US Myths & Misperception About Asia's Tech Industry

Myths and misconceptions about Asia's tech industry


Asia has been often referred to as the ‘manufacturing hub' of the world with people saying that China is the world's factory. Over the last few years, Asia has also emerged as the ‘go-to destination' for banks and financial service companies given the resilience that the region showed in the wake of the recent financial crisis. Of late, Asia's technology industry has also become a force to reckon with and a growing number of Asian companies are poised to emerge as global technology leaders, with their own cutting-edge products and services combined with a growing reputation for innovation.

Closer home, Indian companies like Infosys, Wipro, Mindtree, and TCS have become the leaders in the IT services industry. India has almost become synonymous with the word ‘software'. Taiwan has become the hotbed for hardware innovation and is aggressively challenging the western norms of design, scale and innovation. The rise of several new Asian innovators, such as Asus, Lenovo, and Samsung amongst others comes as markets across Asia see explosive demand for computing of all kinds, with far-reaching implications for the technology industry and the region. To understand why these changes are happening, and what they mean, some widely held misconceptions about Asia need to be dispelled.



The first myth is the misperception of Asia as solely a manufacturing location and not a hub of innovation, according to a report in The Hindu Business Line

Fear of Radiation Treated as "Psychiatric Disorder" by Paul Watson

Fear Of Radiation Treated as “Psychiatric Disorder” In Fukushima
 
Despite the fact that the Japanese government and TEPCO were caught red-handed underplaying the severity of the Fukushima nuclear crisis, a study has found that almost a quarter of Fukushima residents hospitalized in the aftermath of last year’s devastating earthquake and tsunami were treated as having a “psychiatric disorder” because of their concerns over radiation. “Some 24.4 percent of people who were hospitalized in Fukushima with psychiatric disorders in the wake of the outbreak of the crisis at the crippled Fukushima No. 1 Nuclear Power Plant had done so possibly because of fears of radiation exposure, according to the results of research conducted by psychiatrists at Fukushima Medical University,” reports the Mainichi Daily News. 


The phenomenon of authorities underplaying the threat posed by radiation or even characterizing concerns over it as a mental illness has become a dominant theme since the catastrophe just over a year ago. This is despite the fact that Japanese authorities were caught over and over again lying to cover-up the true scale of the disaster. After Japanese authorities released thousands on tons of radioactive water into the Pacific Ocean, the EPA announced that it was raising the “safe limit” of exposure to iodine-131 by around 100,000 times. The treatment of Japanese citizens who expressed concerns about radiation sickness only to be told they had a mental illness is similar to how Desert Storm veterans and other U.S. military servicemembers were told that their health problems from exposure to depleted uranium were in fact a result of a psychological disorder.

The situation at the Daiichi nuclear power plant is by no means stable. Only yesterday, TEPCO announced that, “it has found that the cooling water in one of the damaged reactors at Fukushima is only 60 centimeters deep, far lower than previously thought.” Although the Fukushima crisis seldom makes the headlines anymore, the devastation it wrought is unlikely to be quantified for years or even decades.


Research published by the New York Academy of Sciences last year found that the 1986 nuclear disaster at the Chernobyl reactor killed nearly one million people worldwide as a result of cancer-causing nuclear fallout that circulated the globe. Research has shown that some areas of Tokyo have more radiation than existed in the Chernobyl Exclusion Zones. Indeed, recent soil samples taken in Tokyo were found to be so radioactive that they would be considered radioactive waste in the United States and would have to be disposed of by experts at a secure facility.

TERRIBLE NEWS: Dick Cheney Recovering From Heart Transplant

Former Vice President Dick Cheney is recovering after undergoing heart transplant surgery at Falls Church, Va., today, according to a statement released by Cheney’s office.


Cheney has been on the cardiac transplant list for more than 20 months.
“Although the former Vice President and his family do not know the identity of the donor, they will be forever grateful for this lifesaving gift. Former Vice President Cheney is thankful to the teams of doctors and other medical professionals at Inova Fairfax and George Washington University Hospital for their continued outstanding care,” the statement said.


Mitt Romney tweeted, “Ann and I send our thoughts and prayers to Vice President Cheney for a fast and full recovery.”


Cheney has had five heart attacks, the first of which was in 1978 when he was 37 years old, and the fourth in November 2000, after he and former President George W. Bush were elected to the White House.


In 2001, Cheney had a pacemaker installed into his chest, and in September 2009, he underwent elective back surgery to treat lumbar spinal stenosis.
Cheney’s fifth and most recent heart attack was in February 2010.The heart attack and subsequent two-day hospital stay forced the former vice president to miss a breakfast with his former boss, George W. Bush, and hundreds of former White House and campaign staffers. The event, sponsored by the Bush-Cheney Alumni Association, was to be the first time the two met in person since they left office in January 2009.


Instead, Bush dropped by to visit Cheney at his home in Virginia on Feb. 25. Cheney and Bush, both sporting dark suits, shook hands and exchanged grins on the steps of Cheney’s residence in McLean, Va., before turning to wave to the ABC News camera.


“Mr. President, welcome,” began Cheney.
“Lookin’ good,” said Bush again.
“Could be worse,” the often dry-witted Cheney said.
Cheney underwent surgery in July 2010 to have a heart pump, called a Left Ventricular Assist Device [LVAD], implanted to treat his recurring heart disease.


The LVAD is implanted next to the heart to help its main pumping chamber, the left ventricle, pump blood through the body. Such devices are used mainly for short periods, to buy time for potential transplant candidates as they await a donor organ.


Cardiologists said then that in Cheney’s case, the pump was likely a “bridge” that would keep him alive until he could receive a heart transplant. Many cardiac experts said at the time of his surgery that Cheney may be only one step away from a transplant but could find himself on a wait list for “months or years.”


Cheney served as Secretary of Defense under George H.W. Bush.
ABC News’ Karen Travers contributed to this report.

Shanghai: The City of The Future

New York, go to bed - this is the city that never sleeps.

Shanghai’s registered population in 2009 was 19.2 million. By 2030 it will have an estimated 31 million permanent residents. Shanghai has the 3^rd and 10^th tallest buildings in the world and will also have the second tallest in 2014. 12 buildings over 200 meters are under construction/in planning. Also, both a Disneyland and a Universal Studios are under construction in Shanghai.

Although Tokyo, London and New York will retain their positions as important global cities, there is little doubt that in the coming decades, the brightest spotlights will be on Shanghai.

http://www.ilookforwardto.com/2010/09/why-shanghai-is-the-city-of-the-future.html 

Wheelchair Weilding Toddler Nabbed by TSA

Facebook Summons Wall-Street for Pre-IPO Breifing

(Reuters) - Facebook Inc is taking the next step on its IPO journey and has summoned research analysts from Wall Street banks to its Menlo Park headquarters early next week for a pre-roadshow briefing to discuss the finer points of its business and books.

The world's largest social network, which is racing toward what would be Silicon Valley's largest ever initial public offering, will not disclose new information during the meeting with analysts.

Instead, it will outline its strategy and answer questions on how to analyze its operations and help analysts build models on its financials, two sources told Reuters on condition of anonymity because the meeting is not public. Called a "due diligence meeting", such pre-roadshow pow-wows are standard fare for future debutantes.

It is not clear how many analysts have been invited. One source said analysts from five to 10 of the largest banks underwriting Facebook's IPO will likely attend the meeting.

A second source said analysts from most banks helping underwrite the offering have been invited to the meeting, scheduled for Monday. Both sources would not elaborate because of the conditions of the presentation.

Facebook listed 31 banks as underwriters on its IPO in an updated regulatory filing on March 7.

A spokesman for the company declined to comment.

Founded by Mark Zuckerberg in a Harvard dorm room, Facebook is the world's No. 1 online social network with more than 845 million users. The company plans to raise $5 billion in an IPO expected to value the company at $75 billion to $100 billion, in Silicon Valley's largest-ever coming-out party.

Some on Wall Street worry about the company's over-reliance on advertising for 85 percent of its revenue, which totaled $3.7 billion last year. Others will want to know how Facebook intends to fend off increasing competition from the likes of Google Inc, which is cultivating its own social network called Google+.

Also, corporate governance experts have called attention to the fact that Zuckerberg will retain disproportionate control over the company after it goes public.

The company has said it expects to trade under the ticker FB when it makes its debut as a publicly traded company, expected in mid 2012.

DARPA Director Leaves Pentagon, Moves to Google by Noah Shactman

Darpa director Regina Dugan will soon be stepping down from her position atop the Pentagon’s premiere research shop to take a job with Google. Dugan, whose controversial tenure at the agency lasted just under three years, was “offered and accepted at senior executive position” with the internet giant, according to Darpa spokesman Eric Mazzacone. She felt she couldn’t say no to such an “innovative company,” he adds.

Dugan’s emphasis on cybersecurity and next-generation manufacturing earned her strong support from the White House, winning her praise from the President and maintaining the agency’s budget even during a period of relative austerity at the Pentagon. Her push into crowdsourcing and outreach to the hacker community were eye-openers in the often-closed world of military R&D. Dugan also won over some military commanders by diverting some of her research cash from long-term, blue-sky projects to immediate battlefield concerns.

“There is a time and a place for daydreaming. But it is not at Darpa,” she told a congressional panel in March 2011 (.pdf). “Darpa is not the place of dreamlike musings or fantasies, not a place for self-indulging in wishes and hopes. Darpa is a place of doing.” For an agency that spent millions of dollars on shape-shifting robots, Mach 20 missiles, and mind-controlled limbs, it was something of a revolutionary statement.

The shift was only one of the reasons why Dugan was a highly polarizing figure within her agency, and in the larger defense research community. The Pentagon’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) is also actively investigating hundreds of thousands of dollars’ worth of contracts that Darpa gave out to RedX Defense — a bomb-detection firm that Dugan co-founded, and still partially owns. A separate audit is examining a sample of the 2,000 other research contracts Darpa has signed during Dugan’s tenure, to “determine the adequacy of Darpa’s selection, award, and administration of contracts and grants,” according to a military memorandum.

Results of the inspector general’s work haven’t been released. And the work had “no impact” on Dugan’s decision, according to her spokesman, Mazzacone. “The only reason” she decided to leave the Pentagon was the allure of working at Google.

“Dr. Dugan’s departure is not related to an OIG investigation,” Lt. Col. Melinda Morgan, a spokesperson for the Office of the Secretary of Defense, adds in a statement. “The OIG conducts regular audits of Defense agency contracts and ethics programs; as a Defense agency, this includes Darpa.”

“In the spring, questions were raised over whether it was appropriate for Darpa to have funded a proposal submitted by RedXDefense, particularly in light of the Director’s continuing interest in this closely held small business,” Morgan says. “In response, the Department reviewed the processes in place at Darpa to ensure that those processes would ensure integrity and public confidence.” That review — separate from the OIG’s ongoing audits — found that Darpa and its chief’s actions “were consistent with the letter and spirit of relevant laws, regulations, and policies governing conflict of interest.”

Dugan is expected to depart “sometime in the next few weeks,” Mazzacone notes in an email. Darpa deputy director Kaigham “Ken” Gabriel, who has overseen the agency’s day-to-day operations since mid-2009, will serve as the acting Darpa chief. He’ll certainly be a strong contender for the permanent position, as will Lisa Porter, the head of the Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity — Darpa’s counterpart in the intelligence community.

In the meantime, the Pentagon’s leadership are hailing the first female director of its most important research agency. “Regina Dugan’s leadership at Darpa has been extraordinary and she will be missed throughout the Department,” Frank Kendall, Acting Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, says in a statement. “We are all very grateful for the many contributions she has made in advancing the technologies that our war fighters depend on. She leaves for an exciting new opportunity and we wish her every success.”

Mar. 8, 2012 - Deadline Live Show - Assailed by Halliburton Trojan, Blasterworm, etc.

How President Obama Plans to Implement the NDAA's Military Custody Provisions

http://www.forbes.com/sites/gregorymcneal/2012/02/29/how-president-obama-plans-to-implement-the-ndaas-military-custody-provisions/

 

The National Defense Authorization Act’s (NDAA) controversial military custody provisions have been largely nullified through implementing procedures ordered by President Obama.  The President, through Presidential Policy Directive 14 has crafted a broad set of waivers which allow domestic law enforcement agencies to easily abrogate the military custody requirements found in Section 1022.

The National Defense Authorization Act is the Greatest Threat to Civil Liberties Americans Face

 

As a refresher, Section 1022 of the NDAA requires “the Armed Forces of the United States shall hold a person” who is “captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the Authorization for the Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) in military custody pending disposition under the law of war.”  

Person, as described in the statute means one who is “determined to be a member of, or part of, al-Qaeda or an associated force that acts in coordination with or pursuant to the direction of al-Qaeda; and [is determined to] have participated in the course of planning or carrying out an attack or attempted attack against the United States or its coalition partners.”  Under the plain terms of the statute the “requirement to detain a person in military custody…does not extend to citizens of the United States.”

 The President’s waivers are responsive to the needs of law enforcement who according to The Washington Post “had feared that the law on sending alleged al-Qaeda members to military custody would inhibit their ability to get suspects to cooperate.”  Beyond meeting the needs of law enforcement, PDD-14 specifies that the implementing procedures are designed to ensure that a “rigid, inflexible requirement to place suspected terrorists into military custody” does not “undermine the national security interests of the United States, compromising our ability to collect intelligence and incapacitate dangerous individuals.”

Per the terms of the NDAA, the President is authorized to waive the military custody requirement when doing so is “in the national security interests of the United States.”  The President has flipped the NDAA’s requirement that one be held in military custody pending disposition of their status on its head, instead issuing a waiver at the outset for a number of specific situations that he believes trigger the national security interests of the United States.  Specifically, the President determined that it is in the national security interests of the United States to forgo military custody when:

• PDD-14 II. B. 1.- Placing a foreign country’s nationals or residents in military custody will impede counterterrorism cooperation;
• PDD-14 II. B.2.- A foreign government indicates that it will not extradite or transfer suspects to the United States if the suspects may be placed in military custody;
• PDD-14 II. B.3.- An individual is a U.S. lawful permanent resident who is arrested in this country or arrested by a federal agency on the basis of conduct taking place in this country;
• PDD-14 II. B.4.- An individual has been arrested by a federal agency in the United States on charges other than terrorism offenses;
• PDD-14 II. B.5.- An individual has been arrested by state or local law enforcement, pursuant to state or local authority, and is transferred to federal custody;
• PDD-14 II. B.6.- Transferring an individual to military custody could interfere with efforts to secure an individual’s cooperation or confession;
• PDD-14 II. B.7.- Transferring an individual to military custody could interfere with efforts to conduct joint trials with co-defendants who are ineligible for military custody or as to whom a determination has already been made to proceed with a prosecution in a federal or state court.

While these all seem to be prudent judgments, the blanket waivers under B.3. and B.5. do not, on their face, have anything to do with “the national security interests” of the United States.  B.3. merely treats a lawful permanent resident like a U.S. citizen, but the national security imperative animating that is lost on me.  It is certainly not the case that lawful permanent residents don’t join al Qaeda and engage in acts of terrorism (see here for example).  Now don’t misunderstand me, this waiver may be a good idea, I’m merely noting that it doesn’t fall within the requirement that a waiver be “in the national security interests of the United States” unless national security interests is broadly construed.  Similarly, the blanket waiver under B.5. for those who are arrested by state or local law enforcement and transferred to federal custody also does not fit within “the national security interests” provisions of the statute.  The other waivers (B.1.,2,4,6 and 7) all touch on matters traditionally associated with national security: B.1. and B.2. speak to foreign relations, B.6., and B.7. speak to intelligence collection or ongoing trials.  B.4. is confusing at first glance, but probably contemplates a circumstance where one would fit within the terms of Section 1022, but would not be charged with a terrorism offense, perhaps anticipating a pretextual arrest for national security purposes like we’ve seen with immigration offenses.

As for B.3. and B.5., I find these difficult to square with the requirement that the waiver be “in the national security interests of the United States.”  Nothing in the language of either waiver triggers the type of circumstances traditionally associated with national security interests (no foreign relations issues, no intelligence issues, no ongoing investigations or counterterrorism cooperation issues).  Thus, for these waivers to be valid, we must conclude that the President is entitled to determine, without the benefit of any facts, that military custody is simply never in the national security interests of the United States when a person captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the AUMF happens to be a lawful permanent resident or someone arrested by local authorities.  There may be a national security interest buried in those waivers, but I’m not seeing it.  

Of course, that fact won’t have much of an impact, as this is a matter that will have to be fought out between Congress and the President. 

Greg McNeal is a professor and specialist in law and public policy.  You can follow him on Twitter @GregoryMcNeal.

Andrew Brietbart, "I have Obama Video Tapes," dead at 43

Conservative Blogger, Andrew Breitbart, dead at 43, was about to release tapes featuring President Obama, in college during the 1980's.

 

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/jacketcopy/2012/03/andrew-brietbart-writer-provocateur-dead.html

Andrew Breitbart, the tireless blogger and bestselling author, died early Thursday morning. He was 43. Breitbart, a controversial proponent of right wing ideas and tea party values, grew up in an environment of liberal privilege in Southern California. He was adopted by moderately conservative Jewish parents and attended two of L.A.'s most exclusive private schools — Carlthorp and Brentwood. "It was so awkward, the thoughts I was having," Breitbart told the L.A. Times, describing his political transformation. Breitbart was editor of the Drudge Report for close to 10 years and helped launch the Huffington Post, until striking off on his own. Breitbart had just published his second book, "Righteous Indignation," and been at the center of a recent controversy when he appeared at the 2011 Festival of Books, where he called himself a "reluctant culture warrior." Richard's Note: The full LA Times article written by Carolyn Kellog is well-written but still makes some misstatements. To suggest he was a "provocateur" is poor choice of wording because many people in the Truth Movement, may associate this with a hired "agent provocateur" which I don't yet see any evidence for. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/jacketcopy/2012/03/andrew-brietbart-writer-pr... Following the law of Occam's Razor, it is highly unlikely that someone like Brietbart at the age of 43, with no visible health problems, would randomly die of a heart-attack, when his actions to push unpopular content would be damaging to the reputation of President Obama (i.e. Michael Jackson tried to release controversial music, Matt Simmons to release controversial information on Gulf of Mexico companies, Stanley Kubrick to release video exposing the non-fiction machinations of the NWO, etc). Occam's razor dictates that death by means of "natural causes" MAY be necessary, but not sufficient, in the deaths of these people, in question.

Prosecute Goldman Sachs

The Intel Hub
By Dean Henderson
March 6, 2012

Any meaningful prosecutions to come from Attorney General Eric Holder’s many ongoing investigations of financial crimes related to 2008 bank implosions caused by shady sub-prime housing loan deals will need to be targeted squarely at Goldman Sachs.

For over a century Goldman Sachs has joined the Houses of Morgan, Rockefeller, Rothschild, Warburg and Lazard in lording over the US industrial base – not to mention “our” central bank the Federal Reserve – profiting from boom and depression alike.

In July 1929 Goldman launched the Shenandoah and Blue Ridge investment trusts, at a time when the burgeoning middle classes were eager to hop on the Wall Street easy money bandwagon.

The Goldman Sachs Trading Corporation sold hundreds of millions of dollars worth of shares to public. They peaked at $104. All the while Goldman insiders were selling. By the fall of 1934 the shares were worth $1.75/each.

One of the directors at both Shenandoah and Blue Ridge was Rockefeller cousin and Secretary of State John Foster Dulles.

Insiders at Citibank, Chase Manhattan, Lehman and Merrill Lynch had also bailed out ahead of the Crash of 1929. Americans were outraged. A resurgent populism led to jail time for bankers such as Citibank President Charles Mitchell. It led to the passage of the Glass-Steagal Act, repealed by President Clinton in 1995, which stated that banks could be either commercial, investment or private banks- but only one of the three. And it led to Congressional inquiries into the Federal Reserve private banking monopoly.

Many of these investigations were conducted by the House Banking Committee, chaired by Rep. Louis McFadden (D-NY). Speaking of the Great Depression, McFadden concluded, “It was no accident. It was a carefully contrived occurence…The international bankers sought to bring about a condition of despair here so they might emerge as rulers of all of us.”

His successor, Rep. Wright Patman (D-TX), concurred, stating, “The United States today has in effect two governments. We are a duly constituted government. Then we have an independent, uncontrolled and uncoordinated government in the Federal Reserve System, operating the money powers which are reserved to Congress by the Constitution.”

But Goldman Sachs knows full well that there is but one government and that they own it. Carter Treasury Secretary Michael Blumenthal, Clinton Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin (now CEO at Citigroup), and Bush the Lesser Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson are all Goldman Sachs alumni. It was Paulson who held the gun to the collective heads of the American people and demanded $1 trillion to be handed over to the bankers to “avoid another Great Depression”.

Goldman is heavily involved in crafting the pending bank reform legislation. And it shows. Part of the legislation deals with setting up a “resolution authority”.

This sounds an awful lot like the Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC), which Daddy Bush set up in 1991 to auction off 680 bankrupt Savings & Loans. The S&L fiasco cost US taxpayers a cool $500 billion, with most of the loot going down the CIA guns for drugs Iran Contra rabbit hole.

According to the Charlotte, NC-based Southern Finance Project, more than half of these 680 S&Ls ended up in the hands of 10 giant US investment banks for pennies on the dollar. The largest purchaser was BRW- a partnership between Goldman Sachs and the Blackstone Group. BRW spent $80 million to pick up assets worth billions.

Similar “resolution authority” was exercised by the Fed with no Congressional approval during the 2008-2009 financial melt down. It wasn’t enough that the megabanks got $1 trillion in TARP money. They also vastly increased their assets, further concentrating their economic power and solidifying their “too big to fail” status.

Washington Mutual and Bear Stearns were handed over to JP Morgan Chase, Wachovia was gifted to Wells Fargo and Merrill Lynch was absorbed by Bank of America. Goldman Sachs curiously became a bank holding company.

Goldman Sachs led the Wall Street delegation which handed the Russian oil industry over to the Four Horsemen (ExxonMobil, ChevronTexaco, BPAmoco and Royal Dutch/Shell) for a song, leading to the 1998 Russian economic collapse.

The firm lobbied for Enron just before it went belly up, robbing state pension funds before being “sold” to UBS Warburg for the lofty sum of $0.

At around that same time the infamous Richard Perle was hired as an advisor by Goldman Sachs International. His job was to help Goldman find ways to profit from the coming Gulf War, though the 911 terror attacks had yet to even occur.

In 2007 Goldman Sachs formed a partnership with BCCI insider/crook Sulaiman Olayan, whose Saudi National Commercial Bank is the largest in the Kingdom. For Goldman Sachs, war is business and business is good.

Goldman has profited from everything from the Internet IPO bubble and bust, to the NASDAQ bubble and bust, to the oil price spikes, the food price spikes (see Hill ‘n Holler Columns 1-5), the 1990′s Mexican debt crisis and the current Greek debt crisis.

And now we find that Goldman has profited from both the housing bubble it helped create and from its imminent demise.

Goldman is not a job creator. It is a job destroyer. They are a financial parasite of the lowest variety, which has historically and consistently profited from the suffering of people, the decimation of the environment and the economic destruction of wealth.

Goldman Sachs is the Darth Vader of the global economy. Holder needs to prosecute.
Dean Henderson is the author of Big Oil & Their Bankers in the Persian Gulf: Four Horsemen, Eight Families & Their Global Intelligence, Narcotics & Terror Network, The Grateful Unrich: Revolution in 50 Countries and Das Kartell der Federal Reserve. Subscriptions to his Left Hook blog are FREE at www.deanhenderson.wordpress.com

Zynga Plans to Buy San Francisco Headquarters Building for $228 Million

By Douglas MacMillan - Mar 5, 2012 3:35 PM PT

Zynga Inc. (ZNGA), the online-game company that held an initial public offering in December, plans to buy the San Francisco building where its headquarters are located for $228 million. 

The building has about 670,000 square feet (62,000 square meters) of space, Zynga said in a regulatory filing. The company has deposited $25 million in escrow for the transaction, which is expected to close by the end of the second quarter. 

Zynga moved into its new home base in the city’s South of Market district last year, seeking to house a workforce that now tops 2,800 (ZNGA). The building features a large central atrium, and its lobby is decorated with a 1970s Winnebago motor home and a tunnel lit with color-pulsing LED tubes.

The company now leases about 65 percent of the building’s space, with the rest vacant or occupied by other tenants, according to the filing. 

To contact the reporters on this story: Douglas Macmillan in San Francisco at dmacmillan3@bloomberg.net; 

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Tom Giles at tgiles5@bloomberg.net

Facebook Adds Deutsche Bank, Citigroup, Credit Suisse on IPO

Facebook Adds Deutsche Bank, Citi, Credit Suisse on IPO

By Serena Saitto - Mar 2, 2012 2:36 PM PT

Facebook Inc. (FB) hired Deutsche Bank AG (DBK), Credit Suisse Group AG (CSGN) and Citigroup Inc. (C) to work on its $5 billion initial public offering and give it access to more credit, a person with direct knowledge of the situation said. 

Facebook’s new and existing banks will grant the company an additional credit line of more than $2.5 billion, said the person, who declined to be identified because the decision isn’t public. Morgan Stanley, JPMorgan Chase & Co., Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Bank of America Corp., Barclays Plc and Allen & Co. were the previously hired on the IPO.

Facebook's new corporate headquarters in Menlo Park, California. Photographer: Peter DaSilva/EPA/Corbis

The move would give the social network, whose sales almost doubled to $3.71 billion last year, a pipeline of more than $5 billion in possible borrowings. That compares with a $3 billion credit line for Google Inc. (GOOG), the most valuable U.S. Internet company. While going public with debt is unusual for a Web company, the move by itself may not damp demand for Facebook shares, said Sameet Sinha, an analyst at B. Riley & Co. 

“The demand for Facebook’s stock is going to be so high that I think most investors are just going to overlook this aspect,” said Sinha, who is based in San Francisco. “I don’t see it impacting the overall valuation.” Facebook, led by co-founder Mark Zuckerberg, filed for the IPO last month, pursuing what may be the largest Internet offering on record.

Tax, Legal Bills

The expanded credit line will help Facebook (FB) pay post-IPO taxes and the potential legal costs of patent litigation with Yahoo (YHOO)! Inc., according to the person. Yahoo (YHOO), based in Sunnyvale, California, asked Facebook this week to license technologies covered by its intellectual property, and threatened to take legal action if no agreement is reached. 

The additions will be disclosed in a new regulatory filing in the coming weeks, the person said. The first group of banks, excluding Allen, have already pledged $2.5 billion through a revolving credit facility to the Menlo Park, California-based company, according to a filing last month. 

Citigroup and Credit Suisse representatives declined to comment, as did spokesmen for Facebook and Deutsche Bank. A representative at Morgan Stanley (MS), which is leading the offering, also declined to comment. 

Facebook filed to raise $5 billion in its IPO, though the amount may change. It had been discussing raising as much as $10 billion, a person with knowledge of the matter said late last year. At that size, Facebook’s IPO would be the biggest ever by an Internet or technology company, data compiled by Bloomberg show. Facebook’s implied market value stood at about $93 billion, based on an auction this week via SharesPost Inc. 

Banks handling Facebook’s IPO may collect fees of as little as 1 percent to 1.5 percent of the total amount raised in the sale, two people with direct knowledge of the matter said on Feb. 1. 

Reuters previously reported that Facebook intends to increase its credit line.

To contact the reporter on this story: Serena Saitto in New York at ssaitto@bloomberg.net

 

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Jennifer Sondag at jsondag@bloomberg.net

American universities see an influx of students from China

Study shows that 26.2 percent of international students in Michigan have come from China

By DEBANINA SEATON | Staff Writer

http://thesouthend.wayne.edu/index.php/article/2012/03/american_universities_see_an_influx_of_students_from_china

As a result of its growing economy, middle-class families from China are able to afford American college tuition, bringing an influx of Chinese students to study in the U.S. As a result, Michigan universities have reaped the benefit.
The growth of Chinese students in American schools is prominent around the country. According to the Institute for International Education’s Open Doors report, there was a 43 percent increase in undergraduate Chinese students between 2010 and 2011 in the U.S. States like California, New York, Texas, Massachusetts and Illinois are the major hosts for these students.
Because of this increase, many believe that it is important to invest in Chinese students and partnerships with China. In 2010, Chinese students contributed $158 million to the Michigan economy and $185 million in 2011, according to the Open Doors report.

“It’s a huge economical benefit,” said Smriti Panda, an undergraduate admissions counselor at Wayne State. “They pay nearly twice the standard tuition.”

Because international students come to the U.S. for their studies, many do not have cars and live on campus, meaning that they invest in local grocery stores and other local outlets.

“Given the current economy, it is wise to have partnerships,” Panda said. “It’s a very positive win/win.”

WSU has seen significant growth over the past six years. In 2005, there were 271 Chinese students at WSU; by 2011, there were 335, according to a Feb. 5 article in Crain’s Detroit Business.

Michigan State University has seen a large increase, as well. In 2005, there were 41 Chinese undergraduate students, and in 2011, there were 2,410. At the University of Michigan, there were 796 Chinese students in 2005, which increased by 2011 to 1,853. The Institute of International Education found that 26.2 percent of international students in Michigan came from China, followed by 13.8 percent from India and 11.2 percent from South Korea, according to the Crain’s article.

Both China and India have growing middle-class economies and the largest populations in the world, so all of these social, economic and political changes are allowing the middle class to send their children overseas.
“This is a group that really wants an education,” Panda said. “The world is a lot smaller than it used to be with more business being done with China.”
Recently, WSU Provost Ronald Brown, associate vice president for educational outreach and international programs Ahmad Ezzeddine and College of Engineering Dean Farshad Fotouhi traveled to Xidian University and South China University of Technology (SCUT) to create the partnership known as 3 2 Program, allowing qualified engineering students to earn their undergraduate degree from Xidian or SCUT and then earn their master’s degree in two years at WSU.
Chinese students make up 18 percent of the international student population in America, Panda said. Undergraduate Chinese students make up 32.2 percent, 48.8 percent of the graduate students, 27.5 percent of the study business management — finance or economics — 19.2 percent study business engineering, 11.5 percent student life science and 10.6 percent study math or computer science, she said.

“I’ve had a very good experience,” said Quan Yuan, a graduate student in mathematics. “People are very nice and friendly.”

“I heard of WSU through the internet,” said Xiaoyue Cui, a graduate student studying mathematics. “This department has very good research; the professors are nice and very responsible and prepared. I’ve learned many things here and there are many interactions with other universities.”

Published March 4, 2012 in Campus & Community, News

BREAKING: Senate Passes House Resolution (H.R. 347)

Bob Tuskin Show - March 1, 2012 - 

Bob Tuskin Interviews Aaron McCollum

http://www.bobtuskin.com

http://mp3.oraclebroadcasting.com/Intel_Hub/Intel_Hub.2012-03-01_16k.mp3

Bill Text
112th Congress (2011-2012)
H.R.347.ENR

---

THIS SEARCH     THIS DOCUMENT     GO TO
Next Hit        Forward           New Bills Search
Prev Hit        Back              HomePage
Hit List        Best Sections     Help
                Contents Display   

---

Bill 7 of 7 
Final version (Enrolled Bill) as passed by both Houses. There are 6 other versions of this bill.

Print Subscribe Share/Save

Bill PDF

XML [Help]

Printer Friendly[Help]

Congressional Record References

Bill Summary & Status

H.R.347 -- Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011 (Enrolled Bill [Final as Passed Both House and Senate] - ENR)

--H.R.347--

H.R.347

One Hundred Twelfth Congress







of the







United States of America








AT THE SECOND SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,

the third day of January, two thousand and twelve

An Act

To correct and simplify the drafting of section 1752 (relating to restricted buildings or grounds) of title 18, United States Code.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011'.
SECTION. 2. RESTRICTED BUILDING OR GROUNDS.

Section 1752 of title 18, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

-`Sec. 1752. Restricted building or grounds

`(a) Whoever--

`(1) knowingly enters or remains in any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority to do so;

`(2) knowingly, and with intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, engages in disorderly or disruptive conduct in, or within such proximity to, any restricted building or grounds when, or so that, such conduct, in fact, impedes or disrupts the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions;

`(3) knowingly, and with the intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, obstructs or impedes ingress or egress to or from any restricted building or grounds; or

`(4) knowingly engages in any act of physical violence against any person or property in any restricted building or grounds;

or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b).

`(b) The punishment for a violation of subsection (a) is--

`(1) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than 10 years, or both, if--

`(A) the person, during and in relation to the offense, uses or carries a deadly or dangerous weapon or firearm; or

`(B) the offense results in significant bodily injury as defined by section 2118(e)(3); and

`(2) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than one year, or both, in any other case.

`(c) In this section--

`(1) the term `restricted buildings or grounds' means any posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area--

`(A) of the White House or its grounds, or the Vice President's official residence or its grounds;

`(B) of a building or grounds where the President or other person protected by the Secret Service is or will be temporarily visiting; or

`(C) of a building or grounds so restricted in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance; and

`(2) the term `other person protected by the Secret Service' means any person whom the United States Secret Service is authorized to protect under section 3056 of this title or by Presidential memorandum, when such person has not declined such protection.'.

REFERENCES

1) H.R. 347 - 18 U.S.C. § 1752
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h112-347
2) Jonathan Turley
http://jonathanturley.org/2012/03/03/imprecise-language-and-the-risks-of-h-r-347/
3) http://thomas.loc.gov
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:h347:

4) Bob Tuskin Show - March 1, 2012 -

Bob Tuskin Interviews Aaron McCollum

http://www.bobtuskin.com

http://mp3.oraclebroadcasting.com/Intel_Hub/Intel_Hub.2012-03-01_16k.mp3