Open Book Solutions

Mobile Media Mergers Jump 46%

According to a new report from investment banker JEGI, mobile media and technology sector had seen a 46% increase in mergers and acquisitions in the second quarter of 2009. In the first half of the year, the mobile industry had struck 16 deals valued at a total of $146 million. That's up from 11 deals valued at $107 million in the first half of 2008. Impressive.

What is going on? Clearly, activity in this sector has nothing to do with distress. Use of mobile content and applications is exploding. And companies large and small are in a land grab mode, acquiring small and promising start-ups in hopes of increasing their mobile presence. IAC and Amazon made investments in iPhone applications recently. Amazon also acquired mobile app maker SnapTell and mobile payments player Boku. "Mobile social networking and mobile content are other key areas of investment," according to the report. Yes, times are good if you are a mobile entrepreneur.

Microsoft Adds Some Twitter Updates to Bing Search

In a nod to the increasing importance of real-time search, Microsoft has started adding Twitter updates to its Bing search engine. For now, the Twitter-related results are limited only to searches on prominent Twitterers themselves, not nearly all tweets, according to a blog post by Sean Suchter, general manager of Microsoft's Silicon Valley Search Technology Center:

There has been much discussion of real-time search and the premium on immediacy of data that has been created primarily by Twitter. We’ve been watching this phenomenon with great interest, and listening carefully to what consumers really want in this space. Today we’re unveiling an initial foray into integrating more real time data into our search results, starting with some of the more prominent and prolific Twitterers from a variety of spheres. This includes Tweets from folks from our own search technology and business sphere like Danny Sullivan or Kara Swisher as well as those from spheres of more general consumer appeal like Al Gore or Ryan Seacrest.

Starting later today, when you search for these folks names in association with Twitter, you’ll see their latest Tweets come up in real time on Bing’s search results. ... (Note this feature will be rolling out gradually over the course of the next few hours so you may not see it right away.)

The answer will include that person’s latest Tweets, along with an easy link to “See more tweets” from that individual.

We’re not indexing all of Twitter at this time… just a small set of prominent and prolific Twitterers to start. We picked a few thousand people to start, based primarily on their follower count and volume of tweets. We think this is an interesting first step toward using Twitter’s public API to surface Tweets in people search. We’d love to hear your feedback as we think through future possibilities in real time search.

If you're a bit of a geek, and use the Firefox browser, you can already add Twitter search results to both Bing and Google via a software add-on called Greasemonkey. But it's pretty rudimentary, just a list of the five most recent Twitter search results for that particular query pasted atop the regular results.

A plethora of other real-time search engines is vying to become the one place to go for results on what people are talking about and sharing right now. And I suspect Google, which does offer near-real-time results for some news-oriented queries, won't wait long to add some kind of Twitter-related results in some way or another. But for now, Bing's Twitter results are one thing Google doesn't offer, and that's likely to help maintain the recent positive buzz about Bing.

Sirius XM's Mel Karmazin Gets A Pay Raise

Despite all the tribulations Sirius XM has gone through in the past year, the company's board has just voted to extend the contract of CEO Mel Karmazin through 2012. As part of the new package, Karmazin receives a pay increase of $250,000 a year and 120,000 options exercisable at 43 cents a share. The stock is currently trading at 46 cents. It has jumped nearly 7% on the news of Karmazin's contract renewal.

But shareholders who have seen the stock plummet from $2 a share a year ago might question whether Karmazin deserves the kudos. Yes, he steered the company clear of bankruptcy by securing, earlier this year, a $530 million loan from Liberty Media. But at the same time, Sirius's performance of late has been nothing to write home about. This spring, the satellite radio provider reported its first-ever subscriber loss. More losses could be in the offing as demand for autos equipped with Sirius radios continues to be slow, and consumers opt for satellite radio alternatives, including Web and high-definition radios and iPods.

Sirius has just lost its executive in charge of music programming to Clear Channel. And even the Liberty Media deal leaves shareholders in the cold. The loan can be converted into equity, which would dilute holdings of existing shareholders; so Liberty Media is expected to grab a huge stake in the business at the expense of existing shareholders. While the investment possibly averted bankruptcy, it was arguably in part Karmazin's management -- for instance, his decision to wait for regulatory approval of Sirius's merger with XM for more than a year -- that brought Sirius close to the brink in the first place. The wait kept Sirius from more aggressively marketing its services. Some analysts also question Karmazin's decision, post-merger, to slash some of the company's programming in an effort to cut costs -- a decision that turned off some of the service's long-time users. All together, this seems like the wrong time for dispensing rewards.

Survey: Americans Confused by Smartphone Offers

A survey of 1,000 American adults that was commissioned by Best Buy Mobile reveals consumers' confusion over smartphones, which are souped-up cell phones able to download applications and to surf the Web.

Released on June 30, the survey indicates that 47% of consumers who don't yet own smartphones are confused by the vast assortment of features and models available. Some 52% of women and 42% of men are confused about which smartphone to buy. Indeed, with smartphones representing the fastest-growing part of the cell-phone market, scores of companies including Apple, Research In Motion and Palm have introduced new mobile devices in the past few months. Lots of other companies, such as Acer, are planning to follow suit. As the number of smartphones available from carriers balloons in the upcoming holiday season, consumer confusion should increase further.

Is there a solution to this problem? Clearly, retailers, device manufacturers and carriers need to do a better job explaining capabilities and features of the different devices to consumers. That's where Best Buy, which has stepped up its mobiles sales push, hopes to make its mark. Still, I don't think consumers should expect any miracles. After all, manufacturers and retailers have tried but failed making PC and camera purchases easy. To make the right buy, consumers have to peruse product reviews and to survey friends. While, today, many people don't research phones before buying, perhaps that should change. Consumers need to start approaching buying phones the same way they do laptops, and to start doing more homework.

Facebook To Introduce New, Simpler Privacy Settings

Facebook today introduced a test of new ways for its members to set and adjust their privacy settings for any piece of content they post on the site. The changes follow the recent announcement of new settings for publishing content that allow you to choose to post items that everyone, not just your friends, can see. Many see both moves in part as Facebook's attempt to blunt the rapid rise of microblogging service Twitter.

The changes, which will be tested with 40,000 members in the U.S. in the next week and around the world the week after that, don't add a lot of new options so much as make them simpler to access and set. Facebook hopes the new system, which consolidates 40 different settings on six separate pages, will encourage people to become more comfortable with posting items as freely as they do on Twitter and other services.

The gist is this: You will be able to go to one page to set whom you want to see whatever you post or personal information in your Facebook profile: from just friends to people in a chosen network you're in to the whole world--which means people who aren't Facebook members too, unless you're a minor. And if you want, you can change those settings for each piece of content you post--such as a job complaint you want only close friends to see, not your company network. A "recommended" setting will make your basic info and content posts public--in other words more Twitterlike--but provide more privacy for other things like Wall posting from others and contact info.

You can get the details on the privacy enhancements at a slide show here (and embedded above), as well as on the Facebook blog, which you can also read after the jump here.

The upshot: While the new system is clearly simpler, and will be presented by default when people initially try to post content, I suspect it will still be too much for some people to bother with. The basic problem is that Facebook aims to offer many kinds of messaging, from intimate posts to friends to rants you want the world to read. That inherently involves people making choices, sometimes post-by-post, inevitably making the process more complex. (One blogger, Jason Kincaid at TechCrunch, thinks the new system is a looming disaster because too many people won't realize the implications of public sharing. I'm not so sure it will be worse than it is today, though.)

Twitter is popular partly because it's so simple: Posts are public, or they're not. It's to Facebook's credit that it's providing choices, and to its further credit that it's now trying to make those choices simpler. But it's no sure thing yet that the new system will keep Twitter from becoming the Internet's biggest community bulletin board.

Merrill Lynch's unfortunately timed upgrade on U.S. economic outlook

Guest blog from Economics Editor Peter Coy

Ouch. Merrill Lynch didn't pick the best time to upgrade its outlook for the U.S. economy. The research note on the upgrade hit my email inbox at 8:12 a.m.--minutes before the Labor Dept. announced a worse-than-expected decline of 467,000 jobs in June.

To be fair, Merrill wasn't completely taken by surprise. It had been expecting a loss of 375,000 jobs, which was slightly above the Street consensus, and it was looking for a jobless rate of 9.6%, higher than the actual rate of 9.5%. So it's more a matter of appearances than reality.

The more important question is whether Merrill's new call will prove correct. It said it expects GDP to grow at an annual rate of 2.6% in the third quarter and 2.8% in the fourth quarter, for a second-half average of 2.7%, up dramatically from its previous forecast of 1.4% growth. It attributed the upgrade to stimulus-boosted consumer spending; an upturn in homebuilding; improvement in net exports from stronger growth overseas; and a decrease in inventory draw-downs.

Interestingly, Merrill's U.S. economics team has gotten more bullish since the departure of David Rosenberg, who moved to Toronto earlier this year to serve as chief economist and strategist at wealth manager Gluskin Sheff & Associates. Rosenberg remains an irascible bear in his new position.

I sent an email to Merrill asking about the timing of the upgrade and got this eminently reasonable response from U.S. Economist Drew Matus (my questions in italics):

1. Does this jobs report cause you to lower your newly upgraded forecast for the U.S. economy?

No, it does not. Our new forecast includes the unemployment rate moving up to 10.5% at its peak. Any one month's worth of job losses which have a standard error of more than 100,000 and missed our estimate by less than that amount is not cause for regret or rethinking of a well thought out forecast.

2. Are you wishing you had waited a day to issue your new forecast, until after you had the jobs data?

No. Our consumer spending outlook is weak and our unemployment rate forecast is for a continued rise in unemployment. The near term outlook is driven by consumption related to stimulus which is still occurring; inventory adjustments which have not been impact by this data; housing, which is unrelated; and net trade.

Guest blogger!

Guest blogger Peter Coy will be filling in for me for the next two weeks while I am taking a vacation (at home and in Scotland). You may know Peter as the writer of many of BW's economics cover stories and as a main contributor to the Hot Property blog. He's a great guy as well. Please be nice to him...

Four Unfortunate Facts about the Job Market

After this morning's report, here are four unfortunate facts about the job market.

1) Manufacturing jobs are falling at their fastest rate since 1946, down -12.2% over the past year.

2) Private sector jobs outside of manufacturing are also falling at their fastest rate since 1946, down -4.0% over the past year.

3) Manufacturing jobs are falling much faster than the rest of the private sector. In fact, the 'excess' job decline in manufacturing (the difference between -12.2% and -4.0%) is the largest since 1975.

4) The ten-year job growth in the private sector is down to only 559K jobs. At this rate, we will hit zero ten-year private job growth next month or the month after.

One important question is whether there is a 'floor' for manufacturing jobs. So far, we haven't seen one. Over the past three months, manufacturing jobs have been falling at a -13.6% annual rate.

I would say that the evisceration of U.S. manufacturing may be our single biggest nonfinancial problem right now. I'm currently examining the extent to which this can be tied to trade.

Will the Republicans or the Democrats be the 'Party of Growth'?

Amity Shlaes has a very interesting commentary on Bloomberg. Shlaes responds to the Sanford scandal this way:

...instead of blowing up their marriages, Republicans might try blowing up their party platform.

The single most-profitable franchise for the Republican Party is growth, the kind of growth that sustains the relative competitiveness of the U.S. Instead of being the GOP, the Republicans should become the POG, the Party of Growth.

This growth franchise is Republicans’ for the taking because the Democratic Party leadership is in hot pursuit of other franchises -- the green biz, civil rights and their dearest goal, more government health care.

The growth franchise is also valuable because a lot of people, including many Democrats, recognize that a growth agenda is the only way to preclude a crisis worse than the current one. That crisis is the currency crisis that will occur if the world no longer wants to invest here.

Shlaes has four suggestions for making "the GOP a POG."

-- Junk the social conservatism.
-- Take budget-balancing seriously.
-- Push for growth-oriented tax cuts, the kind that make foreign businesses want to expand here.
-- Stand up for property rights.

Leaving aside the specifics of her proposals, I think Shlaes raises an important question: Will the Republicans or the Democrats become the Party of Growth? Right now, it's up for grabs.

Immelt Speech: U.S. Companies Begin to Realize Their Mistake

I'm going to make a forecast: Over the next couple of years, U.S-based companies will begin to realize that they made a big mistake relying so heavily on off-shoring.

Ironically--or perhaps not so ironically--it may be GE leading the way, just as GE and Jack Welch led the massive offshoring wave to India. Here are excerpts from a speech by Jeff Immelt, GE's CEO, in Detroit last Friday: (Thanks to my regular commenter LAO for pointing this out)

Throughout my career, America has seen so much economic growth that it was easy to take it as a given. We prospered from the productivity of the information age. But, we started to forget the fundamentals and lost sight of the core competencies of a successful modern economy. Many bought into the idea that America could go from a technology-based, export-oriented powerhouse to a services-led, consumption-based economy – and somehow still expect to prosper.
That idea was flat wrong. And what did we get in the bargain? We've seen a great vanishing of wealth. Our competitive edge has slipped away, and this has hit the middle class hard.

As a nation, we've been consuming more than we earn, saved too little and taken on far too much debt. Growth in research and development has slowed. Our country has made too little progress on some of the defining challenges of our time – like clean energy and affordable health care. Our budget and trade deficits have reached levels that are clearly not sustainable.

While some of America's competitors were throttling up on manufacturing and R&D, we deemphasized technology. Our economy tilted instead toward the quicker profits of financial services. While our financial services business has performed well, I can't tell you that we were entirely free of these errors. We weren't.

Leaders missed many opportunities to add to the capabilities of America. In 2000, the U.S. had a positive trade balance of high-tech products. By 2007, our trade deficit of the same products reached $50 billion. We have already lost our leadership in many growth industries, and other new opportunities are at risk. Trust in business is badly shaken, and it is going to take awhile to get it back.

Third: We must make a serious commitment to manufacturing and exports. This is a national imperative. We all know that the American consumer cannot lead our recovery. This economy must be driven by business investment and exports.

We should set a national goal to create high value added jobs and have manufacturing jobs be no less than 20 percent of total employment, about twice what it is today. And we should commit ourselves to compete and win with American exports.