Twenty Practical Steps to Better Corporate Governance | The Corporate Secretaries International Association (CSIA) Please click the li...
@SCCE #SCCEcei @RoySnellSCCE opening w SCCE match $ for LV shooting victims & announce new CEO http://pic.twitter.com/eDBCh8UVYw
— Joshua Toas (@JoshuaBToas) October 16, 2017
//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
from http://twitter.com/SCCE
October 17, 2017 at 07:24PM
via IFTTT
The New Guy. @SCCE #SCCEcei http://pic.twitter.com/vYDCFBhJ2d
— Kasey Ingram (@KaseyIngramJD) October 16, 2017
//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
from http://twitter.com/SCCE
October 17, 2017 at 07:24PM
via IFTTT
New @SCCE logos shared this morning at #SCCEcei http://pic.twitter.com/rvuH3rGSFx
— Kasey Ingram (@KaseyIngramJD) October 16, 2017
//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
from http://twitter.com/SCCE
October 17, 2017 at 07:24PM
via IFTTT
http://ift.tt/eA8V8J
This study examines experimentally how dishonest behavior in the form of misreporting others’ performance depends on the nature of provided incentives. We conduct a ‘lab in the field’ experiment with internal auditors during two large conferences in Germany and evaluate their performance and objectivity, measured as the extent to which they truthfully report the performance of other participants a real-effort task. It has been suggested in the literature that incentive-pay compensation for auditors has the potential to lead to dishonest behavior on their part, for instance when their payoff depends on the performance of the unit that they are auditing. We vary incentives in the experiment from individual (piece rate) to competitive (tournament against another auditor) and collective (based on performance within a team). In line with our hypotheses, we find that incentive-based compensation increases dishonest behavior among internal auditors: competitive incentives lead to under-reporting of other participants’ performance, while collective incentives lead to over-reporting of performance.
April 30, 2017 at 08:22PM
from Loukas Balafoutas
http://ift.tt/eA8V8J
This paper discusses the new financial regulations in the post–financial crisis period, focusing on capital and liquidity regulations. Basel III and the capital stress tests introduced new requirements and new definitions while retaining the structure of the pre-2010 requirements. The total number of requirements increased, making it difficult to determine which constraints are binding. We find that the new common equity tier 1 (CET1) and Level 1 high-quality liquid assets (HQLAs) are the binding constraints at large U.S. banks, especially for banks that are active in capital markets activities. Banks have been holding more CET1 and a larger share of Level 1 HQLAs since the financial crisis of 2007 to 2009. We also find that the market pricing of bank debt appears to have responded to changes in liquidity measures, especially at large capital markets banks. The Basel III regulatory capital ratios appear to have little direct influence on spreads.
April 30, 2017 at 08:22PM
from Baker, Colleen
http://ift.tt/eA8V8J
Now Sweden..Next the World? Seeing the burgeoning populations of muslim integration…unchecked by laws governing marriage the population explosion of polygamy is outpacing many countrys. McDonald’s in the city of Södertälje in the country…
April 30, 2017 at 08:27PM
from IWB
http://ift.tt/eA8V8J
The purpose of this paper is to analyze the contribution of intangible capital in performance design of market and non-market enterprises. The paper is based on a literature review of the subject and a sensitivity analysis of intangible assets evaluation model, based on a cash flow model type DCF (Discounted Cash Flow) and enriched with qualitative data collected from CAC 40 companies and mutual health. The inclusion of intangible assets in achieving performance remains a challenging exercise to develop given the nature and specificity of the structure to evaluate. Analysing the sensitivity of the evaluation model to fluctuations in intangible assets remains more difficult due to the strong link with the specificity of the model used and the assumptions on the independence of input factors. However, with some rearrangements, we can highlight the most likely intangible assets that can improve the performance of companies and mutual health.
April 30, 2017 at 08:22PM
from Jean de Dieu Kagambega
http://ift.tt/eA8V8J
Kasie Hunt: “I would like one very short answer to this question. Who in the Democratic party can beat President Trump in 2020?” Schumer: “Lots of people.” Hunt: “One name?” Schumer: “Not gonna pick…
April 30, 2017 at 08:27PM
from IWB
http://ift.tt/eA8V8J
According to conventional wisdom, multinational firms undertake vertical FDI in order to take advantage of cross-border factor cost differences and source the inputs from abroad at better terms. Recent empirical findings though document that this is not always the case. We provide theoretical support to the latter by demonstrating that when there is transfer of intangible assets between a multinational’s vertically related production plants, its parent firm can engage in vertical FDI in order to improve its cross-threat and its input sourcing terms domestically and not abroad as well as in order to exploit its intangible assets in another country. We also investigate the effects of trade liberalization and the welfare consequences of vertical FDI.
April 30, 2017 at 08:22PM
from Chrysovalantou Milliou
by BNI The measles outbreak within Minnesota’s Somali community continues to spread to more parts of the state. “Officials believe it was imported by a traveler or immigrant from a foreign country, since measles…
April 30, 2017 at 08:27PM
from IWB
Demonstrators gathered in Washington, D.C., and other cities around the world on Saturday for the 2017 People’s Climate March, a rally to demand political action to fight climate change.
This year’s march takes on increased significance, as it occurs on the 100th day in office of President Donald Trump. Trump has derided climate change as a “hoax” and “bullshit” and vowed to roll back regulations for the fossil fuel industries. He’s also said he would pull the United States out of the Paris Climate Agreement, a global pact to cooperate to cut greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate the impact of climate change. His advisers are reportedly still debating about whether the U.S. should pull out.
As people who care about the planet’s future prepared to march on Saturday, many carried funny, creative or just plain beautiful signs to amplify their voices. Here are some of our favorites.
A post shared by @miafeldzie on Apr 29, 2017 at 6:06am PDT
From Bend, Oregon! #climatemarch
A post shared by Deb Leon (@deb_leon) on Apr 29, 2017 at 7:17am PDT
Let’s march #peoplesclimatemarch #climatechangeisreal #climatemarch2017 #resist
A post shared by Jo (@singingjo) on Apr 29, 2017 at 4:22am PDT
A post shared by @caseyktierney on Apr 29, 2017 at 7:21am PDT
We’re off to D.C. for the People’s #ClimateMarch to stand up for our planet and its people!
A post shared by Ben & Jerry’s (@benandjerrys) on Apr 28, 2017 at 12:39pm PDT
Time to people’s #climatemarch !!! Because there’s no planet B
A post shared by Delia (@deliabrigitte) on Apr 29, 2017 at 6:42am PDT
#actonclimate #peoplesclimatemovement #climatemarch #climatemarchme
A post shared by Jesse McMahon (@scuppers1314) on Apr 29, 2017 at 7:19am PDT
Ready for the #climatemarch in Washington DC. @Peoples_Climate http://pic.twitter.com/IBg6ggBVeb
— Catherine Peters (@123catherinep) April 29, 2017
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
April 29, 2017 at 08:28PM
from Hilary Hanson
Chipotle just reported it’s best quarterly numbers since the 2015 E. coli outbreak cut the company’s stock price in half. The stock is responding, rising 4.86% as of 10:20 AM ET.
Credit Suisse analyst Jason West sent a note to clients April 26 raising his price target on the stock to $425 from $375. He reminded investors that the turnaround process is just beginning, and that there is a long and onerous road ahead.
“The pace of recovery should moderate from here as CMG begins to lap more normalized sales and expense trend,” West said. “We also continue to believe the cost of customer recapture will be higher than expected, particularly amidst a very tight labor market and increasing competition.”
West came to his $425 price target by valuing Chipotle based on “~20x 2018E EV/EBITDA”. He gave the stock a higher multiple than the 15X industry average because of Chipotle’s 8-9% new restaurant sales growth.
“We believe this pace of recovery is fully embedded in the stock at this price”, West said.
In the company’s earnings call, Chipotle did report a “payment systems breach,” which tempered gains for the stock after the close April 25. Chipotle has not released many details about the breach but Credit Suisse said “this issue could cause a moderate pullback in near-term sales trends.”
Click here for a real-time Chipotle chart.
Join the conversation about this story »
NOW WATCH: The world’s rarest and most ancient dog has just been rediscovered in the wild
April 26, 2017 at 08:27PM
from Greg Hoffman
None of the bad ideas about economic growth we’re about to discuss are new. But for the next few days — as Washington starts debating our tax code and budget in earnest — our country is going to be just lousy with them.
Despite Donald Trump’s promises to balance the budget and spur economic growth with infrastructure spending, he has instead decided to take old, hackneyed Republican economic policy and Trumpify it (which is to say, make it big league). That means a platform of massive tax cuts, deficit spending, and pushing government investment in public goods off to… whenever.
Of course, his surrogates — and some of the originators of these ideas — are out in force, giving their full-throated approval to ideas that have never proven their worth. The following is a smattering of all that.
We’ll start with Stephen Moore, who served as an adviser to Trump’s presidential campaign, in Wednesday’s Wall Street Journal.
Right now the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) is projecting that the economy will growth at about 1.9% over the next 30 years. That’s bleak, writes Moore. By his conjecturing, we can pay for Trump’s tax cuts, and take care of all our problems, if we can just put 3% GDP growth in our models.
From WSJ:
“…consider what happens to the CBO’s numbers assuming 3% annual growth. By 2040 the economy would expand not to $29.9 trillion, but to $38.3 trillion, according to an analysis by Research Affiliates, a California investment firm. That’s an additional output of $8.4 trillion—roughly the entire annual production today of every state west of the Mississippi River.”
(The country actually reports its first quarter GDP on Friday, and Bloomberg estimates it will come in at 1%.)
It sounds great, and considering that Moore is a holdover from the Reagan era, none of this should be surprising. That was a time when the CBO threw out economic models they didn’t like and simply built new ones. It was a time when so-called “Voodoo economics” really took hold of the Republican Party.
And you can see some of its questionable tenets in the pathway Moore explains will take us to 3%:
Where to start?
Moore does not address the jobs that would be lost thanks to self-driving vehicles (it’s not just valet parking folks, the trucking industry will be decimated by this), nor does he address the jobs that have already been lost thanks to technological advancement. He does not touch on the only thing that can mitigate this issue, which is retraining our workforce for a different kind of economy (education, where did that idea go?).
Moore does, however, address the fact that an economy that demands an expansion of the labor force requires immigration. Obviously, that’s antithetical to Trump policies, so he writes, embarrassingly… “immigration is America’s natural demographic safety valve. Letting in more legal immigrants—especially those with skills and special talents—may not happen under President Trump, but it can and should eventually.”
Where Moore and Trump seem to be on the exact same page, is on these tax cuts.
“The Tax Foundation predicted last year that the House Republican tax reform alone would raise wages by 8%, GDP by 9% and capital investment by 28%. If this is even close to being right, pass the tax cut now and stop obsessing about whether it is paid for within the short-term budget window,” he writes.
Of course, the Tax Foundation is a think tank that runs exactly on Moore’s speed. We’ve been hearing a similar line from the other Reagan-era economists lately. Larry Kudlow thinks we just need to get rid of “state-sponsored barriers to growth” (like Obamacare and taxes) and 3% GDP growth will be a breeze.
More and more, economists are rejecting these ideas, especially in an age of massive inequality when the government needs resources to blunt the dramatic impact of economic change (like robots, sir).
“Trump’s proposal to cut corporate tax rates won’t boost growth or create jobs. In fact, it will discourage corporate investment, as corporations and their shareholders earn even higher profits and pocket more of the cash–just like they did last time we tried a big corporate tax cut,” said Marshall Steinbaum, Senior Economist and Fellow at the Roosevelt Institute. “If Trump wants to encourage investment, he should close loopholes that CEOs exploit to move profits offshore and increase the effective tax rate on corporations, their CEOs, and their shareholders.”
But of course, that’s not what’s happening. Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin is running around talking about how tax cuts will pay for themselves. He will be helped with that, in part, by dynamic scoring — another Reagan era practice of adding the estimated growth tax cuts will “create” to budget projections.
Meanwhile, the originator of all this, economist Arthur Laffer of “Laffer curve” fame, has a feature in the New York Times. Luckily, his ideas are buttressed by appropriate criticism from both sides of the aisle.
From NYT:
Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a former Congressional Budget Office director who advised Senator John McCain’s Republican presidential campaign in 2008, was equally skeptical. “I can imagine cutting the rate to 15 percent,” he said. “I can imagine growing a percentage point faster. I can imagine raising $2 trillion in revenue. I can’t imagine them being one and the same policy.”
Laffer on the other hand, says the tax cuts are a “no-brainer.”
I suppose we agree on that.
Join the conversation about this story »
NOW WATCH: 6 things the Samsung Galaxy S8 can do that the iPhone can’t
April 26, 2017 at 08:27PM
from Linette Lopez
“YOU may smile, but it will come,” said Henry Ford in 1940, predicting the arrival of a machine that was part-automobile and part-aeroplane. For decades flying cars have obsessed technologists but eluded their mastery. Finally there is reason to believe. Several firms have offered hope that flying people in small pods for short trips might become a reality in the next decade. These are not cars, as most are not fit to drive on land, but rather small vehicles, which can rise and land vertically, like quiet helicopters.
A prototype of a small electric plane capable of flying up to 300 kilometres per hour, made by Lilium, a German startup, completed a successful test over Bavaria on April 20th. Lilium is starting work on a five-seat vehicle and hopes to offer a ride-hailing service. Another German firm, e-volo, has been testing a flying vehicle for several years. It recently showed off the second version of its electric Volocopter (pictured), which could be certified for flight as soon as next year.
There are at least a dozen firms experimenting with making small flying vehicles in different guises, including Airbus, an aerospace giant, in partnership with Italdesign Giugiaro, a division of Volkswagen, a carmaker. Many plan to have a certified pilot in command at the beginning and then move on to an autonomous set-up when regulations allow. Motorcycle-type vehicles, which you sit astride, are also in the works.
No matter which manufacturer is quickest to gain velocity, Uber, a ride-hailing firm, aims to be at the centre of things. On April 25th it held an event in Dallas to announce its plan to offer a service where people can hail an electric “vertical takeoff and landing” vehicle and ride it quickly to destinations that would otherwise take hours in heavy traffic. Uber does not want to build these aircraft or landing pads itself, just as it does not own its own cars. Instead, it plans to collaborate with other companies. But Jeff Holden, Uber’s chief product officer, does not exclude the possibility that the firm may at the outset own some aircraft, which he estimates will cost around $1m each.
The firm plans to have a prototype of its service ready by 2020. It will launch it first in Dallas and in Dubai, both cities where the authorities have deep aviation expertise and where people commute long distances. The firm rather optimistically promises that the cost per aerial mile for passengers will be roughly that of its low-cost car service, UberX.
There is plenty for manufacturers and services like Uber to overcome beyond gravity. For battery-powered models, range is limited and the charging rate remains slow. Manufacturers will need to ensure that vehicles can take off and land quietly, if this new form of transport is to stand a chance in cities. How to oversee and license the new aircraft, which are subject to much tougher rules than cars, will be a subject of intense debate among rule-makers, who tend to move slowly and are just getting to grips with drones. Drivers of flying vehicles are also likely to require a pilot’s licence, albeit perhaps a simplified “sports” licence. The journey ahead will be a long one.
April 26, 2017 at 08:26PM
from
|
|
Sindee retweeted:
Wow this is incredible crazy $CDII #CorpGov @kwads1000
April 26, 2017 at 08:20PM
https://twitter.com/vladimiroborw21/status/857252558053703683
from Sindee
http://ift.tt/1Q0Nirn
Free Intraday Cash Tips from Tipz.in for 27th Apr 2017
JSWSTEEL 
| Action | Trigger Price | Stop Loss | Target-1 | Target-2 |
| BUY ABOVE | 200 | 198 | 201.5 | 205 |
| S.SELL BELOW | 197 | 199.5 | 196 | 193 |
Click here for recommendations of stocks below Rs.25
PNB
| Action | Trigger Price | Stop Loss | Target-1 | Target-2 |
| BUY ABOVE | 168 | 165.5 | 170 | 174 |
| S.SELL BELOW | 165 | 167 | 163 | 158 |
MARICO
| Action | Trigger Price | Stop Loss | Target-1 | Target-2 |
| BUY ABOVE | 325 | 320 | 328 | 332 |
| S.SELL BELOW | 319 | 322 | 316 | 309 |
April 26, 2017 at 08:28PM
from noreply@blogger.com (Ak Pathik)
