Saturday, March 30, 2013

Digital Disruption



Even in the field of investment advice the supply chain is being disrupted: Aivars Lode Avantce

By Andrew Osterland
January 20, 2013 12:01 am ET

Internet-based advisory firms aren't much of a concern for most traditional fee-based financial advisers.
But they are for Ric Edelman.
The chief executive of The Edelman Financial Group, which manages more than $9 billion in assets, thinks that technology platforms offering financial advice could become the preferred option for younger Americans who eventually will inherit trillions of dollars from their baby boomer parents.
Equally scary is the possibility that as the digital platforms improve, they will attract more high-net-worth clients who sustain the thousands of fee-based advisers across the country.
Research from consulting firms such as Cerulli Associates Inc. suggests that wealthier investors already have diverted a significant amount of assets to low-cost, self-directed accounts since the financial crisis.
The proliferation of online investment services firms has been staggering.
Two years ago,
Grant Easterbrook, an analyst with consulting firm Corporate Insight, reported on five online startup firms offering different levels of investment management or financial planning services. His latest assessment covers 37 such outfits.
“The services these firms provide range from investment advice based on algorithms to low-cost online financial advisers focused on either investment selection or financial planning. Their fees are cut-rate,” Mr. Easterbrook said.
While few online outfits manage more than $100 million in assets, and most serve small investors who aren't very profitable for traditional advisers, Mr. Edelman believes the technology they use will have a profound impact on his practice and the entire advisory industry.
WHO IS BEING SERVED?
“This is the direction the world is moving, and we're at the beginning stages of it,” Mr. Edelman said. “Technological advances in the next three to five years will have a radical, disruptive impact on financial advice and how it's delivered.”
Attracted by a relatively low $50,000 client minimum, so-called mass-affluent investors have been advisory clients of Mr. Edelman's for a long time. On Jan. 7, however, he opened his doors to all comers, lowering his firm's investible assets threshold to just $5,000.
His plan is to deliver his services to these low-end customers via a revamped Edelman Online platform he says offers the firm's investment management services without human intervention, though all clients will have access to an adviser if they wish.
Mr. Edelman calls it a long-term loyalty program. “When these customers earn more money and receive their inheritances, they'll give it to me to manage,” he said.
Many of his peers think he's wasting his time and money targeting less affluent investors, but Bill Winterberg, founder of FPPad, a technology consulting firm for financial advisers, thinks it's worth the risk.
In fact, firms that don't prepare for the change run the bigger risk, Mr. Winterberg said. “Those who choose not to serve up-and-coming clients will miss the opportunity.”
Conventional wisdom, however, suggests the opportunity isn't much to miss. Numerous studies of lower-asset advisory clients indicate that they rarely evolve into bigger, wealthier ones. Bank of America Merrill Lynch research showed that the asset levels of 92% of small clients remained about the same after a two-year period. The company cited the findings when it announced early last year that it was reducing payouts to advisers on clients with under $250,000 in assets.
Wirehouses as a group continue to push advisers to shed smaller clients, but they're not ignoring them entirely. Merrill Lynch, for example, wants to serve clients with less than $250,000 — but on its Internet-based Merrill Edge platform, which had $75.9 billion in assets as of Sept. 30.
The optimistic view of low-cost tech offerings is that they are simply expanding the market for financial advice, reaching customers not currently served. A Society of Actuaries study in 2009 found that there were 14.9 million households in what they term the middle mass market between the ages of 55 and 74. With median net worth ranging from $111,000 to $348,000 depending on age and marital status, most of these pre-retirees and early retirees are not receiving financial advice, according to Betty Meredith, director of education and research for the International Foundation for Retirement Education.
Jude Boudreaux, a financial adviser whose company, Upperline Financial Planning Inc., has no minimum asset threshold for clients, believes the growth of online advice platforms is positive for the industry.
“We need more ways for non-high-net-worth people to access professional advice and technology,” Mr. Boudreaux said. “I don't think it's a danger to the industry. Technology will never replace what a true financial planner does.”
The more ominous possibility is that technology could undermine the economics of the advice industry just as discount brokers did to the brokerage industry and exchange-traded funds are doing to the asset management industry.
The marketing message of these online upstarts is easy enough to understand. “We're for the mass- affluent investor and anyone else smart enough not to want to spend 2% of their assets on a financial adviser,” said Jonathan Stein, chief executive of Betterment LLC. Mr. Stein's firm, founded in 2011, serves investors online and charges as little as 15 basis points.
It asks customers a series of questions and recommends simple portfolios of stocks and bonds, depending on the answers. The portfolios can be automatically re-balanced for a little extra. The company doesn't offer tax and estate planning or insurance, nor does it advise on philanthropic activities or the like — largely because most of Betterment's clients don't have those challenges.
"ROBO-ADVISERS'
That's not financial planning, said Michael Kitces, partner and director of research at Pinnacle Advisory Group Inc. He calls firms such as Betterment and FutureAdviser “robo-advisers” and doesn't consider them a threat to true financial planners.
“They do what Vanguard and Schwab do. They're just $2 trillion in assets behind them,” he said.
He sees a more substantial challenge from companies such as Personal Capital, a firm led by former Intuit CEO Bill Harris, and Learnvest, a website initially catering to women that offers financial plans for a flat fee but doesn't manage money. Both firms have increasingly elegant analytical tools and have hired dozens of certified financial planners.
“Financial planning done badly will be under siege by firms like these,” Mr. Kitces said. “If you only deliver passive portfolio design and management to your clients, these business models will take you down.”


Folks are lining up around the block to lose money



The numbers say it all commerce is here to stay! Aivars lode Avantce

Folks are lining up around the block to lose money
Saturday, February 2, 2013
 There are times to be bullish, and there are times to be cautious (or even bearish).

And just about nobody ever gets them right.

For example, in early 2009, after the market plunged more than 50% from its 2007 highs, nobody was bullish – even though it was the perfect moment to buy.

And if investors knew that they should become more bullish as stock prices fell and less bullish as they rose, we could have avoided a situation like we faced in 2009, when the S&P 500 traded for 13 times earnings.

The stock market went up almost 20% in 2009. It's gone up every year since, including last year's 13% rise. So folks now are bullish, with the American Association of Individual Investors Sentiment Survey showing 52% of respondents bullish on stocks for the next six months. Historically, anything above 50% is getting into extreme territory. Less than 19% were bullish the week ending March 5, 2009, the day before the S&P 500 officially bottomed.

The mistake is obvious. The herd thinks whatever just happened will happen again soon. It's called "recency bias." It assumes the most recent data is the most important data. In the stock market, recency bias is closely aligned with availability bias. That's when you think the most readily available data is the most important data.

Price quotes are the most readily available data about public companies. So putting our two biases together, the most recent price-quote history is irresistible to the vast, thundering herd of investors.

And now, after four years of stock market gains, all anyone can see in the rearview mirror is a rising market… so that's the overwhelmingly popular expectation.

Everyone wants to buy. Everyone wants to take more risk. "Junk" bond yields dipped below 6% for the first time in history this month. (Earlier this week, Steve Sjuggerud – one of the best contrarians I know – told DailyWealth readers that it's time to sell junk bonds.)

I'm not delusional enough to try to call a top in the market. To believe that is to remain under the spell of recent price quotes. I'm just saying if all you know is price quotes – and that's all most investors know – you're going to lose money… and from the looks of things today, it looks like folks are lined up around the block to lose money in stocks once again.

 One of the biggest trends in the market today is the decimation of brick-and-mortar retailers by e-commerce.

Arguably the most visible bankruptcy resulting from this trend is book retailer Borders. Electronics retailer Circuit City also shuttered in large part due to Internet competition. Circuit City's main rival, Best Buy, is also hemorrhaging sales and clients… And the company's founder is considering taking the company private.

 If you had to pick one company that's done the most to hasten the demise of brick-and-mortar retailers… it would be the world's largest online retailer, Amazon. Take a look at this chart of Amazon's sales versus the sales for the Morgan Stanley Retail Index (an index of 31 national retailers).


Barnes and Noble's hardest lesson: It pays to be small



The internet continues to change the face of retailing. Aivars Lode Avantce

Barnes and Noble's hardest lesson: It pays to be small
By Nin-Hai Tseng, Writer January 29, 2013: 3:33 PM ET

Barnes & Noble has struggled to keep up with the growth of digital books, but that's not the only hurdle it faces. We just want stores to be smaller now.

FORTUNE -- Barnes & Noble expects to close up to a third of its retail book stores over the next decade, The Wall Street Journal reported Monday. The closures seem inevitable. Like other retailers, the chain has struggled in a digital world, where readers increasingly turned to e-books and online discounts. Its savior is arguably its Nook products, but sales during the holiday season fell from a year earlier amid competition from the likes of Amazon,Apple, and Google.
Indeed, it's hard to run a bookstore in the Internet age, but new technology is only part of Barnes & Noble's (BKS) problems. Its stores simply got too big in a nation that increasingly prefers things -- well, smaller.
Since the financial crisis, Americans have warmed to smaller sizes in everything from cars to homes. Even massive Wal-Mart stores (WMT) have downsized. In 1962, the world's biggest retailer opened discount stores averaging 108,000 square feet, says Ed McMahon, senior fellow at the Urban Land Institute. By 1988, Wal-Mart unveiled its Supercenters, averaging 185,000 square feet. But a decade later it opened its Neighborhood markets, which, at an average of 42,000 square feet, was more than two times smaller than its Supercenters. The chain went even smaller in 2011, with its Express stores averaging 15,000 square feet.
The big box trend coincided with what many other retailers did as America's middle class left cities for the suburbs. Between 1960 and 2000, retail space rose ten fold -- growing from 4 to 38 square feet per person, McMahon says. Retail space grew five times faster than retail sales. The financial crisis put an abrupt end to that expansion. There is now more than 1 billion square feet of vacant retail space, mostly where big box retailers once did business.
MORE: Time for Samsung's next act
Beyond Wal-Mart, going small is being driven by several factors - some related, others unrelated: People are getting married later; U.S. cities are growing faster than suburbs for the first time in decades; the remaining suburbs, filled with sleepy strip commercial centers, are being turned into walkable urban places.
Of course, the Internet has played a big role in shrinking physical stores as well. Just as superstores put many local stores out of business, online shopping is hurting big box retailers, McMahon says.
But some local stores that managed to stick around are now thriving again. This is perhaps most evident in the market for books. In the years where big-box chains saw bankruptcies and store closures, the number of independents have generally stayed steady during the past few years. The American Booksellers Association, a trade organization that supports independents says that since the depths of the Great Recession, it has had roughly the same number of members -- 1,524 in 2008 to 1,567 in 2012. Stores did indeed close during those years with few if any new openings, but in 2009, new ones sprung up. Last year, 40 opened nationwide.
That's far fewer than Barnes & Noble, which until 2009 opened 30 or more a year. But the fact that any indie stores are opening at a time when big-box chains are closing says a lot about being small and local.
This isn't to say independents haven't struggled. In November 2011, best-selling novelist Anne Patchett opened Parnassus Books in her hometown, Nashville, TN. When a local bookstore closed and the area lost another one due to the Borders bankruptcy, Patchett partnered with Karen Hayes, a native who left her job in sales at Random House. The closings left a void in the area that's also home to Vanderbilt University, a literary community.
Parnassus filled it, but not all communities may be lucky enough to have an Anne Patchett around.

Office Depot debuts 'interactive' store, as merger rumors boosts stock



Brick and mortar business continue to have to transforn themselves due to the internets continued  business model disruption. Aivars Lode Avantce

Office Depot debuts 'interactive' store, as merger rumors boosts stock
By Marcia Heroux Pounds, Staff Writer
6:07 p.m. EST, February 8, 2013
Savvy customers sip on coffee while surrounded by the latest gadgets. They surf the Internet on laptops or tablets, check out some new headphones or ponder their next electronic purchases in a soothing, relaxed manner.
Office Depot's new "interactive'' stores are a little Apple-like, a little Starbucks-like. The stores still will sell basic office supplies and provide copy and print services for small businesses, but now it comes with a twist, a bit of modernization and hip as the company gets away from its old big-box mentality.
The new versions are already in six states and will be rolled out in Florida and elsewhere later this year as the office-supply giant trends toward smaller-format stores.
"We're looking at drawing traffic and new customers," said Juan Guerrero, senior vice president of Office Depot's North American retail division. The store is trying to attract the 18- to 35-year-old population — not the typical Office Depot shopper. Most current customers are small-business owners or mothers shopping for school supplies for their kids.
Office Depot's latest retail concept caps more than two years of initiatives to turn around the company in a difficult economic environment. The initial phase, introduced in 2011, was to reduce store sizes. The average 23,000-square-foot store is being reduced to units more like 5,000 to 15,000 square feet.
The idea is to attract new customers and inject some excitement into Office Depot stores, which customer surveys revealed were "somewhat clinical and cold," Guerrero said.
While some analysts cast doubt on a younger demographic shopping at Office Depot, most say the smaller-store strategy is beginning to work.
Major stockholder Starboard Value LP could force a bolder move, a merger with rival OfficeMax. The industry is ripe for consolidation, with both retailers smaller than Staples, which leads in sales and profitability, analysts say.
Starboard Value, an activist shareholder that holds nearly 15 percent of Office Depot's stock, may seek seats on the company's board this spring at the company's annual meeting. Speculation of industry consolidation pumped some life into the stock, now over $4 a share, though still down nearly 70 percent from five years ago.
"If Office Depot can turn things around, [Starboard Value] is going to be happy. If that doesn't happen, they may have to do an OfficeMax deal," said Anthony Chukumba, analyst with BB&T Capital Markets.
Starboard has retained former Home Depot CEO Bob Nardelli and former Staples executive Joe Vassalluzzo as consultants, according to a securities filing.
When comparing the rival office-supply stores, "Office Depot is clearly ahead of OfficeMax in terms of small-format stores," said Chukumba, whose firm buys and sells both stocks.
Office Depot already is investing more than $60 million a year reducing its store count, with plans to downsize or relocate 500 stores — nearly half its U.S. outlets over the next five years.
OfficeMax also plans to debut a new, smaller store format this spring, comparable in size to the Office Depot transformations, said Nicole Miller, spokeswoman for the Naperville, Ill.,-based retailer.
"The goal is to focus on innovation and roll it out gradually," she said.
But a merger?
OfficeMax "has a long-standing policy that we do not comment on market rumors or speculation," Miller said.
Morningstar analyst Liang Feng said while Starboard may seek a seat on Office Depot's board, the power still rests with BC Partners, which holds three seats whose directors are contractually obligated to vote with Office Depot management. In 2009, Office Depot sold a 20 percent stake in the company for a $350 million investment.
Chief Executive Neil Austrian has said the company's strategies to shrink stores and increase profits are paying off. Austrian was not available to address recent company issues or plans, spokesman Brian Levine said.
Office supplies continue to be a tough sector. Office Depot's sales decreased 5 percent in its latest quarter, compared to same period in 2011. And during an investor presentation in November, Office Depot forecasts annual sales to be down by 3 percent in 2013, down 1 percent in 2014, and flat in 2015.
If Office Depot and OfficeMax did merge, they would face significant costs. BB&T estimates the companies would have to spend $300 million to $500 million to close 200 North American stores.
Yet savings from a merger also could be significant, according to Goldman Sachs, with lower costs for purchasing and distribution, advertising, and general and administrative expenses.
Another hurdle would be the Justice Department, which could have antitrust concerns.
If a merger is proposed, it would go before the federal official who once denied Staples' proposed acquisition of Office Depot. Former Federal Trade Commission official William Baer was recently confirmed to head the U.S. Justice Department's antitrust division.



The USA's change to first-inventor-to-file (FITF)



patents are ??? what value? Aivars Lode Avantce

The USA's change to first-inventor-to-file (FITF)

With the America Invents Act of 2011, which was signed by President Obama on September 16, 2011. The law will switch U.S. right to the patent from the present "first-to-invent" system to a "first-inventor-to-file" system for patent applications filed on or after March 16, 2013. Many legal scholars.] have commented that such a change would require a constitutional amendment. Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the US Constitution gives Congress the power to “promote the Progress of ... useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to ... Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective ... Discoveries.” These scholars argue that this clause specifically prohibits a first-inventor-to-file system because the term "inventor" refers to a person who has created something that has not existed before.
Under the first-to-invent system, when two people claim the same invention, the USPTO would institute an interference proceeding between them to review evidence of conception, reduction to practice and diligence. Proponents argue that the FITF aligns the U.S. with the rest of the world, according to the original U.S. patent system, and brings more certainty, simplicity and economy to the patent process, all of which allow greater patent participation by startups.

It's Official: Teens Are Bored With Facebook



Teenagers interested in moving away from facebook. Aivars Lode Avantce

It's Official: Teens Are Bored With Facebook

Updated 12:34 pm, Monday, March 4, 2013
Teens texting
Teenagers are a good measure of what's "cool." Observing which apps they use and how they interact with technology can help the rest of us spot budding trends. 
And lately it seems teens have grown tired of Facebook.
Adam Ludwin recently launched a social photo album app called Albumatic. Before its launch, he showed the app to a focus group of 20+ people under the age of 25. Most told Ludwin they didn't like how reliant the app was on Facebook.
"They gave me the typical teenage response: 'We're bored with Facebook,'" Ludwin told Business Insider. 
His test group doesn't seem to be an outlier. Branch CEO Josh Miller recently asked his 15-year-old sister if she still used Facebook in a blog post titled "10th Grade Tech Trends." According to his high school sibling, teens are obsessed with Instagram and Snapchat, but they're less enthralled with Facebook.
"She mentioned that she tries to visit Facebook as infrequently as possible," he wrote. She also told Miller she only visits Facebook after she's thoroughly stalked people on Instagram.
Even Facebook Chat isn't as appealing as it once was. "When you go on Facebook Chat the people you don’t want to talk to are always the ones who immediately chat with you,” his sister said.
Even Facebook has admitted it has a teen problem.
From its annual 10-K report:
We believe that some of our users, particularly our younger users, are aware of and actively engaging with other products and services similar to, or as a substitute for, Facebook. For example, we believe that some of our users have reduced their engagement with Facebook in favor of increased engagement with other products and services such as Instagram. In the event that our users increasingly engage with other products and services, we may experience a decline in user engagement and our business could be harmed.
Why isn't Facebook "cool" anymore? The Verge's Ellis Hamburger asked a few social media experts for their thoughts.
"I think it has less to do with kids consciously looking for 'the next big thing' than Facebook just no longer being a space that serves them," one said. In other words, it used to be "cool" to brag about yourself and show pictures to friends on Facebook. Now people are looking for more intimate places to share items with a handful of people, like Snapchat. There's a sense of privacy there, and it meets a need Facebook has grown too big to serve.
Of course, this doesn't mean teens are deleting their Facebook profiles. They're just looking to use the service less, and they're open to communicating on other platforms.
The good news for Facebook is that teens are still rabid Instagram users. So while they may be shifting attention away from the social network, Zuckerberg can still monetize them on mobile devices.



Does Working from Home Work? Evidence from a Chinese Experiment



The way of the office is to extinction? Aivars Lode Avantce

Does Working from Home Work? Evidence from a Chinese Experiment

Nicholas Bloom, James Liang, John Roberts, Zhichun Jenny Ying

NBER Working Paper No. 18871
Issued in March 2013
NBER Program(s):   LS   PE   PR 
About 10% of US employees now regularly work from home (WFH), but there are concerns this can lead to “shirking from home.” We report the results of a WFH experiment at CTrip, a 16,000- employee, NASDAQ-listed Chinese travel agency. Call center employees who volunteered to WFH were randomly assigned to work from home or in the office for 9 months. Home working led to a 13% performance increase, of which about 9% was from working more minutes per shift (fewer breaks and sick-days) and 4% from more calls per minute (attributed to a quieter working environment). Home workers also reported improved work satisfaction and experienced less turnover, but their promotion rate conditional on performance fell. Due to the success of the experiment, CTrip rolled-out the option to WFH to the whole firm and allowed the experimental employees to re-select between the home or office. Interestingly, over half of them switched, which led to the gains from WFH almost doubling to 22%. This highlights the benefits of learning and selection effects when adopting modern management practices like WFH.