Saturday, August 17, 2013
Wednesday, July 17, 2013
Tata company-NOT SERIOUS - PAID PENALITY
'Cut and paste' job costs Tata company Rs. 2.28 lakh
Sebi said it will not initiate any enforcement action against the company. A consent order enables settling administrative or civil proceedings between the regulator and the party concerned.
 |
An erroneous 'cut and paste' job in updating its shareholding pattern has cost a Tata group firm, The Tinplate Company of India , an amount of Rs. 2.28 lakh as payment towards settlement of a case with the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi).
Sebi, in a consent order dated June 28, has settled charges of takeover norms violation by TCIL after it paid Rs. 2.28 lakh.
Besides, the market regulator said it will not initiate any enforcement action against the company. A consent order enables settling administrative or civil proceedings between the regulator and the party concerned. The company had been charged with delay in filing the shareholding details under Sebi's takeover regulations for 2009 and 2010. Besides, there was inaccurate disclosure regarding change in shareholding of the company between March 31, 2010 and March 31, 2011. However, "change in shareholding had never taken place but that the change in the shareholding which had actually taken place between March 31, 2010 and March 31, 2011 and had already been indicated in the relevant disclosures for that particular year had been repeated for the next year due to a 'cut and paste' error."
Consequently, the disclosures for the period between March 31, 2010 and March 31, 2011 indicated a change in shareholding pattern even though there was no such change. Also, there was no change in control of the company during the period.
TCIL submitted an application with Sebi in December 2012 following which their representatives held a meeting with the regulator's internal committee on consent. After that, the consent terms were placed before the high powered advisory committee of Sebi. The committee recommended the case for settlement upon payment of Rs. 2.28 lakh towards settlement charges. The applicant (TCIL) has remitted the sum towards settlement fees. In a separate consent order, Sebi has settled charges of takeover norms violation by Ashok Alco-Chem Ltd after it paid Rs. 3.52 lakh. The company had not filed the disclosures regarding its shareholding details between 2001 and 2007 and 2009 within specific time-frame.
Sunday, July 14, 2013
-Renewable Energy-Solar attracts $3.86 bn funding ....
Solar sector attracts $3.86 bn funding in April-June
PRESS TRUST OF INDIA : NEW DELHI, JUL 12 2013, 13:34 IST
The solar sector has attracted total funding of $3.86 bn, through 40 deals, including three Indian transactions, says a report.
According to the Mercom Capital Group's second quarter funding and M&A activity report for solar sector, the VC funding in the solar sector continued to be subpar in the second quarter of 2013, with USD 189 million in VC funding in April-June period compared to USD 126 million last quarter.
The report analysed funding on the basis of four categories -- project funding, VC funding, debt funding and others. Three Indian deals three were listed in the project funding category while one Fortum's acquisition of a solar power plant in Rajasthan was included in the project M&A category.
The three Indian deals in Q2 this year include Acme Solar's USD 50 million loan for its 25 MW photovoltaic power plant in Madhya Pradesh, followed by Welspun Energy's financial closure of its upcoming 20 MW solar power project in Maharashtra, wherein financial institutions have committed to a long-term project funding of USD 22.5 million.Further Welspun Energy, received around USD 8 million in funding from financial institutions for its Karnataka solar project.
Among the VC deals solar downstream companies received USD 128 million in funding, Mercom Capital said. "With solar technology companies struggling, investments have been going to downstream companies," Mercom Capital Group CEO Raj Prabhu said. Prabhu further added that "investments into solar technology companies haven't completely dried up. Small venture rounds are still going to several niche technology companies instead of the larger deals that were typical for thin film, CSP and CPV companies."
Meanwhile, solar M&A activity in Q2 2013 amounted to USD 1.27 billion in 18 transactions."Themes emerging out of this quarter's M&A activity included: consolidation in the inverter market, strategic acquisitions, and acquisitions of distressed assets/ companies," Mercom Capital added.
Sunday, November 25, 2012
250 TIMES PREMIUM....
| ||||
Friday, November 23, 2012
USA- FISCAL CLIFF
Nov. 21, 2012, 12:55 p.m. EST 10 people who led us to the ‘fiscal cliff’ Commentary: From Laffer to Obama, they fed our greed and guilt By Rex Nutting, MarketWatch
WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — With our political leaders locked in a fiscal struggle that threatens to throw the economy off a so-called cliff and into recession, you might be wondering how we got to this place.
Remember that this supposed fiscal cliff is the direct result of two contradictory impulses in American life: Greed and guilt. Greed for low taxes, a strong military, a strong safety net and lots of government spending for everyone. And guilt that we weren’t paying our way. Read “Stop calling it a ‘fiscal cliff’”
All of us (or almost all) had a role in this melodrama, either benefiting from the spending or from the lower tax rates. Despite our culpability, it took strong national leaders to foster the heady mix of greed and guilt that brought us to this spot.
Here are the 10 people most responsible for bringing us to the edge of the fiscal cliff:
Arthur Laffer. Laffer was the economist who proved the existence of the free lunch. His Laffer Curve showed, in theory, that cutting tax rates would actually increase tax revenue. He gave intellectual cover to those conservatives who wanted to cut taxes, but who didn’t want to be seen as contributing to a big deficit. He gave them a guilt-free way to cut revenue.
There’s only one problem: Laffer’s ideas didn’t pan out in practice: Tax cuts don’t pay for themselves. Tax cuts are a major cause of our $16 trillion national debt.
Pete Peterson. If there’s one person who we can blame for making us feel guilty about the federal deficit, it’s Peterson, a hedge-fund billionaire who was a cabinet secretary in the Reagan administration. Peterson founded, funded or supported most of the institutions in
Without Peterson’s billions and the guilt it bought, the deficit would be a fringe issue.
Bill Clinton. President Clinton made budget surpluses look easy. The budget was in the black the last four years of his administration. What’s worse, he made surpluses look like a sure thing.
By the time Clinton
Alan Greenspan. Greenspan was a high priest of both guilt and greed. He had always warned Congress about the dangers of the deficits, but his biggest failure as Federal Reserve chairman was the day in 2001 he told Congress that the worst thing it could do was pay down the debt because that would destroy the Treasury market and the Fed’s power to control the economy.
That was the day he endorsed the Bush tax cuts. The Maestro’s endorsement gave intellectual cover to the conservatives who wanted to cut taxes, but who didn’t want to feel guilty.
Greenspan also catered to our greedy side as a serial bubble-blower. He inflated the housing bubble in the 2000s by keeping interest rates low and by refusing to regulate the shadow banking system.
George W. Bush . No one is more responsible for racking up our debt than Bush. He campaigned in 2000 promising to cut taxes in order to avoid paying down the national debt. And when the recession of 2001 arrived, he said tax cuts would revive the economy. And when the economy didn’t revive, he cut taxes some more. Tax cuts for all occasions. And it was all guilt-free
Dick Cheney. While Bush was busy cutting taxes, Cheney was busy planning the war on terror. For the first time in our history, we sent our military into battle without raising taxes at home to help pay for it. It added trillions to the debt.
David Lereah. Lereah was the chief economist for the National Association of Realtors and was perhaps the most enthusiastic and public cheerleader for the housing bubble. Even after the bubble began to deflate, Lereah still insisted that real-estate investments would never lose money.
Of course, Lereah didn’t cause the bubble all by himself, but he does embody the greed that engulfed the real estate industry, the Wall Street banks that profited from it, and the homeowners who took on more debt than they could ever hope to repay.
Grover Norquist. As the head of a powerful lobbying and campaign-finance organization, Norquist forced almost every Republican officeholder to sign a pledge to never raise taxes under any circumstance. If anyone declined to sign or dared to violate the pledge, Norquist would back a primary challenger. The threat worked.
The Norquist pledge blocked any possibility of a budget deal between Democrats and Republicans over the past two years. Democrats insisted that any plan to balance the budget must include more revenue as well as spending cuts, but Republicans held solid against any tax increase.
There are signs that Norquist could be losing his hold on the party. Several Republicans won elections this year without signing his pledge, and several incumbents have said they don’t feel bound by the pledge any more.
Barack Obama. Obama may be the perfect representative of our age, because he encapsulates our national schizophrenia over the budget. He honors both the greed and the guilt. He presided over the largest deficits in history, including a large fiscal stimulus, bailouts of the auto industry, and an expansion of the safety net.
But Obama also lectures us about the need for the government to tighten its belt, even during a recession. He wants to raise taxes, if only on a few, and he’s expressed willingness to cut into the great middle-class entitlements. It was Obama’s administration that first suggested the bargain in 2011 that created the fiscal cliff.
John Boehner. The House speaker is trapped in Grover Norquist’s world. He’s a pragmatic legislator who accepts that the government needs more revenue, but his caucus in the House doesn’t agree. In the summer of 2011, Boehner nearly forced the nation to default on its debt because he couldn’t deliver the votes necessary to raise taxes.
In the end, Boehner was forced to punt the problem down the road. Today’s fiscal cliff showdown is the result of Boehner’s inability to lead the House Republicans to a deal.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/10-people-who-led-us-to-the-fiscal-cliff-2012-11-21?pagenumber=5
USA-FISCAL CLIFF and LEADERS...
REX NUTTING Archives | Email alerts
Nov. 21, 2012, 12:55 p.m. EST 10 people who led us to the ‘fiscal cliff’ Commentary: From Laffer to Obama, they fed our greed and guilt By Rex Nutting, MarketWatch
WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — With our political leaders locked in a fiscal struggle that threatens to throw the economy off a so-called cliff and into recession, you might be wondering how we got to this place.
Remember that this supposed fiscal cliff is the direct result of two contradictory impulses in American life: Greed and guilt. Greed for low taxes, a strong military, a strong safety net and lots of government spending for everyone. And guilt that we weren’t paying our way. Read “Stop calling it a ‘fiscal cliff’”
All of us (or almost all) had a role in this melodrama, either benefiting from the spending or from the lower tax rates. Despite our culpability, it took strong national leaders to foster the heady mix of greed and guilt that brought us to this spot.
Here are the 10 people most responsible for bringing us to the edge of the fiscal cliff:
Arthur Laffer. Laffer was the economist who proved the existence of the free lunch. His Laffer Curve showed, in theory, that cutting tax rates would actually increase tax revenue. He gave intellectual cover to those conservatives who wanted to cut taxes, but who didn’t want to be seen as contributing to a big deficit. He gave them a guilt-free way to cut revenue.
There’s only one problem: Laffer’s ideas didn’t pan out in practice: Tax cuts don’t pay for themselves. Tax cuts are a major cause of our $16 trillion national debt.
Pete Peterson. If there’s one person who we can blame for making us feel guilty about the federal deficit, it’s Peterson, a hedge-fund billionaire who was a cabinet secretary in the Reagan administration. Peterson founded, funded or supported most of the institutions in Washington devoted to publicizing the problem of the deficit, including the Concord Coalition, the Peterson Foundation, The Fiscal Times, and the anti-deficit documentary “I.O.U.S.A.”
Without Peterson’s billions and the guilt it bought, the deficit would be a fringe issue.
Bill Clinton. President Clinton made budget surpluses look easy. The budget was in the black the last four years of his administration. What’s worse, he made surpluses look like a sure thing.
Clinton’s surpluses were partly the result of Washington going on a serious budget diet, with higher taxes paired with moderation in spending. But it was the booming economy — and higher taxes on capital income — that turned the modest deficits of the early Clinton years into surpluses.
By the time Clinton left office, politicians were beginning to talk about perpetual surpluses, in exactly the same way that hucksters on Wall Street were talking about a perpetual bull market. And with exactly the same outcome.
Alan Greenspan. Greenspan was a high priest of both guilt and greed. He had always warned Congress about the dangers of the deficits, but his biggest failure as Federal Reserve chairman was the day in 2001 he told Congress that the worst thing it could do was pay down the debt because that would destroy the Treasury market and the Fed’s power to control the economy.
That was the day he endorsed the Bush tax cuts. The Maestro’s endorsement gave intellectual cover to the conservatives who wanted to cut taxes, but who didn’t want to feel guilty.
Greenspan also catered to our greedy side as a serial bubble-blower. He inflated the housing bubble in the 2000s by keeping interest rates low and by refusing to regulate the shadow banking system.
George W. Bush . No one is more responsible for racking up our debt than Bush. He campaigned in 2000 promising to cut taxes in order to avoid paying down the national debt. And when the recession of 2001 arrived, he said tax cuts would revive the economy. And when the economy didn’t revive, he cut taxes some more. Tax cuts for all occasions. And it was all guilt-free
Dick Cheney. While Bush was busy cutting taxes, Cheney was busy planning the war on terror. For the first time in our history, we sent our military into battle without raising taxes at home to help pay for it. It added trillions to the debt.
David Lereah. Lereah was the chief economist for the National Association of Realtors and was perhaps the most enthusiastic and public cheerleader for the housing bubble. Even after the bubble began to deflate, Lereah still insisted that real-estate investments would never lose money.
Of course, Lereah didn’t cause the bubble all by himself, but he does embody the greed that engulfed the real estate industry, the Wall Street banks that profited from it, and the homeowners who took on more debt than they could ever hope to repay.
Grover Norquist. As the head of a powerful lobbying and campaign-finance organization, Norquist forced almost every Republican officeholder to sign a pledge to never raise taxes under any circumstance. If anyone declined to sign or dared to violate the pledge, Norquist would back a primary challenger. The threat worked.
The Norquist pledge blocked any possibility of a budget deal between Democrats and Republicans over the past two years. Democrats insisted that any plan to balance the budget must include more revenue as well as spending cuts, but Republicans held solid against any tax increase.
There are signs that Norquist could be losing his hold on the party. Several Republicans won elections this year without signing his pledge, and several incumbents have said they don’t feel bound by the pledge any more.
Barack Obama. Obama may be the perfect representative of our age, because he encapsulates our national schizophrenia over the budget. He honors both the greed and the guilt. He presided over the largest deficits in history, including a large fiscal stimulus, bailouts of the auto industry, and an expansion of the safety net.
But Obama also lectures us about the need for the government to tighten its belt, even during a recession. He wants to raise taxes, if only on a few, and he’s expressed willingness to cut into the great middle-class entitlements. It was Obama’s administration that first suggested the bargain in 2011 that created the fiscal cliff.
John Boehner. The House speaker is trapped in Grover Norquist’s world. He’s a pragmatic legislator who accepts that the government needs more revenue, but his caucus in the House doesn’t agree. In the summer of 2011, Boehner nearly forced the nation to default on its debt because he couldn’t deliver the votes necessary to raise taxes.
In the end, Boehner was forced to punt the problem down the road. Today’s fiscal cliff showdown is the result of Boehner’s inability to lead the House Republicans to a deal.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/10-people-who-led-us-to-the-fiscal-cliff-2012-11-21?pagenumber=5
Nov. 21, 2012, 12:55 p.m. EST 10 people who led us to the ‘fiscal cliff’ Commentary: From Laffer to Obama, they fed our greed and guilt By Rex Nutting, MarketWatch
WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — With our political leaders locked in a fiscal struggle that threatens to throw the economy off a so-called cliff and into recession, you might be wondering how we got to this place.
Remember that this supposed fiscal cliff is the direct result of two contradictory impulses in American life: Greed and guilt. Greed for low taxes, a strong military, a strong safety net and lots of government spending for everyone. And guilt that we weren’t paying our way. Read “Stop calling it a ‘fiscal cliff’”
All of us (or almost all) had a role in this melodrama, either benefiting from the spending or from the lower tax rates. Despite our culpability, it took strong national leaders to foster the heady mix of greed and guilt that brought us to this spot.
Here are the 10 people most responsible for bringing us to the edge of the fiscal cliff:
Arthur Laffer. Laffer was the economist who proved the existence of the free lunch. His Laffer Curve showed, in theory, that cutting tax rates would actually increase tax revenue. He gave intellectual cover to those conservatives who wanted to cut taxes, but who didn’t want to be seen as contributing to a big deficit. He gave them a guilt-free way to cut revenue.
There’s only one problem: Laffer’s ideas didn’t pan out in practice: Tax cuts don’t pay for themselves. Tax cuts are a major cause of our $16 trillion national debt.
Pete Peterson. If there’s one person who we can blame for making us feel guilty about the federal deficit, it’s Peterson, a hedge-fund billionaire who was a cabinet secretary in the Reagan administration. Peterson founded, funded or supported most of the institutions in Washington devoted to publicizing the problem of the deficit, including the Concord Coalition, the Peterson Foundation, The Fiscal Times, and the anti-deficit documentary “I.O.U.S.A.”
Without Peterson’s billions and the guilt it bought, the deficit would be a fringe issue.
Bill Clinton. President Clinton made budget surpluses look easy. The budget was in the black the last four years of his administration. What’s worse, he made surpluses look like a sure thing.
Clinton’s surpluses were partly the result of Washington going on a serious budget diet, with higher taxes paired with moderation in spending. But it was the booming economy — and higher taxes on capital income — that turned the modest deficits of the early Clinton years into surpluses.
By the time Clinton left office, politicians were beginning to talk about perpetual surpluses, in exactly the same way that hucksters on Wall Street were talking about a perpetual bull market. And with exactly the same outcome.
Alan Greenspan. Greenspan was a high priest of both guilt and greed. He had always warned Congress about the dangers of the deficits, but his biggest failure as Federal Reserve chairman was the day in 2001 he told Congress that the worst thing it could do was pay down the debt because that would destroy the Treasury market and the Fed’s power to control the economy.
That was the day he endorsed the Bush tax cuts. The Maestro’s endorsement gave intellectual cover to the conservatives who wanted to cut taxes, but who didn’t want to feel guilty.
Greenspan also catered to our greedy side as a serial bubble-blower. He inflated the housing bubble in the 2000s by keeping interest rates low and by refusing to regulate the shadow banking system.
George W. Bush . No one is more responsible for racking up our debt than Bush. He campaigned in 2000 promising to cut taxes in order to avoid paying down the national debt. And when the recession of 2001 arrived, he said tax cuts would revive the economy. And when the economy didn’t revive, he cut taxes some more. Tax cuts for all occasions. And it was all guilt-free
Dick Cheney. While Bush was busy cutting taxes, Cheney was busy planning the war on terror. For the first time in our history, we sent our military into battle without raising taxes at home to help pay for it. It added trillions to the debt.
David Lereah. Lereah was the chief economist for the National Association of Realtors and was perhaps the most enthusiastic and public cheerleader for the housing bubble. Even after the bubble began to deflate, Lereah still insisted that real-estate investments would never lose money.
Of course, Lereah didn’t cause the bubble all by himself, but he does embody the greed that engulfed the real estate industry, the Wall Street banks that profited from it, and the homeowners who took on more debt than they could ever hope to repay.
Grover Norquist. As the head of a powerful lobbying and campaign-finance organization, Norquist forced almost every Republican officeholder to sign a pledge to never raise taxes under any circumstance. If anyone declined to sign or dared to violate the pledge, Norquist would back a primary challenger. The threat worked.
The Norquist pledge blocked any possibility of a budget deal between Democrats and Republicans over the past two years. Democrats insisted that any plan to balance the budget must include more revenue as well as spending cuts, but Republicans held solid against any tax increase.
There are signs that Norquist could be losing his hold on the party. Several Republicans won elections this year without signing his pledge, and several incumbents have said they don’t feel bound by the pledge any more.
Barack Obama. Obama may be the perfect representative of our age, because he encapsulates our national schizophrenia over the budget. He honors both the greed and the guilt. He presided over the largest deficits in history, including a large fiscal stimulus, bailouts of the auto industry, and an expansion of the safety net.
But Obama also lectures us about the need for the government to tighten its belt, even during a recession. He wants to raise taxes, if only on a few, and he’s expressed willingness to cut into the great middle-class entitlements. It was Obama’s administration that first suggested the bargain in 2011 that created the fiscal cliff.
John Boehner. The House speaker is trapped in Grover Norquist’s world. He’s a pragmatic legislator who accepts that the government needs more revenue, but his caucus in the House doesn’t agree. In the summer of 2011, Boehner nearly forced the nation to default on its debt because he couldn’t deliver the votes necessary to raise taxes.
In the end, Boehner was forced to punt the problem down the road. Today’s fiscal cliff showdown is the result of Boehner’s inability to lead the House Republicans to a deal.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/10-people-who-led-us-to-the-fiscal-cliff-2012-11-21?pagenumber=5
Sunday, October 28, 2012
THE SECRECY- THE MICROSOFT WAY!!!!
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- When it unveiled its Surface tablet, Microsoft pulled off something increasingly rare in the tech world: a true surprise.
Even notoriously tight-lipped Apple (AAPL, Fortune 500) can no longer keep details of its iGizmos from reaching the public ahead of the company's carefully crafted launch events.
Microsoft (MSFT, Fortune 500)knew that if Surface details leaked out, the consequences could be disastrous. For the first time ever, it planned to bypass its PC manufacturing partners and directly compete with them. Also, Microsoft was extremely late to the tablet game. Tipping off rivals like Apple could have set Microsoft back even further.
That's why the company went to extreme -- sometimes painful and often hilariously excessive -- lengths to keep Surface a secret.
The development team worked in a secured building dubbed "The Vault." When choosing a name for the team -- a Microsoft custom -- the group picked "WDS," an acronym that stood for absolutely nothing. It was the winner of a contest held to pick the most obscure, nonsensical name -- one that could never be linked back to Surface.
"When people heard about the WDS team, everyone said, 'Tell us what it means!'" says Panos Panay, Microsoft's hardware chief. "I would say, 'exactly.' No one knew what we were working on.".........http://money.cnn.com/2012/10/28/technology/mobile/microsoft-surface/index.html?iid=HP_LN
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)