Для тех, кто интересуется безопасным доступом к онлайн-играм, наш партнер предлагает зеркало Вавады, которое позволяет обходить любые блокировки и сохранять доступ ко всем функциям казино.

Corporate Malfeasance From Enron to Lehman

The world has seen its share of bad business ethics ever since citizens began offering goods or services for a stipend. The effects of such wrongdoings have been magnified, however, as businesses have prospered and the greed of some has grown. Greed which can sometimes drive people to forget their morals. Some may think of Lehman Brothers as the the worst case of corporate malfeasance to ever rock the business world, while others may claim it was Enron.

One website has published what it claims are the “10 Great Moments in Corporate Malfeasance.” I’m not so sure the word “great” aptly describes these 10 moments. I would guess “worst” or “reputation-ruining” would be more appropriate. Nevertheless, after introducing the piece with the Enron scandal, the site says “what follows are 10 more examples of what a person might do if given the chance to make more money.”

It lists pharmaceutical maker Roche (#10) as refusing to sell its HIV drug Fuzeon at $18,000 (what it was valued at by South Korean health officials) as opposed to $25,000. Even though the drug maker would still make a hefty profit, it refused to sell at the discounted price with the head of Roche’s Korean division claiming, “We are not in the business to save lives, but to make money. Saving lives is not our business.” That’s one people won’t soon forget.

WellPoint (#7) didn’t fair so well in the spotlight after the U.S. health care debate raged this year. It was found that the insurance company was severely abusing recission (the policy of finding ways to cancel insurance contracts). Whose contracts were they canceling?

Women who were diagnosed with breast cancer.

WellPoint was using a computer algorithm that automatically targeted them and every other policyholder recently diagnosed with breast cancer. The software triggered an immediate fraud investigation, as the company searched for some pretext to drop their policies, according to government regulators and investigators. Once the women were singled out, they say, the insurer then canceled their policies based on either erroneous or flimsy information. WellPoint declined to comment on the women’s specific cases without a signed waiver from them, citing privacy laws.

Getting to what most people think of when they think “corporate malfeasance,” the list mentions Goldman Sachs (#5) and its “doomed-to-fail” fund.

Investment banking house Goldman Sachs created Abacus 2007-ACI, a fund of mortgages it sold to investors. What Goldman didn’t tell Abacus fund investors was that the mortgages they were betting would succeed had been handpicked by a favorite Goldman investor to actually lose.

That investor was John Paulson, who eventually made $1 billion from the fund.

IBM (#1) and its tech support garnered the unattractive top spot on the list. The tech giant sold some of its earliest model computers to Nazi Germany, with its founder, Thomas Watson, receiving the highest honor the country could bestow upon non-Germans, the Grand Cross of the German Eagle.

IBM admits that the company’s computers were used to carry out the logistics of the Holocaust, but denies awareness of this use at the time.

Thankfully, there are organizations in place that act as watchdogs for major corporations. CorpWatch is a nonprofit that works to expose corporate malfeasance and “advocate for multinational corporate accountability and transparency.” And probably more well-known is Corporate Accountability International, an organization that has fought against abusive corporations for more than 30 years. They have an impressive track record; from the infant formula campaign of the late 70s and early 80s to the nuclear weaponmaker’s campaign that spanned a decade, they work to bring to light wrongdoings of big businesses. Something Lehman and Enron could have used.

We are a capitalist society, which is only wrong when greed comes before humanity.

Tweeting Earnings: Bad for Your Company?

That’s an issue many have mixed feelings about. I, for one, think it’s a great way to relay investor information to the modern, web-loving world in a timely manner. Along with posting earnings on their websites, companies (well, some of them) are using Twitter to announce, among other news, performance numbers.

The microblogging site has seen a flood of earnings tweets for the second quarter of 2010. Some, however, are doing this better than others. IR Web Report compiled a list of 10 public companies that are using Twitter as an investor relations tool — with comments on what they’re doing right and wrong. Here’s a snapshot:

Picture 6

URL: https://twitter.com/PGNewsUS
Followers: 5,166
Apps used: Twitterfeed, CoTweet, TweetDeck
# of Earnings Tweets: 14
# of Clicks from Tweets: 75
Comments: The tweets are coming from P&G’s media relations team, so strictly speaking their activity doesn’t qualify as IR. Except it does because investors don’t discriminate. The tweets are plain vanilla, no hashtags or tickers. There’s a bit of “spin,” but mostly the tweets are informative. Still, the company’s IR department should have it’s own account. It’s hard to find the signal when sales numbers are mixed in with soap suds. The low click-thrus suggest that earnings tweets on this account don’t resonate.

Picture 7

URL: https://twitter.com/Roche_com
Followers: 4,586
Apps used: CoTweet
# of Earnings Tweets: 21
Clicks generated: 182
Comments: Only company where I had to use a calculator to add up all the various clicks to their site! Probably the best experience from a follower’s perspective. By not live tweeting the earnings call, they don’t overwhelm their followers and drive traffic to the webcast. But the greatest value comes from them referring followers to the media’s rolling coverage of the results throughout the day. From start to finish, it’s a well-managed process that is a valuable enhancement to what the company already provides on its website. The one to emulate.

Picture 8

URL: http://twitter.com/ebayinkblog
Followers: 4,638
Apps used: Blog, Seesmic
# of Earnings Tweets: 63
Clicks generated: 169
Comments: The original earnings live-tweeter, eBay continues to be a standard setter. It’s one of the few to incorporate StockTwits into its distribution. Its disclaimer at the start of earnings call live-tweeting sessions, and use of an unique hashtag for each call, are best practices. But too many tweets for my liking, but no one else complains so I’m wrong. Could say more but Richard’s already gotten a lot of ink here. He’s posted a good piece about his set-up and process.

Sure, tweeting financial performance data may be good for these large, blue-chip companies, but the same may not be true for smaller, less visible firms. According to research from the University of Michigan, small and micro-cap companies that participate in greater tweeting “during news event windows is associated with lower bid-ask spreads and greater depths.” Meaning, essentially, a lower stock price. Not good.

Tweeting earnings can have other harsh side-effects. If a company announces earnings news on other sites (such as their corporate website) first, then turns to Twitter (sometimes hours later), it is a slap in the face to the company’s loyal followers. Here are some examples of delayed earnings tweets (courtesy of IR Web Report):

  • A gold company listed both in the US and Canada issued a results release at 8:00am ET but only tweeted the news at 6:45pm ET –- a delay of 10 hours and 45 minutes.
  • A uniform company released earnings via a PR wire at 4:15pm ET and tweeted the same information 77 minutes later at 5:32pm ET.
  • A technology company issued its release at 4:15pm ET and only tweeted it at 4:43pm ET, a 28-minute period during which more than 150,000 shares were traded.
  • A health care solutions company released earnings at 4:00pm ET but didn’t mention the results on Twitter until announcing at 4:35pm ET that its conference call had started. Eventually, the results release showed up, but almost 8 hours after the fact at 11:53pm ET.
  • A networking company released earnings via a PR wire at 4:05pm ET but tweeted it only at 4:31pm ET – a 26-minute delay during which more than 100,000 shares changed hands.
  • A hard disk drive maker that released its results at 4:01pm ET but tweeted them only 24 minutes later at 4:25pm ET – a delay which saw more than 200,000 shares traded.

To investors, these are serious lapses from major corporations’ IR departments. If a company that is active on Twitter cannot manage to update its followers and investors in 140 characters or less on important information in a timely manner, how can it expect to keep such a following?

With more and more companies waking up to the power of social media, more and more sloppiness in the the Twitter and Facebook realm is visible. For companies large and small, to be complacent with such technology is to dig your own grave.