Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
I didn’t know Pigs had wings Did you see that sucker fly by?.....
Ask OBG who has had to literally talk me out of enraged anger at myself for blowing off a 400k with edig. Or maybe last week when I was moaning about phucking up my straddle position, or the 5k in the leep swing I told you about not cashing in on.
I'm not talking 20/20 hindsight. I'm talking if Paule just sold half of what he told everyone he should sell when he told him or her he should sell it; I'd be sitting on a 7-figure portfolio. I made the call entry to exit, and didn’t follow through. That’s my problem period.
I don't care if you don't believe me. I know its true and have several witnesses to attest that I can find them, but phuck up playing them due to greed.
I can write shit but not post ..its? ???
The market 'is' my game now. I know what I am doing wrong. Believe me I have paid enough of my hard earned money to find out just what not to do. I have written a book on what not to do and I'm thinking of publishing it. I have pos**** on my puter telling me that 40% profit is good sell sell!
MY GREED is costing me money nothing else!I have the ability to crank out the rent money in this game.I've been doing it full time for 1 1/2 years now.
Without my greed I'd be sitting on a 7 figure portfolio.NO SHIT.
Come to the parking lot I am fighting (finally) with some jerk attacking IH management...
Go on read the next message I thought I could recoup my losses with the calls and then sell the put at a profit even though that paticular put was at a loss. It almost worked but I got greedy and didn't sell the put at .50 cents or a .35 cent loss, for a total gain of 100 bucks after commish.
OK
A fresh 'garden' salad just hit the spot...
YES NYC I didn't do what you said. I held the puts way too long and didn’t sell at a loss after I made up the loss with the calls. So my first experience was a loss of $400.
I have found several sells on Coke and no buys however the options are weighted in the call side. Then two days after I make the purchase coke comes out with better than expected earnings. I speculated a continued downturn in ko pps. I still do. Look at my KO thread here and read some of my findings.Like I said it was straddle time and I phucked it up once again.
Unless the market goes back down I'll be out 1k playing options. Once again sitting on the sidelines watching until one of my long holds puts me back into the game.
Tomorrow I watch 400 bucks expire. Leaving three weeks of good trading time left on my ko puts.BTW are now so far out of the money there isn't even a bid.
I ate the MCD puts and recouped a little on the 27.50 calls.
Now I'm sitting on coke put and didn’t straddle it or I’d be up .50 cents on the bid right now. Should have cleared the funds to play the damn straddle.
Yes the market needs to be talked in the proper direction. Intelligent investing isn't doing it.
Ooopps. means very pretty!
Something to do with being big...eom
Hey management this is the parking lot. Swearing should be allowed in full. What’s this a kindler and gentler parking lot??? Not with Paule Walnuts in the house!
How about the option threads?
Composite Indicator
TrendSpotter (TM) Sell
Short Term Indicators
7 Day Directional Indicator Sell
10 - 8 Moving Average Hilo Channel Buy
Price vs. 20 Day Moving Average Buy
20 - 50 Day MACD Oscillator Sell
20 Day Bollinger Bands Hold
Short Term Indicators Average: - Hold
Medium Term Indicators
40 Day Commodity Channel Index Hold
Price vs. 50 Day Moving Average Sell
20 - 100 Day MACD Oscillator Sell
50 Parabolic Time/Price Sell
Medium Term Indicators Average: 75% - Sell
Long Term Indicators
60 Day Commodity Channel Index Hold
Price vs. 100 Day Moving Average Sell
50 - 100 Day MACD Oscillator Sell
Long Term Indicators Average: 67% - Sell
Overall Average: 48% - Sell
Stock Analysis of Coca Cola
Thank you for requesting an analysis of Coca Cola from VectorVest ProGraphics. The ticker symbol for Coca Cola is KO. KO is traded
on the New York Stock Exchange and options are available on this stock.
PRICE: KO closed on 04/17/2001 at $45.70 per share.
VALUE: KO has a Value of $33.46 per share. Value is the foundation of the VectorVest system. It is a measure of what a stock is
currently worth. Value is based upon earnings, earnings growth rate, dividend payments, dividend growth rate, and financial performance.
Current interest and inflation rates also play an important role in the computation of Value. When interest and/or inflation rates decrease,
Value goes up. When interest rates and inflation increase, Value goes down. Sooner or later a stock's Price and Value always converge.
RV (Relative Value): KO has an RV of 0.92. On a scale of 0.00 to 2.00, an RV of 0.92 is fair. RV reflects the long-term price
appreciation potential of the stock compared to an alternative investment in AAA Corporate Bonds. Stocks with RV ratings above 1.00
have attractive upside potential. A stock will have an RV greater than 1.00 when its Value is greater than Price, and its Relative Safety (see
below) and forecasted earnings growth rate are above average. In some cases, however, a stock's RV will be above 1.00 even though its
Value is well below Price. This happens when a stock has an exemplary record of financial performance and an above average earnings
growth rate. In this case, the stock is currently selling at a premium, and the investor is banking on future earnings growth to drive the
stock's price higher. This information is very useful not only in knowing whether or not a stock has favorable price appreciation potential,
but it also solves the riddle of whether to buy high growth, high P/E, or low growth, low P/E stocks. We believe that RV ratings above 1.00
are required to consistently achieve above average capital gains in the stock market.
RS (Relative Safety): KO has an RS rating of 1.44. On a scale of 0.00 to 2.00, an RS of 1.44 is excellent. VectorVest looks at safety
from the viewpoint of an equity investor (one who is buying stock of a company) rather than that of a purchaser of debt (one who is
lending money to the company). From this perspective, consistency of financial and operating performance, stock price appreciation
history, and price volatility are the key factors used in the evaluation of Relative Safety (RS). Debt to equity ratio, capitalization, sales
volume, business longevity and other factors are also considered, but to a lesser degree.
VectorVest favors steady, predictable performers. All stocks are rated on a scale of 0.00 to 2.00. A stock with an RS greater than 1.00 is
safer and more predictable than the average of all stocks. A stock with an RS less than 1.00 is less predictable and riskier than the average
stock.
RT (Relative Timing): KO has an RT rating of 0.79. On a scale of 0.00 to 2.00, an RT of 0.79 is poor. RT is a fast, responsive,
short-term price trend indicator. It analyzes the direction, magnitude, and dynamics of a stock's price behavior over the last 13 weeks; then
reflects and projects the short-term price performance of the stock. Once a stock's Price has established a strong trend, it is expected to
continue that trend for the short-term. If the trend dissipates, RT will gravitate towards 1.00. Should the price change dramatically, RT will
notice the crucial turning point. When warranted, it will explode from a Price low and dive from a Price high.
All stocks are rated on a scale of 0.00 to 2.00. If RT is above 1.00,the stock's Price is in an uptrend. Below 1.00, the stock's Price is in a
downtrend.
VST-Vector (VST): KO has a VST-Vector rating of 1.08. On a scale of 0.00 to 2.00, an VST of 1.08 is fair. VST-Vector solves the
dilemma of balancing Value, Safety and Timing. Stocks with high RV values often have low RS values, or stocks with low RV and RS
values have high RT's. How can we find the stocks with the best combinations of Value, Safety, and Timing?
The classic vector formula (square root of the sum of the squares) handles this problem. It combines a set of forces into a single indicator
for ranking every stock in the VectorVest database. Stocks with the highest VST-Vector have the best combinations of Value, Safety and
Timing. These are the ones to own for above average capital application.
GRT (Growth Rate): KO has a GRT of 5 % per year. This is poor. GRT stands for forecasted Earnings Growth Rate in percent per
year. GRT is updated each week for every stock. Watch GRT trends very carefully. If the GRT trend is up, the stock's Price will likely
rise. If the GRT trend is down, the stock's Price will increase more slowly, cease to increase, or subsequently fall.
Recommendation (REC): KO has a Sell recommendation. REC reflects the cumulative effect of all the VectorVest parameters working
together. These parameters are designed to help investors buy safe, undervalued stocks which are rising in price, and to avoid or sell risky,
overvalued stocks which are falling in price.
VectorVest is tuned to give an "H" or "B" signal when a stock's price is approximately 10% above a recent low, and an "S" signal when the
stock's price is approximately 10% below a recent high. High RV, RS stocks are favored toward receiving "B" REC's, and sheltered from
receiving "S" RECs.
STOP-PRICE: KO has a Stop-Price of 45.78 per share. This is 0.08 or 0.2 % above its current closing Price. VectorVest analyzes over
7,400 stocks each day for Value, Safety and Timing, and calculates a Stop-Price for each stock. These Stop-Prices are based upon 13
week moving averages of closing prices, and are fine-tuned according to each stock's fundamentals.
In the VectorVest system, a stock gets a "B" or an "H" recommendation if its price is above its Stop-Price, and an "S" recommendation if
its price is below its Stop-Price.
DIV (Dividend): KO pays an annual dividend of 0.72 per share. VectorVest focuses on annual, regular, cash dividends indicated by the
most recent disbursement. Special distributions, one-time payments, stock dividends, etc., generally are not included in Dividend (DIV).
DY (Dividend Yield): KO has a DY of 1.6 percent. This is above the current market average of 1.1 %. DY equals 100 x
(DIV/PRICE), and is expressed as a percentage.
EY (Earnings Yield): KO has an EY of 3.74%. This is below the current market average of 3.83%. EY equals 100 x (EARNINGS
PER SHARE/PRICE), and is expressed as a percentage.
EPS (Earnings Per Share): KO has an EPS of $1.71 per share. EPS stands for leading 12 months Earnings Per Share. VectorVest
determines this forecast from a combination of recent earnings performance and traditional fiscal and/or calendar year earnings forecasts.
P/E (Price to Earnings Ratio): KO has a P/E ratio of 26.73. This ratio is computed daily based upon Price and EPS. P/E = Price/EPS.
GPE (Growth to P/E Ratio): KO has a GPE of 0.19. This ratio suggests that KO is overvalued. Growth to P/E ratio is a popular
measure of stock valuation which compares Earnings Growth Rate (GRT) to Price Earnings ratio (P/E). A stock is considered to be
undervalued when GPE is greater than 1.00, and vice-versa. VectorVest believes that RV is a much better indicator of long-term value.
The RV of 0.92 for KO is fair.
DS (Dividend Safety): KO has a DS of 87. On a scale of 0 to 99, a DS of 87 is excellent. DS is defined as the assurance that regular
cash dividends will be declared and paid at current or at higher rates for the foreseeable future. Stocks with DS values above 50 on a scale
of 0 to 99 are above average in safety.
RISK (Dividend Risk): KO has a Dividend Risk of Low. All stocks in the VectorVest system that pay dividends are classified as having
Low, Medium or High Dividend Risk (RISK). Stocks with DS values above 50 are above average in safety. These stocks are classified as
having LOW or MEDIUM RISK. Stocks with DS values below 50 are below average in safety and are classified as having HIGH Risk.
DG (Dividend Growth): KO has a DG of 6 percent per year. Dividend Growth is a subtle yet important indicator of a company's
historical financial performance and the board's current outlook on the future use of funds.
YSG-VECTOR (Yield-Safety-Growth Vector): KO has a YSG-Vector of 1.06. On a scale of 0.00 to 2.00, a YSG-Vector rating of
1.06 is fair. VectorVest combines Dividend YIELD, SAFETY and GROWTH into a single parameter. YSG-Vector allows direct
comparison of all dividend paying stocks. Stocks with the highest YSG-Vector values have the best combinations of Dividend Yield, Safety
and Growth. These are the stocks to buy for above average current income and long-term growth.
VOL(100)s: KO traded 4383600 shares on 04/17/2001.
AVG VOL(100)s: KO has an Average Volume of 5301600. Average Volume is 50 day moving average of daily volume as computed by
VectorVest.
% VOL: KO had a Volume change of -17.3% from its 50 day moving average volume.
OPEN: KO opened trading at $45.00 per share on 04/17/2001.
HIGH: KO traded at a high of $45.70 per share on 04/17/2001.
LOW: KO traded at a low of $44.81 per share on 04/17/2001.
CLOSE: KO Closed trading at $45.70 per share on 04/17/2001.
% PRC: KO showed a Price change of 0.6% from the prior day's closing price.
INDUSTRY: KO has been assigned to the Food (Bev-Soft Drinks) Group. VectorVest classifies stocks into over 190 Industry Groups
and 50 Business Sectors.
KO has well above average safety with about average upside potential. It reflects a stock which is likely to give about average, quite
consistent returns over the long term.
GDP to consumer debt is at an all time gap and the last three months have seen 175,000 jobs lost each month.10% average earning report deductions and forecasted for even lower for the upcoming quarters.. PE's are tooooooo high
Yeah a 400 point gain is very appropriate. At the stock market for Pollock’s
You said it yourself last night. The players demanded more control. You bring in a coach and tell him its his way and then let the players say differently what good is the coach at all. Dunlevey probably said fine let them fall on their faces and next year I’ll go play for a team that follows through on their promises. I think your brother had a great point when he said that.
I've often said phuck playing above the refs walk off and watch the riots cost the NBA a ton of cash.
To play above the refs and coach above all these individual self-proclaimed player coaches is an impossible task. Add the Portland fans watching the best team in the NBA play and loose like chumps and I think the season couldn't get over fast enough for Mr. Coach.
The Blazers are sleeping themselves. Why get pumped up for an NBA that is going to tell you to throw a 12 pt leads so the Lakers can go on and win the championship? The coach probably already received the call telling him to go down in three so the Lakers can get a good rest for Sacramento.
Pippen is the man and we have not utilized him as the team leader at all. If Mighty who is not a leader and if Anthony had a problem with Hot Rod than they should have asked to be traded to a lesser team as not to handicap the players who actually put away their egos for a chance at the phucking ring! Correct me if I’m wrong but isn't the ring the sole purpose of their employment. If they can't help contribute then they don't deserve the money. Individual performances are bunk unless your name is Jordan with an invisible Pippen behind you.
I digress
Pre want to go to the mountains today? I am tired of watching myself loose money in a market that should be coming down as fast as Bill Clinton pants do.
I just received my birthday gifts from my wife. Mossy OAK cammo shirts and my Real tree rainwear and commando hat from Cabelas. I used my office depot card to buy a nice backpack and map protector. Just abooot (yes I’m mocking Canadians with my Aboot) ready for the Pig and Caribou hunts.
I want to mark off three hundred yards and play with the 300 mag...Of course we'd have to let a few .454s as well...
I have a friend with a brand new boat. I've been talking to him about Waleye fishing under the 205 bridge..Interested? He's been knocking tha salmon dead.He is an avid hunter and fisherman that when not doing so, is busy buying the bar rounds and telling tall tails....
+200 pts in less than 3 seconds. It takes longer than that to make the hand gestures to signal the trade.
The only good news for me today is the fact that I just heard two different hedge fund managers claim that they were waiting to short this run up back down...I am waiting to hear their reasons.... Probably the same shit I already know and am using to justify my positions.
Maybe the phucking banks will drop the mortgage loans down to the 5% range so I can refinance. Naw......
*phuc*** *phuc*** *phuc*** **** another .50 point cut off the rate phuckingnggreenspan
Ok NYC why is this market acting like a drugged whore? Put those fifteen years to work and give me an analysis of this sideways bullshit we are experiencing.
My DD is there, the market is shit with more shit projected through 02. All of the sudden a couple good earning reports come out and 1 to 3 dollar jumps across the board. FOR NO REASON other than......??????
Is this a Bull trap or are the bears being ‘drugged’ back into hibernation? The number of positive earnings out barely exceeds the number of negative earnings reports. CPI CPU well they say the market should be going lower IMO..The put to call ratio still is in the favor of puts why is this market not tanking properly? LIKE IT SHOULD BE.
I listen to several different opinions on CNBC, MSNBC etc and the general sentiment is that we still have plenty of downside. However that is always followed by a” but the Bulls could run at any moment”…What kind of lame position is that…It’s not, any ***** anal cyst can take that stance. So far the only person who has accurately predicted this quick upshot in the mkt was an RB poster by the name of Zen something or other, while trying to help me play the MCD options. Its almost like one should throw out the book and just ride the waves of idiot investors that like to balloon PE and pps way out of the stratosphere. This ‘I don’t want to miss the run up’ mentality can only be good for the power players on the side holding all the cash?.?.?.?.
PepsiCo Expects to Achieve First Quarter EPS Estimates; Strong Volume Anticipated Across All Businesses
PURCHASE, N.Y., Apr 16, 2001 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ -- PepsiCo announced today
that it expects to deliver EPS growth of 15%-plus for the first quarter, based
on healthy volume and revenue trends across all PepsiCo divisions. Pepsi-Cola
North America, in particular, is expected to report strong bottler case sales
growth of over 4%, based on strength across the bottling system and the addition
of SoBe.
"With the accelerating consumer demand for convenience and our focus on great
tasting convenient food and beverages, we are perfectly positioned to continue
driving double digit growth," said Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Roger
Enrico. "We are confident we will deliver a solid, high-quality first quarter,
consistent with the consensus estimate, and we believe we will achieve strong
results for the year in line with our goals."
PepsiCo will announce its first quarter earnings on April 23. A conference call
with financial analysts and investors will be webcast live over the Internet
that day at 11:00 AM (ET). PepsiCo will issue its complete financial results
before the market opens that morning.
The live webcast will be accessible through the company's website at
http://www.pepsico.com and will be archived at http://www.ccbn.com and at
http://www.vcall.com for a period of 90 days.
This release contains certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of
the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements are based
on currently available competitive, financial and economic data and our
operating plans and are naturally subject to uncertainty and changes in
circumstances. Actual results may vary materially from the expectations
contained herein.
SOURCE PepsiCo, Inc.
CONTACT: Richard M. Detwiler, Jr. Vice President, Public Relations,
914-253-2725 or Kathleen Allen Luke, Vice President, Investor Relations,
914-253-3691, both at PepsiCo, Inc.
URL: http://www.pepsico.com
http://www.prnewswire.com
(C) 2001 PR Newswire. All rights reserved.
The Coca-Cola Company Announces First Quarter Operating Results And Outlook for Future Growth* Earnings per share of $0.35 and worldwide unit case volume growth of 4 percent, driven by 6 percent international growth. * Management comfortable with cu
ATLANTA, Apr 18, 2001 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ -- The Coca-Cola Company reported
today that first quarter earnings per share were $0.35, compared with a loss of
$0.02 a year ago, on a reported basis. Worldwide unit case volumes grew 4
percent in the quarter, driven by international growth of 6 percent.
Taking into account first quarter volume performance in key markets and a
slightly more conservative outlook due to economic indicators, the Company now
expects unit case volume growth of 5 to 6 percent in the current year. This
incorporates the anticipated benefits of heightened marketing activities, led by
a new campaign for brand Coca-Cola, which will begin in the second quarter.
After considering the revised outlook for volume growth, the Company remains
comfortable with full-year diluted earnings per share in the range of analysts'
expectations. This estimate excludes any impact from transactional gains, as the
Company views such items as nonrecurring in nature.
Regarding the longer-term outlook, Douglas N. Daft, chairman and chief executive
officer, said, "We have recently concluded a thorough, disciplined process
involving a comprehensive business analysis of all factors impacting our system,
including the macroeconomic environment, demographic trends, consumption
patterns, and the long-term financial returns of the Coca-Cola system. As a
result of this exhaustive analysis, which we have reviewed with the Board of
Directors, we have recalibrated our long-term performance objectives. We are
confident that in the future we will be able to consistently achieve growth of
company-owned, worldwide unit case volume in the range of 5 to 6 percent and
earnings per share growth in the range of 11 to 12 percent, on a currency
neutral basis."
For 2002, the Company anticipates that volume and earnings per share will grow
in accordance with long-term objectives from a base earnings per share amount
that excludes the previously announced 2001 incremental marketing activities.
Mr. Daft said, "Over the past year, we have strengthened our platform to deliver
long-term shareowner value. More importantly, we will continue to do so over
time. Our success will be driven not by short-term financial goals alone, but by
our system's ability to capitalize on our key competitive advantages.
"The financial yardsticks we will use to measure ourselves, and by which we
believe others will measure us, include our ability to deliver significant cash
flows, strong operating income and attractive returns on capital well into the
future. Coca-Cola has the most recognized beverage brands in the world and is
able to reach consumers in nearly 200 countries through an unparalleled
distribution system.
"Our core business has the potential for significant expansion and can realize
that opportunity. For example, people outside the United States drink less than
one serving of carbonated soft drinks a week. Within the U.S., consumers drink
more than one serving a day. Therefore, we continue to aggressively drive the
business and build on our competitive strengths, and we are confident this will
produce sustainable growth in volume, earnings and cash flow, delivering
outstanding financial returns for our system and our share owners," concluded
Mr. Daft.
Volume Measurement
Consistent with industry practice, in the future, the Company's unit case volume
information will only include unit case volume from operations which are
majority-owned by The Coca-Cola Company. Therefore, after regulatory approvals
are obtained, the Company intends to exclude volumes from the joint venture with
Nestle and from the company it is forming with Procter & Gamble.
Had the Company excluded unit case volume contributed in the first quarter 2001
by brands which will be managed through equity investments in the future,
worldwide unit case volumes would have grown 4 percent, reflecting no change.
THE COCA-COLA COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARIES
(In Millions, except per share data)
First Quarter
2001 2000 % Change
NET OPERATING REVENUES $4,479 $4,256 5
Cost of Goods Sold 1,345 1,398 (4)
GROSS PROFIT 3,134 2,858 10
Selling, Administrative and
General Expenses 1,854 1,938 (4)
Other Operating Charges
Organizational Realignment -- 275 --
Primarily Asset Write-downs -- 405 --
OPERATING INCOME 1,280 240 433
Interest Income 81 67 21
Interest Expense 91 99 (8)
Equity Loss - Net (38) (85) 55
Other Income (Loss) - Net 15 (26) --
Income Before Income Taxes and 1,247 97 --
Cumulative Effect of Change in
Accounting Principle
Income Taxes 374 155 141
Income Prior to Cumulative Effect
of Change in Accounting Principle 873 (58) --
Cumulative Effect of Change in
Accounting Principle -- SFAS 133 (10) -- --
NET INCOME (LOSS) $863 $(58) --
DILUTED NET INCOME (LOSS)
PER SHARE* $0.35 $(0.02) --
Average Shares Outstanding -
Diluted* 2,490 2,472 --
* For the first quarter, "Basic Net Income (Loss) Per Share" was $0.35 for 2001
and $(0.02) for 2000 based on "Average Shares Outstanding - Basic" of 2,486 and
2,472 for 2001 and 2000, respectively.
Operational Review
First quarter worldwide unit case volume increased 4 percent. Worldwide gallon
sales in the quarter increased 11 percent. Actual gallon sales were the
equivalent of unit cases in the quarter; however, the percentage increase in
gallon sales was higher than the increase in unit case volumes due to the
reduction of concentrate inventory by certain bottlers during the first quarter
of last year.
Asia -- Unit case volume increased 10 percent for the quarter due to strong
performance in most major markets, including China at 16 percent and India at 12
percent. Volumes within Japan grew by 1 percent, accelerating in the quarter to
reach very strong growth in March as a result of solid marketing programs behind
brand Coca-Cola and Georgia coffee. In the early part of the quarter, the
Company's focus was on growing the highly profitable coffee business, which is
weighted toward smaller package sizes. Gallon sales in Asia increased 34 percent
in the first quarter 2001, as a result of the planned inventory reduction by
selected bottlers in the first quarter 2000.
Latin America -- First quarter unit case volume increased 3 percent. In Brazil,
unit case volume increased 5 percent on top of 13 percent volume growth a year
ago, driven by locally developed marketing activities. Mexico was impacted by
extremely poor weather conditions early in the year; however, improving volume
trends allowed for growth in the quarter of 1 percent on top of 8 percent growth
last year.
In Argentina, the Company's strategy to offer greater diversity in its portfolio
led to unit case volume growth of 14 percent. In Chile, volumes declined 1
percent due to low levels of consumer spending and difficult comparisons from
the prior year. Gallon sales in Latin America increased 4 percent in the
quarter.
North America -- Unit case volume increased 1 percent in the first quarter, as
major 2001 marketing initiatives are heavily weighted to the second, third and
fourth quarters. New product launches have begun across North America, including
Fanta, Manzana Mia, Planet Java, KMX, Minute Maid Lemonade and Fruit Punch and
other products specifically tailored to consumer groups in each market. Gallon
sales in North America increased 4 percent compared to the prior year.
Europe, Eurasia and Middle East -- Unit case volume increased 4 percent. With
the exception of Turkey and Germany, performance was solid across the entire
region led by Central Europe, CCE Europe Territories and Southeast Europe. The
Eurasia Division reported a decline in volumes of 14 percent due to the
significant, continuing economic crisis in Turkey. Unit case volume growth in
Germany was negatively impacted by retail pricing actions. The Company
anticipates improving business results in Germany as the new management team,
business strategies, and aggressive marketing activities combine with a bottling
system which will be strengthened by the restructuring process now underway.
Gallon sales in Europe, Eurasia and Middle East increased 12 percent for the
year compared to the prior year.
Africa -- First quarter unit case volume increased 10 percent, led by South
Africa and Nigeria. In South Africa, local marketing initiatives and new product
launches combined for successful unit case volume growth. In addition to cycling
last year's volume decline resulting from a significant price increase, Nigeria
experienced volume increases driven by new product and packaging launches.
Gallon sales in Africa increased 33 percent compared to the prior year
reflecting the impact of the planned concentrate inventory reduction by selected
bottlers in 2000.
Financial Review
Fully diluted earnings per share were $0.35 for the first quarter. Revenues
increased by 5 percent in the first quarter reflecting gallon shipments and
price increases in selected countries, partially offset by structural change and
the impact of foreign currencies. Structural change related to the sale of the
Company's Japanese vending operation to local bottlers and the transfer of the
German canning operation to Coca-Cola bottlers in Germany. Both events impacted
revenues and cost of goods sold but had an immaterial impact on operating
income.
Operating income for the first quarter 2001 increased significantly due to solid
business results and the cycling of several nonrecurring items in the prior
year. The impact of a stronger U.S. dollar reduced our operating income by
approximately 3 percent during the first quarter, led by movements in the Euro,
Brazilian real, Australian dollar and South African rand. Excluding the
nonrecurring items in the prior year first quarter, net income grew by 11
percent.
In the first quarter 2000, a reduction in concentrate inventory by certain
bottlers impacted the Company's diluted earnings per share by approximately
$0.10 after tax. Reported operating income for the first quarter 2000 was also
impacted by nonrecurring charges of $0.08 per share after tax due to the
Company's organizational realignment and $0.16 per share after tax primarily
related to the write-down in the carrying value of the Company's Indian bottling
operations.
The Company reinitiated its share repurchase program during the first quarter
2001, reflecting improving cash flow trends. During the quarter, the Company
repurchased over 1 million shares of common stock at an average cost of $50.54
per share. Since the inception of our initial share repurchase program in
January 1984, the Company has repurchased over 32% of common shares then
outstanding, or a cumulative total of over 1 billion shares at an average cost
of approximately $12.51 per share.
Accounting Standards
During the quarter, the Company implemented SFAS 133, "Accounting for Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities," and the cumulative effect of the accounting
change was a one-time, non-cash charge of $10 million. The application of this
new accounting standard in the first quarter 2001 decreased earnings by $16
million on a pre-tax basis.
In the first quarter, the Company adopted the provisions of the Emerging Issues
Task Force (EITF) issue No. 00-14 "Accounting for Certain Sales Incentives," and
issue No. 00-22 "Accounting for Points and Certain Other Time-Based Sales
Incentive Offers, and Offers for Free Products or Services to Be Delivered in
the Future." The adoption of both EITF No. 00-14 and EITF No. 00-22 resulted in
the reclassification of $135 million for first quarter 2000, from selling,
administrative and general expenses to a reduction in net revenues. The amount
reclassified relates primarily to volume incentives offered to customers by The
Minute Maid Company.
Conference Call
The Company will host a conference call to discuss the first quarter 2001
earnings release with financial analysts on April 18, 2001 at 1:00 p.m. (EDT).
To listen, please visit the Investor Relations section of the Company's website
at www.coca-cola.com .
This press release contains statements, estimates or projections, not historical
in nature, that may constitute "forward-looking statements" as defined under
U.S. federal securities laws. These statements, which speak only as of the date
given, are subject to certain risks and uncertainties that could cause actual
results to differ materially from our Company's historical experience and our
present expectations or projections. These risks include, but are not limited
to, our ability to finance expansion plans, share repurchase programs and
general operating activities; changes in the non-alcoholic beverages business
environment, including actions of competitors and changes in consumer
preferences; regulatory and legal changes; fluctuations in the cost and
availability of raw materials; interest rate and currency fluctuations; changes
in economic and political conditions; our ability to penetrate developing and
emerging markets; the effectiveness of our advertising and marketing programs;
litigation uncertainties; adverse weather conditions; and other risks discussed
in our Company's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
"SEC"), including our Annual Report on Form 10-K, which filings are available
from the SEC. The Company undertakes no obligation to publicly update or revise
any forward-looking statements.
The Coca-Cola Company
First Quarter 2001
Volume Results
First Quarter 2001
` vs.
First Quarter 2000
Unit Case Volume
% Change
Worldwide 4
North America 1
United States 1
Latin America 3
Argentina 14
Brazil 5
Central America & Caribbean 9
Chile (1)
Mexico 1
Europe, Eurasia and Middle East 4
Germany (4)
Spain 2
Eurasia (includes Turkey) (14)
Middle East 12
Africa 10
North and West 10
Southern and East 9
Asia 10
China 16
India 12
Japan 1
SOURCE The Coca Cola Company
CONTACT: Ben Deutsch of The Coca-Cola Company, 404-676-2683
URL: http://www.coke.com
http://www.prnewswire.com
(C) 2001 PR Newswire. All rights reserved.
Have you checked your chaps lately? nuff said
Thats Ok, Our Alaskan she friend sent me down some fresh Caribou for the swamp to fix up for breakfast...too bad you'll be at work...Oh well I'll make sure yours doesn't go to waste.
Looked more like a man who couldn't tell time try to duck and run if you ask me. Grabbing Mrs Viv by the arms and throwing her in the way of Paule Walnuts revenge!lol
I knew them Texans saved that yellow ribbon for more than that old oak tree.;O)
Paule Walnuts
Daily Chart for PEPSICO INC
http://www.askresearch.com/cgi-bin/chart?symbol=pep&exchange=USA&size=800x600&months=3+m...
Daily Chart for COCA COLA CO Price and Indicator charts
http://www.askresearch.com/cgi-bin/chart?symbol=ko&exchange=USA&size=800x600&months=3+mo...
Don't forget you're talking to us Northern Boys...A little cold and rain ..we eat for breakfast...Bring out the sun and we tend to act like vampires......I mean we don't all wear our shades 24/7 cause of herbs red eye know what I’m saying....
McDonald's 1st-Qtr Profit Seen at 29c-Share: Earnings Outlook
4/17/01 5:57 AM
Source:Bloomberg News
Oak Brook, Illinois, April 17 (Bloomberg) -- The following is a summary of first-quarter earnings forecasts for McDonald's Corp., the world's biggest restaurant company. Expected Earnings
McDonald's Corp.'s first-quarter profit is expected to fall to 29 cents a share, the average estimate of analysts polled by First Call/Thomson Financial. The company earned 33 cents in the year-earlier quarter. Time
McDonald's, based in the Chicago suburb of Oak Brook, Illinois, is expected to report earnings on Thursday. Behind the Numbers
McDonald's has been hurt by consumers in Europe, who shunned beef because of concerns about ''mad-cow'' disease. Europeans are buying fewer hamburgers than McDonald's expected because of the brain-wasting disease found in cattle that has been linked to incidents of Creutzfeldt-Jakob's disease, which caused the deaths of dozens of people in Europe.
Sales also may be hampered by the spread of foot-and-mouth disease in the U.K., executives said last month. While considered harmless to humans, foot-and-mouth disease causes weight loss, reduced milk production and the death of young pigs, sheep, cattle and deer.
The company also has been hurt by declines in the value of the euro, the British pound and the Japanese yen compared with the dollar. What the Experts Say
''The first quarter is not going to be pretty,'' said Raymond James analyst Damon Brundage. ''The question is what happens in the next nine months of the year?''
''My sense is that mad cow has stopped getting worse and that foot-and-mouth still needs moderating. It doesn't seem that the outbreak has been contained.''
Brundage said concern about mad-cow disease likely is already reflected in the company's stock price.
McDonald's probably will report a good quarter in the U.S., where it held promotions to compete with Diageo Plc's Burger King Corp., he said. Previous Market Reaction
McDonald's shares fell 6.3 percent to $30.81 on January 24, after the company said fourth-quarter profit fell 7 percent because fears about ''mad-cow'' disease hurt sales in Europe. Market Performance
The shares have fallen 29 percent in the past year, more than the 16 percent decline in the Standard & Poor's 500 Index.
Because nobody else did?…
I am a fan of the new Pepsi product Sobe, Add Frito Lay the Pepsi savior and I think continued growth over Coke will last for quite some time. Coke is struggling to gain market share in its non-carbonated drinks such as MinuteMaid, and Pepsi is already there.
Pepsi I don't think will make the same errors of selling too many more of its assets off especially after (as I stated earlier) its Frito Lay division is what’s giving them the income right now.
Coke has almost double the P.E ratio of Pepsi. I told everybody 5 years ago to buy Coke at 35. Cokes time has come and gone with the price returning to almost five year lows. I think it’ll stay in the 35- 45 range while the new management restructures..For continued movement upward I would hazard to say Pepsi looks better than Coke right now. I’m playing options on both these companies.
Not that I trust too many analysts however several have been giving Pepsi the thumbs up on CNBC and have been for several days. Yesterday they compared Coke and Pepsi charts and business plans. It seems that lately CNBC is responsible for a lot of consumer sentiment....
Personally I can’t stand Pepsi and am a Coke fan.
Last warning?
Here are some of my favorite overboard statements:
China has a mighty strategic rear, i.e., Russia, whose leaders firmly support any PLA action aimed at expansion and confrontation with the US. . . . China and Russia intend to sign a Treaty On Friendship and Cooperation, and will formalize their strategic-military alliance. . . . . This particularly means unconditional support of China by the Russian side -- with all resources available -- in the case of a Sino-US military conflict.
Hehe. Russia is pragmatically "making peace" with China to ensure it is not invaded and overrun by the biggest threat to its independence as a nation, by its longest standing and most feared enemy (China). But to infer that this means Russia's going to hand over its weapons and technology to its biggest enemy is just plain silly. And then to suggest that Russia would somehow overtly support China in any sort of conflict with the only remaining world superpower, and its largest supplier of foreign aid is delusional. (Russian leaders stay in office these days, in no small part on the back of American foreign aid, not treaties signed with China). I especially liked the characterization of Russia as "a mighty strategic rear." That would be the same Russia who missiles are being taken apart and sold for scrap value, whose vessels are in such a state of disrepair they rarely leave port for fear of disaster like what struck the Kirsk sub, and whose military is in tatters -- the part of it that hasn't walked off because it hasn't been paid in months?
"Jiang Zemin received an assurance from Putin that -- in case of a serious crisis around Taiwan, or any other crisis related to direct conflict between Chinese and US forces -- a significant part of the Russian Pacific Fleet will "block the way of the US Navy."
Hehe. They couldn't get a significant part of the Russian Pacific Fleet fueled and out of port, much less block the way of the U.S. Navy.
"Chinese leaders are especially counting on large-scale direct Russian military assistance, which could include even the actions of Russian strategic aircraft."
Another funny one. What jets they could manage to get airborne would probably have combat kill ratios not much different than the Gulf War skirmishes. 48 hours and the ones that hadn't been shot out of the sky would refuse to take off.
China has the potential to one day become a superpower. It is nowhere near one now and could not be for many years. While the focus of our strategic military planning will no doubt shift more and more toward that theater in coming years, it will be gradual and proportional to the growth and sophistication of the Chinese military capabilities.
The notion of China declaring or provoking war at any time in the next decade is highly unlikely. Smart leaders don't start wars they have no prayer of winning, particularly against countries that hold the key to their future economic advancement. Engaging in war with the U.S. or an ally of the U.S. brings all of NATO into play as well.
Expect China to build its military forces to establish psychological superiority in the region, and build up its national pride. Expect China to test the limits to which it can reach beyond its boundaries, until it finds a definitive boundary. Expect Chinese leaders to bluster in order to score political points at home and augure their own pride.
But let's not kid ourselves. As China tests to see if we are resolute in our pledge to support Taiwan in armed conflict, it will just as surely halt at the point where it is equally certain of our resolution and willingness to engage. They'll take what they can get without going to war, and that's it.
No chance Chinese political (or military) leaders would provoke an armed conflict in which they would go home humiliated and decisive losers.
Not to mention the fact that it would set them back substantially to have to rebuild all the tactical weapons, aircraft, ships, subs, and command and control hardware that we'd vaporize in the conflict.
It's Kruschev in Cuba all over again, only far less threatening. It's just a test. We'll pass. Taiwan will be fine.
Regards,
ECM1
Two-dimensional, you provided pictures of your lovely face :O). After viewing the pictures of the family and myself during my wedding, did that not change your perception of me just a little bit? I know viewing you for the first time did me.
See I am just the opposite. IRL I stop and carefully plan any response. Her I am able explode with the youthful passion denied irl.
Do you think the way we write is a gateway to our inner being? Psychiatrists tell us our life story after checking yes or no in the proper box. The handwriting experts tell the police how insane you are by the size of the swoop in your “ls” Is it possible for the layperson to perceive your or at least come close to perceiving your true self despite the front you believe is protecting you? I know the computer screen is a ‘cold’ representation but still…..
RE goofy or clumsy…you should read what you write sometimes. Does trying to burn everything down count as clumsy? The goofy part comes from laughing at it..lol
However after talking to NYC on the phone....
I still think he's a bull headed prick ;O) lol
NYC" I said limit order you idot .You just cost me a quarter point stupid.Limit. Limit! Ahh never mind i'll do it"
The things you hear while on hold.LOL
Viv...
"Some of them have seen the real me in pictures, but none really knows me. I think we all form mental images of one another."
Are you saying that after three years of interaction the "real you” has not shown bits and pieces of herself enough times to piece together a fairly accurate "mental image"?
You claim to know me pretty well however to meet me IRL, as I’m sure Pre would attest to, is a much different experience all together. I am a very affable person. I still argue but very affable. ;O) I do agree with you, most of us do become more brazen behind the safety of a computer screen however I believe that safety to be a very weak crutch easily broken irl. I.E. push the same people outside the box and watch the same behavior expose itself.
By: ECM1 04-16-01 at 2:04 pm
Reply To: pmcw Post # 21965
pmcw - Thoughts from the middle
To begin, here are a couple positives I saw from the Bush administration that haven't gotten much play in the press. First, note that President Bush didn't fly to Whidbey Island to maximize his own press exposure. There are times for political pimping and grandstanding, and there are times where it's simply inappropriate. Just MHO, but it was a refreshing change to see Mr. Bush stay home and allow the military and the young men returning home take center stage, rather than littering the landscape with administration officials. He certainly could have chosen a different route. It would have been easy enough to put Colin Powell, Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfield, Condaleesa Rice and others in front of the cameras in a crass attempt to make a political event out of the whole deal. Second, it's clear Mr. Bush has rejected Colin Powell's disturbing "Powell Doctrine" isolationist approach to world affairs, and refused to pander to the far right wing isolationists who wanted to grandstand by demonizing the Chinese. His reserved approach, and willingness to forego domestic political pandering and preying on the fears of the American people in favor of a higher standard, were notable. He made it clear that we won't be a pushover, but he didn't close any doors with the Chinese. Bravo.
On the other side of the ledger, here's a different take on Knight Ridder, which you labeled as a liberal institution. While certain of Knight Ridder's editorial boards print more left-of-center content on their editorial and op-ed pages than others, I think it's a stretch to call it a liberal entity. I know each of the past two Chairmen well, as well as many of the Sr. executives at Knight Ridder. To a man (yes they're all men), they were and are all staunch Republicans. Having worked for a number of years with editorial boards and writers from Knight Ridder publications from east coast to west, I have a sense of the interplay between management and content. In recent years, more and more direct pressure has been placed by management on editors to shape content in ways that cater to the desires of paying advertisers. Part of determining whether a paper is liberal or conservative is about what the paper does and doesn't cover, not just what they write on the editorial pages. I have watched investigative pieces come under increasing censorship / elimination from management in the past 3 years. Not that this tension between more conservative managers who run the business side and more liberal editors who run the content side hasn't always existed. But the competitive challenges facing the industry have multiplied in recent years, and the result is seen in the content (or often the lack there-of). As an aside, I still recall with a chuckle when the editorial board of the Miami Herald set to endorse Walter Mondale in 1980, was informed by the then Publisher that they would endorse Reagan or they would be fired. Half the editorial board resigned in protest (although all but two came back). In the end, the Herald did not endorse Mondale.
Finally, you've repeated a number of times as rationale for why you believe the Bush tax cut proposal should be adopted, that personal income tax collection as a percentage of GDP is high relative to any time since WW II. Without commenting on whether I do or don't support the Bush proposal, I'd suggest that your rationale seems to me to be much like the reasoning of the investor who compares current share prices relative to prices past, rather than evaluating it on the basis of fundamentals. Xerox, for instance, is trading lower today than it has at any time in its history. That hardly makes it a buy, however.
It seems to me, issues regarding level of taxation are better debated around discussion of what types and kinds of activities in which government should and should not be involved, and in those areas that government should be involved at what level it should be involved, and finally, once those things have been determined, what are reasonable costs for government to incur in doing them. Whatever that turns out to be, it turns out to be. What happened in the past really is largely irrelevent in that regard.
For example, 50 years ago, we didn't even have an EPA. Nor did we have a Clean Water Act, a Clean Air Act, a Resource Conservation & Recovery Act (or Superfund provision), a Safe Drinking Water Act. We didn't need to clean up hazardous waste dumps, we didn't need to regulate municipal water supplies (because they weren't being constantly polluted), we weren't paying for an infrastructure to cap and bring down the trashing of our rivers, lakes, streams and oceans, nor did we spend anything ensuring we had breathable air in our major cities. We didn't have to have a large FDA because the drug industry hadn't exploded in size, and did not create new compounds and drugs at anywhere near the rate they do today, nor aggressively attempt to push tens of thousands of new compounds into the market - and therefore didn't have to invest in regulatory costs to protect us from inappropriate or potentially harmful new products. (Even with these protections, more than 200,000 people in this country die from adverse reactions to new drugs each year). Back then we hadn't driven our fisheries so far into the ground that the Department of Commerce had to invest in monitoring and regulatory activities to protect what remained of that industry from canibalizing itself. We hadn't destroyed the majority of our coral reefs and many marine populations to the point that we had to establish a National Marine Sanctuary system to ensure these national assets would be around for future generations to enjoy. I could list hundreds more functions of government that we pay for today that we did not back then. Most all of which I think even most conservatives would not want to see taken away. Given that what we ask government to do for us today relative to 50 years ago, it is hardly surprising that it costs more.
An equally important factor in the equation is the deficit. Which is a double whammy. Part of the reason many of the years between our first years of heavy deficit spending under FDR have seen tax receipts as a smaller percentage of GDP is because those receipts were being subsidized by deficit spending. So if you were to make those sorts of comparisons, they really ought to be adjusted for the effects of deficit spending. Deficit spending should be added in, AND the percentage of taxes used to pay interest on the debt should be subtracted. I'll bet if you take out the nearly 1/3 of the budget allocated to debt payments, those relative comparison numbers would look considerably different.
As a last aside, while we all find "pork" or wasteful spending anathema, when thinking our way through what can be done to reform the budget on the expense side, it's worth keeping relative size in mind. Non-military, non-entitlement, non-interest on the the debt, general spending is roughly equal to the interest on the debt. Obviously what constitutes "pork" is in the eye of the beholder, but if you wanted to say that as much as 10% was, that would still be only between 3% and 4% of the total budget. In fact, it is probable that military "pork" alone, amounts to more than all other pork combined.
I think it would be healthy rather than debating taxation on the grounds of abstract numbers that really aren't "apples to apples", we ought to go straight to the expense side of the ledger and talk about what we'd like to see cut out of the expense side. Whatever that number is, the tax cut / debt reduction should be fashioned from.
I've often looked at my own personal budgeting thinking "I really ought to have a higher percentage of money going into savings and investments." In the abstract, it always seems so obviously true. And I say to myself, "sheesh, there've got to be tons of things I'm wasting money on that I don't need." Only after I repeat the review of the expense side to find that, indeed, I had put a great deal of well-reasoned thought into assembling it, and that there's little on the list that I want to do without, that I can get down the difficult business of relating the abstract thought to the rational process of choosing among trade-offs and making value based choices.
I happen to believe there are some things that government is doing that should be dropped. I believe there are things government needs to continue doing, but that it should be doing to a lesser degree, and I believe there are things that I want government doing, but which I think it's "overcharging" to do. It seems to me that that's where the debate should start.
You've obviously done a bunch of research on the federal budget. I'm guessing you probably even have the itemized breakout of the federal budget somewhere near at hand. I think it would be highly educational for that to be posted to the board. (I remember being surprised at the relative amounts we spend on certain activities the first time I saw a pie chart). I'll bet we'd have a humdinger of a debate over what parts should be cut, and what parts should not (or even those that should be expanded). I think having that debate would be better than debating abstract numbers. What do you think?
Regards,
ECM1
Yeah but what has changed? You showed up, and the same attacks by the same people who have such shallow lives, that it would seem doled out abuse is the lifeblood of their being. Is it yours as well?
Personally I believe you have the ability to offer a lot in regards to making people think differently about the way they perceive and understand the stock market. People actually listen to what you have to say. About religion you are repeating a tired lame argument that has existed for as long as there has been religion. You stated it yourself "I've never seen a check mate on these threads" so I am wondering what you are hoping to accomplish with this? Conversion?
They reinstated my Brother_Paule alias.It's not my origional alias of Paule so I still am not planning on posting anytime soon. Vagabon on the options thread and that’s about it.Soon as IH options thread picks up...
Are you ever going to answer my three questions?
Looking at trading in my two vehicles for a new ford f150 4x4 extra cab regular bed.
You are still ugly!
I didn't proof read last message hear not here.EOM
Colt if we don't here form Pre today I'll call him tonight.I really don't think it very cool to call and bug somebody over these threads. I do need to set up a shooting time, so I'll slip in IH, as parting conversation.
Why do you need a new alias?You already changed the definition of "NEVER". eom
Darn Texans... Just cause they are two hours ahead of us, they think they special. While Their posting on the puter this Oregon Boy is hard at work finding his next paycheck in the stock market. The financial world starts at 3 am my time that 5 your time, so as you can see, you're the one sleeping in Buddy.
Thats ok we know how you older people need your rest!
Paule
COLUMN: Iowa State on Coke
AMES, Iowa, Apr 16, 2001 (Iowa State Daily, U-WIRE via COMTEX) -- "Our mission
is to maximize share-owner value over time." -- Coca-Cola Company
"Becoming the Best." -- Iowa State University of Science and Technology
Iowa State University, the great land-grant university, is currently in
negotiations for a deal that could make Coca-Cola products the exclusive
on-campus beverage for the next 10 years.
There have been smaller contracts in the past, but this new deal is an
all-encompassing, permeating mass we haven't seen the likes of since pink ooze
took control of the Metropolitan Museum in Ghostbusters 2.
In exchange for handing over exclusivity rights, choice seating and parking at
athletic events, etc., to Coke, Iowa State will pocket a few million dollars for
its cooperation.
This isn't the first time Coke has bought its way onto my school grounds. Two
years earlier, the "gentle giant" of a corporation signed a similar deal with
Ames High School.
For the privilege of hawking its sodas to a captive audience (minus the burden
of competition), Coke gave a couple grand to the athletic department.
I remember being only slightly peeved at the time. Most of my peers found Coke
acceptable or didn't care at all.
If an exclusivity contract with one of the biggest brand names in America bought
the football team nicer tights or better footballs, then I could deal with that.
Of course, Coca-Cola corporate mind share tactics didn't stop at the vending
machine.
Every student was rationed out a "Coke card" in homeroom, which was basically a
plastic card which promised special deals to the cardholder.
Sadly, when presented at convenience stores across Iowa, its value wasn't worth
the plastic it was printed on. (Unless you count throwing said card at the face
of an unsuspecting attendant and temporarily blinding her while your buddy
looted the store.)
The Coke card was utterly worthless to students, but for Coca-Cola it was an
opportunity to plant its logo into the wallets of a certain percentage of high
school students. I'm sure Coke's Teenage Mind Control division could quote you a
number.
That high school contract was peanuts, however, compared to the pending deal
with Iowa State.
Coke cards were the extent of corporate *******ization of my high school, but
you can bet the millions of dollars that Iowa State stands to gain is far from a
handout.
According to the Des Moines Register, in addition to first-class seating and
parking at athletic events, "Bicycle racks would bear the logo of Powerade, a
Coke product. Thirsty students would see on vending machines pictures of
Beardshear Hall with Coca-Cola banners wrapped around its columns."
If you could only see me as I type these words -- I'm frothing at the mouth with
excitement.
On the ISU beverage committee (yes, we have a beverage committee), opinions are
understandably split.
While there's no doubt that a cash-strapped university could benefit from the
funds, some believe whoring ourselves to corporations isn't the most ethical of
solutions.
It jeopardizes the university's role as a center of learning, they protest.
To make an analogy, imagine Iowa State not as the educational institution we all
know and love, but instead a major corporation.
I know this is quite a stretch, so I'll try to keep the analogy brief.
As a corporation, our president is like a CEO, and wealthy alumni are like
investors. The corporation's duty (like Coke's succinct mission statement), is
to make investors happy. This is akin to building skyboxes over Jack "Powerade"
Trice Stadium.
When corporations run into money trouble, they tend to remedy the situation with
a couple rounds of layoffs and reorganizations. Iowa State fires temp teachers,
shaves course offerings and eliminates men's baseball and swimming.
Professors and teachers are the tech support, which makes undergrads the poor
saps who dial in for a help.
We can only hear the sounds of elevator music and a polite female voice
repeating, "Your education is very important to us. Unfortunately, all of our
lines are currently busy. Please hold, and your request will be answered in the
order it was received. If you are a rich alumni, press '2' now or say,
'ka-ching!' for immediate assistance."
If Iowa State were a corporation, then the Coke exclusivity contract and perks
would be a business deal, plain and simple. But to the disappointment of our
administrators, Iowa State is actually an educational institution. Its main goal
should be to teach people stuff, not sell itself to beverage companies. The fact
is, when it comes to pretending to care about teaching, Iowa State needs a
better acting coach.
As a columnist, I'm sad to say that I have little influence over the
administrative policy. So instead, I would like to take this opportunity to
speak directly to alumni, whom I understand read the Daily quite regularly.
Dear Alumni:
I would urge you to reconsider any donation to Iowa State University.
The university is currently uninterested in investing the monies it receives
toward furthering education and has instead directed its efforts to
transmogrifying itself into somewhat of a corporate play toy.
They're schmoozing for cash from Coca-Cola right now. It's pathetic.
If you're interested in helping out students, establish a scholarship.
If you're one of those super-rich alumni who doesn't want the donation to go
toward undergraduate education and only cares about sitting in that stupid
skybox or getting your name on a building, you disgust me.
Donate all you want; when you visit our campus and notice the skyrocketing
tuition, teacher shortage and abundance of Coca-Cola paraphernalia, talk to a
student yourself and see how much respect your millions will buy.
By Sam Wong