Showing posts with label Inca Cola News. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Inca Cola News. Show all posts

Friday, April 10, 2009

It really is everything you've ever wanted to know about the Amazon rainforest

TO BE NOTED: From Inca Kola News:

"A most impressive map of the Amazon rainforest

A couple of weeks ago IKN ran this post with a chart that shows just how much (read 'how little') of the Amazon Rain forest is protected by its host countries. Well now the people behind the study RAISG, have released their truly fabulous interactive zoom-in detailed map of the whole region, it's protected areas, its indigenous territories etc etc

Click to enlarge (it gets very big)

The above map is a screenshot from the site, but you should really go to the link right here and have a play for yourself. It really is everything you've ever wanted to know about the Amazon rainforest but were too afraid to ask and you can zoom in and out, change parameters, look in close detail and all the rest. A highly recommended website and superb source material.

Friday, March 20, 2009

This chart shows the percentage of GDP made up by incoming remittances for the major LatAm countries

TO BE NOTED: From Inca Kola:

"Remittances in LatAm, 2008 (the chart of the day)

There has been ink spilled already on the slowdown on LatAm remittances (i.e. money sent back from industrialized nations by LatAm citizens living over there) that the financial crisis is causing, but so far the analysis has been stuck at the amounts of money being sent over and hasn't really examined which countries are more likely to feel the pinch.

This chart shows the percentage of GDP made up by incoming remittances for the major LatAm countries (with all due respect places like Belize are left out as their tiny GDPs skew the results out of shape and don't provide a fair comparative sample). The remittances data used comes from the Interamerican Development bank and the country GDP figures are from the CIA using the purchasing power parity (PPP) figures.


Click to enlarge

Top of the pops on this poll is El Salvador, a country that relies on cash sent home for 8.35% of its country GDP; that's an enormous figure and is comparable to the direct effect copper has on the GDP of Chile. Next up are three other Central American states, Guatemala (6.15%), Nicaragua (5.76%) and the Dominican Republic (3.73%). Only then does South America appear, with Ecuador (2.64%), Bolivia (2.51%) and Paraguay (2.4%).

Mexico is next at 1.59% but deserves a special mention due to the absolute size of its remittances trade. At U$25.145Bn it is by far the largest destination for remittances (second is Brazil at U$7.2Bn) and Mexico in fact accounts for 38.44% of all remittances received in LatAm in 2008.

Finally, the trio of Costa Rica (1.25%), Peru (1.24%) and Colombia (1.19%) are the other three countries that beat the regionwide average of Remittances/GDP of 1.09%. It's safe to say that all of the above countries will feel the effects of a slowdown in remittances in 2009 and beyond, with the first tranche of Central American states, Mexico, Ecuador, Bolivia and Paraguay feeling the worst effects.

"The law does not cover emergencies derived from the global crisis"

From Inca Kola:

"Citigroup (C): Mexico moves the goalposts


And so Citigroup can likely keep Banamex, according to Mexican gov't politicos that have just earned themselves a "one large favour owed to me" card (and will surely know how to use it). Reuters translates the moneyline which is being used....

"The law does not cover emergencies derived from the global crisis"

.....which is, of course, a total affront to logic and commonsense. Y'see according to Mexican lawmakers the clear legal statute that does not allow any foreign government to hold more than 10% of a bank doing trade in Mexico suddenly doesn't count because......because....because the US gov't didn't WANT to buy 36% of Citigroup ....and that makes it different. Cos they said so. And that national laws go out the window and Mexican pants are dropped to US pressures isn't really news. After all, it's greedy human beings we're dealing with here so logic obviously has to take a back seat. I'll just shrug my shoulders and scrunch my brow a bit and go "waddya expect?".

Bloomberg does a good job of explaining the outcome of the Mexican mental and legal gymnastics that lawmakers have gone through to get to this point. Here's the link worth reading. The only thing lacking from both Reuters and Bloomie's reports are meaningful opposition quotes and positions. Bloomie has.......

"If it’s a proposal that helps, that doesn’t infringe against the sovereignty, the nationalism and the interests of Mexico, I say it should be approved. If it infringes, we’re going to dispute it.”

.......from an opposition PRD flunkey and Reuters hints at previous "pressure from nationalists", but the comments are low key. This is strange, because this story will create open season on a Felipe Calderon (allegedly) selling out la patria to the gringos. Lopez Obrador and company will milk this one for all it's worth; and it's worth a lot. Calderon gets the piñata treatment as of tomorrow morning.

Digg This!Add to del.icio.usStumble It!Post a commentEmail this

1 comments:

Don said...

I'm still not clear as to what their position is if the US has to seize Citi. It sounds like we can. Was that mentioned anywhere?

Don the libertarian Democrat

Sunday, March 1, 2009

if the US Gov't takes its 36% stake in Citigroup then it will be a larger-than-10% shareholder of Banamex, something against Mexican law. Won't it?

From Inca Kola News:

"Citigroup and Banamex: There's a fight brewing


The Mex Files has a post up that notes the Mexican angle to last week's news about Citigroup giving 36% of itself over to the US Government. RG starts his note by saying that it's a story you probably won't get to read North of the Rio Grande.

I beg to differ. I think it might become a very big story indeed.

The nub of the issue revolves around Mexican law, which states in crystalline manner that foreign governments cannot own more than 10% of any bank that operates inside Mexico. It's as clear as a bell and on the statute. So as Banamex is a wholly owned subsidiary of Citigroup (C paid $12.1Bn or so back in 2001 for the bank) if the US Gov't takes its 36% stake in Citigroup then it will be a larger-than-10% shareholder of Banamex, something against Mexican law. Won't it?

Well, maybe yes and maybe no. It was interesting that Citi's CEO, Vikram "still got a job" Pandit, spent two days down Mexico way earlier this month. He met with the bank honchos of course, but also gov't lackeys and the regulator dudes too, so we hear. He also made it very plain that Citigroup plans to hold on to Banamex, saying things like the Banamex is Citi and Citi is Banamex and may sacred matrimory reign etc etc. Pandit dixit Feb 20th 2009:

"I want to make it very clear: Citi and Banamex are one and the same......The future of Citi is in emerging markets. It’s in Latin America. It’s in Mexico with Banamex.”

So with last week's Citigroup/US Gov't announcement that already has Mexican officialdom and opposition politicos smelling blood, it's worth noting how Pandit recently split C into two parts, namely Citi Holdings (all the bad stuff) and Citicorp (all the retail banking things that are profitable and everyone likes, including Banamex).

So here's the question that's been itching at me all weekend: Do Citigroup's intentions regarding Banamex signal that the US Gov't is only (or majority) buying into Citi Holdings, the toxic end of C?

It's intriguing. It would be an über-underhand move concealed from the market so far and would cause uproar if the news hit. If it is true, then the US taxpayer is getting an even worse deal than s/he thought. In fact, it would likely make Uncle Sam the majority holder in the toxic bank to end all toxic banks. However it does fit the Citigroup line that says Banamex is safe and not in any legal trouble and will stay part of C.

However, if in all likelihood it's not true and the US gov't is getting 36% of the whole shebang, Citigroup is undoubtedly breaking Mexican law by holding onto ownership of Banamex. So either Mexico changes the law to suit present circumstances (possible, though it will be an absolute political field day for Calderon's opposition) or Banamex will have to be sold to a third party, something that Pandit clearly doesn't want to happen.

Already there are overtures being made by other banks, which isn't surprising because unlike its lamentable parent company Banamex is a well-managed and highly profitable bank. I'd go as far as to say that Banamex is quite the jewel in the Citigroup crown and as such a prized asset that would be a major loss for both C and Pandit. But sharks are circling all right. For example here's an AP report noting Brazil's Itau is interested in the asset.

The price tag being bandied around the market right now is something in the region of U$12Bn to US$15Bn, meaning that Citigroup would most probably walk away with its original investment money (not to mention the eight years of profits generated by the subsidiary). Let's see how the story develops, but you have to wonder if Banamex is the canary in Pandit's coalmine. After all the moves and sounds made by Pandit this month any eventual sale of Banamex might become the straw that breaks the camel's back* and sees him "being resigned".

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Appendix: A few stats about Banamex as culled from the C website. This gives you an idea as to why Pandit wants to keep a tight hold.
  • 1,233 branches
  • 28,759 employees
  • 4,492 ATMs
  • 7.9 million credit cards
  • 2.6 million checking cccounts
  • 20.52% of all assets in the Mexican banking system
But wait! There's more!
  • Seguros Banamex (Insurance): 5th largest Mexican insurance company
  • Afore Banamex (Pension Funds): Mexico's largest private pension fund with over 4 million affiliates
  • Accival - Acciones y Valores de México (Brokerage House): Top Brokerage of the country holding 16% of assets

* metaphor mixing is a sacred right of the blogger

Digg This!Add to del.icio.usStumble It!Post a commentEmail this



Me:

Blogger Don said...

What you're saying is that Citi has a $15 billion asset that it doesn't want to sell. But if Citi was seized, someone would pay $15 billion or so for Banamex.

There's been a lot of talk about holding companies, but I wonder if the US taxpayer knows that Citi could raise $15 billion on its own.

What you describe is an attempt to allow Citi to keep Banamex, which is where the profit really is. In other words, we're funding Citi so that it can keep Banamex. Am I wrong?

Don the libertarian Democrat

March 1, 2009 3:23 PM

And a response:

Otto Rock said...

That's kind of right, Don.

Perhaps the more pressing issue is that Pandit&Co realize the enormous difference between a $15Bn asset and $15Bn in cash right now. If Banamex were sold, the money raised would have to be thrown down the bottomless pit and lost forver. However the assets (if C can hang onto them) will make C worth something in Pandit's Utopian future.

So yes, I suppose that in effect (in the longer-term vision) the US taxpayer is paying C not to sell its Mexican holdings. Make of that what you will; I couldn't say if it's good or bad.

Saturday, February 21, 2009

The Colombian weekly magazine 'Semana' has today broken another big story.

TO BE NOTED: From Inca Cola News:

"Colombia: Another day, another gov't human rights abuse: But this one is big.

The Colombian weekly magazine 'Semana' has today broken another big story. Those Spanish speakers amongst you should stop reading this, go here immediately and read the report, but as a quick resumé of Semana's scoop:
  • Colombia's official snoops, the "Departamento Administrativo de Seguridad" (Administrative Department of Security) normally known as DAS has been eavesdropping on anyone and everyone regarded as a 'threat'.
  • The list includes opposition leaders, journalists critical of the government, members of the judiciary that have been heading cases against government officials, government functionaries and civil servants.
  • Just before a new head of DAS took up his post on January 22nd, mountains of documents were secretly destroyed by DAS. An anonymous whistleblower who works as a detective at DAS (obviously anonymous, as if his identity were revealed he could probably count his life expectancy in minutes) told Semana (via Ottotrans™):
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"We received the order to collect everything we had in several offices in the building and in external centres and take it to the Counterintelligence. For two days we collected portable hard drives, we changed computer hard drives, collected CD-ROMs, voice archives and confidential documents. I alone, not counting my colleagues, took two boxes full of these things.

"Of all the boxes that were taken to Counterintelligence, with documents, recordings and such, only one survived, which was taken out of the 11th floor on Wednesday afternoon. I don't know what was left in it or where it was taken. I just know that everything else was destroyed."
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • But possibly the most damning and chilling aspect of the Semana report is the allegation, backed up by its anonymous sources, that DAS ran a network of information sales and would sell official intelligence to narcotraffickers, paramilitaries and guerrilla groups such as the FARC. In a country with an appalling record of extrajudicial killings, union leader asassinations and attacks on judicial bodies, this is an astonishing revelation (though it has to be said, hardly a surprise for those who have followed the rise and rise of Alvaro Uribe and his pseudo-democratic government).
Let's see how much of a fuss is made of this story amongst English language media sources. Colour me cynical, but don't hold your breath up there.......



UPDATE: Good English language site Colombia Reports has its take on the story here."