Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Likelihood of Carbon Trading Increasing
If you believe in - where the big boys of Wall Street invest is an indicator as to what the expectation of future growth is - then the likelihood of Carbon Trading has got another yeah. Goldman Sachs announced $14 million investment in APX, a Silicon Valley company that certifies carbon and emissions offset certificates. Read here. It seems like APX will act as middleman which may grow into a NYMEX or another futures type trading market as the emissions trading takes off. It has also got funding from Bechtel Enterprises Holdings, Kinetic Ventures, ONSET Ventures, Technology Partners and Woodside Fund. The space is very small as it is still in infancy. But when cap and trade takes off, there seems to be immense opportunity.
Sunday, February 24, 2008
Tax structure in India
1) Qus. : What are you doing?
Ans. : Business.
Tax : PAY PROFESSIONAL TAX!
2) Qus. : What are you doing in Business?
Ans. : Selling the Goods.
Tax : PAY SALES TAX!!
3) Qus. : >From where are you getting Goods?
Ans. : From other State/Abroad
Tax : PAY CENTRAL SALES TAX, CUSTOM DUTY & OCTROI!
4) Qus. : What are you getting in Selling Goods?
Ans. : Profit.
Tax : PAY INCOME TAX!
Qus. : How do you distribute profit ?
Ans : By way of dividend
Tax : Pay dividend distribution Tax
5) Qus. : Where you Manufacturing the Goods?
Ans. : Factory.
Tax : PAY EXCISE DUTY!
6) Qus. : Do you have Office / Warehouse/ Factory?
Ans. : Yes
Tax : PAY MUNICIPAL & FIRE TAX!
7) Qus. : Do you have Staff?
Ans. : Yes
Tax : PAY STAFF PROFESSIONAL TAX!
8) Qus. : Doing business in Millions?
Ans. : Yes
Tax : PAY TURNOVER TAX!
Ans : No
Tax : Then pay Minimum Alternate Tax
9) Qus. : Are you taking out over 25,000 Cash from Bank?
Ans. : Yes, for Salary.
Tax : PAY CASH HANDLING TAX!
10) Qus.: Where are you taking your client for Lunch & Dinner?
Ans. : Hotel
Tax : PAY FOOD & ENTERTAINMENT TAX!
11) Qus.: Are you going Out of Station for Business?
Ans. : Yes
Tax : PAY FRINGE BENEFIT TAX!
12) Qus.: Have you taken or given any Service/s?
Ans. : Yes
Tax : PAY SERVICE TAX!
13) Qus.: How come you got such a Big Amount?
Ans. : Gift on birthday.
Tax : PAY GIFT TAX!
14) Qus.: Do you have any Wealth?
Ans. : Yes
Tax : PAY WEALTH TAX!
15) Qus.: To reduce Tension, for entertainment, where are you going?
Ans. : Cinema or Resort.
Tax : PAY ENTERTAINMENT TAX!
16) Qus.: Have you purchased House?
Ans. : Yes
Tax : PAY STAMP DUTY & REGISTRATION FEE !
17) Qus.: How you Travel?
Ans. : Bus
Tax : PAY SURCHARGE!
18) Qus.: Any Additional Tax?
Ans. : Yes
Tax : PAY EDUCATIONAL, ADDITIONAL EDUCATIONAL & SURCHARGE ON ALL THE CENTRAL GOVT.'s TAX !!!
19) Qus.: Delayed any time Paying Any Tax?
Ans. : Yes
Tax : PAY INTEREST & PENALTY!
20) INDIAN :: can i die now??
Ans :: wait we are about to launch the funeral tax!!!
(Courtesy - Mohit Jain)
Investing in energy stocks
caminoenergy.com tracks energy stocks. It uses some interesting indices - check it out.
Saturday, February 23, 2008
Market Reforms in China and India
Much of the growth stories of China and India are attributed to free-market reforms by many. To get a different perspective, here's an interesting article by Prof Bardhan. If you wonder that my Chicago influence will automatically indicate where I stand, then that would be as flippant as reading with the understanding that the author is from UC Berkeley. But jokes apart, some very important issues have been brought forth which are typically lost in popular disourse. Talking about China, he says -
"...socialist control and regulations undoubtedly inhibited initiative and enterprise in both countries, the positive legacy of reforms undertaken in the ‘70s and ‘80s cannot be denied, particularly in China’s recent pattern of state-controlled capitalist growth. China’s earlier socialist period arguably provided a good launching pad for market reform. That foundation provided wide access to education and health care; highly egalitarian land redistribution that created a rural safety net and thus eased the process of market reform, with all its wrenching disruptions and dislocations; increased female labor participation and education that enhanced women’s contribution to economic growth; and a system of regional economic decentralization"
India fares poorly in China's comparison - in equality in land owership, education, and health care. Prof Bardhan attributes this to - "... Chinese are better capitalists now because they were better socialists then!"
Interesting read overall.
"...socialist control and regulations undoubtedly inhibited initiative and enterprise in both countries, the positive legacy of reforms undertaken in the ‘70s and ‘80s cannot be denied, particularly in China’s recent pattern of state-controlled capitalist growth. China’s earlier socialist period arguably provided a good launching pad for market reform. That foundation provided wide access to education and health care; highly egalitarian land redistribution that created a rural safety net and thus eased the process of market reform, with all its wrenching disruptions and dislocations; increased female labor participation and education that enhanced women’s contribution to economic growth; and a system of regional economic decentralization"
India fares poorly in China's comparison - in equality in land owership, education, and health care. Prof Bardhan attributes this to - "... Chinese are better capitalists now because they were better socialists then!"
Interesting read overall.
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Lessig for Congress?
Larry Lessig is considering running for Congress. Is this the best way to propel the change in corruption that he is fighting for.? Would be quite interesting what he finally decides and does. See his video at lessig08.org.
Sunday, February 17, 2008
Cancelled Coal Power Plants
The list of cancelled (or on hold) coal power plants is quite a long one. Let's take the plants in Kansas that were cancelled in Q4 2007 and then recently efforts to resurrect the plants are facing tough times. Evidently, most people welcome such a development. The surge in public awareness against CO2 has made the permitting process extremely difficult for plant developers to develop coal plants. Usually, permits are being denied or sent back asking for specific measures to sequester CO2 rather than dumping into the atmosphere.
This is an interesting argument. While I agree with the general swing that greenhouse gases need to be controlled which means better ways to contain CO2, what I am not convinced is the way this ideology is being enforced. People in the industry would say that carbon capture technology which will not allow CO2 to be released in the atmosphere but rather hold it like the way NOx and SOx are being captured are available but expensive. Also, once we capture, what do we do with that. There are some ideas on using it in some mines or oil wells, but not necessarily there is oil well near a power plant which means there is a transfer cost. Add all of that and where do the economics go. The business case simply fails.
Look at any of these bulk options - coal, gas, nuclear - the story finally unfolds to arrive at this point. There are some negative aspects which we had considered as an externality over the last 100 years of electric power industry. Now we want to attach a value and want it to be addressed. But are we willing to pay for it? Paying for a cooler earth for our children is like giving up our own temptation of buying a new car or going for that exotic vacation and building up the inheritance for our children. Are we ready to do so?
One thing is certain - we need electricity. Renewables cannot meet our demands. The only options that are available are coal, gas, and nuclear. How far do we go in giving up today's needs? Are we prepared to face periodic power shortages? Are we aligned for rate increases when utilities go for their next rate case filing? Are we ready to pay that extra cost when cap and trade comes into effect. Or, a possible carbon tax passed onto us. We have to wait and see - how much of the arguments placed forth in these cancellations are knee-jerk rhetoric and how much is real change in societal perception.
This is an interesting argument. While I agree with the general swing that greenhouse gases need to be controlled which means better ways to contain CO2, what I am not convinced is the way this ideology is being enforced. People in the industry would say that carbon capture technology which will not allow CO2 to be released in the atmosphere but rather hold it like the way NOx and SOx are being captured are available but expensive. Also, once we capture, what do we do with that. There are some ideas on using it in some mines or oil wells, but not necessarily there is oil well near a power plant which means there is a transfer cost. Add all of that and where do the economics go. The business case simply fails.
Look at any of these bulk options - coal, gas, nuclear - the story finally unfolds to arrive at this point. There are some negative aspects which we had considered as an externality over the last 100 years of electric power industry. Now we want to attach a value and want it to be addressed. But are we willing to pay for it? Paying for a cooler earth for our children is like giving up our own temptation of buying a new car or going for that exotic vacation and building up the inheritance for our children. Are we ready to do so?
One thing is certain - we need electricity. Renewables cannot meet our demands. The only options that are available are coal, gas, and nuclear. How far do we go in giving up today's needs? Are we prepared to face periodic power shortages? Are we aligned for rate increases when utilities go for their next rate case filing? Are we ready to pay that extra cost when cap and trade comes into effect. Or, a possible carbon tax passed onto us. We have to wait and see - how much of the arguments placed forth in these cancellations are knee-jerk rhetoric and how much is real change in societal perception.
Sunday, February 03, 2008
Microsoft's Bid on Yahoo
I have been having very interesting conversations with friends and colleagues over the last few days on Microsoft’s unsolicited takeover bid on Yahoo. Many among us believe that this was not a surprise at all – just a matter of when. We all know the cat is out of the bag. The 62% premium bid has been announced. Others argue that it smells a la Time Warner – AOL – does not make business sense and doomed for failure.
I believe it makes good business sense. And my reasoning is pretty much what Microsoft has laid it out – nothing ordinary. It is about time that they did something disruptive to compete with Google. Without a shade of doubt Google has been dominating the $8 billion paid search advertising space which is supposed to grow at 28% to $11 billion. That’s too big a pie for even the “blue monster” to ignore. Other internet players like Yahoo have so far been unsuccessful in challenging Google. Yahoo repeatedly missed opportunities that Google has grabbed. Whether it is with decent ad space monetizing models or with key acquisitions like Doubleclick. There seems to be another strategic element to why Microsoft is concerned. Google has been quite successful in expanding its application scope to create many more avenues to pump in advertisements. Take for example, Google aps. Not very popular as yet, and miles away from the power and sophistication of Microsoft Office functionalities, yet going forward, the fact that it is free and is accessible from anywhere (need internet connectivity) might attract people using these aps. Once it creeps into people’s usage, Microsoft will find it difficult to get users switch back to Microsoft products like Office. Who knows more than Microsoft on how easy it is to get people switch applications. Simply put – Microsoft may just quite end up on the wrong side of the table this time. It is prudent to think about an alternative business model and how to capture internet dollars.
- Merging two very different organizations. 14,000 employees in Yahoo will be a part of the 80,000 existing Microsoft force. I am told by friends that the incentive structures are different, day to qay work culture is different. Yahoo, many believe, has a flavor of a startup while Microsoft is a large bureaucratic (in many ways). Will people like it? Well, right now – people are skeptical. Microsoft has to handle this carefully.
- Cannibalizing its own business. If Microsoft uses the internet as an alternative platform for all the good things that it has been doing on top of Windows, it would be interesting to see to what extent and how soon they cannibalize their own businesses and cash cows and venturing into new technology before someone else starts doing so. (Skeptic econ friends of mine are smelling sunk cost fallacy here)
- Getting more eye balls. As any e-business guru would say, “It is all about eye balls.” More eye balls translate to more ad revenues. So will Microsoft/Yahoo combine shift be able to divert people from using Google? Remains to be seen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
