Reason to believe the next global economic crisis will start in the East and not the West
Posted on 19 May 2013
Mirror, mirror on the wall where are the biggest bubbles of all? That is the question to ask when looking for where the next global economic crisis is most likely to erupt. It’s been five long years since the last crisis and we are about due for another. The long gap between the Asian financial crisis of the late 90s and the subprime debacle was a bit of an anomaly.
Sure the Fed appears to have saved the US from economic collapse and the death of the eurozone was greatly exaggerated. But what about the bubbles inflating in Asia today and the nationalistic governments unable to call on the moderate federalism of the US or even the eurozone to solve these problems?
Japan’s money printing
Japan is inflating its money supply three times faster than the Fed’s QE program. It is weakening the yen as intended and exporting deflation to its customers, making them less competitive. The sugar-rush effect is reflected in a booming Japanese stock market as profits from abroad will also now be higher in yen.
However, devaluation in a highly indebted economy is fraught with danger. Why hold a currency like the yen that pays almost zero interest rates if it collapsing in value? Besides the increased profits are coming to companies whose product lines are out-dated and at the cost of a ballooning money supply and inflation down the pike.
It’s also very bad news for Japan’s main trading partner China, though the response by nationalistic Chinese politicians has been to whip up public fervor over some disputed and uninhabited islands. That put a dent in Japanese car sales last year.
Of course, the situation is much worse on the Korean peninsula where the lunatics are running the assylum in the North. These guys have their triggers on nuclear weapons and can only stay in power by taking an increasingly aggressive stance.
Chinese banking crisis?
Then again the biggest threat to Asia could well turn out to be the Chinese banking system. Hedge fund manager Carson Block whose Muddy Waters Research has uncovered a series of huge financial scandals in China in recent years is now warning that the risks within China’s banking system are more severe than those in Western financial institutions before the crisis.
He told the Sunday Telegraph: ‘Our view is that China is a massive asset bubble. This puts resource-based emerging market economies and Australia, Canada and New Zealand at direct risk. A China unwind will have significant knock-on effects in other developed markets too, likely implicating liquidity and asset prices. The severity of the effects in the rest of the developed world of course partly depend on the timing of the unwind.’
Timing is the tough call, all the same. Hedge fund billionaire Jim Chanos has been shorting China for a couple of years. Still if you want to spot the next global financial crisis perhaps you should be looking East and not West.
Statistics: Posted by yoda — Sun May 19, 2013 12:27 am
View full post on opinions.caduceusx.com
The one reason why gold’s sell-off doesn’t matter…
by SIMON BLACK on APRIL 15, 2013
April 15, 2013
Somewhere, Paul Krugman is smiling.
The Nobel Prize winning economist, whose brilliant ideas include:
spending your way out of recession
borrowing your way out of debt
conjuring unprecedented amounts of currency out of thin air without consequence
staging a false flag alien invasion of planet Earth
is perhaps most famous in certain circles for calling gold a “barbarous relic“. He also recently suggested that Europe’s failing euro monetary union is the modern day equivalent of the gold standard. I’m told he was completely sober when he said this.
Of course, Krugman is smiling right now because he thinks that he’s been proven right. Gold’s massive sell-off over the last few days has shaved over $200 from the metal’s nominal price… a steep move any way you look at it.
And as Krugman has been saying, ‘gold is not a safe investment.’ But that’s because he fails to understand the fundamental premise of gold.
Gold is, in fact, a terrible investment. It’s an even worse speculation. But let’s look at what those actually mean–
When you ‘invest’, you risk a portion of your savings, typically for several years, hoping for a nominal gain when denominated in paper currency. You buy for $1,000 and you sell for $2,000.
‘Speculating‘ involves taking much higher risk, often for shorter periods of time with a smaller percentage of your portfolio, hoping for outsized nominal gains when denominated in paper currency. You buy for $100 and you sell for $2,000. But you could easily lose everything.
Well, gold makes for a really bad speculation. Like almost any real asset, it can’t really go to zero. It’s physical. It’s real. It’s always going to be worth something. And for physical gold, there’s very little leverage available.
Gold makes for a bad investment too… because in either case, the price of gold tends to rise and fall over the long-term with inflation and inflation expectations. If it’s leading (or keeping pace with) inflation, then you can’t expect much of an inflation-adjusted return.
But these reasons for buying gold miss the point.
Gold is a proxy against the financial system. It’s a way to withdraw savings from a corrupt fiat currency and hold something that cannot be conjured out of thin air by a tiny banking elite. We don’t buy gold hoping to sell it down the road for even more paper currency.
This is the same reason why I’m buying so much agricultural property in South America… it’s controlled by nature, not by men. Plus, I get paid huge dividends by way of organic fruit.
If you look at the fundamentals briefly, gold had a major sell-off this morning in part because the Chinese reported poor economic data. In addition there was Friday’s pitiful consumer numbers in the Land of the Free.
- poor economic data still abounding from the US to China…
- massive, debilitating debt still accumulating…
- Europe still completely bust..
- Japan promising unprecedented money printing in an era already marked by unprecedented money printing…
… what will the general trend be? Will central bankers around the world continue printing money?
It certainly seems likely. If they stop printing, interest rates surge… and nearly every government in the developed word will go bankrupt. That’s a big incentive to bankers.
With this in mind, while the gold correction probably has quite some time to play out, the long-term trend is obvious.
http://www.sovereignman.com/finance/the … ter-11656/
Statistics: Posted by yoda — Mon Apr 15, 2013 12:47 pm
View full post on opinions.caduceusx.com
One good reason not to trust Fox News
Posted: Saturday, February 23, 2013 7:00 pm | Updated: 10:40 pm, Sat Feb 23, 2013.
FRANK MIELE/Daily Inter Lake | 3 comments
What’s good for the goose is good for the gander, and the same thing goes for Al Gore and Rupert Murdoch, right?
I wrote a column recently excoriating Al Gore for selling his Current TV cable channel to Al Jazeera, the Arabic news broadcast company based in Qatar. It isn’t just that Al Jazeera is Arabic, but rather that it is a mouthpiece for the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamist causes.
Turns out that the new Al Jazeera America may not be the only problem, however. An interview with columnist Diana West on the website www.radicalislam.org has pointed to Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News as another unlikely point of origin for Islamic propaganda in the United States.
Before we consider the particulars, let’s look at the larger picture.
Does American freedom of the press mean that our country is obligated to provide a forum for those who would destroy us? That is the central philosophical question on which hinges our cultural survival — for if we cannot ban anti-American propaganda within our own borders, then the Constitution is indeed a suicide pact, as a Supreme Court justice once famously assured us it wasn’t.
Yes, I know we are a diverse society, and we welcome all opinions, but nonetheless it is insane to allow foreign agents to promote anti-American viewpoints from within our very own shores. That’s why I wrote a column last month that blasted Gore for selling his company to Al Jazeera and its Muslim Brotherhood backers.
But this isn’t just a problem created by liberal Democrats. It is a social problem, and it reaches so deep that it avoids any partisan label. There was plenty of evidence of American subservience to Islamic sensitivities during the Bush administration. President Bush was famous for calling Islam a “religion of peace” at the same time when its clerics were calling for his head on a platter.
More recently, a perfect example is the failure of the Army to declare the attack at Fort Hood either a military attack or terrorism. Nope, just a plain old psycho who coincidentally happened to be a Muslim in communication with Islamic terror leader Anwar al-Awlaki.
And one more example: The U.S. military has responded to attacks on our soldiers by their Afghan trainees not by halting the training programs, but by implementing “Islamic sensitivity” sessions so that our GIs know why they annoy the Afghans so much.
Which brings us back to Fox News and Rupert Murdoch. I’d been vaguely aware that a minority shareholder in Fox News was Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, but the interview with Diana West showed just how much concern that should cause. Not only does bin Talal own 7 percent of Murdoch’s News Corp, but Murdoch also owns 19 percent of Rotana, which is bin Talal’s Arabic media group. These two are intimately involved in each other’s profit motives, and West makes a convincing case that Fox News has avoided controversial topics involving Islam ever since bin Talal made his first investment in News Corp in 2005.
Indeed, bin Talal bragged publicly that year about complaining to Murdoch that Fox News was characterizing street violence in Paris as “Muslim riots.” A short while later, Fox joined the rest of the mainstream media in referring to the “civil riots” in Paris without reference to the Islamic origin of the unrest.
It appears that Alwaleed’s investment in Fox News, as well as Al Jazeera’s purchase of Current TV, both represent the culmination of a plan which Alwaleed himself expressed in a 2002 interview with his own Arab News:
“Arab countries can influence U.S. decision making “if they unite through economic interests, not political… We have to be logical and understand that the U.S. administration is subject to U.S. public opinion. … And to bring the decision-maker on your side, you not only have to be active in the U.S. Congress or the administration, but also inside U.S. society.”
That is an absolutely transparent confession of what is going on, and yet Congress, the news media and the American public just act as though it doesn’t matter. They apparently believe that the United States is invulnerable to any threat — foreign or domestic — and that we really ought to just welcome our Muslim brothers to our shore as part of the great American melting pot that is now so diluted that there is virtually nothing American left about it.
Ask yourself: How exactly does the United States benefit by having the propaganda arm of the Muslim Brotherhood and the worldwide Islamic revolution being welcomed into millions of homes across the country?
I guess there’s nothing like humanizing the face of jihad so that Mr. and Mrs America can start to feel better about submitting to sharia (Islamic law) and dhimmitude (subservience by non-Muslims to their Islamic betters). Not much chance we will be watching programming on the “Real Oppressed Wives of The Casbah” or “My Big Fat Obnoxious Terrorist.” Instead, it will be a steady stream of how reasonable, rational and peaceful everyone is in the Middle East when they are not throwing together a “spontaneous demonstration” outside the U.S. mission in Benghazi, sentencing rape victims to death for provoking men by not wearing a burka, or stoning Christians for… well… for being Christians.
Oh, wait, I remember now. As I have been informed by my liberal betters, there is no reason to fear Islam. It is just right-wing hate speech to point out the historical basis of that fear. It is bug-eyed McCarthyism to suggest that foreign elements might not have America’s best interests at heart (even though history has proven that McCarthy was right about the Soviet Union’s spy network operating throughout the U.S. government in the 1950s).
Muslims, we are told, are not our enemy until they do something to prove they are an enemy. But tell that to journalist Danny Pearl, who was kidnapped in Pakistan in 2001 by Islamic fundamentalists who later cut his head off. Tell it to Nick Berg, a Jewish American businessman who was executed in Iraq by the terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in 2004. Tell it to Eugene Armstrong or Jack Hensley, American contractors who were also decapitated after being captured in Iraq in 2004. These are but the tiniest indicators of the nature of Islam, but like the arrow of a compass aiming infallibly toward the magnetic field at the North Pole, these murders point inexorably toward the gathering force that confronts Western civilization.
But, of course, we need to all try to get along — so the less said about those brutal murders the better. We don’t want to insult our Muslim brothers by making them feel unwelcome. Remember, our self-interest as a free society should always come second if there is the slightest chance that our honesty might offend someone from a more oppressive, less tolerant culture. Otherwise we are being selfish, and that is politically incorrect.
Which is why, I suppose, there is absolutely no way for our country to stop our enemies from taking over our media centers, our digital networks, our manufacturing facilities, probably even our military and our government eventually. We are just too darn polite to ever say anything about how much our institutions and traditions mean to us. We used to fight to the death to preserve our culture, but now we are way TOO cultured to presume that the American way of life is in any way better than any other.
Hey, maybe that anti-American propaganda is working! Just a thought.
Statistics: Posted by yoda — Sun Feb 24, 2013 3:44 am
View full post on opinions.caduceusx.com
You can thank the reckless money printing that the Federal Reserve has been doing for the incredible bull market that we have seen in recent months. When the Federal Reserve does more “quantitative easing”, it is the financial markets that benefit the most. The Dow and the S&P 500 have both hit levels not seen since 2007 this month, and many analysts are projecting that 2013 will be a banner year for stocks. But is a rising stock market really a sign that the overall economy is rapidly improving as many are suggesting? Of course not. Just because the Federal Reserve has inflated another false stock market bubble with a bunch of funny money does not mean that the U.S. economy is in great shape. In fact, the truth is that things just keep getting worse for average Americans. The percentage of working age Americans with a job has fallen from 60.6% to 58.6% while Barack Obama has been president, 40 percent of all American workers are making $20,000 a year or less, median household income has declined for four years in a row, and poverty in the United States is absolutely exploding. So quantitative easing has definitely not made things better for the middle class. But all of the money printing that the Fed has been doing has worked out wonderfully for Wall Street. Profits are soaring at Goldman Sachs and luxury estates in the Hamptons are selling briskly. Unfortunately, this is how things work in America these days. Our “leaders” seem far more concerned with the welfare of Wall Street than they do about the welfare of the American people. When things get rocky, their first priority always seems to be to do whatever it takes to pump up the financial markets.
When QE3 was announced, it was heralded as the grand solution to all of our economic problems. But the truth is that those running things knew exactly what it would do. Quantitative easing always pumps up the financial markets, and that overwhelmingly benefits those that are wealthy. In fact, a while back a CNBC article discussed a very interesting study from the Bank of England which showed a clear correlation between quantitative easing and rising stock prices…
It said that the Bank of England’s policies of quantitative easing – similar to the Fed’s – had benefited mainly the wealthy.
Specifically, it said that its QE program had boosted the value of stocks and bonds by 26 percent, or about $970 billion. It said that about 40 percent of those gains went to the richest 5 percent of British households.
Many said the BOE’s easing added to social anger and unrest. Dhaval Joshi, of BCA Research wrote that “QE cash ends up overwhelmingly in profits, thereby exacerbating already extreme income inequality and the consequent social tensions that arise from it.”
So should we be surprised that stocks are now the highest that they have been in more than 5 years?
Of course not.
And who benefits from this?
The wealthy do. In fact, 82 percent of all individually held stocks are owned by the wealthiest 5 percent of all Americans.
Unfortunately, all of this reckless money printing has a very negative impact on all the rest of us. When the Fed floods the financial system with money, that causes inflation. That means that the cost of living has gone up even though your paycheck may not have.
If you go to the supermarket frequently, you know exactly what I am talking about. The new “sale prices” are what the old “regular prices” used to be. They keep shrinking many of the package sizes in order to try to hide the inflation, but I don’t think many people are fooled. Our food dollars are not stretching nearly as far as they used to, and we can blame the Federal Reserve for that.
For much more on rising prices in America, please see this article: “Somebody Should Start The ‘Stuff Costs Too Much’ Party“.
Sadly, this is what the Federal Reserve does. The system was designed to create inflation. Before the Federal Reserve came into existence, the United States never had an ongoing problem with inflation. But since the Fed was created, the United States has endured constant inflation. In fact, we have come to accept it as “normal”. Just check out the amazing chart in the video posted below…
The chart in that video kind of reminds me of a chart that I shared in a previous article…
Not that I expect the United States to enter a period of hyperinflation in the near future.
Actually, despite all of the reckless money printing that the Fed has been doing, I expect that at some point we are going to see another wave of panic hit the financial markets like we saw back in 2008. The false stock market bubble will burst, major banks will fail and the financial system will implode. It could unfold something like this…
1 – A derivatives panic hits the “too big to fail” banks.
2 – Financial markets all over the globe crash.
3 – The credit markets freeze up.
4 – Economic activity in the United States starts to grind to a halt.
5 – Unemployment rises above 20 percent and mortgage defaults soar to unprecedented levels.
6 – Tax revenues fall dramatically and austerity measures are implemented by the federal government, state governments and local governments.
7 – The rest of the globe rapidly loses confidence in the U.S. financial system and begins to dump U.S. debt and U.S. dollars.
I write about derivatives a lot, because they are one of the greatest threats that the global financial system is facing. In fact, right now a derivatives scandal is threatening to take down the oldest bank in the world…
Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena, the world’s oldest bank, was making loans when Michelangelo and Leonardo da Vinci were young men and before Columbus sailed to the New World. The bank survived the Italian War, which saw Siena’s surrender to Spain in 1555, the Napoleonic campaign, the Second World War and assorted bouts of plague and poverty.
But MPS may not survive the twin threats of a gruesomely expensive takeover gone bad and a derivatives scandal that may result in legal action against the bank’s former executives. After five centuries of independence, MPS may have to be nationalized as its losses soar and its value sinks.
So when you hear the word “derivatives” in the news, pay close attention. The bankers have turned our financial system into a giant casino, and at some point the entire house of cards is going to come crashing down.
In response to the coming financial crisis, I believe that our “leaders” will eventually resort to money printing unlike anything we have ever seen before in a desperate attempt to resuscitate the system. When that happens, I believe that we will see the kind of rampant inflation that so many people have been warning about.
So what do you think about all of this?
Do you believe that Federal Reserve money printing is the real reason why the stock market is soaring?
Please feel free to post a comment with your thoughts below…
View full post on The Economic Collapse
Michael F. Cannon
On Tuesday, I testified before the Florida Senate’s Select Committee on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Also testifying was economist Jonathan Gruber. Gruber is an architect of RomneyCare, and one of ObamaCare’s leading proponents. So it was significant when Gruber agreed that there is no reason for states to establish Exchanges this year:
Michael Cannon, director of health policy studies at the Cato Institute, and Jonathan Gruber, an economics professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, agreed on little about the federal health law, [yet] one bit of common ground emerged: Florida should go slow in its approach to a health-insurance exchange.
Gruber thinks that for 2014, states would be better off opting for a type of federal Exchange called a type of “partnership” Exchange, and then maybe running the Exchange themselves after that. I argue there is no reason for states to lift a finger to implement this law, now or ever, and that states would benefit from refusing both to establish an Exchange and to expand their Medicaid programs.
But now that ObamaCare’s leading proponent has acknowledged there is no reason for states to establish Exchanges this year, it will be easier for states who are still wrestling with that question (e.g., Idaho, Utah, North Carolina, Kentucky, Mississippi) to make up their minds.
View full post on Cato @ Liberty
The single best reason to own gold
By Ben Mountifield, September 11th, 2012.
Over the past twenty years the value of paper money has fallen markedly. Since September 1992, for example, the US dollar has lost 80% of its value, the Euro has lost 83% and the British pound 84%, and it’s a process that’s far from over. Investors and those with wealth are becoming increasingly aware of this threat and are opting to hold gold since it offers the ultimate store of value and hedge against inflation.
In response to the global financial crisis, the United States, together with many other G20 nations, dramatically increased their level of debt. They did this in order to pump new money and credit into the global economy and avert a collapse of the financial system and global depression. Their actions prevented, or rather postponed, a collapse; however, they also turned a banking crisis into a sovereign debt crisis.
Now, as part of the solution to their unsustainable levels of debt, and in an attempt to stimulate economic activity, these nations have adopted a deliberate policy of currency debasement.
Today all currencies are fiat, that is, they are money only by government edict, by the law; they have no inherent value and are not backed by reserves. Because of this central bankers around the world can create/ print new money almost without limit, and as with all markets currency prices are set by the law of supply and demand, and as more dollars, euros, pounds and yen are created, their value falls.
In the words of US Federal Reserve chairman, Ben Bernanke, the world’s most influential central banker:
“US dollars have value only to the extent that they are strictly limited in supply. But the US government has a technology, called a printing press (or, today, its electronic equivalent), that allows it to produce as many US dollars as it wishes at essentially no cost. By increasing the number of US dollars in circulation, or even by credibly threatening to do so, the US government can also reduce the value of a dollar in terms of goods and services, which is equivalent to raising the prices in dollars of those goods and services. We conclude that, under a paper money system, a determined government can always generate higher spending and hence positive inflation.”
Herein lies the problem with today’s fiat (paper) money. Because it can be created at the touch of a button, it doesn’t provide a good long-term store of value, which is why more and more wealthy individuals and investors are swapping their dollars, euros, pounds and yen for gold.
Although gold is a commodity and has some uses as an industrial metal, its primary role is as a monetary asset and it has served as money for thousands of years.
“Gold was not selected arbitrarily by governments to be the monetary standard. Gold had developed for many centuries on the free market as the best money; as the commodity providing the most stable and desirable monetary medium.” Murray Rothbard.
Gold is indestructible, is no one else’s liability, and cannot be created at will by central bankers. Gold then, is the ultimate currency.
On 7 September 1992 it took US$343 to purchase one ounce of gold. On 7 September this year, i.e. twenty years later, it takes US$1,728 to buy the same ounce of gold. That means that, relative to gold, the US dollar has lost 80% of its purchasing power.
The table below shows the loss of purchasing power, relative to gold, of the world’s major currencies in just the past twenty years.
Source: Gold prices from World Gold Council
In the words of Winston Churchill, “All previous attempts to base money solely on intangibles such as credit or government edict, or fiat, have ended in inflationary panic and disaster”, and I believe that our current experiment with a faith-based paper money system will be no different.
The United States, Japan, Great Britain, France and many other nations are in dire financial straits and their extreme level of indebtedness virtually ensures continued monetary debasement. And as the value (purchasing power) of paper money declines, so the value of gold will continue to rise.
Ultimately our political leaders and finance chiefs will see sense, and return us to some form of sound money (likely backed by gold), but not until we have experienced a great deal more pain. In the mean time it is gold that provides the best protection from the collapsing value of our paper money, and that is why investors will continue to gravitate towards it.
Statistics: Posted by yoda — Wed Sep 12, 2012 11:11 pm
View full post on opinions.caduceusx.com
The Real Reason to Worry about Oil
By Robert Huebscher
April 17, 2012
The global economy will have trouble with oil prices above $125 per barrel, Hansen said. At the other end, the cost of production establishes a floor for oil prices. That cost ranges from around $80-$90 per barrel for Saudi Arabia to $100 for Russia. Those are the prices necessary to guarantee domestic stability, since both countries use oil revenue for political purposes; the variable cost of production is much lower.
“That’s not a big window,” Hansen said, “and it’s getting tighter, because the floor is going up as the cost of exploration, extraction and production of oil goes up.” When prices go outside of that zone, “someone suffers,” he said.
The investment opportunities
Hansen’s portfolio is built on a long-term expectation of diminished resources and higher oil prices.
He doesn’t own any airlines, which he said cannot overcome the high percentage of fuel costs built into their cost structure. He also thinks long-haul trucking will be chronically troubled by liquid fuel prices, although local trucking will thrive as an extension of the rail network.
Railroads will be the big winner in transportation, and rail infrastructure represents the biggest sector holding in his portfolio. Aside from transporting coal, rail traffic has been increasing in recent years, Hansen said.
“Trucks cannot compete with rail,” he said. “This is a permanent trend.”
Hansen expects natural gas prices to increase, but he doesn’t hold any direct commodity positions in gas or in oil. He dislikes commodity-based funds and ETFs, citing the well-known problems posed by carrying costs with commodities that are in contango. Instead, he said, the biggest winners from increasing natural gas prices will be larger, low-cost power generators.
Almost all of Hansen’s investments are in individual securities. He prefers dividend-paying investments that offer downside protection. His biggest holding is a hydro-electric company.
Over the very long term, Hansen worries that rising energy prices will dramatically change the way we live. Liquid fuels, he said, support 95% of global transportation needs. As fossil fuel supplies stagnate, we will spend far more time closer to home – which, he said, was the way we lived 50 years ago, before air transportation became cheap and readily available. Car ownership in the US could go from 90% of households to 70%, as it is now in Europe.
Neither time nor the supply of financial resources are aligned with the problems the world faces in replacing the 95% of transportation energy needs, Hansen said. “It took over 150 years to build out the liquid fuel infrastructure that exists today and it is going to take decades to replace it,” he said.
When it comes to alternative fuel development, Hansen said if it is in the lab today it is 10 years to large-scale deployment. “Our problem is well inside that envelope.”
Statistics: Posted by DIGGER DAN — Thu Apr 19, 2012 2:15 am
View full post on opinions.caduceusx.com
Wall St. Cheat Sheet
April 6, 2012
By Aabha Rathee
It’s time to wipe that smug look off your face and work on a new strategy, Microsoft (NASDAQ:MSFT). The statistics the company always cited in response to Apple’s (NASDAQ:AAPL) growing cult — statistics that show it to have a complete hold on the workplace — have changed.
Research firm Forrester found that 46 percent of all corporations now issue Apple’s Mac computers to workers instead of PCs. “The use of iPads and iPhones in the workplace is creating increased awareness and consideration of Macs,” Forrester’s principal analyst, Frank Gillett, told Wall Street Journal.
Business sales of Macs grew 50.9 percent at the end of 2011 and accounted for 34.9 percent of the platform’s total year-over-year growth, according to analyst Charlie Wolf, who added that Apple’s efforts to add features to OS X to make it integrate with Microsoft’s network environment were helping considerably. The high cost of the Mac computers was the main reason cited for the Microsoft Windows-based PCs keeping their small majority in the workplace, but the cheaper MacBook Air, which starts at $999, has chipped at that advantage.
At Cisco (NASDAQ:CSCO), for instance, employees can choose between a PC and a Mac, and 25 percent of the company’s 63,870 employees have already opted for the latter.
Microsoft’s contention that user comfort and familiarity will keep giving it the edge in the workplace is also getting shot down. CBS Interactive (NYSE:CBS) chief technology officer Peter Yared replaced employee computers with Macs instead of PCs in October and said the biggest surprise was that people didn’t need any training in using the Apple machines.
Forrester also found that managers and executives were twice as likely to use Apple products than PCs. Apple was also the more preferred option for younger workers and those with higher income levels, and were also the default choice of most Silicon Valley startups.
Microsoft clearly needs a new play.
To contact the reporter on this story: Aabha Rathee at firstname.lastname@example.org
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Damien Hoffman at email@example.com
Statistics: Posted by DIGGER DAN — Thu Apr 05, 2012 6:11 pm
View full post on opinions.caduceusx.com