at the time of publishing had no direct positions in securities mentioned in the article. No information accessed through the Investing Caffeine (IC) website constitutes investment, financial, legal, tax or other advice nor is to be relied on in making an investment or other decision. Please read disclosure language on IC “Contact” page.

February 3, 2010 at 12:01 am Leave a comment

Newer Posts


Receive Investing Caffeine blog posts by email.

Join 1,778 other followers

Meet Wade Slome, CFA, CFP®

DSC_0244a reduced

More on Sidoxia Services

Recognition

Top Financial Advisor Blogs And Bloggers – Rankings From Nerd’s Eye View | Kitces.com

Wade on Twitter…

Share this blog

Bookmark and Share

Subscribe to Blog RSS

Monthly Archives