LyrArc Article Gist
Reited Gen Gantz appears to be the likely head of a new government after winning the most seats in parliament. Policy towards Iran is not likely to change. But a Gantz led government is likely to reduce the divisiveness in the country, and provide a more unifying effort in Israeli society. The role of religious groups in daily life would also be held back. Better relations with Jewish people in America would result and peace negotiations with Palestinians would be encouraged. The prime minister would concentrate less power in his hands. By temperament Gantz is a quiet leader who preferred not to engage in the back and forth attacks in the election campaign even when Mr. Netanyahu  did not hesitate to do so. As the head of the military from 2011 to 2015 he also has the confidence of people in Israel looking for a new start after a long period of Netanyahu rule. The current prime minister could be indicted soon after a hearing next month on charges of bribery and fraud. Mr. Trump has said that U.S. relationship is not with any leader but with the country Israel. Gantz makes it clear after Netanyahu's style of politics has rocked Israel for many years- "We will bring about a real change in priorities, and heal Israeli society in all its parts." Mr. Gantz has said that he think the Obama administration could have done more in securing a better nuclear deal with Iran. Yet at an event in 2015 when the deal was being set, Mr Gantz said he also saw "the half full part of the glass." That the deal would keep Iran 10 or 15 years from making a nuclear weapon "with the right price." At this juncture in world affairs this is important because Mr. Trump has shown flexibility in dealing with Iran following the firing of National Security Adviser Bolton. Trump held back on a response at several points during the attacks in the Straits of Hormuz and the taking of ships hostage by Iran and the UK. The attacks on Saudi oil facilities and the difficulty of protecting oil installations in the region, Iran's increasingly difficult position under tight U.S. sanctions and pressure on Asian buyers of Iranian oil to cut back purchases, the efforts of Japan and India dependent on Saudi and Iranian oil to reduce tensions, all point to a new policy in the region with a new Israeli government playing a useful role to keep policy control in the hands of Asian countries dependent on oil supplies for their economies, and in the hands of a U.S. president better informed about a policy course that is in U.S. interests of avoiding unnecessary engagements overseas when there are other pressing priorities. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The market for copper experienced a global oversupply in the last 4 years with a sharp decline in prices. The Sierra Gorda mine in Chile and the Constancia mine in Peru will add more supply of copper. Prices of iron ore dropped 50% in 2014, and copper 14%. The CEO of Glencore PLC, Ivan Glasenberg, says the problem is a huge misallocation of capital, as companies in the mining business continued to invest heavily with supplies outstripping demand.

LyrArc Article Gist
Max Fisher of the NYT points out the unique approach taken by Canada in the U.S.-Canada relationship - to cultivate a grassroots network of Americans in legislatures, business, and at different levels of government. This has enabled the Trudeau government to build a relationship with president Trump, and at the same time have relationships at different levels of government and with business in the U.S. to tackle issues where the Trump administration has acted in ways unfavorable for Canada. Provincial governments in Ontario and Quebec lobbied against a New York state government provision for Buying American on state contracts worth over $100,000. By emphasizing the $10 billion in exports from New York to Ontario this lobbying persuaded the New York legislature to cancel the provision. Premier Trudeau's popularity helps and the proximity to the U.S. means Canadians can visit quickly and understand the U.S. as a close neighbor. Still Premier Kathleen Wynne of Ontario says Canadian businesses are nervous about the uncertainty from the Trump administration.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. market looks like it is becoming the kind of maturing market that Japan and Germany have become for automobiles. Germany and Japan saw sales peak at high levels and then decline. And they have been declining steadily for several years. The US has a growing population and demographics because of immigration compared to Japan so there wil be continued demand for new cars. However since 2000 carmakers have introduced so many price incentives, interest free loans, and other ways of pushing sales that sales have continued to climb to unsustainable levels. All through the 1990's sales were in the 15 million range, then after 2000 sales climbed, except for the short period of uncertainty after 9/11/2001 Trade Center bombings. Sales climbed up to 17 million and stayed at these higher levels till the recent crises in 2007 saw a drop in sales and a shift to smaller fuel efficient cars. GM was offering 0% financing for 5 years through its Keep America Rolling campaign in the aftermath of 9/11. By 2005 automakers were offering as much as $8000 in discounts on pickup trucks. Employee pricing enabled regular customers to buy at employee prices. The Big Three sold to rental fleets unsold cars, so much so that by 2005 25% of all vehicles made by GM and Ford went to rental fleets, to rental companies in which these companies had large ownership stakes. For GM this became part of strategy. Fixed costs were high and the UAW contracts made it difficult to layoff workers, a jobs bank in which layed off workers could remain till rehired was itself quite costly as money had to be paid to the workers in the job bank. With this kind of inflexibility in the labor market GM could only spread all the fixed costs for its aging workforce which required pension payouts to retirees and health payments to retirees, by selling more automobiles. During this period of inflexibility in labor, and the legacy costs of previous boom years since the 1950's with generous UAW contracts, GM and Ford pushed sales to unsustainable levels; without considering the furture implications of this short term strategy. Another way this could hurt is by pulling sales in future years into current years because of interest free financing or huge discounting which probably happened in 2004-2005 and is seeing a payback today in 2008. At the peak in 2005 carmakers were planning further expansion of SUV capacity or expansion of other carmaking facilities. Gas was still not at the high levels of today. In 1999 gas cost $1.15 cents a gallon, and it was a little higher than that, but nowhere near what we are seeeing today. These new plants are coming up just as the sales are dropping dramatically, the half million SUV's sold in 2008 is about half the sales in 2003, enough to fill 2 plants when many more plants are being built or opening. The new capacity of 4 plants capable of producing 1 million vehicles is looking like a big mistake, like the new Toyota Tundra plant in Texas. Some of the new carmaking capacity is a Toyota plant in Tupelo, Mississippi, a Honda plant in Indiana, and a Kia Motors plant in Georgia. All this means a big drop in factory utilization rates. GM has 2 plants making full size SUV's. Later this year GM will cut production at these plants and at 2 plants making pickup trucks to utilize them only for 1 eight hour shift a day. Toyota has 1 full plant of excess capacity, not including the plant opening in Tupelo, Missisippi, making it likely to be down in utilization very significantly as well. Nissan is only using 65% of capacity at plants in Canton, Mississippi and Smyrna , Tennessee. And these utilization rates reflect the impact at the early stage of the housing crisis, consumption spending is only now beginning to bite, and unemployment is still to take a hit, so th economic recession immpact is still not reflected in auto sales. Even now GM and Chrysler cling to the hope of a sales pickup in late 2008 and in 2009, which is looking less likely by the day. J.D. Powers survey show the North American auto making capacity at 18.7 million cars and production this year at 14.1 million. This means the automakers have disastrously misjudged the auto market, and the role their own actions in pushing sales have affected the market in inflating the sales numbers beyond what is a sustainable sale increase. When credit tightening and lower consumption spending, housing crisis, and higher unemployment all hit the US in full impact by 2009 the situation is likely to worsen significantly and could become a disaster. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the NYT by Halbfinger and Kershner shows a Israel that is divided in its views about prime minister Netanyahu. In early 2018 with the police report on the investigation into Mr. Netanyahu on campaign finances, half of Israelis support Netanyahu, with the other half thinking that Netanyahu should resign. Mr. Netanyahu has dismissed the investigation as full of holes like Swiss cheese. His supporters see it as part of a left wing conspiracy including state prosecutors and police. Supporters of Netanyahu see him as having improved Israel's security in its region, people who oppose him see him as being too divisive, using divisive rhetoric to improve his own position.  Younger voters in particular have a distaste for divisive politics practiced under Netanyahu, which extends to the supporters of Israel in America, and the policies leading to delaying of the peace project.  That peace project is also seen as part of the nation's mission to seek peace with its immediate neighbors, an unfinished project for Israel as a nation. After many years in office Netanyahu's party lacks the dynamic vision needed and it now appears only to see remaining in office as its goal, according to this NYT report. This is happening at a time when a larger centrist constituency is developing in Israel as most of the moderates are outside government. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Results of a CBS New York Times Poll of 1018 adults in the U.S., reported Feb 28, 2006. Results show 55% showed support for gasoline tax if it reduced dependence on foreign oil, 59% showed support if it also reduced global warming. There is additional support if the money is used to fight terrorism, allocated to specific projects such as electric cars, or help low income people with extra gasoline costs. The important distinction in the results is what respondents were asked. When told about their response to a gasoline tax 85% of respondents opposed it, but when told it would reduce dependence on foreign oil 55% support it. Some respondents want to see it earmarked so that its use would reduce dependence on foreign oil through fuel efficiency improvements. The gasoline tax has remained at 18.4 cents a gallon since 1993. Politicians see the 85% and stay away from the issue and at periods of higher oil prices there is more concern about the impact on consumers. Prof. Borenstein, director of an energy institute at the University of California, Berkeley, says his calculations show a 10% increase in gasoline cost would reduces consumption by 6-8%. As the tax is regressive by putting a higher burden on low income consumers, this should be offset by income tax relief that would make middle and lower income people better off , says Prof. Borenstein. Some of the revenues would be used to support projects at automakers and research universities to develop more fuel efficient technologies for automobiles. Shows support is there if the tax and where money is spent is shaped in the right way....

LyrArc Article Gist
BP's difficulties in the deal with Rosneft. In mid-January 2011 BP signed a deal with Rosneft with each company investing in the other through a stock swap of 5% of BP and 9.8% of Rosneft. They also agreed to jointly explore oil fields in the Russian Arctic. This sidelines BP's former partners in the TNK-BP venture. Robert Dudley, who headed the Russian operations of BP, is now CEO of the company. From 2003 to 2008, Dudley headed the TNK-BP joint venture. BP's partners in that venture, known as the AAR group of oligarchs, have sued BP over the BP-Rosneft deal. An arbitration tribunal in Sweden ruled that the Rosneft venture violates a shareholder agreement BP has in the TNK-BP venture. BP was under the impression that support from Igor Sechin, deputy prime minister and head of Rosneft, would ensure there would be no litgation by AAR, but this has not happened. It shows the uncertainties in Russian politics. Russian President Medvedev has asked political leaders to give up corporate positions, which would mean Sechin would have to give up his position in Rosneft. BP continues to benefit from access to new resources in Russia even with these difficulties. BP contributed $6 billon in cash in 2003 to the TNK-BP joint venture. BP has made $14.3 billion in dividends since 2003 on this investment and holds 50% of the assets in that venture. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Wagoner became President at age 45, CEO at age 48. So you would think that young blood is coming in to GM, but that does not appear to be the case. At the Board level most of the Board members like George Fisher formerly of Motorola, have been around for a long time, and there does not appear to be new blood that would bring in fresh thinking. And serious decisions about investment in developing new technologies to develop fuel efficient cars, like hybrid technologies, electric and other alternative technologies, diesel technology, have been held up for years at General Motors. The way decisions are made on such issues with Board members voicing their opinions more than wrestling seriously with the issues, shows serious shortcomings of management and the Board. At key points of decision making the CEO and key members of his team had not prepared carefully, and Board members did not come up with serious thinking on the problems facing GM. It, appears that the investment in technologies to develop fuel efficient cars much earlier, long before they were finally being addressed in 2006, was a failure of Wagoner's management and of the Board. Management discussed this but continued to be mired in old ways of thinking that continuing with the status quo- cars with existing low fuel efficiency- would not expose GM to illwinds as preferences changed. Its clear from the description here of discussions within GM that the old thinking is quite entrenched at GM, and Wagoner just was not the kind of person who could vigorously articulate a new vision for GM. A couple of things are noteworthy in this account of management indecision at GM. When fuel prices began hurting sales of SUV's and large vehicles in 2005, efforts to get a decision on investments in new technologies for fuel efficiency for the whole product lineup failed at the Board level in an April 2005 meeting. One Board member saying at that meeting, that" do we want to lose another billion dollars in developing new technology for fuel efficient cars." And no one calling him to account that the remark still did not address the point that GM had to respond to the changing market and world oil dynamics, and not just hope for the best, as GM had aggressive competitors, and faced continually diminishing role in the market place for the entire decade of the 1990's. While April 2005 was already at the tail end of the previous era of gas guzzling cars and a decision then would still not have shown a forward looking vision of things, it was not until 10 months later that a decision was reached. And this almost from necessity, as oil prices jumped in 2006 after hurricane Katrina, and by this time President Bush was also calling for higher mandated fuel efficiency standards. The other noteworthy point here is that by making the changes so late in the game, GM had to compress the development cycle for new and some cases unknown technologies into short time frames. If the ingenuity of its engineers comes to its rescue it still faces another hurdle that of cost, because the technologies have to be perfected and improved, so that the costs are low enough for customers, and importantly comparable with what it is costing competitors to make the same fuel efficient technology engine or other part. Which is why one Honda executive remarked, "GM like everyone else is serious about this, because they have to be, but how many of their hybrids and how many Volts will they sell? Their technology is very expensive." Even if GM develops the Volt electric car by 2010, GM will need a whole range of fuel efficient technolgies to power its large product lineup. Its just to hard to avoid the conclusion that this is going to prove costly. All the dragging of feet and indecision, and failure to prepare GM for a different world in case something drastically different from what was expected happened, will prove very costly especially considering how aggressive and well financed some of the Japanese and German competitors are. It also hard to avoid the conclusion that there is too much bureaucracy at the large auto companies, and getting new blood and new ideas and fresh thinking is tough in a place where everybody agrees with everybody else, and there is uniformity of thinking. This makes it difficult for any original or wayward types to thrive. These bureaucracies look up to the top for direction. Initiative is discouraged on one hand, and at the same time even if a new direction is taken at the top. a lot of resistance can be expected to implementing it throughout the company without persistent persuasion and reminder of new facts and realities. This is true for both Wagoner and Mullaly as they face the skepticism of subordinates to new direction. Mullaly for instance has to remind his managers that large vehicles are only a small percentage of the entire global market, and if Toyota is making money in small cars so can Ford. See the link to this. Is Toyota immune from bureaucracy type behaviour throughout the company? Not really, Toyota's chairman emeritus came out of retirement in fact and went out of the way to caution its CEO and management about their complacency a year or so before. Shoichiro Toyoda personally intervened to caution against too much expansion in the US and climbing wage costs, and other risks they perceived such as the company managers in the USA appearing to be resting on their laurels. See the link to this. A lot of discussion is probably going on within these companies about the present state of affairs, and considerable anxiety for what the future will bring. It may be useful to ask the question is there something that makes it difficult for once successful organizations -now with entrenched bureaucracy and set ways -to put forward leaders with vision and foresight, till it becomes very late? The vision and foresight about where their markets and the world is heading, and the ability to move their organizations in that direction. Or to break out of old patterns of behaviour and thinking....

LyrArc Article Gist
Mexico's growth rate has averaged annual growth of below 2% for 2013-2015 under the Pena adminstration. Predictions were for growth of 5-6%. The investment in the oil industry is low with decline in demand for oil. The peso has dropped in value to 16 to the U.S. dollar in August 2015 compared to 13 in 2014. The popularity rating of the Pena administration dropped to 34% in August 2015.