Features have proliferated on BlackBerrys as part of RIM’s move to the broader consumer market, and so have the number of models. Since 2007, RIM has introduced 37 models. The company, in a statement, said it did not know how many models were on the market.

How can a company not know how many products it cells? Sometimes it seems like journalists are just piling on with RIM, but maybe it’s justified.

Well, it sounds like the FCC doesn’t think this makes sense either and it asking the courts to require the FCC app before they decide.

As the the merger itself. Emotionally I hate it. But the question is will T-Mobile go away even if there isn’t a merger?

Mr. Adoboli, 31, has now been charged with one count of fraud and two counts of false accounting in connection with a $2 billion trading loss at his former employer, the Swiss banking giant UBS.

This raises the question: Was he a rogue trader when he was making money for UBS (and collecting bonuses)?

Which leads to: How many profitable rogue traders are there?

Why is President Obama’s $70 million initiative to promote robotic development being promoted as:

…a vehicle to transform American lives and revitalize the American economy

I suppose unemployment will transform a life. Ok, I realize technology moves on and we need to adapt. But I find it ludicrous that this initiative is being promoted as a way to promote jobs. Although no one actually mentions that they’ll increase jobs. Maybe there will be a slight increase until the robots start building themselves (aka reproducing).

The first was from the Planet Money blog and pointed me to Joe Nocera’s NY Times column. He talks about the AIG mess and how the company has to be kept alive:

And yet — and this is the part that should make your blood boil — the company is being kept alive precisely because it behaved so badly.

Then in today’s New York Times I read that the the former execs of Countrywide, a failed company synoyms with the mortgage crisis, have formed a company to profit on the toxic assets they created. They’ve been buying up mortgages from the government for pennies on the dollar.

I guess because of the insider knowledge of the crisis they’re doing well.  According to a report from the head of loan servicing when reporting to CountryWide’s former president:

“In fact, it’s off-the-charts good,” he told Mr. Kurland, who was leaning back comfortably in his white leather boardroom chair, even as the financial markets in New York were plunging.

Unfortunately they haven’t been convicted of a crime so there’s no way to keep them from starting a business. But with all the rules being put in place over executive pay, can’t we limit the selling of loans to the people who contributed to the crisis?

It’s also been said that the executives suffer because the compensation is in stock which is down. Well, in this case the stock may have been diluted, but it was saved and they aren’t the reason it’s not at zero.

How can such a massive failure be anything other than the failure of upper management and the CEO Vikram Pandit? I don’t see the economic meltdown as an escuse in this case. Citigroup helped cause the meltdown through lax oversight. Yet they remain in place and despite announcing massive layoffs they might still receive their bonuses. From the article announcing the layoffs:

Mr. Pandit, however, has not decided on whether to share the pain by turning down an annual bonus. “Citi’s board of directors will make the decisions about the structure and level of compensation after the end of the year,” the bank said in a statement.

Sure, let the board decide. Hopefully the board will decide to make Mr. Pandit’s compensation zero and make the latest job reduction total 52,001. How can the board live up to their fiduciary responisbility and give that guy even a dime?

In theory the board is supposed to represent shareholders and act in their interests. Perhaps if the Citigroup rescue plan wipes out shareholder value shareholders in other companies will take more interest in the way their business is run. Citigroup may be too big to fail (open to debate) but even if it is, that doesn’t mean bad management shouldn’t have consequences. Especially for the managers.

I used to be a Circuit City regular years ago. There was once near my hours and I’d check out the Sunday circulars every week. That was when I was still buying DVDs and their discount bin was also a regular stop. It was convenient and easy to run in and get something, especially with their in-store pickup. I probably stopped in at least twice a month.

Then things started to change. My local store was remodeled and it appears the overall concept was to force the customer to walk all over the store. First to find what they were looking for and then to find someone to take payment. Even their in-store pickup became an adventure. Sure, I can see making me walk past those big screen TVs to get to the DVDs, but even then the sale DVDs would be hidden elsewhere in the store.

Then they fired over three-thousand experienced workers (read as paid more than newbies) and replaced them with lower paid people. By then my visits were infrequent so this change didn’t bother me until Christmas season last year. I stopped in to get a couple DVDs and actually found them, but I left without them. I couldn’t find anyplace to pay. I’m not saying long lines, I’m saying no central registers. I would have had to wait for one of those commissioned sales people to finish with there customers and pay in one of the departments. I haven’t been back since.

Circuit City didn’t fail because of the economy or competition. They failed because of management decisions that caused a terrible customer experience but still at brick and mortar prices. OK, competition was an reason, but just the fact any exists is enough to keep me out of the store. My prediction is the death spiral will continue and they won’t be around in a year, so avoid the Circuit City gift cards.

Circuit City seems to be circling the drain. The Wall Street Journal (subscription req’d although you can read the lead) reports Circuit City plans to close 150 stores. They also say they hired the same bankruptcy counsel that handled Kmart. Back in May Blockbuster was looking to buy Circuit City for about $1.5 billion (that’s with a “B”). At today’s close Circuit City had a market cap of 58.84 million (that’s with an “M”). Ars Technica has more info and no subscription required. Others have reported Circuit City is a bit limited in getting credit from it’s vendors heading into the critical holiday season. In the case of the Circuit City deal I have to admit I didn’t understand the reasoning but from Circuit City’s perspective I would certainly have taken the money. Even back then the company was suffering from bad decisions (firing experienced sales people and using lower cost new hires).

Then there’s Yahoo. Earlier this year the wires were abuzz with news and rumors about Microsoft buying Yahoo. Yahoo management seemed vehemently against the concept at any price and looked for any way to fend Microsoft off. The Google deal they made is still under Justice Department review (or pre-review discussions). The most common price bandied about at that time was $33 and share. Today the market (including Microsoft) was up but Yahoo stock was down, closing at $12.86.

Yahoo seems to be flailing. A small (0.14%) Yahoo investor tried to get Microsoft to make another offer of $22 a share. Now there are rumors of more Yahoo layoffs. While people should expect change with web apps, Yahoo deleted user profiles (set them to blank) as part of some changes. Change is one thing and since people just hate change complaints are expected, user outrage will blow over unless the changes suck. But deleting data? There’s no excuse (Even if, as the first Slashdot commenter said, “And nothing of value was lost”)

Back when Microsoft made the initial overtures it appeared Jerry Yang and company were more concerned about themselves (or their egos) than shareholder value. They promised they had a plan and shareholders would do better with them than Microsoft. How the hell do these guys stay in their positions?

Years ago I owned a few Yahoo shares. That was back when I was learning that individual stock picking wasn’t for me. Glad I got out when I did. I was lucky, I underperformed the market but got out when that meant I could still be on the plus side. With the way Yahoo is today it was obvious I wasn’t any good at long term predictions either.