Sunday, May 13, 2007

NBER Prog. on Economic Fluctuations and Growth

I ran across work done at the National Bureau of Economic Research’s program on economic fluctuations and growth (www.nber.org/programs/efg/). The bureau is the nonpartisan, nonprofit institute whose macroeconomists conduct their own research and ascertain the timing of the nation’s booms and recessions. There are 177 current members from academia (primarily, i believe). Their recent report on the current business cycle was notable for its comparison to current post-recession gdp performance vis-a-vis average for previous 6 recessions.

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket
Quarterly Real GDP: The dark line shows the movement of quarterly real GDP in 2000-2003 and the shaded line the average over the previous 6 recessions. Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce (www.bea.doc.gov).

The current recovery has not seen as high a growth rate of real GDP as in the average recovery. In addition, productivity has grown unusually rapidly during the recession and recovery. As a result, employment has continued to decline slightly during the recovery. In dating the trough, the committee relied on the tradition of the Bureau's business-cycle dating procedure that emphasized output as the measure of economic activity, rather than employment.

Saturday, May 12, 2007

BizWk article on China economy

Economics April 23, 2007, 12:01AM EST text size: TT
Why Taming the China Dragon Is Tricky
Slowing down China's high-speed economy is devilishly hard to do, and may even be beyond Beijing's control
by Brian Bremner

It's a problem a lot of developing countries would die for. Yet Beijing faces a policy quandary of the highest order. China's $2.6 trillion economy, which blew away market expectations and clocked 11.1% growth in the first quarter, is rushing along like some blisteringly fast, runaway maglev train. Chinese President Hu Jintao's economic team in Beijing has been trying to tap the brakes to avoid a reprise of the painful boom-and-bust scenario that hit the country in the mid-1990s, yet hasn't managed to do so despite three years of effort.

China's seemingly unstoppable surge was a big topic on the podiums and in the hallways at the 2007 Boao Forum for Asia, a gathering of regional leaders and executives held in the southern province and resort island of Hainan on Apr. 20-21. Another prime subject: the global economic risks of a China that might jump the rails.

While China's restrictive currency policy that has kept the yuan relatively cheap gets much of the blame, Beijing is having trouble wrestling with this economic beast for lots of reasons that cut to the basic structure of China's economy. Among them is a massive savings glut in the corporate sector, the globalization of manufacturing networks, and the still vast developmental needs of an economy that must generate 15 million-plus jobs annually to avoid widespread joblessness and social unrest. Here is a quick guide to some of the issues:

Just how strong is the Chinese economy right now?

The world has never seen such a sudden and sustained rise of an economy that was so desperately poor just three decades ago. China has averaged 9.6% growth rates for 30 years and is now the fourth-biggest economy in the world—and likely will overtake Germany as No. 3 in the next year or so. It's the third-biggest trading nation: Two-way trade between China and the rest of the world hit $1.76 trillion last year.

China's nearly $1.2 trillion stockpile of foreign currency is the biggest on the planet, a reflection of the mainland's role as the biggest creditor economy and massive capital power. Lured by cheap labor and a white-hot Chinese domestic economy, foreign companies pumped about $60 billion in direct investment last year, and the country's global trade surplus came in at a record $177 billion. "No nation has moved as fast as China in establishing a global footprint," marveled Pakistani Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz at the Boao gathering.

Sounds like party time. Why are Chinese leaders worried?

Lost in all the breathless talk about China's overall economic performance is the cold, hard reality that the country's per capita gross domestic product is only $2,000 per person. There are huge income imbalances between China's big-city and rural provinces, years of rapid development have ravaged the environment, and the pressure to create fresh jobs and provide adequate social welfare policies is awesome in a country that is home to 1.3 billion people, about one-fifth of humanity.

"China remains a developing economy that has a long way to go before it can achieve modernization," says Wu Bangguo, chairman of China's National People's Congress standing committee. A big runup in inflation or an economic bubble that bursts would be absolutely catastrophic for hundreds of millions of Chinese families barely making ends meet—not to mention for Hu and his comrades running the show in China's one-party Communist regime.

Why doesn't Beijing just ratchet up interest rates to cool things off?

China did so in March, when the People's Bank of China increased a key benchmark, the one-year interest rate, by 27 basis points, to 6.39%. The one-year deposit rate was nudged up by the same amount, to 2.79%. It was the third such interest-rate hike in the past 12 months—and one or two more credit tightening moves are likely in 2007.

Yet here's the thing: China needs to slow down investment in factories and public works projects, which drive 40% of overall gross domestic product growth. Slowing down loan growth helps, but not in a country where all manner of state-owned companies (about 50% of the corporate sector) are enjoying double-digit profit growth and don't have to pay dividends like big publicly traded companies in the West. They are awash in cash and will keep investing into overcrowded sectors like autos, steel, cement, and construction.

China has an enormous pile of savings (the national savings rate is an awesome 50%), and the retained earnings the corporate sector is now generating is a big reason for this. Gang Fan, an economist and president of the Beijing-based National Economic Research Institute, points out that 5% to 10% of the national income the economy generates is now getting socked away by state-owned companies because the government doesn't require a dividend payment, which publicly traded foreign companies have to pay to shareholders. "It's quite a serious problem," he says, regarding the efforts by Beijing to slow things down.

What about throwing some ice water on the export sector by letting the yuan appreciate?

Beijing financial authorities probably could do more in this area, but it is not a magic bullet for two reasons: the weak consuming power of most individual Chinese consumers and the mainland's critical role as a final assembly platform for global companies. One big driver of China's rapidly expanding trade numbers is that ordinary Chinese families aren't spending enough on foreign goods.

True, there is plenty of conspicuous consumption in prosperous coastal cities such as Beijing, Shanghai, and Shenzhen, but there are also 700 million Chinese in the hinterland who don't buy Rolls-Royce Phantom sedans and Gucci handbags. China is reluctant to risk a major slowdown because these folks would get crushed. Beijing needs to keep the economy stoked in high-speed mode until China's vast income gap closes more. "The income disparity is behind the low consumption," figures Yifu Lin, a professor and director of the China Center for Economic Research at Beijing University (see BusinessWeek.com, 4/30/07, "China's Cautious Consumers").

Consider, too, that some of the biggest exporters out of China are actually foreign companies from Taiwan, Japan, the U.S., and Europe. There are some 600,000 overseas-funded companies operating in China. They import goods, assemble them on the mainland with cheap labor, slap on the "Made in China" label, and then ship mobile phones, desktop computers, and sedans to the rest of the world. These products get counted as Chinese exports but are really pieced together with components from around the world.

China can't really order Honda (HMC) or Nokia (NOK) to export less out of China. And the kind of trade sanctions being contemplated by trade hawks in the U.S. would ultimately hurt foreign corporate interests in China, too. "This is a problem of economic globalization," not just Chinese policies, reckons Yongtu Long, a former Chinese trade negotiator and secretary general of the Boao Forum.

What's the way out of all of this?

Short term, China needs to boost private consumption by shifting tax breaks away from the cash-rich corporate sector and toward Chinese families. A stronger social safety net—more affordable health care and education and secure pensions—would give them more confidence in their futures and get them spending more.

Beijing also needs to crack down on banks and local governments that keep lending and spending, despite the risks to the entire country if the economy overheats. Phased-in liberalization of the yuan, interest rates, and capital flows is another needed reform. This would allow market forces to send price signals to policymakers and executives alike about when to slow down and speed up.

Yet this is going to take many years, if not a decade, to realize. Chinese authorities, naturally enough, are far more concerned about the living standards of their own people than those of the comfortable middle class in the U.S. They probably will do just enough to avert trade sanctions from the U.S. It would take a dramatic currency shift to really improve the trade balance with the U.S.—but that would risk destroying China's fragile social balance. From China's perspective, "it's about hundreds of millions of rural workers," says Chinese economist Fan.

Bremner is Asia Regional Editor for BusinessWeek in Hong Kong.

Monday, January 15, 2007

% of Population Under 25

(Report from ICICI Securities – Info Edge (India), December 22, 2006)

India has the potential to become global manpower supplier
India’s young population, in an environment where most developed countries are
aging fast, offers a big opportunity for India to become the global supplier of skilled manpower to the developed world. Table 7 shows the percentage of total population less than 25 years (as of ’04) for developed and developing countries.
Table 7: India – Youngest country with scale
Country % of population below 25 years of age








Germany26
Japan27
Brazil29
Indonesia30
US30
China42
India53


Source: ILO
Population alone is not an advantageous factor. However, given that India produces the largest number of graduates and engineers in the world, we believe the country has the potential to become the service hub of the world.

Sunday, January 14, 2007

WSJ: China to Continue Birth-Rate Control

China to Continue Birth-Rate Control
By ANDREW BATSON, January 13, 2007

BEIJING -- Concluding a three-year review of its controversial population policies, China says it has no choice but to continue controlling birth rates despite increasing population imbalances.

The government acknowledged that its one-child policy will produce a surge in the number of single men and elderly -- trends with worrisome implications for social stability and government finances. But the nation can't support a population much larger than the current 1.3 billion, according to the review.

State controls on childbearing have "eased the pressure of population growth on the economy, society, resources and the environment," the National Population and Family Planning Commission said in a report published this past week, although that "relationship is still strained, and is bringing many serious challenges."

Photobucket - Video and Image HostingThe government wants to keep the birth rate low, at the current average of 1.8 children per woman. The report says this will ensure the population will rise only slowly in coming years and peak at 1.5 billion people after 2033 -- and then start declining.
China's family-planning policies were launched in 1973, in response to a wave of births that threatened to send population growth out of control. Now, the government officially "encourages late marriage and childbearing and advocates one child per couple."

The restriction on births is applied most strictly on women living in cities, and less so elsewhere. But local governments have leeway in implementing policy, which has sometimes led to abuses when they try to meet their family-planning targets.
The commission's report called for greater "innovation" in family planning and for the creation of a social-security system for the elderly in rural areas, so that couples don't feel they must have children to provide for them.

The population controls have brought their own set of unintended problems. Because the one-child policy effectively means that each generation will be smaller than the one preceding it, the elderly will have to be supported by a shrinking number of younger people. That is becoming a challenge for a country trying to expand a rudimentary social-welfare system.

Another consequence has been the creation of a gender imbalance. If a Chinese couple can have only one child, they usually prefer to have a boy. As a result, births have become heavily skewed to boys. In 2005, there were 118.6 boys born for every 100 girls.

That means that by 2020, there will 30 million more men than women in the 20-to-45-year age group, the report says, which is likely to bring greater "social disorder." This gender imbalance may push increasing numbers of Chinese men to move to other countries in search of partners.

Friday, December 22, 2006

Thursday, December 21, 2006

美国在中国网络上撤退和缩减

Yahoo-Alibaba(Aug 2005)

Yahoo to:
  1. Purchase 201mm ordinary shares of Alibaba for $250mm cash
  2. Purchase Softbank share of Taobao for $360mm cash and transfer to Alibaba (Alibaba to own 100% of Taobao)
  3. Contribute Yahoo China business and ops to Alibaba
  4. Purchase additional shares of Alibaba in secondary offering for $390mm cash. Will own 40% of Alibaba (fully-diluted)


Click here for SEC doc.

Ebay-Tom (Dec 2006)

  • New site to be launched (Tom Eachnet). Ebay Eachnet customers will be offered option to transition to new site.
  • JV formed with ownership 51% Tom Online, 49% Ebay, incorporated in British Virgin Islands with limited liability.
  • 6 BOD seats, 3 from Ebay and 3 from Tom.


Tom to provide:
  1. $20mm shareholders' loan to JV
  2. Leadership and management services
  3. Marketing to Tom user base (drive traffic to JV site)

Ebay to contribute/license
  1. trademark and domain names to venture
  2. $40mm initial funding to JV
  3. transfer all equity in EENIS* to member of JV


If initial funds consumed, additional funding to be made in form of shareholders' loans from Ebay and Tom (equal proportions) up to $10mm
New JV platform to be launched called Tom Eachnet

On the "event of default" certain put and call options based on third-party equity valuatio of JV would be invoked

*EENIS is a wholly owned foreign enterprise incorporated in the PRC owned by Ebay. 2005 loss was RMB68mm (~$8.5mm), and net assets were RMB144mm (~$18mm).

Click here for SEC doc.

Sunday, December 17, 2006

Silly Pipe

I like Keats's comments on his poem Endymion, after it had been thrashed by the critics. It's possibly Keats's best known poem (first line "A thing of beauty is a joy forever"). He wrote to his publisher in October 1818:
In Endymion, I leaped headlong into the Sea, and thereby have become better acquainted with the Soundings, the quicksands, & the rocks, than if I had stayed upon the green shore, and piped a silly pipe, and took tea & comfortable advice. -- I was never afraid of failure; for I would sooner fail than not be among the greatest.

Economist Oct 12, 2006: Now we are 300,000,000

Bullets:

Soundbite: “Problems of growth are easier than the problems of decline”

  • US=2.1 kids/HH, steady-state rate. Growth due almost entirely to immigration.
  • Most other dev’d countries have lower kids/HH.
  • Reason for difference: 1) US more religious (more hope=more kids), 2) US child-rearing more evenly shared bt husband and wife vs patriarchal countries, and 3) US lower incremental cost of land (more new families can move out to exurbs, compared to JP)
  • Case study Houston: People who live in areas actually pay for infrastructure, rather than public subsidy of exurbs and suburbs. Greater diversity (prob due to immigration driving growth) positive for more globalized local economy




    America's rising population will solve more problems than it creates

    THE Lakewood Church in Houston has a space, complete with cartoon murals, for parents to leave their children while they attend a service. There is room for 5,000 children. Lakewood's size may be unusual—it occupies a refurbished basketball stadium, and Pastor Joel Osteen's televised sermons are watched by 7m people each week—but its focus on the family is not. “I love children because they are so pure,” says Victoria Osteen, Mr Osteen's wife and co-pastor. “For myself, [having children] has been an awesome, wonderful, full life.”

    When Europeans hear the words “America”, “religion” and “family values”, they think of brimstone preachers raging against unconventional domestic arrangements. They often forget the more positive role American churches play in nurturing conventional families. Lakewood's ministries, for example, teach married couples how to communicate better and give them practical advice on how to bring up children and put the family finances in order. In such a mobile society people often have nowhere else to turn for friendly counsel. Hillary Clinton once said that “it takes a village to raise a child.” Often in America “the church is the village,” says Stephen Klineberg, a sociologist at Rice University in Houston.

    Photobucket - Video and Image HostingOn or around October 17th, according to the Census Bureau's population clock, the number of people in the country will hit 300m, up from 200m in 1967. By as early as 2043, the bureau says, there will be 400m Americans. Such robust growth is unique among rich countries. As America adds 100m people over the next four decades, Japan and the EU are expected to lose almost 15m.

    These are only projections, of course. Lifespans will no doubt continue to stretch and immigration rules may change. What is striking, though, is the gulf between the fertility rate in the United States and other rich countries. American women today can expect to have an average of 2.1 children. That is the number needed to keep a population stable, so observers sometimes take it as a given and say that America's population growth is entirely due to immigration. This obscures the point: for every big advanced country besides America and Israel, the alternative to “replacement rate” fertility is a baby bust.

    The fertility rate in the EU is 1.47—well below replacement. By 2010, deaths there are expected to start outnumbering births, so from that point immigration will account for more than all its growth. And that average hides countries that have seen an astonishing collapse in the willingness of their citizens to breed. The fertility rate in Italy and Spain is 1.28, which, without immigration, would cause the number of Spaniards and Italians to halve in 42 years.




    Falling birth rates are linked to prosperity
    People in very poor countries tend to have lots of babies because they expect some of them to die in infancy, and because they need help in the fields and someone to care for them in their old age. The fertility rate in Niger and Mali, for example, is over seven children per woman.

    As countries grow richer and women get educated, they have fewer children and invest more in each one. Whereas peasants in Mali cannot afford not to have kids, many Westerners fret that they cannot afford to have them. University is expensive, and if Mum (or Mom) decides to stay home, the household must forgo the salary she used to earn. Add to this the sudden halt to a life of carefree first-world hedonism, and it is no wonder that birth rates have plummeted in all rich countries.

    But much less so in America. Why should this be? Religion plays a role, argues Mr Klineberg. Americans are more devout than Europeans, if church attendance is any guide, and their faith colours their worldview. Don Iloff, a spokesman for Lakewood Church (and Victoria Osteen's brother), agrees. Faith begets hope, he says, and if you have hope for the future, you are more likely to want to bring children into the world.

    Polls certainly suggest that Americans are more optimistic than people in most other countries. Philip Morgan, a sociologist at Duke University, and Miles Taylor, a population expert at the University of North Carolina, cite several other possible factors. Birth rates are lower in more patriarchal rich countries, such as Japan and Italy, than in places where the sexes are more equal, such as America and Scandinavia. Perhaps the knowledge that Dad will help with the housework makes women more willing to have children.

    America's wide open spaces also make child-rearing more attractive. Bringing up a large family in a tiny Japanese apartment is a struggle, even if you can fold away your bed during the day. The world's lowest fertility rates are in super-crowded Hong Kong (0.95), Macau (1.02) and Singapore (1.06). In America the average family-home has doubled in size in the past half-century, from 1,000 square feet (93 square metres) in 1950 to 2,100 square feet in 2001.

    America's coastal areas are fairly densely settled, but families who cannot afford a spacious home with a garden in Connecticut or California can move somewhere cheaper. They often do, one reason why the mean centre of America's population—ie, the point at which an imaginary, flat United States would balance if only the people on it weighed anything—keeps moving south and west. In 1800 it was still near the eastern seaboard, in Maryland. By 2000 it was in Phelps County, Missouri, and heading for Oklahoma.

    Houston, we have lift-off
    Can America cope with a relentlessly expanding population? A look at Houston suggests it can. The city is one of America's fastest-growing. The population of Harris County, which includes Houston, grew by 21% in the 1990s, to 3.4m. The surrounding counties are booming, too. Since Houston has no zoning laws, developers can build wherever they think there will be demand. Rather than waiting for the city to extend sewers and power lines to outlying areas, they can issue bonds to pay for such services themselves, and pass the cost on to the people who buy the houses they build.

    At the Woodlands, a 28,000-acre (11,300 hectares) planned community north of Houston, you can buy a three-bedroom family home on a quiet wooded street for $130,000. By comparison, the median house price in San Francisco is over $700,000. The Woodlands has good schools, 145 miles (235km) of hiking trails, golf courses designed by the three greatest retired golfers in the world, and a cluster of oil and high-tech firms.

    It is also safe. “Police salaries are paid by the community, not the county, so we have more of them,” says Roger Galatas, who used to run the Woodlands operating company. The community makes its own rules. Restrictive covenants prevent anyone from uprooting too many trees, or building eyesores. Several houses share each mailbox, so neighbours chat when they pick up the mail.

    Houston was 70% white in 1960, but is now a mix: 57% white (of which 42% are Hispanic), 24% black and 6% Asian. “Where you grew up is irrelevant in Houston,” says Tim Cisneros, a local architect whose mother came from Mexico. “Everyone is so busy making money they don't have time to worry about race.” Polls suggest that the picture is not quite so rosy—79% of blacks think blacks are “often” discriminated against in Houston. But 69% of Houstonians think the city's ethnic diversity will become a source of strength. It is easier to deal with a globalising world if your citizens have roots in many countries.

    America's future could look something like Houston's present, argues Joel Kotkin, a writer on demography. As the nation's population surges, it will become more ethnically mixed and especially more Hispanic. Houston suggests that that will be just fine. Rapid growth may cause environmental problems, but it will greatly slow the pace at which America ages. Whereas in the EU by 2050 there will be fewer than two adults of working age for every person over 65, the proportion in America will be less scary, at almost three to one. The problems of growth, says Mr Klineberg, are easier to deal with than the problems of decline.

    Can the world cope with a relentlessly expanding America? Many non-Americans will shudder at the prospect, but which alternative superpower would they prefer? China? If demography is destiny, they will not have to find out what a Chinese hyperpower looks like: the fertility rate in China is only 1.7, and there are almost no immigrants.
  • Thursday, October 12, 2006

    Balmer's thoughts on competitors

    Guys who can touch us in multiple places probably matter more than guys who can touch us in any one place. And actually we don't really have our big competition from any one company. Any one company, we know how to compete with. It's alternate business models that we will have to embrace or compete well with. You give me any enterprise software company, O.K., and I'll say c'mon. We know how to go do that. We do do that. And we're really pretty good at it. We haven't gotten any worse at it. Boom. Boom. Boom. We know how to keep coming.

    Open source is not a new technology area. It was a new business model. In the last three or four years, we have competed very well by extending our value. Open source never goes away as a business model or competitor. We have learned how to compete with open source, and we will compete with it for the rest of time. But competing with open source will have to be something that's burned bright on the foreheads of our senior people.

    The second big competitive force is advertising as a business model. Typically, people just want to reduce that to Google, and if you want to do that, you can. But it's do we embrace advertising fully enough as a business model? Because at the end of the day, anybody who comes at you with a cheaper-to-the-customer proposition, you got to worry about. And advertising looks cheaper to a consumer than something you pay for.

    In the case of open source, we couldn't adopt the business model. We adopted a competitive approach that so far has worked very well. In the advertising case, we can embrace that model. We don't have to sit here and say it's that bad.

    A third model I could sit here and write down on this list is that there are cases where software gets monetized through hardware. That's what an iPod is. iPod is a software thing. You just happen to collect the money on the hardware. You could say in China and India, it's unclear whether classic software will get paid for as much as advertising, hardware, subscriptions, etc.

    So our ability to embrace and benefit from or compete with new business models—and I would say ad-funded and open source, more than this hardware thing—is more the way to categorize the key competitive dynamic for us.

    Does Zune fit into the hardware piece of this?
    Sure it does. Because the value of Zune, if we're successful, is all in the software. It's in community [the ability to share music and pictures with other Zune users]. I want to squirt you a picture of my kids. You want to squirt me back a video of your vacation. That's a software experience. The truth is, though, if it makes money, it will be built into the gross margin on the hardware. We'll figure out how to make money on the community perhaps later though advertising or other means.

    How much money will you lose per Zune?
    None. Apple (AAPL) put the hammer down there, dropped the price down to $249. If they had been $299, it would have been nicer. They have the advantage of scale. So we're at $249, too. We don't make a lot of money, not to start out.

    Thursday, August 17, 2006

    A little online levity

    I'm cleaning out the inbox, and Kari forwarded these to me way back. They're worth keeping in the blog rather than the inbox.

    Will Ferrel as Dubya: R&R in Crawford

    Mahna Mahna

    Office Space: Gary Cole Lumbergh Sound Board

    Homer Simpson

    Lazy Sunday

    Friday, July 14, 2006

    Roe-Willettes in SEA

    Thursday morning at Pike Place Market

    Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

    Exploring in Discovery Park
    Found squishy animals called "rough piddocks".

    Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

    Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

    Bored in traffic on way home from Ballard Locks



    At 232 Belmont resting

    Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

    Windy dinner at Ray's

    Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

    Why does Vancouver seem bigger than Seattle??!

    I am beginning to collect some statistics about Seattle and Vancouver, BC (of course, not WA) to figure out why one seems so great to live in and one seems so ... not so great to live in. My first piece of data is population. After slogging around for 10 minutes in the government websites, I went to Wikipedia and found the same information but better organized and all in one place.

    Seattle pop: 578K
    Seattle land area: 217 sqkm (excludes 152 sqkm of water)
    Seattle density: 2,663 people/sqkm

    Greater Seattle pop: 3.8MM
    Greater Seattle area: 21,202 sqkm
    Greater Seattle density: 179 people/sqkm

    Vancouver pop: 545K
    Vancouver area: 114 sqkm
    Vancouver density: 4,780 people/sqkm

    Greater Vancouver pop: 2.0MM
    Greater Vancouver area: 2,879 sqkm
    Greater Vancouver density: 694 people/sqkm

    So Seattle city is half as dense as Vancouver city, while Greater Vancouver is 3-4x denser than Greater Seattle . This supports my unscientific observation that Seattle has more sprawl than Vancouver.

    Monday, July 10, 2006

    Richmond 夜市

    我们在Richmond区离温哥华二十分钟玩一玩。

    Video of us wandering


    我们吃了

    蔬菜饼
    Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

    烧鱼章
    Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting
    Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

    秘制香辣鱼蛋
    Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

    豆花
    Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

    红豆pastries
    Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

    芋头西米露
    Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

    Oyster pancakes
    Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

    日式海鲜烧饼
    Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

    臭豆腐
    Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

    Wednesday, June 21, 2006

    DVD rental data from Rentrak

    Click here to see article.

    Rev-Share Still Lives
    Author: KURT INDVIK (HomeMediaRetailing.com)
    Sept 16, 2005

    The time for sharing is hardly history. Revenue-sharing may have flourished in the heyday of the high-priced rental cassette. But even though the business has shifted to low-priced DVDs, the concept of suppliers getting a percentage of rental proceeds in return for cheaper up-front costs hasn't faded away completely. Studio involvement is mixed — and evolving.

    The major rental chains, including recent convert Movie Gallery, still aggressively use direct rev-share deals with the studios to manage cash flow and inventory.

    Smaller retailers, on the other hand, are a lot more selective in their use of revenue-sharing because their cost of goods has plummeted from around $65 for a rental-priced cassette to around $17 for a new DVD. [nb: This is for new releases, rather than back catalog]

    On average, rentailers involved in revenue-sharing acquire anywhere from 40 percent to 60 percent of their rental inventories through the practice, according to industry sources. [nb: NFLX reports 30/70 front/back, vs 70/30 for BB]

    "If you are in a cash crunch, as Blockbuster apparently is, then [revenue-sharing] becomes more important," said analyst Dennis McAlpine, of McAlpine & Associates.

    He estimates Blockbuster has upped revenue-sharing to about 70 percent in the latest quarter.

    "At any one time, we may have about 70 percent of product coming into our stores through revenue-sharing agreements," Blockbuster spokesman Randy Hargrove confirmed. "We continue to believe revenue-share and copy-depth programs are useful for providing the movies that customers want and maximizing revenue on a title by title basis for both Blockbuster and the movie studios."

    Movie Gallery, McAlpine said, revenue-shares about 50 percent of its rental inventory, although the recent merger with Hollywood Entertainment Corp. makes estimates problematic. Movie Gallery did not respond to requests for comment.

    Netflix, the online rental giant, brings in about 60 percent of its new releases through revenue-sharing, said chief content officer Ted Sarandos. "Revenue-sharing is a way to maximize customer satisfaction in a margin-neutral way," he said. "Direct wholesale purchasing of rental units puts the rentailer in the position to manage margins by regulating access to what a customer wants and when they get it." [nb: if, as they report, 30% of their catalog is front catalog, and none of the back catalog is rev share, then around 18% of their overall catalog is rev share]

    Marty Graham, COO of Rentrak's PPT division, said with consumers having more entertainment options than ever, video stores can't afford to run out of hot titles. Revenue-sharing, he said, allows them to pump up their inventories without investing too much cash in advance.

    "The majority of studios offer product on output deals, so they're taking in more, but in exchange the retailer is getting more attractive terms," Graham said. "Revenue-sharing is the largest piece of our business today, and we don't see that changing any time soon."

    Rentrak also offers programs for independent suppliers, aimed at smaller retailers who might balk at spending even $17 on a relatively (or completely) unknown film.

    Industry analyst Tom Adams of Adams Media Research said the low price of DVD has diminished the rentailer's need for revenue-sharing.

    Many independent rentailers are reluctant to take on rev-sharing deals, largely because of restrictions in selling previously viewed titles. The average is 30 days, and with the short legs of new hits, that's simply too long, rentailers say.

    "We recommended a year ago to our members that if they were doing revenue-sharing to get out," said Ted Engen, president of the Video Buyers Group (VBG), which reports about 1,800 storefronts in its membership. "When your cost is under $20 for a DVD, there isn't any reason to take on a partner." In a recent VBG poll of members, 68 percent said they typically began selling off rental titles within 30 days of street date.

    "Under revenue-sharing, you lose the flexibility to start selling off those titles when you need to," Engen said.

    Rentrak's Graham doesn't see studios budging much on selloff restrictions, since they don't want to risk cannibalizing their new sellthrough.

    On the studio side, sources say three of the six majors — Buena Vista Home Entertainment, Universal Studios Home Entertainment and 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment — have opted not to enter into any long-term deals with the chains.

    All the major studios have PPT deals with Rentrak, with variations. Most offer output deals for DVD and videocassettes, with Buena Vista's and Universal's PPT involvement limited to VHS. Upfront fees ranging from nothing to $1.50 (Universal and Buena Vista charge $3.75 and $6.75 for VHS). On average, retailers then keep 60 percent of the rental proceeds, and all but $1.25 to $3.80 of the selloff take.

    Last March, Warner Home Video tweaked its revenue-sharing program to include a back-end minimum guarantee back to the studio.

    Rentrak also has deals with a variety of smaller suppliers, including Wellspring, Ardustry and MTI. PPT programs also are available for some video games, with upfront fees averaging $8.50 to $12.50 and participating retailers getting 54 percent of the rental proceeds.

    Friday, June 16, 2006

    Tuesday, June 13, 2006

    DVD stats

    From NYTimes "As DVD Sales Slow, Hollywood Hunts for a New Cash Cow" 6/13/2006:
    • For movies that gross more than $100 million at the box office, 84 percent of DVD sales are in the first six weeks after their release
    • Comcast, the country's largest cable company, lets its subscribers view 7,500 free movies and programs, and since 2004, they have watched them two billion times.
    • Studios earn $17.26 for each DVD they sell, but only $2.37 for movies on demand and $2.25 per DVD rented, according to Tom Adams, the president of Adams Media Research. [NB-I think $17.26 is for front-catalog discs]



    DVD stats nyt, originally uploaded by ssaito.

    Monday, June 12, 2006

    Excerpts from Kevin Kelly's "Scan This Book!" (NYTimes)

    "From the days of Sumerian clay tablets till now, humans have 'published' at least 32 million books, 750 million articles and essays, 25 million songs, 500 million images, 500,000 movies, 3 million videos, TV shows and short films and 100 billion public Web pages."

    "Nearly 100 percent of all contemporary recorded music has already been digitized, much of it by fans. About one-tenth of the 500,000 or so movies listed on the Internet Movie Database are now digitized on DVD. But because of copyright issues and the physical fact of the need to turn pages, the digitization of books has proceeded at a relative crawl. At most, one book in 20 has moved from analog to digital."

    "The 15 percent of the world's 32 million cataloged books that are in the public domain are freely available for anyone to borrow, imitate, publish or copy wholesale. Almost the entire current scanning effort by American libraries is aimed at this 15 percent. The Million Book Project mines this small sliver of the pie, as does Google. Because they are in the commons, no law hinders this 15 percent from being scanned and added to the universal library.
    The approximately 10 percent of all books actively in print will also be scanned before long. Amazon carries at least four million books, which includes multiple editions of the same title. "

    Monday, February 27, 2006

    Rare snow loon


    Rare snow loon, originally uploaded by ssaito.

    Saturday, February 11, 2006

    Poetry

    Poetry

    I didn't know what to say,
    my mouth could not speak
    my eyes could not see.

    And something ignited in my soul,
    fever or unremembered wings?
    And I went my own way deciphering
    that burning fire.

    And I wrote the first bare line
    pure foolishness, pure wisdom
    bare, without substance
    pure foolishness, pure wisdom
    of one who knows nothing.

    And suddenly,
    I saw the heavens unfastened and open!

    -Pablo Neruda

    Love After Love

    The time will come
    when, with elation
    you will greet yourself arriving
    at your own door, in your own mirror
    and each will smile at the other's welcome,

    and say, sit here. Eat.
    You will love again the stranger who was your self.
    Give wine. Give bread. Give back your heart
    to itself, to the stranger who has loved you

    all your life, whom you ignored
    for another, who knows you by heart.
    Take down the love letters from the bookshelf,

    the photographs, the desperate notes,
    peel your own image from the mirror.
    Sit. Feast on your life.

    - Derek Walcott
     
    * ----------------------------------------------- * Apture script * ----------------------------------------------- */