Invensys - Haythornthwaite waits
Apparently, I was premature when I reported (eNews 8 November 2004)
that Rick Haythornthwaite had already stepped down from his CEO
position at Invensys and handed the reins over to Ulf Henriksson.
The London Sunday Times issued a confusing story that led to my
conclusion. It was apparently wrong. Rick Haythornthwaite has not
stepped down as CEO - yet. Instead, "boardroom sources" suggested
that "there was a clear understanding that Haythornthwaite would
stand down once the company was seen to have overcome the worst
of its problems." Now, since the problems appear to be worsening,
how long will Haythornthwaite wait? And when will Ulf push
to take the helm?
Haythornthwaite himself says he does not want to stay with Invensys.
"I do not think I am the right guy to run this long term. Only when
Invensys is seen to be turning, then it will be a natural time for
a successor. The time is not right now. I am not looking for a job,
I am not actively searching the market."
After the recent announcement of poor half-year results, poorly
interpreted as "progress" it shouldn't take more than a few weeks for
the Invensys board to make some moves. Perhaps that's enough time
for Slick Rick to land himself another "strategic turnaround" job.
Meanwhile, Andrew Bond of the influential UK monthly
"Industrial Automation Insider" newsletter reports:
"Invensys' competitors continue to express surprise, both that
it has thus far been able to maintain its independence, and that
major users continue to place orders, despite the company's
uncertain future.
"Almost every major process automation vendor seems to have
considered making an approach but has been unable to come up
with a formula which would separate the most desirable plums
in the Invensys pudding".
Here are some of the confusing news reports after the
Nov. 11 2004 announcement of Invensys' half-year results:
- Invensys 'turns corner' with Loss.
- Departing boss Rick Haythornthwaite told investors that
by meeting City operating earnings targets for two consecutive
quarters the corner has been turned.
- Operating profits in four remaining core industrial controls
businesses slumped by a third to £63m in half-year end-Sept.2004.
However, that was wiped out by £133m of asset write-downs and
restructuring costs and £287m losses and write-offs on disposals.
- Losses have hit £477m [$875 million] so far this year.
- Hopes of a takeover have been dismissed by the City because
of the group's twin 'poison pills' of £700m of debt,
and pension fund liabilities now topping £600m.
- Long suffering investors remain unmoved. Shares in the former
FTSE 100 stock drifted down, not far from their all-time lows.
Stay tuned...
Reuters - Invensys chief says he's staying
Invensys 'turns corner' with loss
Provide your own feedback on the Invensys weblog
Return to the TOP
Automation 'patent trolls' net millions from end-users
An interesting series of patent infringement lawsuits have been impacting
the industrial automation business over the past several years. Solaia
Technology, a company solely in the business of enforcing patents,
has partnered with Schneider Automation to pursue patent infringements.
Schneider owns four patents, issued between Sept. 1998 and May 2000.
Two were developed by Square D (acquired by Schneider), and two were
bought in late 2000 from Ken Crater of Control Technology Corp. The
patents relate to interface modules which translate Internet protocols
- Ethernet, TCP/IP, and HTTP - into data recognizable to a PLC.
Schneider began selling web-enabled PLCs in 1998.
Schneider opened with a lawsuit against Opto-22 which had been selling
its Snap I/O Ethernet-based product since 1999. This was settled after
more than 2 years and a ton of legal fees (estimated at about $2m for
each side). It is not known whether Opto paid a big fee, or a nominal
face-saver. But it ended with Opto buying a license for the "protected
technology". But that still left the controversial patent unchallenged,
awaiting the next defendant.
Solaia seems to be following a different tactic. Rather than suing large
manufacturers like Rockwell and Siemens, they sued Rockwell's customers,
including large end-users like Clorox, Boeing, Eastman Kodak, Eli Lilly,
Shell Oil and others. Clearly end-users are more likely to avoid lengthy
proceedings and settle out of court. And indeed, some seem to have
settled, netting millions for the "patent trolls" (as companies
like Solaia are called).
Of course, major automation suppliers like Rockwell would rather have
the matter settled once and for all. It's interesting that Rockwell filed
their countersuit, not against Schneider Automation and Solaia, but their
lawyers - the firm Niro, Scavone, Haller & Niro - alleging that they
"conspired to extract tens of millions of dollars in licensing fees"
and for filing "baseless, sham" patent infringement suits.
Rockwell's suit is unusual because law firms are not typically sued,
and also because the law firm Niro Scavone has a reputation as one of
the country's leading patent enforcers.
The commentary on this continuing battle continues. Some weblinks
are provided below (courtesy of Dick Caro).
Law.com - Latest on the Solaia/Rockwell lawsuits
Automation List exchange on the Opto22 issue
Law.com - Battling the Patent Trolls
Return to the TOP
Extending the human life-span
When he became an octogenarian, a good friend told me, "I feel like a
young man, with a lot of ailments". The problem is that the human body
deteriorate with age. The risk of death increases exponentially, doubling
every 8-10 years. Why do we fall apart? And what can we do about it?
The body is a failure-prone, defect-ridden machine, formed through the
processes of biological evolution. But today, it can be improved through
genetic engineering and can be better maintained through preventive,
regenerative, and anti-aging medicine, and by repairing and replacing
worn-out body parts. So, the rate at which the human body falls apart
can be decreased, and maybe even eliminated.
Startling discoveries in the areas of genomics, biotechnology, and
nanotechnology are occurring regularly and rapidly. Already it is possible
to analyze our individual genetic makeup and evaluate our predisposition
for almost any deadly diseases. Once the genes have been isolated, it will
soon be possible to repress or enhance them through biotechnology.
Soon it will be feasible for 10% of our red blood cells to be replaced by
artificial cells, radically extending our life expectancy and enhancing
physical and mental abilities beyond what is humanly possible today.
Ray Kurzweil, one of the most influential living inventors, expects that
rapidly accelerating progress in biotechnology, nanotechnology, and medical
devices will systematically eradicate causes of death within the next
50 years. His latest book, "Fantastic Voyage: Live Long Enough to Live
Forever", coauthored with an expert on human longevity, has just been
published (Oct. 2004). It makes interesting reading - take a look.
Boston Globe - The Futurist
IEEE Spectrum - Why We Fall Apart
MIT Tech Revoew - The Longevity Gene
Book: Fantastic Voyage - Live Long Enough to Live Forever
Return to the TOP
Modern slavery is uncomfortably close
Here's a disquieting reality: There are more human slaves today than
at the height of the transatlantic slave trade, and more than at any
time in human history.
Although banned in every country, modern-day slavery has boomed over
the past 50 years as the global population has exploded. Slaves are
cheap these days, with prices lower than ever. And the world has
a glut of slaves - 27 million by conservative estimates. And the
"first-world" countries utilize the benefits - with cheap goods
that flood our shopping-malls and super-markets.
Extreme poverty, combined with local government corruption and the
global economy, has produced a surge in the number of slaves. Forced
labor is used in many, many countries, with debt laborers whose pay
can never meet the debt they owe. Workers often give their bodies as
collateral for debts that never diminish over many years, or even
generations. The practice is widespread and part of everyday life.
In 1850, a slave would cost about $40,000 in today's dollars. Today,
you can acquire a "slave" for $30. So, the cheap availability of slave
labor has converted them from being the equivalent of buying an
automobile to buying cheap, disposable goods.
How many of us think of "slave labor" when we buy cheap Chinese goods
from Wal-Mart? The fact that slavery is still thriving is mainly due
to ignorance, and the lack of resources to eradicate it.
There is slavery in the developed world too. For example, some 15-20,000
people are trafficked into the US annually, most forced into the sex trade,
domestic servitude, or agricultural labor. At any one time, between 50,000
to 100,000 people are in bondage in the US, mostly in plain view, in towns
and cities across the country. People simply don't recognize slavery.
But, emancipation is not the complete answer. Freed slaves are often
unable to cope outside their former existence. With one of the largest
botched emancipations in human history, the US is a prime example of
what happens when a country does no more than liberate its slaves.
Four million people were dumped into the US economy without any tools,
capital, education, political participation, rehabilitative care.
Nothing. And the legacy persists.
Uncomfortable - but needs thinking and involvement. This problem
won't disappear by itself.
Slavery is not dead, just less recognizable
Book - Disposable People: New Slavery in the Global Economy
Return to the TOP
eFeedback
David Rapley [david@rapley.net] sent us his post-election ramblings:
"Jim, we'll obviously have to agree to continue to disagree
politically, but we might be closer than you think.
"We were on Vancouver Island in British Columbia (Canada) during the
election, where the event was watched with a high degree of interest
and emotion. The high emotion was typically anti Bush. Of course when
I watch their TV and read their newspapers, it's easier to understand
why that is. So I agree with the eNews reader that commented about the
lack of objectivity in the press. It's here in the US, in Canada and
in the UK.
"The eNews contributor from the UK who had gained the opinion that
we Americans believe we have an obligation to change the world for
the better, was flattering. If this war results in the establishment
of democracy in the Middle East, then history will judge us as having
effected a change for the better. However, does anyone believe that
we would be fighting there if we and other Western nations didn't need
the oil from that region?
"I'm sure we all have different ideas of what, or who, is to blame for
our terrorist problem. I still have a Cato Institute article published
just after the fall of the Evil Empire. It suggested that now the threat
from Russia had been diminished, the biggest threat to the US would come
from terrorism. Therefore it advocated that we should adopt a low profile
internationally. We should avoid setting ourselves up as a target.
We would need a strong military to be used when we were threatened,
but we should avoid inflammatory activities. Hindsight would suggest
that this would have been a prudent course of action. Has any
administration since, followed this advice?
"So now we're in this war and I believe it's essential that we win it
(however we define winning it). So I voted for Bush because I think he
can do it, not because I agree with everything he's done or will do.
There are many reasons why I couldn't vote for Kerry. I can't understand
why the Democratic Party can't come up with better candidates.
"What really worries and disappoints me is that neither party seems
to be able to develop a vision for our country 10 or 20 years from now.
If we keep on doing what we've always done, we're always going to get
what we always got! So what's the grand plan that will ensure that 20
years from now we're not spending $80 billion/yr, or more, on fighting
terrorism? Actually I think the terrorist plan is to slowly bankrupt us
At the present rate of spending, it might not take 20 years.
"Well certainly if we weren't so dependent on Arabian oil, that would
help. To borrow a line from John Lennon, "Imagine" a federally lead
program to encourage the use of alternate and renewable energies that
would lead us to energy independence or at least in that direction.
Imagine the effect it would have on the US economy!
"But unfortunately, like Lennon I'm a dreamer and this imagining would
take real LEADERSHIP in Washington ! I can't sing either."
Return to the TOP
Kenneth Brant [k2brant@yahoo.com] presents an insightful analysis
of US anti-terrorism policies:
"I do hope the American electorate perceives enough cognitive dissonance
(from the ideological scenario-building of the current administration to
the empirical truth - told not just by its opponents in this election but
by some of its very own deputies and acolytes) to decide something is
very wrong at this juncture in US history.
"It's simply not good enough policy to bash the evil-doers and/or those
who harbor them abroad - including widespread 'collateral damage' to
innocents and non-western culture. Islamist-inspired terrorism is fed
by alienation and dislocation. As a nation we need to recognize that
we continue to feed it (even if we don't agree on whether we cause it,
intentionally or unintentionally).
"Bush is right that there are "9/10" and "9/12" views of the world.
But the important difference lies not in who possesses the most anger
"post 9/11" and is doggedly committed to venting it. The important
difference lies in strategy, tactics and willingness to embrace new
thinking on how to respond to the threats.
"It is Bush who has the "9/10" view of the world because he is
prosecuting the "war on terrorism" with 20th century approaches to war
that have been proven ineffective against insurgency, guerrilla war
and terrorism: a/ traditional, pre-emptive military campaigns against
nation-states (though updated with modern technologies to provide shock
and awe'); b/ attempts at nation-building under the guise of promoting
democracy; and c/ military occupation. In fact, insurgency, guerrilla
war and terrorism were the responses to these forms of military action
when overwhelming force could not be directly engaged on the battlefield.
"It is Bush's 'pre-9/11' war that has created an engine for new
terrorism that will plague current and future generations of Americans
and others worldwide. They have produced a precarious, perverted and
deeply flawed 'democracy' in Iraq in which 'indirect' violence and
suffering may be as significant to the 'direct' suffering under an
admittedly bad man - Saddam Hussein. And, they have resulted in our
troops being bogged down in a single geography with no plausible scenario
for fast redeployment to the distributed fronts in the 'war on terrorism'
- while many nodes of terror continue to build across the world. It is
also wise to remember any arithmetic in this war must include addition
(new terrorists inspired and recruited) as well as subtraction -
ostensibly 2/3 of al Qaeda's known leaders caught or killed. Osama Bin
Laden himself did not crash into the WTC - we need to limit the
recruitment of the real agents of terror not just damage its hierarchy
which can and may be rebuilt in an even more covert organization.
"Islamist-inspired terrorism has been clearly shown to be a networked
phenomenon and its containment will require networked approaches.
Cell-leader Mohammed Atta was an Egyptian national among mostly Saudi
cohorts. He studied and developed terror plans while in Germany, entering
the US through Canada. So, early detection and intervention to insure our
citizens' 'homeland security' will require functional alliances and joint
actions with entities like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Germany and Canada (and,
yes, even with France, which has a relatively large Muslim population,
as well as with Pakistan which already has nukes and where the majority
is increasingly hostile to the US and its own military leader) and
increasingly with non-state actors. The need for stronger, more
functional and more imaginative alliances is not a sign of weakness
on our part. Putting aside the deeply divisive but equally necessary
debates on ethics, fairness and justice, in this unconventional war
success will be won with unconventional tactics. Alliances and
imaginative new policies that help us prosecute an agile, surgical
and interventionist war, while mitigating the alienation of the 'middle'
in Islam and in Christendom, are a sign of strength 'post-9/11'.
"The irony here is that Kerry needed to go further in the direction
of foreign policy (imagination) change away from status quo as well
as adopting new models of military engagement. He didn't go far enough
- and perhaps taking that direction made him unelectable!"
Return to the TOP
Or, if you're lazy (you may miss some privileges) simply send a blank email message to :
Sign-up@JimPinto.com
with subject line :
"sign me up for JimPinto.com E-mail news".