Tsing Tao has led me to an insight this morning. Why have I so relentlessly (perhaps only subconsciously, until now) ferreted out the pessimists and other kinds of negativists in my company? Why have I without fail "assisted" them to "pursue other career opportunities"? I think the answer has to be that this is a type of insurance. Should I fail in my role, fail to inspire a manager's passion, or fail to capture and direct their passion, and sadly I do fail at this periodically, at least they still bring to the company a certain kind of strength that, all else lacking, is better for us than the first alternatives mentioned. Sure, I want them to be realistic, I expect that as proof of technical competence, but at the end of the day I want them to understand, and act accordingly with, the knowledge that "reality" is in constant flux (that's why we have "so many" meetings, to reinterpret it), and that their attitudinal foundation never takes second-place importance to any thing else they walk in the doors with. I have no doubt that this approach, among others of course, and acknowledging the help of everyone I work with, has been crucial in making us number 1 worldwide in our sector. Thank you, Tsing.
You are welcome. Tell me, if you would please: Do you allow the folks at "your" company to also pull the wool over your eyes when they present you with performance statistics? Not knowing what type of business you do (and not caring, either), when whatever sales are presented to you, can they fluff the numbers to make them look better? Do you prefer it this way, leading you to believe the business is doing better than it is in actuality, simply because in doing so, your business compatriots can walk around whistling a happy tune (at least until the banker or shareholders come knocking, that is). Do you prefer factual assessments, no matter how bleak they may come across? Because I'll tell you. From what I have seen online, you prefer the unicorns and happy rainbows world of the fantasy, as you always take the "spin" over the facts in any economic report, happily skipping along through your imaginary field of tulips, blissfully unaware at just how ignorant you are (and come off as) in your cheering on data that just isn't accurate by any stretch of the imagination. See, if it were me, I'd like to know all the facts before I come to the conclusion that a particular number is, or is not, what it claims to be. I don't voluntarily eat the shit sandwich just because the media tells me it's roast pork. It seems you are, however, so inclined. Please prove me wrong. Show me where, how, when, anything about you doing your due diligence.
Again, ignoring the facts doesn't make them go away. I see you neglected to educate yourself on the whole Channel Stuffing aspect, so I'll help you out. GM records a sale when it sells it's car to a dealer. And then there's this chart: Gee! If car sales are at a supposed record, then why is Dealer Inventory ALSO at a record? That seems weird, does it not? Incidentally, even though the data on the chart only goes back to 2009, at 623,666 cars in the month of Nov 11, it is an all time absolute record, and represents about 3.5 times the vehicles total GM says it sold in November! I can see your office now. "We have doubled sales again this month! That makes 500 consecutive months in a row! There is no recession here!"
So, this week we've heard reports on construction spending, vehicle sales, factory orders, chain store sales, job cuts, jobless claims, consumer comfort, and for tomorrow the employment situation. Oh, let's not forget the PMIs, here and abroad. I trust you trade contrary to how you emote?
Its not hard to take on Risk when someone else, or more specifically in this case the government is the one who is taking the loss, when that risk goes horribly wrong. I would be swinging half million share positions in the spys all day if the government was the one taking the hit for me if i lose. We wonder why these companies like GM and the banks make such poor decisions, well you would to, if you knew it was a game of "heads I win, tails you lose."
When Bush allowed companies to suspend standard accounting practices I must admit, I stopped believing the numbers. ----------------------------------------------------- Intelligence Czar Can Waive SEC Rules Now, the White House's top spymaster can cite national security to exempt businesses from reporting requirements President George W. Bush has bestowed on his intelligence czar, John Negroponte, broad authority, in the name of national security, to excuse publicly traded companies from their usual accounting and securities-disclosure obligations. Notice of the development came in a brief entry in the Federal Register, dated May 5, 2006, that was opaque to the untrained eye. Unbeknownst to almost all of Washington and the financial world, Bush and every other President since Jimmy Carter have had the authority to exempt companies working on certain top-secret defense projects from portions of the 1934 Securities Exchange Act. Administration officials told BusinessWeek that they believe this is the first time a President has ever delegated the authority to someone outside the Oval Office. It couldn't be immediately determined whether any company has received a waiver under this provision. The timing of Bush's move is intriguing. On the same day the President signed the memo, Porter Goss resigned as director of the Central Intelligence Agency amid criticism of ineffectiveness and poor morale at the agency. Only six days later, on May 11, USA Today reported that the National Security Agency had obtained millions of calling records of ordinary citizens provided by three major U.S. phone companies. Negroponte oversees both the CIA and NSA in his role as the administration's top intelligence official. http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/may2006/nf20060523_2210.htm --------------------- Just imagine how this may have been applied since the "recession" began. Also, look at the timing of this compared to the start of the "recession".
Autonation: http://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...s-record-third-quarter-results-132226963.html Group 1: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/gr...ese-brand-vehicle-supply-shortages-2011-10-25