DATE: 07/12/2008 16:34:49

In 2006, the apparent consumption of manufactured goods in the U.S. totaled $6.47 trillion; however, the aggregate net revenue of 329,062 U.S. manufacturers accounted for only 23.0% of the market share, domestic enterprises having over $1 billion in assets—an elite group earning more than double (201.52%) the after tax profits of all other U.S. manufacturers—dominated the market by capturing a 53.7% share, with the remaining 23.3% going, via U.S. imports, to foreign competitors. Exacerbating their competitive difficulties, between 1997 and 2006, the aggregate net revenue of non-monolithic manufacturers indicated a compound annual growth rate of only 0.46%—the CAGR of net earnings for companies with over $1 bil-lion in assets was 6.44%, while manufactured imports increased 8.12% in annual value. Despite being the only way to offset usurpation of their domestic market, only 67,757 (or 20.47%) of all U.S. manufacturers exported in 2006; it is relevant that the top 2,000 exporting manufacturers accounted for 90.1% of the $818.31 billion in U.S. manufactured exports—thus establishing that 99.40% of domestic manufacturers rely on their U.S. consumer base for survival. Substantial IT expenditures and a broad range of governmental and private sector export assistance services notwithstanding, the business strategies of U.S. manufacturers are inadequate to the challenges of 21st century commerce; be advised, this insight voids inculpability, renders complacency unjustifiable, and compels the implementation of remedial business strategies! © 2008 Thomas J Judge Jr

View Entry

DATE: 11/11/2007 14:06:57

Due to the products they make, their R&D efforts and resulting spin-offs from the technological advances made by U.S. manufacturers, and their direct impact on nearly every other business sector, they represent the cutting-edge of U.S. competitiveness and backbone of our economy. But because they are embedded in an economy in which such a small percent of the world's population (4.58%) represents 26.85% of its wealth (in 2007), they are ill-prepared for the levels of competitiveness they face. In fact, between the very largest domestic manufacturers and foreign importers of manufactured goods, only 22.1% of the U.S. apparent market for manufactured goods was left for them to “capture” (based on 2005 data, the latest available). Please understand, that along the way to reaching the point at which it became possible to develop such information, I acquired much knowledge existing beyond the traditional business repertoire, such business acumen lends itself to the development of novel and extraordinary business strategies—I am describing universal strategies applicable across the spectrum of industry through which $10's of billions in any sector (in total, trillions of dollars in global commerce) can be made exploitable at any desirable or relevant magnitude (amount increments). Several factors provide a paradoxical twist to this situation, to begin, U.S. manufacturers seem largely oblivious to the competitive dangers they face, and that's despite substantial investments in Information Technology (can't IT gurus tell the light up ahead is the largest and most powerful train ever imagined, in fact, it is an economic dynamic most akin to the hypothetical irresistible force, because it cannot be contained; or realize that it is impossible to remain competitive with companies earning more than double the after tax profits of your own). It is also unusual that conventional business strategies (including all currently available professional services) are inadequate to avert the ill-fated destinies facing U.S. manufacturers; this is proven out by history, if they were adequate to the task, the challenges they are facing would not have become as insurmountable as they are now. So… they are unaware of the dangers they face, clueless as to how to transcend such challenges, extremely resistant to being made aware of their peril, and I offer their best hope of survival; even if a specific company felt no competitive pressure, and was doing great—what could be a better time to implement strategies that could lower costs, increase profits and sales, and expand their market base—I can provide competitive advantages unavailable elsewhere! The problem is that I've tried everything within my range of capability to secure client companies, but I am open to suggestions… you can respond here, or if you prefer to respond privately, my email address is: tjudge@usa.com. Thanks for your help! exotrade/Tom Judge

View Entry

DATE: 09/02/2007 00:04:22

An undiscerned synergism of domestic and foreign transnational corporations is decimating U.S. manufacturers! In 2005, the apparent consumption of manufactured goods in the U.S. totaled $6.05 trillion; however, the aggregate net revenue of 331,460 U.S. manufacturers accounted for only a 22.1% share of the market, domestic enterprises having over $1 billion in assets—an elite group earning more than double (230.09%) the after tax profits of all other U.S. manufacturers—dominated the market by capturing 55.2%, with the remaining 22.7% captured by foreign competitors via U.S. imports. Exacerbating their competitive difficulties, between 1997 and 2006, the mainstream group’s gross revenue indicated a compound annual growth rate of only 0.46%—the CAGR of gross revenue for companies possessing over $1 billion in assets was 6.44%, and 8.12% for imports of manufactured goods. Despite being the only way to offset usurpation of the domestic market, only 65,413, or 20.22%, of all U.S. manufacturers exported in 2005; it is more relevant that the top 2,000 manufacturing exporters accounted for 89.7% of the $708.41 billion in U.S. exports of manufactured goods—thus, making it clear that 99.40% of all domestic manufacturers depend on the U.S. market for their survival. Despite substantial IT expenditures and a broad range of governmental and private sector export assistance services, the business strategies of U.S. manufacturers are inadequate to the challenges of 21st century commerce. Be advised this insight has compromised your inculpability, complacency is now unjustifiable and time for remedial action is running out! © 2007 Thomas J Judge Jr

View Entry

DATE: 07/19/2007 16:40:06

Major epiphany… U.S. manufacturers are fighting an existence threatening loss of domestic market share! In 2005, of 333,460 manufacturers in the United States, only 67,413 exported—of those, the top 2,000 accounted for 89.7 percent of all manufactured exports by value!—meaning that 65,413 had only a minimal supplemental market base and 266,047 companies had no supplemental market base to offset ever-increasing portions of the domestic market usurped by foreign competition. The resulting attrition of U.S. manufacturers is a serious concern, they provide an economic trickle-down that ripples through just about every sector of the economy and is felt throughout their communities and nation; for reference, the number of U.S. manufacturers diminished by 5,623 between 2004 and 2005. What are manufacturers facing? For starters, based on 2005 data, of $5,385,929 million in the sale of manufactured goods, 71.95 percent belonged to the small universe of companies having over $1 billion in assets; on those sales, these monoliths made over double, 232.09 percent (for calendar year 2005), the net profit made on the combined sales of all other manufacturers. [Paragraph.] Now, let’s explore what government economists refer to as “apparent consumption”; unfortunately, they provide an incomplete economic analysis, adjusted by only the trade deficit—by overlooking the fact that exports benefit only a relative few companies, while imports erode the domestic market base of all manufacturers, their overly simplistic analysis is highly misleading. In 2005, manufactured goods totaled $5,385,929 million in gross sales, to get a more realistic picture of the domestic market it is necessary to deduct the $708,406.4 million exports of manufactured goods; though revealing a more accurate view of the domestic market as $4,677,522.49 million, it fails to reflect imports, an important element of geoeconomic commerce. Although imports are vital to attaining a complete understanding of the domestic market, because only 20.22 percent of U.S. manufacturers exported, and (as indicated) an even much smaller number exported to any significant degree; it is necessary to understand the amount of damage inflicted on domestic industry as a whole through the extent of incursion into the market represented by U.S. imports for consumption. In 2005, the import of manufactured goods totaled $1,370,916.36 million, raising the apparent consumption of manufactured goods by the U.S. market to $6,048,438.95 million; with that market base, foreign competition captured 22.67 percent of the domestic market. Foreign competition is best viewed as an invading armada of transnational corporations (2005 data) comprised of 77,175 parent corporations (2,418 based in the U.S.) and 773,019 foreign affiliates (24,607 based in the U.S.) in pursuit of the 27.87 percent of the world's wealth represented by the U.S. Gross Domestic Product (in 2005); but because they transport to our shores goods produced for substantially lower costs, they are a highly destructive invading force. [Paragraph.] With the output of manufacturers having over $1 billion in assets adjusted to reflect 89.7 percent of exports, they account for 55.22 percent of the “apparent” domestic market, added to the 22.67 percent captured by foreign competition that totals 77.89 percent—leaving only 22.11 percent of the domestic market for manufactured goods, by value, to be fought over by roughly 331,460 U.S. manufacturers. From this multi-sourced layer upon layer analysis, it’s possible to determine what cannot otherwise be known; that imports are far more destructive to domestic industry than when typically whitewashed as a mere trade deficit—this is conceptually indicative of my business strategies, which are no less likely to be duplicated or equaled by others. It also validates my core contention that it is necessary to comprehend the whole picture and all of its elements in order to develop and implement the greatest strategic advantages in business. Despite all notions to the contrary, even if manufacturers were capable of mirroring all market expansion, cost saving and tax avoidance strategies used by transnational corporations; the economy of scale factor would prevent them from competing on an equitable basis. Their best hope for long-term survival (viability) is through the implementation of methodologies and strategies more creative (and powerful) than any known to exist to facilitate expansion beyond the borders of their domestic market. [Paragraph.] It is also necessary to consider the temporal factor, are heroic efforts to save your company, now, too little, too late? A question that’s impossible to answer with any certainty, due to varying degrees of market erosion across industry sectors, and the independent abilities of each company to increase output and absorb growth. Even if it were possible to instantaneously implement all of the “right” strategies, it would require a reasonable amount of time for a company to attain the degree of security necessary to survive future challenges; and, because with each passing day that unknown deadline draws closer, time becomes a more critical element in the equation. Do not take time for granted, since the 1994 implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement, the U.S import of manufactured goods for consumption indicates a compound annual growth rate of 9.04 percent—remember, the countdown clock is running… [Paragraph.] On the off chance, you are prepared to dismiss the importance of these observations, before doing so, please consider the following. How is it possible for the 331,460 subject enterprises to have invested hundreds of billions ($32,523 million in 2005) of dollars in information and computer technology equipment and computer software, yet be totally clueless as to what business strategies are essential to ensuring their survival? That is, expansion into external markets able to subsidize their loss on the home front. Though difficult to explain, it is common for me to perceive things that are counterintuitive to the core competencies of companies, ranging from neighborhood businesses to multibillion-dollar enterprises; despite that, I find it difficult to comprehend such endemic myopia, but attribute such universal complacency to being an inherent aspect of a business life cycle played out inside the world’s largest and most insular economy. [Paragraph.] Whether your client or company believes its survival is threatened or not, you will never find a better means of facilitating company growth. It is important for recruiters and companies in other developed economies to understand that although the values may differ, the outcome is the same; your domestic market is being eroded beyond your ability to keep pace with the process… and eventually you will be trampled by the competition. I possess the abilities to do what no others can to assist companies in any market in which conducting business with U.S. businesses and persons is legal, under both local and U.S. law. [Paragraph.] © 2007 Thomas J Judge Jr

View Entry

DATE: 07/15/2007 23:15:48

In Greek myth… struck by the beauty of Cassandra, daughter of Priam, the king of Troy, the god Apollo granted her the gift of prophecy; however, after his romantic overtures were rejected by the princess, in anger, he extracted revenge by taking away her powers of persuasion. Therefore, despite the ability to foresee the future, she could neither alter it, nor convince anyone else of the validity of her visions. In psychology, the term “Cassandra Syndrome,” describes the tendency of people to disbelieve dire predictions; leaving the bearer of ill tidings with a paradoxical conundrum, possessing foreknowledge of impending disaster, yet unable to prevent its outcome. [Paragraph.] Of course, the “vision” from which I share Cassandra’s plight is the result of cognitive prescience rather than paranormal clairvoyance or precognition; but with the former based on vast expanses of arcane factual data and knowledge of which only a relative few are privy, it can be difficult for others to differentiate from the latter. To this mix, add an array of skills and levels of awareness developed under extraordinary circumstances… in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attack, the intelligence community universally perceived that its inherent “compartmentalization,” served as barriers detrimental to its overall efficiency and functionality. As a former member of the U.S. intelligence community, I had reached the identical conclusion a decade earlier in reconciling the greatest intelligence failure in history—after over fifty years of being a primary target of generations of intelligence assets, operatives and activities, the Soviet Union’s economic and political collapse caught the U.S. and world intelligence communities (the KGB, too, it seems!) completely unaware. [Paragraph.] While for decades the Cold War defined many aspects of the world ranging from politics to social dynamics, in retrospect, my experience in it unleashed personal potentials exponentially beyond all expectation or any previously demonstrated to exist. Internalizing its lessons and applying them to the private sector both inspired and demanded attaining a microcosm-to-macrocosm-to-microcosm perspective of commerce; encompassing a view ranging from the acquisition of raw materials, through production processes and then traversing the retail chain on to the ultimate consumer, across all industries and markets! That required identifying the tools and developing the skills necessary to provide unprecedented levels (actionable/exploitable) of competitive intelligence across the full spectrum of commerce. Dismissing such extraordinary capability due to a presumed lack of industry-specific knowledge fails to account for that assimilated in accessing the diverse range of informational resources providing source material for most industry journals. Beyond that, tapping the right resources makes it possible to gain insight into all major issues concerning nearly any industry in short order; add to that the exploitability of industry-specific commerce measurable in billions of dollars and the singularity of such capability becomes apparent—it’s quite simple… the advantages I can provide a company are among the most powerful, attainable and/or possible, and cannot be found elsewhere. © 2007 Thomas J Judge Jr

View Entry

DATE: 07/13/2007 22:37:28

The Mass Extinction Event of 21st Century Commerce… (see my previous blog posts to have the dots connected) for decades the global business arena has been and continues to be terraformed via the geopolitical and socioeconomic manipulation of Second World (China and former members of the Soviet Union since its 1989 collapse) and Third World (developing and transitioning economies) nations by transnational corporations intent on plying the most exploitable resources to further their domination of First World markets. In the simplest terms, the world’s largest companies (based on total assets and/or revenue) are using low wage workforces to maximize profits in developed markets—a strategy, that by undercutting the costs of conducting business in developed economies, erodes the domestic market bases of companies within them. This is nothing new, just the logical extension of evolutionary business practices inevitably resulting from profit being the least common denominator of business; verifiable by the decline of the manufacturing sector’s share of contribution to the U.S. Gross Domestic Product, now, less than half of what it was immediately after World War II (1947). [Paragraph.] Unfortunately, the extent to which this is occurring—in its World Investment Report 2006, the United Nations estimates that transnational corporations comprised 77,175 parent corporations and 773,019 foreign affiliates in 2005; along with catalytic advances in the global communications infrastructure, suggest that not only will this trend continue, but accelerate drastically—China became the largest exporter of manufactured goods to the U.S. in 2005, will likely become the top exporter of all goods to the U.S. this year, and, given its economic growth rate, will become the world’s wealthiest country within several years. Given the tenuous hold that many U.S. manufacturers have on their futures due to already low profit margins, as competition for dominance of the most important consumer markets intensifies among the behemoths of commerce, increasing numbers of domestic enterprises will falter (in all developed markets). [Paragraph.] Because this evolution of business strategies developed, and has gone unanswered by domestic enterprises, for decades; it is erroneous to believe that companies currently uninvolved in international markets (79.78 percent of U.S. manufacturers as of 2005) possess the savvy to gain control of their destinies. Though inexplicable, their IT departments are oblivious of, and inadequate to, the coming challenges; otherwise, measures to ensure company viability would be in the process of implementation. The bottom line is that companies must adapt or face extinction… the sooner they begin the first, the less likely they will fall victim to the second. © 2007 Thomas J Judge Jr

View Entry

DATE: 06/24/2007 13:55:24

Past decades have brought about evolutionary changes having a profound effect on our everyday lives and the way business around the world is conducted: Wal-Mart’s (Fortune magazine’s #1 Global 500 company, based on its $351,139 million revenue in 2006, ranked 23rd among global economies by Gross Domestic Product) aggressive distribution and expansion strategies led to the decimation of Hometown, USA’s Main Street; the Foreign Direct Investment of trillions of dollars, by what is now over 280,000 foreign affiliates (2005 estimate) of transnational corporations, empowered China’s transition from a Second World nation to one having an extraordinarily robust economy (second only to the U.S., based on Purchasing Power Parity—up from its rank as ninth in the last 25 years) able to usurp both jobs and shares of consumer market bases from all major developed economies; and a quantum leap in the communication infrastructure enables companies, possessing the resources to implement such strategies, to globally outsource order fulfillment, customer support and a wide variety of business services from countries able to provide them at a fraction of their domestic costs. Even so… the times they are (still) a-changin’… if you need a predictive indicator of that change, note that the Gross Domestic Product of India in 2006 was fourteenth in the world—and watch its dramatic shift over the coming decades (due in no small part to the U.S. agreement to construct a nuclear power grid across the country). [Paragraph.] Geoeconomics will be the driver of change in an ever-broadening range of industries for the foreseeable future. While it is impossible to fully comprehend the disproportionate political and socioeconomic influence of transnational corporations, comprised of 77,175 parent corporations and 773,019 foreign affiliates (2005 estimate) worldwide, consider this… the combined $20,900.34 billion sales revenue of Fortune’s 2007 Global 500 companies accounted for 43.41 percent of the $48,144.47 billion Gross World Product in 2006—that’s substantially more than the 27.51 percent represented by the U.S. Gross Domestic Product for the year! In light of this data, it is no longer possible to view the U.S labor market as a protected and isolated force; for just a glimpse of the big picture, consider that the 2.45 billion combined populations of China and India are over eightfold that of the United States. [Paragraph.] Twentieth century vision lacks the acuity to ensure survival much longer into a new century of accelerating market dynamics; companies across the spectrum of business are feeling competitive pressures beyond their means to fight back. When the client companies upon which your collective professional futures lack the knowledge necessary to ensure their viability in ever-evolving business environments, it will be obvious that they should have proactively implemented more heroic measures to preserve those interests—but, by then, it will be too late! If YOU are up to the challenge, help your clients begin to recognize the bold new colors of 21st century commerce… it's a very demanding world, and becoming even more so each day… © 2007 Thomas J Judge Jr

View Entry

DATE: 05/01/2007 21:57:05

The global marketplace, projected at $13,052 billion in goods and $3,087 billion in services this year, across the full spectrum of business, may very well place a greater premium on “Made in America,” than the domestic market. Yet, even though the very existence of many U.S. businesses is threatened by the globalization of commerce, relatively few domestic companies choose to compete in the international arena. That is unfortunate, because, in it, many bypass opportunities able to ensure their future survival and miss some more prosperous than those for which they typically compete at home. Although the path to success in international markets is less apparent for service companies, it is no less promising; opportunities ranging from franchising to infrastructure related projects of all varieties and magnitudes are plentiful. Handled with savvy, global markets can be as lucrative as they are exploitable; but few companies have the native expertise to go beyond marginal levels of success, and most fail to realize that such knowledge transcends, but is also synergistic with their industry awareness. So, despite being the most important discipline able to be assimilated into existing enterprises (73.27% of the world’s wealth lies beyond U.S. borders, and many companies are losing the battle for their market share of the 26.73% within them!); it is a rarefied blend of art and science that is both esoteric and undervalued. © 2007 Thomas J Judge Jr

View Entry

DATE: 04/22/2007 19:28:35

“Our world is richer than ever before, but it is also marked by enormous inequalities, both within and between countries. The average annual income of someone living in the world’s richest country, Luxembourg, is more than one hundred times larger than that of the average citizen of Sierra Leone, one of the world’s poorest.” These words preface the United Nations’ publication “World Economic and Social Survey: 2006." To varying degrees, the economic disparity indicated in that report applies to all developed nations; but most particularly to the United States, where its 301.7 million inhabitants and $13,770.3 billion Gross Domestic Product projected for 2007, represent only 4.58% of world’s population, but 26.73% of its wealth. If one then considers, that approximately 4 billion of the world’s people live in relative poverty (having incomes below $3,000 per year, in 2002 dollars, in local purchasing power); how is it possible for an economic gulf of that enormity to be bridged? Aside from economic aid and charitable relief efforts, the reality is by transnational corporations—the United Nations’ “World Investment Report 2006” estimates there were 77,175 parent corporations and 773,019 affiliate companies in 2005. Shareholder primacy and their Foreign Direct Investment ensure that low wage labor will remain a driving force of business for the foreseeable future. Of course, this is an oversimplification, and there are many other factors to consider, such as expansion and advances in frastructure, but they often provide synergies able to be plied against the domestic enterprises of developed nations (how long can your client companies keep up with competitors using foreign support via call centers, etc.). For domestically owned and operated enterprises, business-as-usual is no longer sufficient to ensure long-term viability… the problem is that most, having had their inceptions and life cycles embedded in the world’s wealthiest market, fail to realize it. I consider it necessary for domestic enterprises to awaken to the competitive challenges of 21st century commerce; if it takes the vested interests-driven prodding of recruiters, then so be it! Besides, the assimilation of such insight may help differentiate your services from recruiters having more myopic vision than your own—and how could that be a bad thing? © 2007 Thomas J Judge Jr

View Entry

DATE: 04/21/2007 09:11:21

Although apparent, the high labor costs and low profit margins of U.S. industry are vulnerable to exploitation by transnational corporations; in-depth macroeconomic analysis reveals the converging dynamics of geoeconomics are devastating endemically myopic enterprises. A problem exacerbated by the inability of even the most actively engaged manufacturers to alleviate the threat of increasingly globalizing commerce; thus exposing the inadequacy of contemporary business and marketing strategies in fulfilling the need to establish competitive postures in foreign markets. Globalization, often euphemistic for the exploitation of foreign labor and other unfair market practices, enabled both domestically- and foreign-owned TNCs to capture 76.95% of the “apparent consumption” of the U.S. market in 2006—it requires an export intensity greater than 30.37% just to offset the industry-wide incursion of foreign-made goods last year! Increasing economic interdependence is flattening global markets, giving enterprises at greatest risk insufficient time to develop and implement essential survival strategies! Prescience, and profound insight into inherent inequities on the so-called “level playing field,” inspired development of an intelligence-driven business paradigm; conceived to transcend this unprecedented challenge by providing synergistic strategies a quantum leap beyond conventional methodologies in effecting survivability of the inevitable further globalization of markets. [Paragraph.] © 2007 Thomas J Judge Jr

View Entry