The Microsoft-Google-Yahoo Love Triangle

Some fews days ago, Microsoft withdrew its bid to acquire Yahoo after failing to agree to a price even after Microsoft raised its bid, which was about $5 billion more than the original offer. According to Yahoo CEO, the company was grossly undervalued by Microsoft. Consequently, Yahoo share price fell significantly following the withdrawal(BBC News,2008).

Now that the deal is no longer on the table, Yahoo must convince investors it can turn the company around and deliver on promises that it can grow its revenue at a pace that pleases Wall Street(equivalent of the City in London) and allows Yahoo to compete successfully against Google in online advertising.

Shareholders already are getting restless. Some Institutional shareholders plan to expand a complaint, originally filed as two lawsuits In March 2008, against the CEO and other members of Yahoo’s board of directors, saying they failed to act in the best interest of shareholders in rejecting Microsoft’s bid to buy Yahoo. It is expected that Yahoo will face similar law-suits in the coming months.

The attempt to acquire Yahoo by Microsoft was seen as an attempt to match Google on advertising revenue. It is alleged that Google played a part in undoing Microsoft bid for Yahoo to undermine Microsoft Advertising business(Yahoo News). Matter of fact, Yahoo did a test run on Google’s advertising Adsense inorder to discourage Microsoft from launching a hostile takeover bid (how smart of Google!!!). In the end Google wins in the Microsoft-Google-Yahoo triangle. But are Yahoo the most stupid in all this? How can a business out-source a strategic part of its business to a competitor?

The question is why would the CEO and other directors at Yahoo Inc. reject an offer which is seen by many analysts as a good offer at the expense of shareholders’ wishes? In the meantime, who is going to tame this animal-Google? Would Microsoft organic growth be enough to mount enough challenge.

In the end, the guys at Google are smart not only technically, but also business-wise. Sadly, it is the Yahoo shareholders who are the most victims.

Would the Auditor General Review his own work???

I have just learnt that Mr Rexford Kampanje who was formerly the Accountant General has been confirmed as Auditor General. The parliament also confirmed the appointment of Lovemore Munlo as the Chief Justice.

I am not so much concerned by the appointment of Munlo, rather my concern hinges on the appointment of a fellow Accountant Rexford Kampanje. Normally, I should be celebrating at his appointment with hope that he is going to represent the interests of Accountants in Civil Service but most importantly he would institute controls within the civil service to avoid a repeat of the Field York Scandal and the K187m Education corruption from happening again by insuring amongst other things that procurement and expenditure authorisation procedures are adhered to by civil servants. Sadly am not celebrating and this why;

(a) Mr Kampanje is the former Accountant General, therefore by accepting the appointment, would he be auditing his own work? He has been at the OPC less than 12 months whilst waiting for parliamentary approval to become the Auditor General.

(b)Mr Kampanje is ACCA qualified. Under the code of professional ethics, Accountants must not take up appointment that would compromise their professional independence. So why would Kampanje accept the appointment? Is it because of political pressure?

Some few months ago the Finance Minister Goodall Gondwe rightly asserted that if Mr Kampanje was appointed Auditor General, he would be reviewing his own work. My view is that if we had good and transparent corporate governance structures in Malawi governement civil service, the proposal to appoint Kampanje should not have been made in the first place because there would be an obvious threat to independence. Would he be able to question accounts or expenditure he himself authorised?

The safeguard of appointing external auditors as suggested by the finance minister to avoid independence problems that may arise as a result of the appointment is not adequate. In any case, external auditors should be hired with or without the Auditor General in place. The appointment of an Auditor General does not subsume the need for independent external auditors, rather it is a way of setting up controls and monitoring of those controls in government and government departments. The external auditors should be appointed to act as an independent control to monitor tools set by the Auditor General and his team, otherwise , there might also be the danger that the AG woul be reviewing his own work.

The fact that the Malawi government has been without the Auditor General for quite a while is simply beyond me. Malawi is blessed with top Accountants who would uphold the moral standards by ensuring that government resourses are utilised effectively and efficiently. It is simply not right to have the position of Auditor General vacant for a long time. Does it suprise anyone why some corrupt practices in civil service have gone unchecked?

Although Kampanje has accepted the appointment, it has not come without its challenges. Firstly, there is a small matter where the Speaker’s ruling on parliamentary quorum is being challenged. This follows the boycotting of opposition MPs from deliberations. This means that the appointment was approved by the government side only. Is it legal? Would civil servants respect Kampanje?

Should the opposition succeed on their challenge of the parliamentary Quoram, the appointments of Munlo and Kampanje will be nullified. Is this cost effective on the part of government?

Am sure there are Malawians within the civil service equally capable and qualified if not better to carry out the duties of the office of the Auditor General. Is Mr Kampanje exceptionally good??

What is the difference between the Auditor General and Accountant General interms of ranking? What would motivate someone to take up one and leave the other? Is it a form of promotion or greed? Someone please educate me.

Fair Trade in Malawi’s Sugar, Tobacco, Cotton, etc

Most western organisations thrive on philanthropy. Firstly, because they genuinely believe in giving something back to society. This has brought arguments as to whether company directors are really interested in giving back to society or that the exercise is merely a marketing gimmick.

Well, both arguments hold true. Society benefits when organisations sponsor projects such as recycling to cut the rate of global warming but at the same time, an ethically minded organisation improves its image and therefore attracts new or continued custom. Corporate Social Responsibility(CSR) as is popularly known has become a fundamental concept for most companies, it is a vehicle through which both society and organisations benefits. Most governments are willing to give companies revenue or capital grants for undertaking specific CSR projects.

In Malawi, the National Insurance Company(NICO), National Bank of Malawi and SOBO are some of the organisations setting the tone for good CSR by sponsoring a variety of projects and sports.

During my undergraduate research here in the United Kingdom, I was intrigued to discover that TESCO which is the largest supermarket in the UK stocks Fair Trade Brown Sugar and Tea Bags from Malawi. Another German owned LIDL supermarket also sells this Fair Trade product(sugar). Both sell these products at above normal or prevailing market prices. Companies are involved in selling Fair Trade products not because they necessarily want to make a profit(costs are high) but simply to enhance image.

One of the attributes of Fair Trade is that companies such as TESCO have become so powerful, they promote good Labour practices in producing countries, discourage child labour as was the case with GAP in Thailand and India. However, I wonder if Malawi is benefitting from these Fair Trade practices? I ask this because my dad who has been a smallholder farmer in Nkhota-kota(Dwangwa) for nearly 30 years still lives in abject poverty. He gets peanuts every year and the reason advanced to him and other farmers for this situation is that of poor world prices for sugar. Whilst I do not believe this, and have my own theory I believe in the spirit of professionalism that my blog is not the right forum to address matters of this nature. Fair Trade has become such a political tool to force companies to reform. NIKE manufacturers of the popular brand of sports shoes was accused of exploiting cheap chinese labour paying just above £1 for the productions of a pair of shoes while they sold the same shoe in the UK, USA and many countries including china for over £100 making lots of million pounds in profits. It was until the company was faced with calls by rights groups for people to abandon NIKE products that the company asked their suppliers to improve working conditions. Today, as I write, NIKE enjoys massive publicity by premiership football stars. Matter of fact, Arsenal football club which I support are sponsored in part by NIKE. I dont wear NIKE products for personal reasons, one of which is that I cant afford them but also that substitute products such as AND1 are equally and fashion-wise impressive but cheaper.

There has never been a better time to promote Malawian products to the rest of the world than this. The government should support cotton, bananas, fishing, sugar associations to get Fair Trade accreditation and encourage western supermarkets to invest in the expansion of their supply chain that undercuts unscrupulous middlemen for fair prices. The wholesale liberalisation of the economy just over 10 years ago resulted in some dubious traders conning farmers into selling their produce at below acceptable prices using phoney bags and tampered with scales. For this to work indegeneous companies must adopt good CSR policies, that encourage enterpreneurship from their suppliers by adopting fair prices when buying raw materials. There is no point in encouraging foreign companies to intervene in our mess when we let our own companies make huge profits at the detriment of farmers. Directors motive should not only be profit maximisation- Profit is just one element of measuring an organisation’s success, all other things are equally important.

The economics in the Tobacco industry leaves alot to be desired. Too much politics and a strong cartel aimed at breaking farmers hearts through price fixing. Suffice to say that sales for 2008 as reported in different media outlets at both Lilongwe and Limbe auction flours seem to be putting a smile on farmers faces. I strongly hope that this trend shall continue and that it simply not a political ploy as 2009 general elections draw nearer.

Fair Trade in Malawi’s Sugar, Tobacco, Cotton, etc

Most western organisations thrive on philanthropy. Firstly, because they genuinely believe in giving something back to society. This has brought arguments as to whether company directors are really interested in giving back to society or that the exercise is merely a marketing gimmick.

Well, both arguments hold true. Society benefits when organisations sponsor projects such as recycling to cut the rate of global warming but at the same time, an ethically minded organisation improves its image and therefore attracts new or continued custom. Corporate Social Responsibility(CSR) as is popularly known has become a fundamental concept for most companies, it is a vehicle through which both society and organisations benefits. Most governments are willing to give companies revenue or capital grants for undertaking specific CSR projects.

In Malawi, the National Insurance Company(NICO), National Bank of Malawi and SOBO are some of the organisations setting the tone for good CSR by sponsoring a variety of projects and sports.

During my undergraduate research here in the United Kingdom, I was intrigued to discover that TESCO which is the largest supermarket in the UK stocks Fair Trade Brown Sugar and Tea Bags from Malawi. Another German owned LIDL supermarket also sells this Fair Trade product(sugar). Both sell these products at above normal or prevailing market prices. Companies are involved in selling Fair Trade products not because they necessarily want to make a profit(costs are high) but simply to enhance image.

One of the attributes of Fair Trade is that companies such as TESCO have become so powerful, they promote good Labour practices in producing countries, discourage child labour as was the case with GAP in Thailand and India. However, I wonder if Malawi is benefitting from these Fair Trade practices? I ask this because my dad who has been a smallholder farmer in Nkhota-kota(Dwangwa) for nearly 30 years still lives in abject poverty. He gets peanuts every year and the reason advanced to him and other farmers for this situation is that of poor world prices for sugar. Whilst I do not believe this, and have my own theory I believe in the spirit of professionalism that my blog is not the right forum to address matters of this nature. Fair Trade has become such a political tool to force companies to reform. NIKE manufacturers of the popular brand of sports shoes was accused of exploiting cheap chinese labour paying just above £1 for the productions of a pair of shoes while they sold the same shoe in the UK, USA and many countries including china for over £100 making lots of million pounds in profits. It was until the company was faced with calls by rights groups for people to abandon NIKE products that the company asked their suppliers to improve working conditions. Today, as I write, NIKE enjoys massive publicity by premiership football stars. Matter of fact, Arsenal football club which I support are sponsored in part by NIKE. I dont wear NIKE products for personal reasons, one of which is that I cant afford them but also that substitute products such as AND1 are equally and fashion-wise impressive but cheaper.

There has never been a better time to promote Malawian products to the rest of the world than this. The government should support cotton, bananas, fishing, sugar associations to get Fair Trade accreditation and encourage western supermarkets to invest in the expansion of their supply chain that undercuts unscrupulous middlemen for fair prices. The wholesale liberalisation of the economy just over 10 years ago resulted in some dubious traders conning farmers into selling their produce at below acceptable prices using phoney bags and tampered with scales. For this to work indegeneous companies must adopt good CSR policies, that encourage enterpreneurship from their suppliers by adopting fair prices when buying raw materials. There is no point in encouraging foreign companies to intervene in our mess when we let our own companies make huge profits at the detriment of farmers. Directors motive should not only be profit maximisation- Profit is just one element of measuring an organisation’s success, all other things are equally important.

The economics in the Tobacco industry leaves alot to be desired. Too much politics and a strong cartel aimed at breaking farmers hearts through price fixing. Suffice to say that sales for 2008 as reported in different media outlets at both Lilongwe and Limbe auction flours seem to be putting a smile on farmers faces. I strongly hope that this trend shall continue and that it simply not a political ploy as 2009 general elections draw nearer.

Fair Trade in Malawi’s Sugar, Tobacco, Cotton, etc

Most western organisations thrive on philanthropy. Firstly, because they genuinely believe in giving something back to society. This has brought arguments as to whether company directors are really interested in giving back to society or that the exercise is merely a marketing gimmick.

Well, both arguments hold true. Society benefits when organisations sponsor projects such as recycling to cut the rate of global warming but at the same time, an ethically minded organisation improves its image and therefore attracts new or continued custom. Corporate Social Responsibility(CSR) as is popularly known has become a fundamental concept for most companies, it is a vehicle through which both society and organisations benefits. Most governments are willing to give companies revenue or capital grants for undertaking specific CSR projects.

In Malawi, the National Insurance Company(NICO), National Bank of Malawi and SOBO are some of the organisations setting the tone for good CSR by sponsoring a variety of projects and sports.

During my undergraduate research here in the United Kingdom, I was intrigued to discover that TESCO which is the largest supermarket in the UK stocks Fair Trade Brown Sugar and Tea Bags from Malawi. Another German owned LIDL supermarket also sells this Fair Trade product(sugar). Both sell these products at above normal or prevailing market prices. Companies are involved in selling Fair Trade products not because they necessarily want to make a profit(costs are high) but simply to enhance image.

One of the attributes of Fair Trade is that companies such as TESCO have become so powerful, they promote good Labour practices in producing countries, discourage child labour as was the case with GAP in Thailand and India. However, I wonder if Malawi is benefitting from these Fair Trade practices? I ask this because my dad who has been a smallholder farmer in Nkhota-kota(Dwangwa) for nearly 30 years still lives in abject poverty. He gets peanuts every year and the reason advanced to him and other farmers for this situation is that of poor world prices for sugar. Whilst I do not believe this, and have my own theory I believe in the spirit of professionalism that my blog is not the right forum to address matters of this nature. Fair Trade has become such a political tool to force companies to reform. NIKE manufacturers of the popular brand of sports shoes was accused of exploiting cheap chinese labour paying just above £1 for the productions of a pair of shoes while they sold the same shoe in the UK, USA and many countries including china for over £100 making lots of million pounds in profits. It was until the company was faced with calls by rights groups for people to abandon NIKE products that the company asked their suppliers to improve working conditions. Today, as I write, NIKE enjoys massive publicity by premiership football stars. Matter of fact, Arsenal football club which I support are sponsored in part by NIKE. I dont wear NIKE products for personal reasons, one of which is that I cant afford them but also that substitute products such as AND1 are equally and fashion-wise impressive but cheaper.

There has never been a better time to promote Malawian products to the rest of the world than this. The government should support cotton, bananas, fishing, sugar associations to get Fair Trade accreditation and encourage western supermarkets to invest in the expansion of their supply chain that undercuts unscrupulous middlemen for fair prices. The wholesale liberalisation of the economy just over 10 years ago resulted in some dubious traders conning farmers into selling their produce at below acceptable prices using phoney bags and tampered with scales. For this to work indegeneous companies must adopt good CSR policies, that encourage enterpreneurship from their suppliers by adopting fair prices when buying raw materials. There is no point in encouraging foreign companies to intervene in our mess when we let our own companies make huge profits at the detriment of farmers. Directors motive should not only be profit maximisation- Profit is just one element of measuring an organisation’s success, all other things are equally important.

The economics in the Tobacco industry leaves alot to be desired. Too much politics and a strong cartel aimed at breaking farmers hearts through price fixing. Suffice to say that sales for 2008 as reported in different media outlets at both Lilongwe and Limbe auction flours seem to be putting a smile on farmers faces. I strongly hope that this trend shall continue and that it simply not a political ploy as 2009 general elections draw nearer.