Category: Business

‘Italy wants to expand investment in Turkey’

Italian Ambassador Carlo Marsili said on Friday that Italy wants to expand its investments, currently concentrated in the western parts of Turkey, to the entirety of the country.

Marsili told reporters in Adana that economic relations between the two countries have gradually strengthened, noting that the number of Italian companies operating in Turkey has reached 700. He said Italian investment in Turkey amounted to $5 billion, while the trade volume between the two countries exceeded $19 billion.

Marsili said Italian companies in Turkey operated primarily in the industrial sector as well as in cement, banking and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Marsili said they wanted to expand Italian investment, which is concentrated in the west of the country, to other parts of Turkey, noting that they were making assessments on cities such as Adana, Gaziantep, Konya and Kayseri.

Meanwhile, British mobile phone giant Vodafone has vowed to increase its investments in Turkey, reiterating its commitment to continuing operations despite a recent plunge in its subscriber numbers in the country. “Our investments in Turkey are long-term and we are looking forward to presenting our 3G products,” Vodafone CEO Vittorio Colao said in a written statement on Friday. He added that the company would allocate half of its 2009 revenues to investments.

Source: www.todayszaman.com, 09 May 2009

May 10, 2009
Turkey balances Azeri, Armenian links

By Orhan Coskun

ANKARA, May 5 (Reuters) – Turkey’s efforts to normalise relations with Armenia will not harm planned energy projects with Azerbaijan, including the Nabucco gas pipeline, Energy Minister Taner Yildiz said on Tuesday.

Turkey’s traditional ally Azerbaijan has objected to U.S.-backed talks with Armenia because it wants to first resolve a dispute with Armenia over its occupation of the Nagorno-Karabakh enclave before Turkey opens its borders.

“Energy will play the role of catalyst in bringing relations between Azerbaijan, Armenia and Turkey to a more positive level,” said Yildiz, who took over the government’s energy portfolio after a cabinet reshuffle at the weekend.

“There’s no plan to delay the projects with Azerbaijan” because of the Armenian normalisation talks, he said.

Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan is due to meet President Ilham Aliyev in Baku next week and is expected to try to allay some of Azeribaijan’s concerns over the thaw in Turkish-Armenian ties.

Partners in the 7.9 billion euro Nabucco project, which has European Union backing, want Azeri gas to fill the pipeline initially when it opens in 2013.

The 3,300-km-long Nabucco will eventually carry about 30 billion cubic metres of gas from the Caspian and Middle East to meet about 5 percent of European demand.

Botas the state pipeline operator in Turkey, Germany’s WE, Austria’s OMV, Budapest-based MOL, Bulgaria’s Bulgargaz and Romania’s Transgaz are partners in Nabucco.

Turkey already buys about 6 billion cubic metres of Caspian natural gas annually after a pipeline from the Azeri Shakh-Deniz field opened in 2007. Some of that gas, which Turkey buys at a discount, is shipped on to Greece.

Turkey is seeking an additional 8 billion cubic metres of gas from Azerbaijan to meet domestic needs, according to Energy Ministry sources.

Botas officials are in Baku this seek to discuss the Turkish request for more gas, Yildiz said. (Writing by Ayla Jean Yackley)

Source: www.guardian.co.uk, May 5 2009

May 6, 2009

Sell in May and Go Away – John Mauldin

Thoughts from the Frontline Weekly NewsletterBack to the Future Recession by John Mauldin May 1, 2009
In this issue: Sell in May and Go Away? The End of the Recession? Is the US Consumer Back? A Dangerous End Game A Few Thoughts on Swine Flu
The old adage that one should “sell in May and walk away” has been around for years. I mentioned that bromide about this time last year, urging readers to head for the sidelines if they had not already done so. I was also suggesting a strategic retreat in August of 2006 (after which the markets went up 20% before plummeting). In this week’s letter we look at the actual data and offer up a fresh viewpoint. Then we turn our eyes to the recent GDP numbers, which were awful, though many took comfort in the apparent rise in consumer spending. Are Americans back to their old ways? It will make for an interesting letter. Sell in May and Go Away? My friend and South African business partner Prieur du Plessis recently updated a chart on monthly stock market returns since 1950. It clearly shows that the November through April periods have on average been superior to the May through October half of the year. (To read his very interesting blog you can go to And the difference is quite significant. As Prieur notes, the “good” six-month period shows an average return of 7.9%, while the “bad” six-month period only shows a return of 2.5%. Of course, selling creates taxable events, which can hurt your returns. Plus, you never know when the markets are going to go down and when they will be up. There can be a lot of variance from year to year. For instance, in 2007 the markets were up during the summer by 4.52% and down during the “good” period by -9.62%, which is opposite the average pattern. Of course, the markets did go down by 30% after May 1 last year and down another 5% since then. That is what bears markets can do. Which caused me to wonder. The last 59 years have seen two significant secular bull markets (roughly 1950-1966 and 1982-1999) and two secular bear markets (1966-1982 and 2000-??? — the one we are in now). I wondered if the pattern changed during the bear cycles, so I shot a late-night note off to Prieur and came in the next morning and had my answer. It made a significant difference. May through October in secular bear cycles has been ugly. Look at this graph: And just for fun, let’s look at the monthly numbers since the present secular bear market began in 2000. So far, this has been a lot worse than the 1966-82 cycle, although we have not yet had the recovery phase from the current doldrums, which will likely make the overall numbers look better in 4-5 years. As noted above, these graphs simply give us past trends and not an absolute forecast. But they do provide food for thought. There are times when you should be cautious and times when you should throw caution to the wind. I think this is the former. While some pundits are talking about green shoots and the second derivative of growth, this economy may be worse than their rosy forecasts of the end of the recession, as we will see in a few paragraphs. The End of the Recession? Let’s revisit 2000 and 2006. The yield curve was inverted in the late summer and early fall of both years. By that I mean that short-term yields were higher than long-term yields. When that happens for longer than 90 days, a recession has always followed within 12 months. (I wrote numerous e-letters on the topic. You can go to the website and search for “Mishkin,” one of the authors of a Fed paper on the yield curve.) I wrote in this letter on both occasions that it was time to get out of the market, as the stock market drops an average of 43% during a recession. There is a YouTube of me on CNBC in August of 2006 on Larry Kudlow’s show. I was forecasting a recession in 2007 based on the inverted yield curve. And if there was going to be a recession, I reasoned, then a bear market would follow. Larry and John Rutledge basically noted that “this time it’s different,” because the reasons for the inverted yield curve were different. And the market did rise another 20%+ for over 12 months. There was a recession, but it did not come until 15 months later, in late 2007. The yield curve was right in forecasting a recession, but the timing was different this cycle. If you had gotten out in August of 2006, you were not terribly happy 12 months later; but today you are still way ahead, plus the gains on your bonds and alternatives. On October 5 of 2007 I wrote about what I saw coming as a “Slow Motion Recession.” I was more convinced than ever we were either in a recession or soon would be. As it turned out, we were. But at the time there was a lot of criticism from a lot of analysts. Christopher Amberger did a particularly scathing piece (which was at least witty) on YouTube on October 10, suggesting that the concept of a recession was nonsensical and there were still plenty of opportunities in the market. (Oh, and buy his newsletter to find out what they are). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjAK0s9I8vA The market topped two days later. The point is that it is more important to get the general direction right than to be right on the specifics. In August of 2006 I was seeing a modest recession in the future. As time went on, I became increasingly bearish. But whether it was to be a mild recession or a major one, the advice would have been the same. You do not want to get caught long the market before a recession. Today, there are those who say the stock market will start rising six months before the economy does. And maybe it will. I don’t know. The predisposition of this market is down. Valuations are not at a level that has spawned major bull markets in the past. At the beginning of real bull markets, volume is strong and rising. Now it is weak (modest at best) and shows no real sign of becoming strong, especially going into summer. Further, this rally has all the earmarks of a major short squeeze. Regulators have recently (and correctly) been enforcing short selling rules that require stock to be delivered and settled on short trades. This may be a one-time event. When the short squeeze is over, the buying will stop and the market will drop. Remember, it takes buying and lot of it to move a market up but only a lack of buying to create a bear market. Corporate earnings are likely to go even lower, as consumer spending is likely to get weaker in the coming months. Capacity utilization is at its lowest point since they began tracking it. The National Federation of Business says a recent survey shows none of the responders plans to raise prices, which is not a sign of business strength. Banks are not yet lending, and the past quarter’s positive performance was mostly accounting gimmicks. Citigroup, for instance, said they made $1.6 billion. They did this by booking a one-time gain of $2.7 billion, because the value of Citigroup bonds have fallen (!), giving them the theoretical possibility of buying back their debt at a discount. And with consumer and credit card loans showing more weakness, Citi decided to REDUCE its loan loss reserves, allowing it to show another $1.3 billion in profit. And then there was the profit of $400 million from the new mark-to-market rules, which allowed them to produce a profit on “impaired assets.” Without all these games, there would have been a loss of $2.8 billion. Maybe this time it’s different. But when I survey the economic landscape, I see lots of opportunity for disappointments and missed targets. And bear market rallies are killed by disappointments and missed expectations. To be long this market going into summer you need to be brave or have very serious stops on your portfolio. I think the possibility of missed expectations at the end of the second quarter is high. It could be ugly. Is the US Consumer Back? The headlines told us that even as the economy fell an annualized 6% in the first quarter, consumer spending rose by 2%. Given that consumer savings climbed to 4.2%, unemployment rose, and income was down, how did consumer spending rise? To get the real picture, you have to dig into the numbers. (Thanks to 82-year-old, long-time reader Paul Miller for doing the slicing and dicing of the data at his excellent blog https://musingsbymiller.wordpress.com/.) First, the headline numbers are inflation-adjusted. Consumer spending in actual dollars rose $28 billion. But since prices went down (deflation), the “real” or after-inflation/deflation number shows up in the headlines as $44 billion. But where prices went down makes the real difference. Gasoline and other energy costs were down $50 billion, allowing consumers to spend on other items. Over the last two quarters energy costs are down almost $200 billion from the second and third quarters, making a huge difference. But now the “tax cut” from energy is largely gone, as prices have stabilized. Paul notes, “But … now … the gasoline tax cut has dissipated, and coming to the rescue are the Obama administration’s tax cuts. In fact, the cuts began to be felt in the first quarter. Personal income declined modestly in the first quarter, by $60 billion, or a 2% annual rate. But personal taxes were down by $193.5 billion, some part of which was the result of the tax cuts, so that disposable income rose at a 5% annual rate. Putting taxes and lower gasoline prices together gave consumers $143.5 billion more to spend or save than they would otherwise have had, which accounted for the rather amazing performance of consumption in the face of immense job losses.” And going further into the GDP numbers, there is an interesting statistic. Imports fell more than exports, mainly due to oil. The net trade deficit was only about $26 billion last month. Falling prices in imports, and especially oil, actually added about 3% annualized to the GDP number. Without that boost, the number would have been far more ugly. That being said, we are very likely to see better numbers in the future, and maybe even a positive one in the 4^th quarter. But a large part of that will be statistical. For instance, housing construction is now down to 2.5% (or thereabouts) of GDP. Drops in housing construction have contributed almost a negative 1% a quarter for the last year. Even if housing construction goes down another 10-20%, it is becoming a very small piece of the puzzle and is not likely to be a big drag on future GDP. Inventories, though, have been a large drag on the economy for the last two quarters. While we could see inventories drop somewhat this quarter, as the ISM manufacturing number is still significantly negative, they will probably not drop a lot more in the third and fourth quarters. There are more stimuli and tax cuts on the way, and they will start to have an effect, as individuals will have more disposable income, whether to pay down debt, save, or spend. But that positive will be balanced by rising unemployment, likely to hit 10% or more by the end of the year. If you count those who are part-time workers wanting full-time work or who are discouraged workers, unemployment is over 15% today. A Dangerous End Game The Fed and the Obama administration are playing a dangerous game. The Fed is going to print trillions of dollars to forestall deflation and try to re-ignite the economy. But for a variety of reasons we will go into next week, a real, sustainable recovery may be a few years away. What happens when the market start balking at high and unsustainable national deficits? What happens when inflation (finally) does return? Can the Fed remain independent and take back the money it is printing in the face of what will likely be a tepid recovery? And if they don’t, what happens to the dollar? Next year, we will be entering what will certainly be the most dangerous era in my lifetime for the US economy. It is not clear what will happen. There are a lot of paths that can be taken, though some are more likely than others. For those who are convinced that high inflation and a falling dollar are absolutely, unequivocally in the future I have just one word: Japan. Yes, there are differences, but there are a lot of similarities. While I think the most likely outcome is a long Muddle Through recovery, the likelihood of a lost decade of deflation a la Japan is a very real potential outcome. And the possibility of stagflation and a seriously impaired dollar is also quite real. Investors, businessmen, and entrepreneurs need to be as nimble as possible. A free market will figure out what paths to take, and I am still optimistic about the long term. But we have some very dangerous times in front of us, and we need to be realistic. And before I close, let me make a few comments about the Chrysler and GM issues. I tell my kids all the time that actions have consequences. If I hold senior secured debt of a company and the government tells me I have to take less than unsecured junior debtors, I am not going to be happy. I may have been dumb to make the loans in the first place, but I did it under a very specific contract and the rule of law. If the Obama administration arbitrarily changes those rules to favor a political class (unions), then that is going to have a chilling effect on future lending to all corporations. As an aside, they are spending $12 billion to save 54,000 Chrysler jobs (at $22,000 per job). With 600,000 jobs a month being lost, why are these 54,000 jobs more special than those of the rest of the unemployed, who get a fraction of that amount in unemployment benefits? Actions have consequences. The lenders who are forcing the Chrysler deal into bankruptcy court are not all “predatory hedge funds.” They are mutual funds, pension funds, and other financial firms with small stakeholders as their investors. Cerberus, the hedge fund that originally bought Chrysler, deserves to lose their money. They made a bad investment. But those who lent money deserve to be treated in accordance with the contracts they signed. Demonizing investors and businessmen is hardly helpful. They are precisely the people we need to help get this economy moving. Governments don’t create true job growth, businesspeople do, and mostly small businesses. I am not certain why small business owners, the job creation engine of the country, should see their taxes raised in order to protect bond holders of automobile companies or banks, or for union jobs to be preserved in companies that are clearly not competitive. But that is just my final thought late at night, before I hit the send button. OK, one more thought. If Chrysler couldn’t figure out how to make efficient cars from their partnership with Daimler-Benz, are they now going to become viable through a partnership with Fiat, which has been on the verge of bankruptcy for the last decade? Really? GM paid $2 billion in penalties to Fiat in 2005 so as to not be forced to buy them. And Fiat gets 20% for no cash? Finally, a very quick three-paragraph commercial. In the current market environment, there are managers who have not done well and then there are money managers who have done very well. My partners would be happy to show you some of the managers they have on their platforms that we think are appropriate for the current environment. If you are an accredited investor (basically a net worth over $1.5 million) and would like to look at hedge-fund and other alternative-fund managers (such as commodity traders) I suggest you go to www.accreditedinvestor.ws and sign up; and someone from Altegris Investments in La Jolla will call you if you are a US citizen. Or you’ll get a call from Absolute Return Partners in London if you are in Europe. If you are in South Africa, then someone from Plexus Asset Management will ring. And for my long-suffering readers who are patiently waiting for another accredited investor letter, there is one in the works. If you sign up today, you will get it. (In this regard, I am president and a registered representative of Millennium Wave Securities, LLC, member FINRA.) If you are not an accredited investor, I work with CMG in Philadelphia. We have created a platform of money managers who specialize in the alternative management space. By this I mean they do not need a bull or bear market in order to have the potential for profits. (Past performance is not indicative of future results.) You can go to and quickly read about the recent past performance of a manager we recently added to the platform, and then sign up to get more information. If you are an investment advisor, all of my partners will work with you in providing your clients exposure to alternative-style investments and managers. Obviously, if your clients are high-net-worth individuals, then you will want to work with Altegris or ARP; and if your clients need lower minimums, then you should work with CMG. And if you have any feedback or comments, feel free to write me. A Few Thoughts on Swine Flu Intellectually, I know that flu is something that we live with every year. According to the Centers for Disease Control, seasonal flu infects between 15 and 60 million Americans each year (5% to 20%), hospitalizes about 200,000, and kills about 36,000. That comes out to over 800 hospitalizations and over 250 deaths each day during flu season. Worldwide deaths from “regular” flu are between 250,000 to 500,000 a year. In the last SARS virus “epidemic” in 2003, there were around 8,000 deaths worldwide but none in the US. Swine flu has been diagnosed 160 times in ten countries, plus several hundred more in Mexico. The toll is almost sure to rise a great deal, but will it reach the level of normal, everyday flu? I hope not, and I rather doubt it, at least based on the recent SARS scare. But that is all an intellectual, distanced, nuanced concept. The real world is a little different. This morning I went to wake up my son to get ready to take him to school. For a real change, he was already up. He had been throwing up, he had a sore throat, and his head was warm. We finally found the thermometer and took his temperature. It was 100, and 20 minutes later had risen a degree. We got into the car and went to the local “Doc-in-the Box.” (For non-US readers, that is a local private-care clinic that will take walk-up patients without an appointment.) After a few tests, which they can now do in a few minutes, they determined it was not flu or strep throat. It was just some bug he had come down with that needed a course of antibiotics. We got the medicine and went home. On the way back I asked him if he was worried about whether he had swine flu. The day before, his school had cancelled a field trip, and a local large school district (Fort Worth) had simply closed for a week after one diagnosed case. “Yeah, Dad, I was worried a little. Glad it’s not the flu.” And Dad was, too. Statistics, whether financial or medical, become meaningless when it’s personal. Have a great week, and stay healthy! Your planning to enjoy his May through October analyst, John Mauldin John@FrontLineThoughts.com Copyright 2009 John Mauldin. All Rights Reserved Note: The generic Accredited Investor E-letters are not an offering for any investment. It represents only the opinions of John Mauldin and Millennium Wave Investments. It is intended solely for accredited investors who have registered with Millennium Wave Investments and Altegris Investments at www.accreditedinvestor.ws or directly related websites and have been so registered for no less than 30 days. The Accredited Investor E-Letter is provided on a confidential basis, and subscribers to the Accredited Investor E-Letter are not to send this letter to anyone other than their professional investment counselors. Investors should discuss any investment with their personal investment counsel. John Mauldin is the President of Millennium Wave Advisors, LLC (MWA), which is an investment advisory firm registered with multiple states. John Mauldin is a registered representative of Millennium Wave Securities, LLC, (MWS), an FINRA registered broker-dealer. MWS is also a Commodity Pool Operator (CPO) and a Commodity Trading Advisor (CTA) registered with the CFTC, as well as an Introducing Broker (IB). Millennium Wave Investments is a dba of MWA LLC and MWS LLC. Millennium Wave Investments cooperates in the consulting on and marketing of private investment offerings with other independent firms such as Altegris Investments; Absolute Return Partners, LLP; and Plexus Asset Management. Funds recommended by Mauldin may pay a portion of their fees to these independent firms, who will share 1/3 of those fees with MWS and thus with Mauldin. Any views expressed herein are provided for information purposes only and should not be construed in any way as an offer, an endorsement, or inducement to invest with any CTA, fund, or program mentioned here or elsewhere. Before seeking any advisor’s services or making an investment in a fund, investors must read and examine thoroughly the respective disclosure document or offering memorandum. Since these firms and Mauldin receive fees from the funds they recommend/market, they only recommend/market products with which they have been able to negotiate fee arrangements.

You have permission to publish this article electronically or in print as long as the following is included: John Mauldin, Best-Selling author and recognized financial expert, is also editor of the free Thoughts From the Frontline that goes to over 1 million readers each week. For more information on John or his FREE weekly economic letter go to: http://www.frontlinethoughts.com/learnmore To subscribe to John Mauldin’s E-Letter please click here: http://www.frontlinethoughts.com/subscribe.asp

May 3, 2009

Nabucco as a Chess Game: Azerbaijan’s Next Move

On March 27, 2009, a memorandum was signed between the Azerbaijani oil company SOCAR and Russia’s Gazprom. This memorandum includes a statement of deliveries, beginning in January 2010, of Azerbaijani natural gas to Russia on the boundary conditions, DAF Azerbaijan / Russia. In the near future the Baku – Novo Filya pipeline, part of the transmission system of Azerbaijan, which runs from Baku to the Russian border on the Caspian coast, will be inspected. The length of the pipeline is about 200 km; the diameter of the pipe is the same 1220 mm.

On March 27, 2009, a memorandum was signed between the Azerbaijani oil company SOCAR and Russia’s Gazprom. This memorandum includes a statement of deliveries, beginning in January 2010, of Azerbaijani natural gas to Russia on the boundary conditions, DAF Azerbaijan / Russia. In the near future the Baku – Novo Filya pipeline, part of the transmission system of Azerbaijan, which runs from Baku to the Russian border on the Caspian coast, will be inspected. The length of the pipeline is about 200 km; the diameter of the pipe is the same 1220 mm.

This agreement is important because for the first time since its independence Azerbaijan, which imported gas from Russia, has become an exporter to this country. The signing of this memorandum has led to a number of preconditions, which are the causes of events occurring in the region. The first is to note that Gazprom was particularly interested in signing such an agreement with Azerbaijan. This serves several reasons. The first reason is that in the past few years, production of natural gas in Russia has been decreased. Preferring not to invest large amounts of capital in the development of natural gas, Gazprom to date has preferred to operate with the Soviet Union deposits, although these deposits have begun to dry up over time. However, a treaty signed with European suppliers obliges Russia to search for additional volumes of gas. Therefore, first of all Russia has guaranteed the supply of gas from Central Asia, significantly increasing the price for it. Russia also extended the proposal to Azerbaijan, which opened the large Shahdeniz gas field in the late 90s.

Russia’s second reason lies in the problems of gas supplies to southern Russia. Thus, one could guarantee the stable supply in the North Caucasus republics. But the main reason is the desire of Russia to concentrate the supply of natural gas from former Soviet republics on its territory. Actually, Azerbaijan is the only state that could supply gas to the planned Nabucco pipeline. Proposed by the EU, this pipeline would transport natural gas from Azerbaijan and the Central Asia states through Turkey to south-eastern Europe. In reality, gas may come only from Azerbaijan.

Russia has proposed an alternative to Nabucco project, South Stream, which is also in need of Azerbaijani gas. In this case, Russia tries to prevent the realization of Nabucco.

With regard to Azerbaijan, it is the first time, after gaining its independence, that it shifted its energy exports from west to the north. There were several reasons for this.

The primary reason was the passive attitude of Western partners in the implementation of the project. Lack of coordination and understanding in the sphere of energy between the members countries of the EU led to the fact that this organization could not determine the strategy for the implementation of Nabucco. Paradoxically, the EU and its members are waiting for more concrete steps from potential exporters, hoping thereby to strengthen the project. However, Azerbaijan does not have a desire to pursue their own policies without the support of the West, and thereby worsen relations with Russia. This fact was especially true after the 5-day war in Georgia. Despite the fact that the political regime in Georgia came to power with broad support from the West, these countries did not provide the support it expected to receive. Azerbaijan also has the problem of separatism. In this case, in the interest of Azerbaijan is not to commit acts that could provoke Russia.

Another reason for signing the memorandum with Russia lies in the position of Turkey. Turkey is trying to address not only the transit of Azerbaijani gas through Nabucco, but also wants to become the seller. In particular, Turkey wants to purchase natural gas at the border with Azerbaijan and resell it to Western consumers at a several-fold price increase. This situation would not benefit Azerbaijan. In addition to that, Russia’s proposal to buy Azerbaijani gas is commercially much more attractive. Azerbaijan profits more from selling gas in Russia than Turkey.

In addition, between Turkey and Azerbaijan, disagreements arose about the intentions of Turkey to open its border with Armenia. This border has been closed since 1993, after Armenian troops occupied the Azeri region of Kelbedzhar. Recently, however, the government of Turkey has decided to develop relations with Armenia, and the first step was the visit of President Gul to Armenia’s capital Yerevan to watch a soccer qualifying match between the two national teams. The next step in the development of relations is to be the opening of borders between the two countries in mid-April. It should be noted that the prior condition for the opening of the border was the unconditional release of Armenian-occupied Azerbaijani territories.

This decision has received a sharp reaction in Azerbaijan. Public opinion in the country reacted negatively to the intentions of Turkey, which severely condemned the possible turn of events. Another reaction to the Turkish intention can be described with the signing of a contract between SOCAR and Gazprom. The President of SOCAR, Rovnaq Abdullayev, is also the president of the Football Federation of Azerbaijan. He arrived in Moscow on the eve of the qualifying soccer match between Azerbaijan and Russia. The signed contract has become a kind of symbolic response to Gul’s «football diplomacy» in Yerevan.

It should be noted that the signed memorandum negotiates gas exports to Russia for 2010. In this case, there is a certain amount of time to solve the problems of the realization of Nabucco, as the second phase of gas production at Shahdeniz has not yet begun. However, if there will be no concrete steps to implement Nabucco, gas for this pipeline could go in a northerly direction.

Rovshan İbrahimov

International Research Club – www.interesclub.org

April 13, 2009
CALIFORNIA: KREKORIAN INTRODUCES AB 961 IN SACRAMENTO PUNISHING THOSE DOING BUSINESS WITH TURKEY OR AZERBAIJAN !!!:
Dostlar,

Birgun donup dolasip gelecegi nokta buydu…

Eger bu Ermeni yasasi Sacramento’da gecerse Turkiye ve Azerbaycan ile ticaret yapan firmalar suclu sayilacak ve ceza odeyecek. Buyurun bakalim. Yillar suren sessizligimize, “Bana ne canim, baskalari yapsin” zihniyetine bicilen aci bir fiatdir bu.

Asagida Karahan Mete’nin yazdigi ilk ve tek mektup. Bu is birkac kisinin isi degil, butun toplumun isi. Hatta, Turkiye’mizin de isi.

Neye uzuluyorum en cok biliyor musunuz?

Su satirlari yazdigim anda Kaliforniya’nin en buyuk Turk Festivali’nin acilisinin yapilmasina 3 gun kalmis. Costa Mesa’daki Orange County Fair alanina duzinelerce Turk marangoz, asci-sef, ve is adami gelmis. Kaliforniya otelleri Turk dolu. Hepsi ticareti nasil patlatiriz diye umut ve heyecan dolu dolu gelmisler. Halbuki Sacramento’daki bir Ermeni “kardesimiz” onlar icin, bizler icin, hepimiz icin daragaclarini hazirliyor, hem de benim kesemden verdigim vergilerimle!

Bizim toplum ise masallah misil misil uykuya devam.

Allah rahat uykular versin.

Baska ne denir?

…

Ergün KIRLIKOVALI

TURKISH FORUM DANISMA KURULU UYESI

BILL NUMBER: AB 961 INTRODUCED

BILL TEXT

INTRODUCED BY

Assembly Member Krekorian

FEBRUARY 26, 2009

An act to add Article 14 (commencing with

Section 10485) to

Chapter 2 of Part 2 of Division 2 of the Public

Contract Code,

relating to public contracts.

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL’S DIGEST

AB 961, as introduced, Krekorian.

Public contracts: state contract

eligibility: genocidal regimes.

Existing law authorizes contracting between state agencies and

private contractors and sets forth requirements for the procurement

of goods and services by state agencies and the various

responsibilities of state agencies and the Department of General

Services in implementing state contracting procedures and policies.

Existing law prohibits a scrutinized company, as defined, that is

involved in specified activities in Sudan, from entering into a

contract with a state agency for goods or services, subject to

specified requirements and exemptions.

This bill would prohibit a scrutinized company, as defined, that

was engaged in business with perpetrators of genocide, from entering

into a contract with a state agency for goods or services. The bill

also would require a prospective bidder for those state contracts,

that currently or within the previous 3 years has had business

activities or other operations outside of the United States, to

certify that the company is not a scrutinized company and would

impose civil penalties, as specified, for a company that provides a

false certification.

The bill would allow the Director of General Services, under specified

conditions, to permit a scrutinized company to enter into state contracts

for goods and services.

Vote: majority. Appropriation: no.

Fiscal committee: yes.

State-mandated local program: no.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Article 14 (commencing with Section 10485) is added to

Chapter 2 of Part 2 of Division 2 of the Public Contract Code, to

read:

Article 14. Prohibition on Contracts with Companies that Aided

Genocidal Regimes 10485. For purposes of this article, the

following definitions apply:

(a) “Genocide” means any of the following events:

(1) The atrocities committed by the Ottoman and

Turkish governments against Armenians from 1915 to 1923,

inclusive, which constituted the Armenian Genocide, and the

massacres of Armenians committed by the Ottoman Empire from

1894 to 1909, inclusive.

(2) The Holocaust committed by Nazi Germany against Jews from 1938

to 1945, inclusive, and the persecution and massacre of Roman,

Slavic, Polish, Soviet, disabled people, homosexuals, and political

and religious dissidents by the Nazi regime.

(3) The oppression, forced labor, and murder of the Cambodian

people by the Khmer Rouge regime from 1975 to 1979, inclusive.

(4) The aggression and ethnic cleansing committed by the Rwandan

Hutu majority against minority Rwandan Tutsis that constituted the

Rwandan genocide of 1994.

(5) The aggression and ethnic cleansing committed by elements of

the Bosnian Serb army against the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina

from 1992 to 1995, inclusive.

(b) “Scrutinized company” means a company, and any affiliates of

that company, that was engaged in business with the perpetrators of

genocide and that still holds looted or deposited assets of a victim

of a genocide or his or her heirs.

10485.5. (a) A scrutinized company is ineligible to, and shall

not, bid on or submit a proposal for a contract with a state agency

for goods or services.

(b) (1) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), the Director of General

Services may permit a scrutinized company, on a case-by-case basis,

to bid on or submit a proposal for a contract with a state agency for

goods or services, if it is in the best interests of the state to

permit the scrutinized company to bid on or submit a proposal for one

or more contracts with a state agency for goods or services.

(2) In making this determination, the Director of General Services

may consider attempts by a scrutinized company to settle claims

against it by a victim of genocide, or his or her heirs, or evidence

refuting those claims presented by the scrutinized company.

10486.

(a) A state agency shall require a company that submits a

bid or proposal with respect to a contract for goods or services,

that currently or within the previous three years has had business

activities or other operations outside of the United States, to

certify that the company is not a scrutinized company.

(b) A state agency shall not require a company that submits a bid

or proposal with respect to a contract for goods and services to

certify that the company is not a scrutinized company if the company

has obtained permission to bid on or submit a proposal for a contract

with a state agency pursuant to subdivision (b) of

Section 10485.5.

10486.5. (a) If the Department of General Services determines

that a company has submitted a false certification under Section

10486, the company shall be subject to all of the following:

(1) The company is liable for a civil penalty in an amount that is

equal to the greater of two hundred fifty thousand dollars

($250,000) or twice the amount of the contract for which a bid or

proposal was submitted.

(2) The state agency or the Department of General Services may

terminate the contract with the company.

(3) The company is ineligible to, and shall not, bid on a state

contract for a period of not less than three years from the date the

state agency determines that the company submitted the false

certification.

(b) The Department of General Services shall report to the

Attorney General the name of the company that the Department of

General Services determined had submitted a false certification under

Section 10486, together with its information as to the false

certification, and the Attorney General shall determine whether to

bring a civil action against the company. The company shall pay all

costs and fees the plaintiff incurred in a civil action, including

costs incurred by the state agency and the Department of General

Services for investigations that led to the finding of the false

certification and all costs and fees incurred by the Attorney

General.

10487. (a) If any one or more provision, section, subdivision,

paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this act or the

application thereof to any person or circumstance is found to be

invalid, illegal, unenforceable, or unconstitutional, the same is

hereby declared to be severable and the balance of this act shall

remain effective and functional notwithstanding such invalidity,

illegality, unenforceability, or unconstitutionality.

(b) The Legislature hereby declares it would have passed this act,

and each provision, section, subdivision, paragraph, sentence,

clause, phrase or word thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one

or more provision, section, subdivision, paragraph, sentence,

clause, phrase, or word be declared invalid, illegal, unenforceable,

or unconstitutional.

Letter sent by Karahan Mete, TP&J COM. IN CALIFORNIA:

Turkish Peace and Justice Committee California

P. O. Box. 866 Sacramento, CA 95812–866 Tel: 530 297-1655 turkishpjc@gmail.com

AB 961***

California Assembly member Kerkorian introduced bill AB 961.

Simple and plain evaluation for AB 961 is: the bill basically forbids the company for betting on California government contracts if they are doing business with countries that proved or assumed to be contributed to holocaust, genocide or atrocity. In his definition, every country in the world can be accused of contributed atrocity and be barred from California government contracts. His first line of the accused countries are Germany, Italy, Austria, France, Pollen, Russia, Cambodia, Rwanda, Serbia, Turkey etc.

While United States is struggling with huge trade deficits that cannot be sustained for a long period of time, introducing such a very poorly prepared bill will be very destructive for the US economy.

About the US / Turkish trade relation;
- US have trade surplus with Turkey.
- Turkey imports from US is twice as much its export in US
- US is Turkey’s second largest trade partner after the EU
- Turkey buys everything from US, from potato chips to computer chips.
- From seeds to agricultural products.
- Turkey imports large amounts of grain, rice, corn and others
- Turkey imports machinery parts and buys engineering and consulting services.
- Turkey buys almost all the military equipments and parts from US
- Turkey buys commercial and military aircraft and parts from US.
- Some of the large utility companies involved for building energy power-plant in Turkey
- Tourism industries rapidly growing between two countries. US hotel chains are operating hotels and resorts in Turkey.
- Some of the California satellite-launching companies are negotiating with Turkey for getting multimillion dollar contracts.
All these companies and others that are doing profitable business with Turkey will be barred from California Government contracts according to AB 961. This same unethical policy will be applied to countries stated in this bill (Germany, Italy, Austria, France, Pollen, Russia, Cambodia, Rwanda, Serbia, Turkey etc.).

AB 961 is written so poorly that it will scrutinize any business and it will create out-of-control lawsuits that might cost hundreds of millions of dollars from US Companies and strain their competitiveness. In addition, AB 961 will create massive bureaucracy and position state department to undertake imposable tasks.

At a time when all the trade organizations, Federal and state agencies are working diligently trying to improve US trade, it is hard to understand a lawmaker to take such drastic and unnecessary steps to cause distress in US economy.

While this bill is an insult to these countries, they can take their businesses somewhere else (another country or States). AB 961 does nothing on these countries stated in this bill but will instead harm the US and California economy. Eventually, this bill will widen US trade deficits and cost US taxpayer millions of dollars, cause job losses and increase unemployment….

In addition, we all support human rights, democracy and justice, and this bill does not contribute to world human rights, democracy or justice. On the contrary, this bill creates an unjust state of affairs for our own US Companies to compete in the world market.

Furthermore, the AB 961 subject matter is an international state of affair. State should not be interfering or passing laws that contradict United States international affairs.

We respectfully ask you to take all the necessary steps to prevent this destructive act against US companies and prevent devastation in US and California economy.

Respectfully yours,

Karahan Mete

Karahan.mete@gmail.com

(530) 297-1655
March 31, 2009
Invitation to talk Turkey

March 18, 2009

COMPANIES looking to trade with Turkish firms are invited to a free advice clinic in Manchester next week.

The session will be held on Monday at the Royal Bank of Scotland’s offices in Spinningfields. It is being organised by international trade advisers from The Export Network and representatives of Istanbul-based training and support outfit Doga Innovatory. Companies can book a 45-minute slot to talk over issues.

Turkey is the 15th largest market in the world, and exports from Britain totalled £5.5bn in 2007. Around 1,800 UK companies have interests in Turkey.

For more information, contact Simon Watson at the RBS via simon.watson@rbs.co.uk.

Source: www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk, March 18, 2009

March 20, 2009