-
Tammy Haddad
|
Jan 31, 2009 11:25 AM
-
Daniel Gross
|
Jan 30, 2009 01:05 PM
-
Daniel Gross
|
Jan 30, 2009 01:03 PM
-
Daniel Gross
|
Jan 30, 2009 01:01 PM
-
Daniel Gross
|
Jan 30, 2009 10:22 AM
Like the carpet in my room at the Club Hotel, the Spirit of Davos is getting a little frayed this year. The overwhelming mood here is one not so much of gregarious friendship—this is Switzerland, after all—but of civility and politesse, a certain consideration. In the real world, when a CEO or private equity bigshot doesn't want to talk to a reporter, his p.r. person will (sometimes rudely) say no. Here, they'll make pleasant chit-chat, give you an off the record quote or two, and move on. Davos is like a large, mobile country club. And there are certain things country club members just don't do to one another—like embarrassing one another socially or financially. (Ahem,, Mr. Madoff)
But the rising financial and geopolitical stress have made it difficult to maintain the veneer of civility. The big news from last night? A well-attended forum on the Middle East, featuring Shimon Peres of Israel and Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, ended in a storm of controversy. Erdogan left the stage in a fit of pique, arguing that Peres's impassioned defense of Israel's Gaza offensive—at one point he asked Erdogan how Turkey would respond if it were attacked in a similar manner—was "in a manner not in line with. . . the spirit of Davos." He was also angered that moderator David Ignatius of the Washington Post had tried to keep him within prescribed time limits while Peres had spoken at length. Erdogan said he'd never return. Two things: First, Turkey and Israel, it will be recalled, are supposed to be allies. Second, droning on beyond allotted time frames isn't rude at Davos. It's a sign of Davos Man's virility. That's what people do here. They talk—a lot, and at length. If people angered at the inadequate speaking time allotted them and the over-generous speaking time allotted rivals were to start boycotting the World Economic Forum en masse, next year's edition could safely be held in a Starbucks in Cambridge, Mass.
The less-than-generous spirit could be seen elsewhere. I had dinner with a group of executives in the airline, shipping, and auto industries, where (ALERT!: NAME DROP WARNING!) I was seated near Nissan's worldly and sharp CEO Carlos Ghosn. During the evening, an Indian industrialist, prefacing his remarks by saying that he didn't want to be on the record criticizing a competitors, went on to make the case as to how one of India's most well-known industrial names had made a series of poor decisions and would probably need a bailout.
Make no mistake, the Good Time Charlies are still here. At a paparazzi-packed lunch on philanthropy, Bill Clinton and Tony Blair provided a double-shot of charisma, bonhomie, and humor. But they made introductory remarks and quickly left together. Shorn of their offices, Clinton and Blair have been reduced to bit players on the global stage. And so the spirit of these cuddly politicians, who craved affection, no longer dominates. Instead, the large geopolitical presences here are brooding, stand-offish—Chinese premiere Wen Jiabao and Russia's Vladimir Putin. Putin has proven himself to be not particularly clubbable. A few weeks ago, in the dead of winter, he essentially turned off the supply of heating fuel to much of Europe.
Even though we're in the German-speaking part of Switzerland, schadenfreude is a sentiment that is generally frowned upon. At Davos, the powerful and wealthy congratulate themselves for taking time out of their busy schedules to ponder the plight of the less fortunate. One of the events organized by a non-government organization is the "Refugee Run," a simulation of life as a refugee, complete with hostile, armed rebels, power outages, and barbed wire. (My politically incorrect first thought on reading about the event: I don't need to travel 4,000 miles to see shell-shocked people living hand-to-mouth. I work for a media company.) And yet, in the hallways and in the plenary sessions at the private dinners and in the informal cocktail hours, there has been an avalanche of schadenfreude over the travails of Wall Street. At a dinner Wednesday night, as noted, "Black Swan" author Nassim Nicholas Taleb, his gray beard set off by a black turtleneck, was positively giddy over the failure of Lehman Brothers—not just because he may have profited from the volatility in the financial sector but because it gave this preening smart guy great pleasure to see so many stupid people who had enjoyed unwarranted success prosper. His next book should be a memoir: The Gray Peacock. Ah, the spirit of Davos.
More
-
Michael Freedman
|
Jan 30, 2009 02:34 AM
There has been much hand wringing here about the specter of
protectionism, and in particular about the "Buy American" plan in
Barack Obama's $819 billion stimulus package, which passed the House of
Representatives this week. The fear is that it will trigger a round of
protectionist policies in countries throughout the world, and it only
added to the sense of economic gloom that has pervaded this year's
forum. But there is one bright spot amid the despair: executives here
from the renewable energy sector are confident that business will be
just fine. After all, built into the stimulus package are billions of
dollars worth of tax credits and incentives for solar, wind and other
alternative energy companies.
More
-
Daniel Gross
|
Jan 29, 2009 02:33 PM
Spend
a day or two here, and it seems that every business, in every sector, in every
geographic area, is suffering. There seem to be no safe havens, and few truly
countercyclical industries this time around. But I think I may have found one:
white-collar networking. Reid Hoffman, the CEO of LinkedIn, says that the site,
essentially a networking site for yuppies, is expanding rapidly. It has 34
million members, and is adding one million every 17 days. Advertising is holding
up. Hoffman expects revenues and employment to rise in 2009, and expects the
company to be profitable. “Networking is cycle resistant,” Hoffman said. “In an
environment with lots of jobs and few free employees, people feel a need for
LinkedIn and the access it offers. And in a market with lots of employers and
few jobs, members feel like they need it.” Membership growth, in other words, is
tied in part to white-collar job anxiety. “It was interesting to see all the
people from Lehman Brothers join” after the company went bankrupt in September,
Hoffman said.
More
-
Michael Freedman
|
Jan 29, 2009 11:39 AM
There were two views on Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin's speech
at the World Economic Forum Wednesday evening. The
first, expressed in this morning's International Herald Tribune, was
that Putin "struck a conciliatory tone" with the West, talking about
"mutual interests" and "mutual dependencies" rather than pounding the
drum against the West. The second is that the speech was essentially a
pack of lies coming from a man who has proved time and again that any
talk of mutual dependence and foreign investment masked the vast human
rights abuses in his own country, a history of pushing foreigners out
and his aggression toward neighbors and other world leaders. According
to the Financial Times, he "mocked the American delegates" in
attendance.
Both views are wrong. If anything, Putin's speech
yesterday was surprising because he had an audience of some of the most
important people in the world, yet managed to say virtually nothing
that hadn't been heard before. He sounded familiar themes about energy
security, the need for regional reserve currencies and his desire to
build new international structures that are better equipped to deal
with the crises like the one now at hand. Indeed, his only tough remark
was aimed at Michael Dell, in response to a question from Dell about
how his company (and the technology sector more broadly) could help
Russia. "We don't need help. We are not invalids," Putin said.
But
those who walked away with the view that Putin's tone was either
conciliatory or mocking missed the point of the Russian prime
minister's speech altogether. What he was stating in bold, sometimes
blunt terms, is his view that Russia is a big, confident player in the
world and therefore ought to receive respect from other sovereign
nations. In this view, what's needed to solve Russia and the world's
problems is more cooperation among all the big countries -- Russia
included. In other words, as Putin told Dell, Russia does not want
"help"; it wants its interests to be understood and taken into account.
A simple message, and those who try to read more deeply into it do so
at their peril.
See text of Putin's remarks after the jump:
More
-
Daniel Gross
|
Jan 29, 2009 11:38 AM
-
Stefan Theil
|
Jan 29, 2009 04:33 PM
Trying to get a break from all financial crisis, all the time, I went to a dinner discussion about global organized crime last night. The worry among international prosecutors, crime-fighting agencies and anti-corruption NGOs was that the world’s attention...
More
-
Michael Freedman
|
Jan 29, 2009 07:49 AM
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has taken heat from Jewish groups
and others for his tough remarks about Israel, remarks that his critics say
helped spark a recent upsurge in sometimes violent anti-Semitism in Turkey. At a
briefing this morning, Erdogan said Israel used "disproportionate force" in its
campaign in Gaza, but insisted that those people who have tried to portray him
or his country as anti-Semitic are doing an "injustice." He also said something
that is perhaps more provocative, although in a different way. He called upon
Barack Obama to "redefine" the meaning of terrorist and terrorist organizations
in the Middle East, and develop a new U.S. policy in the region based on this
definition. What should this definition be? Erdogan sidestepped the
question--one of the most politically emotional questions one can pose--but
merely by raising it again, this time in the context of Gaza, he has perhaps
ensured that it won't go away anytime soon.
-
Daniel Gross
|
Jan 28, 2009 07:59 PM
At a large mid-day session hosted by CNBC’s Maria Bartiromo – think
of a combination of the old Phil Donahue show and a hanging party –
groups of Davosers (Davosites?) sat around tables and tried to affix
blame for the debacle. The group was asked to assess questions such as:
What was the greatest market failure? And what was the greatest
regulatory failure. There was a lot of talk about failed models and
regulatory regimes with poor incentives. But there was little talk of
who was to blame.
At one point, somebody stood up and said,
“It’s intriguing nobody is to blame. In other industries, there are
consequences if you make toxic products that hurt people. Policy makers
need to make it clear that there are serious consequences for that type
of behavior.”
Big applause!
And yet aside from the odd
mention of Alan Greenspan and an oblique reference to Robert Rubin, the
former Treasury Secretary who became a senior executive at Citigroup,
there was little talk of individual players who bore responsibility. Of
course, you can make the case that the people who caused the damage
have been punished: they didn’t’ get to go to Davos this year. Last
year, Davos was thick with investment bankers and hedge fund managers.
This year, the only true Wall Street bigshot I’ve seen is Stephen
Schwarzman of the Blackstone Group.
More
-
Michael Freedman
|
Jan 28, 2009 11:01 AM
One of the big themes emerging from the World Economic Forum this year
is the reemergence of the state. Wall Street titans are noticeably
missing here and forum promoters boast of the record number of heads of
state and government in attendance. But if these folks are meant to
come up with solutions to the financial mess, one striking problem
keeps emerging: they are not trusted by the electorate. Ukraine faces
one of the steepest drops in economic growth in all Europe, while its
president, Viktor Yushchenko, reportedly suffers from something on the
order of a 2 percent approval rating. (He apparently bowed out of
coming to Davos at the last minute; draw your own conclusions as to
why.) In a panel on the state of Europe, Latvian President Valdis
Zatlers said his country is going to go from 12 percent growth in 2007
to a 5 percent drop this year. According to one recent report, "the
Latvian government's approval ratings have dropped to 10 percent, the
worst in the EU," and Latvians have already taken to the streets in
violent protest. The question now, for countries both small and large,
is just how much time governments have to start turning things around
before things start to turn ugly. Aside from the possibility of more
widespread protests, the big fear voiced here in Davos is a turn to
populism, protectionism and beggar-thy-neighbor policies, which may
have a short term political benefit, but will only worsen the
underlying economic problems.
More
-
Daniel Gross
|
Jan 28, 2009 09:49 AM
Every year, Davos is about the green (i.e. money). In recent years, with the rise of eco-consciousness, alternative energy, sustainability, and concerns about global warming, it’s also been about the other type of green (i.e. the environment). Last year,...
More
-
Stefan Theil
|
Jan 28, 2009 02:18 PM
As Dan Gross posted on this blog yesterday, optimistic CEOs are going to be hard to find at Davos this year. How hard is what PricewaterhouseCoopers tried to answer last night with their traditional pre-Davos release of the Annual Global CEO Survey ....
More