Thailand
Compare health insurance plans and insurance rates on family and individual health insurance. Free health quotes and more.
Spanish stocks dropped sharply early Friday morning after ratings agency Moody’s downgraded its credit score of 16 Spanish banks in the latest blow to the troubled financial sector.
The Ibex 35 index was off more than 2 points shortly after trading began Friday. Banks were among the biggest losers.
Moody’s acted late Thursday, citing banks’ load of non-performing loans amid a recession-plagued economy, their creditworthiness and the government’s sovereign debt problems, among other woes.
Those punished included Banco Santander, SA, the eurozone’s largest bank by market capitalization.
Shares in Bankia SA, a recently nationalized bank, took a roller coaster ride Thursday, ending up sharply lower on reports depositors pulled out a (EURO)1 billion in a week.
On the bond market the interest rate on 10-year bonds was unchanged at 6.25 percent.
Making it easy to find the right instant payday loan. No fax, hassle free cash advance loans from $100-$1500 in less than 1 hour.
For 10 years, Daniela Ballico has been knocking on Romans
(Corrects euro bond holdings in ninth paragraph in story that was published on May 4.)
Norway
The Wendy’s Co. returned to a first-quarter profit as it recorded a large gain on the sale of an investment.
The casual dining chain reported net income of $12.4 million, or 3 cents per share for the period ended April 1. That compares with a loss of $1.4 million, or breakeven results, a year ago.
Excluding items, earnings were 1 cent per share. Analysts expected earnings of 3 cents per share.
Revenue rose 2 percent to $593.2 million. That missed Wall Street’s estimate of $608.1 million.
Its shares fell 22 cents, or 4.5 percent, to $4.65 in premarket trading.
Company-run restaurant margin fell due to increased commodity costs, particularly for fresh beef.
The Dublin, Ohio company cut its 2012 earnings forecast mostly because of weaker-than-expected sales and the company-run restaurant margin.
It’s barely a rounding error in their multimillion-dollar pay packages, but America’s imperial CEOs are losing some of the trappings of power.
Companies that once paid for their leaders’ cars and club memberships – and sometimes handed them extra cash to pay the taxes on those goodies – are now taking a principled stand against perquisites.
Among St. Louis firms, Olin and Spartech eliminated their executive perks at the beginning of last year. Express Scripts, Reinsurance Group of America, MEMC Electronic Materials and a few others already had no-perks policies.
Spartech used to give auto allowances of more than $10,000 to some executives. Olin provided company cars along with financial planning services to help executives manage their millions. As of last year, those goodies are gone.
Pay consultant Steven Hall says Olin and Spartech are part of a trend. “In the last few years, companies have been eliminating these kinds of benefits,” he said. “In some cases, the amounts are not meaningful at all, but companies are saying it’s a matter of principle.”
Hall, managing director of Steven Hall & Partners in New York, was speaking about the largest U.S. companies, which tend to be trendsetters in pay practices. St. Louis CEOs, especially at smaller companies, have been slower to give up their perks.
Among 40 St. Louis companies that have made their pay disclosures for 2011, three-fourths offered special benefits to top executives. A car allowance was the most common perk, offered by 17 companies. Fourteen firms let the boss and/or a spouse take personal flights on the company dime, and 12 paid for club dues. Six gave the boss extra cash to pay taxes on the benefits, a practice that shareholder-advocacy groups frown upon.
One of the longest lists of perks went to payday loan.stltoday.com/business/columns/david-nicklaus/smaller-bonus-shrinks-pay-total-for-viasystems-ceo/article_84c7c0e0-7384-11e1-b7ba-0019bb30f31a.html” target=”_blank”>Viasystems Chief Executive David Sindelar: a $33,994 car allowance, $15,337 worth of financial consulting, $31,296 in club dues, $61,603 for entertainment, $6,110 worth of continuing education and $1,000 in charitable contributions. Some of those amounts were grossed up to cover taxes.
The biggest single perk, though, belonged to David Farr, chief executive of Emerson. Farr took $304,007 worth of personal flights on company aircraft, a practice that Emerson justifies on security grounds.
Other frequent fliers included Energizer CEO Ward Klein, who took $176,478 worth of free flights; Brown Shoe Chairman Ronald Fromm ($165,365) and Monsanto CEO Hugh Grant ($124,665).
Free flights seem to be the one perk that isn’t going away, Hall says. Companies justify it based on security – Emerson and others actually require their CEOs to use company planes for all trips – and efficiency.
For watchdog groups, though, such perks are a red flag. They are indicators of an entitlement mentality and a situation in which the board is subservient to an imperial CEO.
As the Corporate Library, a governance-research firm that’s now part of GMI Ratings, said in a 2010 study, “If the board cannot set appropriate limits for the CEO in this regard, will it be able to do so in matters of greater strategic consequence?”
McDonald’s ever-evolving mix of old menu standbys and new items like Chicken McBites lured in more diners who helped boost its first-quarter profit.
The world’s biggest hamburger chain said Friday that its net income rose 5 percent in the first quarter, in line with Wall Street expectations.
McDonald’s Corp. said global sales rose 7.3 percent at stores open at least 13 months, driven by gains from all regions. The metric is key because it excludes the impact of newly opened stores.
A big part of the McDonald’s success story in recent years has been the chain’s rollout of popular menu items such as coffee frappes and fruit smoothies, which have high profit margins and bring in customers throughout the day. Customers also love them because it’s a way to have a treat for a couple of bucks.
Other recent introductions by the fast-food chain include oatmeal and Chicken McBites, which the company said helped boost sales in the U.S. in the first quarter.
For the first three months of the year, McDonald’s reported a profit of $1.27 billion, or $1.23 per share. That compares with a profit of $1.21 billion, or $1.15 per share, in the year-ago period.
In the U.S., sales at restaurants open at least 13 months rose 8.9 percent, as new menu items like Chicken McBites, updated restaurants and warm weather drew customers. The results also benefitted from an extra day in the Leap Year.
McDonald’s said sales in Europe, its biggest market, rose 5 percent despite economic turmoil and severe weather in many parts of the region. Sales rose 5.5 percent in the Asia Pacific, Middle East and Africa region, where the company is focusing its expansion efforts in the coming years.
Although McDonald’s has consistently outperformed its peers in the fast-food industry, the company is facing the pressures of increasing costs for ingredients. The company’s is also seeing costs for labor and rent increase in some overseas markets.
The higher expenses are particularly problematic for a chain like McDonald’s, which risks driving away customers if those costs are passed on.
Still, the fast-food chain last year raised prices three times for a total price increase of 3 percent. The company has said it expects commodity costs to increase an additional 4.5 percent to 5.5 percent this year, which would be roughly in line with last year’s increases.
Because of its size, the way McDonald’s handles price increases can set the tone for the rest of the fast-food industry.
Shares of McDonald’s, based in Oak Brook, Ill., rose $1.72, or nearly 2 percent, to $95.28 in premarket trading.
International Monetary Fund Managing Director Christine Lagarde said she has received pledges worth about $320 billion so far in her campaign for a bigger reserve to combat threats to global growth.
Goldman Sachs more than doubled its first-quarter profits and announced plans to raise its dividend Tuesday.
The strong results masked other problems, including a 16 percent decline in revenue. To make up for that, and to propel earnings higher, Goldman turned to cost-cutting.
The storied investment bank slashed 3,000 workers over the year, or about 8 percent of its work force. It cut back on salaries, trimmed occupancy costs and paid less in brokerage fees, cutting total expenses by 14 percent.
Revenue from financial advising, where the bank advises big companies and investors on mergers and acquisitions, was one of the few areas to record a revenue gain, 37 percent.
Revenue from underwriting stock and bond sales fell 27 percent. Revenue from trading fell 14 percent, hurt by lower fees and revenue from the division that trades bonds, currencies and commodities. Total revenue fell to $9.9 billion from $11.9 billion, though that beat the $9.4 billion that analysts polled by FactSet had been expecting.
Goldman Sachs said its net income available to common shareholders rose to $2.1 billion, or $3.92 per share. That was a jump of about 128 percent from $908 million, or $1.56 per share, a year ago. The per-share earnings also beat expectations of analysts, who had been predicting $3.52.
The bank also announced it would raise its quarterly shareholder dividend to 46 cents per share from 35 cents. Though the bank didn’t say so, that’s a particular sign of strength in the current market, because it’s also a reminder that Goldman, unlike some of its peers, got permission to do so after passing the government’s most recent round of stress tests.
CEO Lloyd Blankfeink called the quarter a “solid performance.” In a prepared statement, he noted that “client activity remains relatively low in certain areas,” but said that “our mix of businesses gives the firm significant room for revenue growth as economic and market conditions continue to improve.”
For decades, Goldman has been known for beating its Wall Street competitors and churning out executives who go on to high leadership positions.
But the past few years have left it bruised. Last fall, it recorded a quarterly loss, only its second since going public in 1999. In 2010 and 2011, its net income fell year-over-year in six of the eight quarters.
Investors are trying to piece together whether the troubles are a short-term annoyance or a sign of deep-rooted problems. They wonder if the bank needs a new game plan.
Like the rest of the banking industry, Goldman has to figure out how to navigate a world of stricter government controls that will dry up some of its key revenue streams. Goldman has made big profits trading for its own account, especially when markets are volatile. But regulations taking effect this year will reduce Goldman’s ability to make those trades.
Unlike much of the banking industry, Goldman doesn’t have a large consumer banking arm to fall back on when trading and investment banking get bumpy. Its clients are largely hedge funds and multinational corporations that need to hedge their bets on foreign currencies, fluctuating interest rates and commodities.
Return on equity was about 12 percent, in line with a year ago. That was a big change from 38 percent five years ago, before the global economic meltdown.
Goldman also has public-relations problems to worry about. In the era of Occupy Wall Street, Goldman has been the target for much of the vitriol of people who blame the financial crisis on reckless practices in the banking industry. Last month, the vitriol came to a head when a mid-level executive resigned via a blistering editorial in the New York Times, where he accused the bank of losing its “moral fiber” and caring only about its own profits rather than its clients’.
The accusations are still swirling. Last week, the bank agreed to pay $22 million to settle regulators’ charges that Goldman analysts shared confidential research with favored clients. In the first quarter, the bank set aside $59 million for litigation and regulatory proceedings.
Goldman Sachs’ stock fell slightly in pre-market trading, down 73 cents to $117.
The Times of London is being sued over email hacking, a lawyer said Friday, an indication that the scandal over media misdeeds at Rupert Murdoch’s British newspapers continues to spread.
Lawyer Mark Lewis told The Associated Press that his firm had filed suit against the 227-year-old publication over its hacking of police blogger Richard Horton’s email account.
“We did lodge papers,” Lewis confirmed in an email, adding that the suit was filed on Tuesday.
The Times unmasked Horton as the detective behind the award-winning “NightJack” blog in a controversial 2009 piece which Horton unsuccessfully sued to try to suppress.
According to an account of the lawsuit published in Britain’s New Statesman magazine, Horton’s lawyer raised the possibility that the detective’s Hotmail account had been illegal accessed _ an allegation dismissed as “baseless” in 2009 by Times lawyer Alastair Brett pay day loans.
However, in public statements and in testimony before an official inquiry into media ethics, senior Times managers admitted that one of their reporters had accessed Horton’s account.
“‘Baseless’ was not the best word to use,” Brett told the inquiry last month.
Times publisher News International did not immediately return an email or a call Friday.
Powered by WordPress -- XHTML 1.0