Let’s Welcome Back Hockey with This ESPN Commercial






We realize there’s only so much time one can spend in a day watching new trailers, viral video clips, and shaky cell phone footage of people arguing on live television. This is why every day The Atlantic Wire highlights the videos that truly earn your five minutes (or less) of attention. Today:  


RELATED: Cookie Monster Batman and the Dog You Wish You Had






Hockey, schmockey. As a whole, the Atlantic Wire staff is sort of ambivalent that the NHL is finally back. (Our Canadian correspondent, however, is thrilled.) But you know what we are thankful for? The ESPN commercial reminding us that the NHL is finally back: 


RELATED: Behold the Power of ‘Gangnam Style’


RELATED: The Robot That Performs Gangnam Style Better Than You


These people are awesome (and, hey, maybe some of them play hockey):


RELATED: The Uncle You Wish You Had and the Joy of Human Jukeboxes


RELATED: How to Ride an Impossibly Tiny Bicycle; One Adorable Jam Session


People are awesome, and also quite strange. Like this guy, who offers the world a video review of the Astor CB-100 (totally SFW), and the 33,000+ views his video has already gotten:


And finally, these are ponies in sweaters. Ponies in sweaters, people:


Wireless News Headlines – Yahoo! News





Title Post: Let’s Welcome Back Hockey with This ESPN Commercial
Url Post: http://www.news.fluser.com/lets-welcome-back-hockey-with-this-espn-commercial/
Link To Post : Let’s Welcome Back Hockey with This ESPN Commercial
Rating:
100%

based on 99998 ratings.
5 user reviews.
Author: Fluser SeoLink
Thanks for visiting the blog, If any criticism and suggestions please leave a comment




Read More..

Voice actor for Charlie Brown arrested in Calif.


SAN DIEGO (AP) — The man who was the voice of Charlie Brown on many "Peanuts" television shows has been charged with stalking and threatening his former girlfriend and a plastic surgeon who gave her a breast enhancement he apparently didn't like.


Peter Robbins pleaded not guilty Wednesday in San Diego Superior Court.


Robbins was arrested Sunday at the San Ysidro Port of Entry after authorities doing a background check upon his return from Mexico spotted a warrant from the San Diego County Sheriff's Department.


Prosecutors say the 56-year-old stalked and threatened his former girlfriend, as well as the plastic surgeon. Authorities say Robbins paid for the breast enhancement.


He is being held on $550,000 bond.


Robbins was the voice of Charlie Brown on "A Charlie Brown Christmas" and other TV specials.


Read More..

Well: Long Term Effects on Life Expectancy From Smoking

It is often said that smoking takes years off your life, and now a new study shows just how many: Longtime smokers can expect to lose about 10 years of life expectancy.

But amid those grim findings was some good news for former smokers. Those who quit before they turn 35 can gain most if not all of that decade back, and even those who wait until middle age to kick the habit can add about five years back to their life expectancies.

“There’s the old saw that everyone knows smoking is bad for you,” said Dr. Tim McAfee of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “But this paints a much more dramatic picture of the horror of smoking. These are real people that are getting 10 years of life expectancy hacked off — and that’s just on average.”

The findings were part of research, published on Wednesday in The New England Journal of Medicine, that looked at government data on more than 200,000 Americans who were followed starting in 1997. Similar studies that were done in the 1980s and the decades prior had allowed scientists to predict the impact of smoking on mortality. But since then many population trends have changed, and it was unclear whether smokers today fared differently from smokers decades ago.

Since the 1960s, the prevalence of smoking over all has declined, falling from about 40 percent to 20 percent. Today more than half of people that ever smoked have quit, allowing researchers to compare the effects of stopping at various ages.

Modern cigarettes contain less tar and medical advances have cut the rates of death from vascular disease drastically. But have smokers benefited from these advances?

Women in the 1960s, ’70s and ’80s had lower rates of mortality from smoking than men. But it was largely unknown whether this was a biological difference or merely a matter of different habits: earlier generations of women smoked fewer cigarettes and tended to take up smoking at a later age than men.

Now that smoking habits among women today are similar to those of men, would mortality rates be the same as well?

“There was a big gap in our knowledge,” said Dr. McAfee, an author of the study and the director of the C.D.C.’s Office on Smoking and Public Health.

The new research showed that in fact women are no more protected from the consequences of smoking than men. The female smokers in the study represented the first generation of American women that generally began smoking early in life and continued the habit for decades, and the impact on life span was clear. The risk of death from smoking for these women was 50 percent higher than the risk reported for women in similar studies carried out in the 1980s.

“This sort of puts the nail in the coffin around the idea that women might somehow be different or that they suffer fewer effects of smoking,” Dr. McAfee said.

It also showed that differences between smokers and the population in general are becoming more and more stark. Over the last 20 years, advances in medicine and public health have improved life expectancy for the general public, but smokers have not benefited in the same way.

“If anything, this is accentuating the difference between being a smoker and a nonsmoker,” Dr. McAfee said.

The researchers had information about the participants’ smoking histories and other details about their health and backgrounds, including diet, alcohol consumption, education levels and weight and body fat. Using records from the National Death Index, they calculated their mortality rates over time.

People who had smoked fewer than 100 cigarettes in their lifetimes were not classified as smokers. Those who had smoked at least 100 cigarettes but had not had one within five years of the time the data was collected were classified as former smokers.

Not surprisingly, the study showed that the earlier a person quit smoking, the greater the impact. People who quit between 25 and 34 years of age gained about 10 years of life compared to those who continued to smoke. But there were benefits at many ages. People who quit between 35 and 44 gained about nine years, and those who stopped between 45 and 59 gained about four to six years of life expectancy.

From a public health perspective, those numbers are striking, particularly when juxtaposed with preventive measures like blood pressure screenings, colorectal screenings and mammography, the effects of which on life expectancy are more often viewed in terms of days or months, Dr. McAfee said.

“These things are very important, but the size of the benefit pales in comparison to what you can get from stopping smoking,” he said. “The notion that you could add 10 years to your life by something as straightforward as quitting smoking is just mind boggling.”

Read More..

Number of homes entering foreclosure drops 22.1% to six-year low









California's foreclosure crisis eased considerably during the final quarter of last year, with the number of homes entering foreclosure dropping to a six-year low.


The steep decline, accompanied by a similar drop in home repossessions, clears the path for a quickened pace of recovery this year. Fewer foreclosures on the market should lead to higher home prices and a healthier real estate market.


"Ultimately, fewer foreclosures means an even tighter market, which means a more rapid recovery," said Christopher Thornberg, a principal at Beacon Economics. "I see very little to forestall the real estate market this year."





The real estate research firm DataQuick reported a 22.1% decline in default notices during the final three months of 2012 compared with the previous quarter — and a 37.9% drop from a year earlier. A total of 38,212 default notices were logged on California houses and condominiums last quarter, the lowest number since the final quarter of 2006. A default notice is the first formal step in the state's foreclosure process.


Since the number of new foreclosure cases peaked in early 2009, experts and analysts have feared a second wave of home loan defaults flooding the market. Three years later, that appears unlikely as banks turn to foreclosure alternatives and home prices rise.


"We are past the peak of this," said Kenneth Rosen, chairman of the Fisher Center for Real Estate and Urban Economics at UC Berkeley's Haas School of Business.


A steadily improving economy has helped ease homeowner woes. And the vast number of underwater borrowers — those owing more on their homes than they're worth — have continued to pay their mortgages instead of walking away. Rising home prices should help more underwater homeowners come up for air, allowing them to regain equity and sell their homes if they run into financial trouble.


"Home values increased through most of 2012, and the rate of increase picked up toward the end of the year," DataQuick President John Walsh said in a news release. "That means fewer and fewer homeowners are underwater."


California's median home price rose 22.4% last quarter to $300,000.


California has also been able to work through its foreclosure problem faster than other states, in part because foreclosures take place largely outside the courtroom, said Celia Chen, a housing economist with Moody's Economy.com. That means California has not been bogged down with the same level of paperwork issues and delays that states such as Florida or New York have experienced.


California has also benefited from economic growth from Asian trade and from the technology industry centered around Silicon Valley. Indeed, the technology-rich Bay Area's declines in default notices outpaced both the statewide drops and those in every other region.


Those foreclosed homes that are hitting the market are being snapped up by investors to either rent or flip. Investors bought 42% of all homes sold at foreclosure auctions statewide last quarter, according to DataQuick.


Big hedge funds have become so interested in cheaply priced homes that flippers are now increasingly searching for homes in the $400,000 to $600,000 range throughout Los Angeles County, said Robert Fragoso, executive vice president for Anchor Loans, which makes short-term loans to investors. The new interest among renovators in pricier homes should also push up prices. Already, some homes are selling for more than the asking price, Fragoso said.


"I am seeing the inventory levels right now at very, very, very low rates, especially when you are talking about the product that has already been remodeled," he said. "We are getting multiple offers on almost everything within days of it hitting the market."


Banks have been increasingly averse to foreclosure because state and federal regulators increased scrutiny on the process, which led to huge settlements as well as new laws. Major lenders have now stepped up short sales and other kinds of loan modifications to deal with troubled borrowers.


Although the foreclosure crisis has abated, the number of people losing their homes remains at a very high level compared with historical averages, said Paul Leonard, California director for the Center for Responsible Lending. Those entering foreclosure are most likely people suffering from California's still tough economy or those with the most limited resources. Aid programs and reforms by federal and state authorities are still needed, he said.


"One has to be very cautious," Leonard said, "even as we have seen substantial declines in the overall levels of default and foreclosure."


alejandro.lazo@latimes.com


andrew.khouri@latimes.com





Read More..

Even with record sales, Apple's earnings report may disappoint









If all goes according to plan Wednesday, Apple Inc. will report record revenue. The company will reveal that it sold more iPhones than in any previous quarter. And it will confirm that it hauled in another boatload of cash to swell its overflowing coffers.


In other words, Apple's earnings have all the makings of a colossal disaster.


That's because no matter how mind-blowing its performance, there is growing concern among investors that Apple's remarkable run of smartphone dominance is coming to an end. Although analysts' estimates for the company are all over the map, there is general agreement that Apple will not grow at nearly the same pace as it has over the last five years.





But after months of speculation and countless rumors that has helped drive the company's stock down 28% from its September peak, there is still widespread disagreement about how much that growth will slow and whether investors should be alarmed.


With observers desperate to finally hear what Apple executives have to say, the company's earnings report scheduled after the market closes Wednesday has become one of its most pivotal and highly anticipated in years.


Ben Reitzes, an analyst at Barclays, sent a recent note about Apple's earnings to clients under the title "Preparing for the Most Important Conference Call in Years."


Quiz: What set the Internet on fire in 2012?


"We believe that investor sentiment is quite negative right now for Apple, with significant concerns around demand trends for the iPhone 5," he wrote.


How investors adjust to that reality of slower growth is hard to predict. Will it be interpreted as a sign of weakness? Or just the reality that as a company gets bigger its pace of growth will inevitably slow?


First, the numbers. In October, Apple told Wall Street analysts that for its first quarter, which ended in December, investors should expect the company to report $52 billion in revenue and earnings of $11.75 a share.


But Apple tends to be notoriously conservative in its own guidance. For the same quarter a year earlier, Apple beat revenue estimates by more than 25% and earnings forecasts by nearly 50%. The surprising quarterly performance sent its stock into the stratosphere over the next nine months, eventually hitting an all-time high of $702.10 in September.


Such a huge surprise seems unlikely this time around. The consensus among Wall Street analysts is that Apple will report $54.7 billion in revenue and $13.41 a share in earnings. If the latter figure proves correct, that would represent a decline from the $13.87 a share in earnings that Apple reported for the same quarter last year. Not only would it be the first drop in a decade, but it also could confirm fears that Apple's new mix of products, including the iPad Mini, are hurting the company's historically high profit margins.


Making this all the more complicated is a quirk in the calendar. Last year, the same quarter had 14 weeks. This year, it has only 13 weeks. That means once the numbers are released, analysts and investors will have to do some fast calculations to make comparisons that are truly apples to apples.


In addition to worries about profit margins, investors have been fretting over rumors that the iPhone 5 has not been selling as well as expected, that rival Samsung Electronics Co. is widening its lead in smartphone sales, and that Apple's product upgrades don't dazzle like they once did. Of course, much of this is conjecture. But it has muddled projections, with analysts predicting that Apple could report earnings from as low as $11.53 a share to as much as $15.50 a share.


That kind of uncertainty has made investors even more eager than usual to hear any news about Apple's performance. Even more important than the numbers, however, is what Apple executives say about the future.


Since last summer, analysts have been growing more pessimistic about the current fiscal year, which ends in September, lowering their earnings projections to $48.86 a share from $54.87 a share in July. Should Apple lower that outlook further in the conference call Wednesday, it could trigger panic among Apple's investors.


"I think the concerns being reflected in the stock today have more to do with the next quarter than this one," said Walter Piecyk, a research analyst at BTIG.


To some analysts, the gloom over Apple's prospect is simply absurd. The value of the stock, trading at about 11 times earnings, is low by historical standards. Its price-to-earnings ratio hasn't been this low in more than five years, a period in which it has hovered between 15 and 20 times earnings.


And according to research firm Bespoke Investment Group, Apple is currently trading further below the consensus target ($728.36) than any of the other 100 largest stocks in the S&P 500. Apple on Tuesday closed up $4.77, or 1%, to $504.77‎.


In this view, the world's most valuable company is trading at bargain basement prices.


"There's nothing wrong with their business," said Colin Gillis, director of research at BGC Financial. "It's just a question of whether growth is going to slow. That had to happen eventually."


chris.obrien@latimes.com





Read More..

‘Atari’ Is in Trouble Again






Atari is declaring bankruptcy — twice. Both the U.S. video game company and its French parent have done so, the latest twist for the company which largely invented the video game industry and remains synonymous with it, despite having seen its glory days end by the mid-1980s.


But wait. Even though the Atari name celebrated its fortieth anniversary last year, it’s a mistake to talk about Atari as if it’s a corporate entity which has been around for four decades. (The Los Angeles Times’ Ben Fritz, for instance, refers to it as an “iconic but long-troubled video game maker.”) Instead, it’s a famous name which has drifted from owner to owner. It keeps being applied to different businesses, and yes, for all its fame, it does seem to be a bit of a jinx.






Here’s a quick rundown of what “Atari” has meant at different times (thanks, Wikipedia, for refreshing my memory):


1972-1976: It’s an up-and-coming, innovative startup cofounded by Nolan Bushnell and Ted Dabney.


1976-1984: It’s part of Warner Communications (which, years later, merged with Time Inc. to form Time Warner, overlord of this website). It’s a massively successful maker of video games and consoles, but then it crashes, along with the rest of the industry.


1984-1996: Atari morphs into a semi-successful maker of PCs when it’s acquired by Tramel Technology, a company started by Jack Tramiel, the ousted founder of Commodore.


1996-1998: Tramiel runs Atari into the ground. After merging with hard-disk maker JTS, the company and brand are largely dormant.


1998-2000: Atari resurfaces under the ownership of  toy kingpin Hasbro as a line of games published under the Atari Interactive name.


2000-present: It becomes a corporate entity controlled by French game publisher Infogrames, which increasingly emphasizes the Atari moniker over its own and takes over completely in 2008. In recent years, it’s focused on digital downloads, mobile games and licensing of its familiar brand and logo.


The above chronology doesn’t account for Atari’s original business: arcade games. As far as I can tell, the arcade arm was owned at different times by Warner Communications/Time Warner (twice!), Pac-Man purveyor Namco and arcade icon Midway, among other companies. But use of the Atari brand on arcade hardware petered out in 2001.


Basically, Atari has never been one well-defined thing for more than twelve years, max, at a time. That the name has survived at all is a testament to its power and appeal. And even though the current Atari has fallen on hard times, I’ll bet that the brand survives for at least a few more decades, in one form or another. Several forms, probably.


Gaming News Headlines – Yahoo! News





Title Post: ‘Atari’ Is in Trouble Again
Url Post: http://www.news.fluser.com/atari-is-in-trouble-again/
Link To Post : ‘Atari’ Is in Trouble Again
Rating:
100%

based on 99998 ratings.
5 user reviews.
Author: Fluser SeoLink
Thanks for visiting the blog, If any criticism and suggestions please leave a comment




Read More..

Shakira gives birth to baby boy


LOS ANGELES (AP) — Shakira is a mama.


A spokeswoman for the 35-year-old Colombian singer says Shakira Mebarak and 25-year-old soccer star Gerard Pique of FC Barcelona welcomed son Milan Pique Mebarak on Tuesday at 9:36 p.m. in Barcelona, Spain.


A statement posted on the pop star's site in English, Spanish and Catalan says that "just like his father, baby Milan became a member of FC Barcelona at birth." The statement also says Milan weighed approximately 6 pounds, 6 ounces, and that "both mother and child are in excellent health."


Shakira asked fans earlier Tuesday on Twitter "to accompany me in your prayers on this very important day of my life."


Milan is the couple's first child.


___


Online:


http://shakira.com/


Read More..

The Well Column: Facing Cancer, a Stark Choice

In the 1970s, women’s health advocates were highly suspicious of mastectomies. They argued that surgeons — in those days, pretty much an all-male club — were far too quick to remove a breast after a diagnosis of cancer, with disfiguring results.

But today, the pendulum has swung the other way. A new generation of women want doctors to take a more aggressive approach, and more and more are asking that even healthy breasts be removed to ward off cancer before it can strike.

Researchers estimate that as many as 15 percent of women with breast cancer — 30,000 a year — opt to have both breasts removed, up from less than 3 percent in the late 1990s. Notably, it appears that the vast majority of these women have never received genetic testing or counseling and are basing the decision on exaggerated fears about their risk of recurrence.

In addition, doctors say an increasing number of women who have never had a cancer diagnosis are demanding mastectomies based on genetic risk. (Cancer databases don’t track these women, so their numbers are unknown.)

“We are confronting almost an epidemic of prophylactic mastectomy,” said Dr. Isabelle Bedrosian, a surgical oncologist at M. D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston. “I think the medical community has taken notice. We don’t have data that say oncologically this is a necessity, so why are women making this choice?”

One reason may be the never-ending awareness campaigns that have left many women in perpetual fear of the disease. Improvements in breast reconstruction may also be driving the trend, along with celebrities who go public with their decision to undergo preventive mastectomy.

This month Allyn Rose, a 24-year-old Miss America contestant from Washington, D.C., made headlines when she announced plans to have both her healthy breasts removed after the pageant; both her mother and her grandmother died from breast cancer. The television personality Giuliana Rancic, 37, and the actress Christina Applegate, 41, also talked publicly about having double mastectomies after diagnoses of early-stage breast cancer.

“You’re not going to find other organs that people cut out of their bodies because they’re worried about disease,” said the medical historian Dr. Barron H. Lerner, author of “The Breast Cancer Wars” (2001). “Because breast cancer is a disease that is so emotionally charged and gets so much attention, I think at times women feel almost obligated to be as proactive as possible — that’s the culture of breast cancer.”

Most of the data on prophylactic mastectomy come from the University of Minnesota, where researchers tracked contralateral mastectomy trends (removing a healthy breast alongside one with cancer) from 1998 to 2006. Dr. Todd M. Tuttle, chief of surgical oncology, said double mastectomy rates more than doubled during that period and the rise showed no signs of slowing.

From those trends as well as anecdotal reports, Dr. Tuttle estimates that at least 15 percent of women who receive a breast cancer diagnosis will have the second, healthy breast removed. “It’s younger women who are doing it,” he said.

The risk that a woman with breast cancer will develop cancer in the other breast is about 5 percent over 10 years, Dr. Tuttle said. Yet a University of Minnesota study found that women estimated their risk to be more than 30 percent.

“I think there are women who markedly overestimate their risk of getting cancer,” he said.

Most experts agree that double mastectomy is a reasonable option for women who have a strong genetic risk and have tested positive for a breast cancer gene. That was the case with Allison Gilbert, 42, a writer in Westchester County who discovered her genetic risk after her grandmother died of breast cancer and her mother died of ovarian cancer.

Even so, she delayed the decision to get prophylactic mastectomy until her aunt died from an aggressive breast cancer. In August, she had a double mastectomy. (She had her ovaries removed earlier.)

“I feel the women in my family didn’t have a way to avoid their fate,” said Ms. Gilbert, author of the 2011 book “Parentless Parents,” about how losing a parent influences one’s own style of parenting. “Here I was given an incredible opportunity to know what I have and to do something about it and, God willing, be around for my kids longer.”

Even so, she said her decisions were not made lightly. The double mastectomy and reconstruction required an initial 11 1/2-hour surgery and an “intense” recovery. She got genetic counseling, joined support groups and researched her options.

But doctors say many women are not making such informed decisions. Last month, University of Michigan researchers reported on a study of more than 1,446 women who had breast cancer. Four years after their diagnosis, 35 percent were considering removing their healthy breast and 7 percent had already done so.

Notably, most of the women who had a double mastectomy were not at high risk for a cancer recurrence. In fact, studies suggest that most women who have double mastectomies never seek genetic testing or counseling.

“Breast cancer becomes very emotional for people, and they view a breast differently than an arm or a required body part that you use every day,” said Sarah T. Hawley, an associate professor of internal medicine at the University of Michigan. “Women feel like it’s a body part over which they totally have a choice, and they say, ‘I want to put this behind me — I don’t want to worry about it anymore.’ ”


We hope you’ll “Like” Well on Facebook, where you’ll find news and conversations about fitness, food and family health.

Read More..

Even with record sales, Apple's earnings report may disappoint









If all goes according to plan Wednesday, Apple Inc. will report record revenue. The company will reveal that it sold more iPhones than in any previous quarter. And it will confirm that it hauled in another boatload of cash to swell its overflowing coffers.


In other words, Apple's earnings have all the makings of a colossal disaster.


That's because no matter how mind-blowing its performance, there is growing concern among investors that Apple's remarkable run of smartphone dominance is coming to an end. Although analysts' estimates for the company are all over the map, there is general agreement that Apple will not grow at nearly the same pace as it has over the last five years.





But after months of speculation and countless rumors that has helped drive the company's stock down 28% from its September peak, there is still widespread disagreement about how much that growth will slow and whether investors should be alarmed.


With observers desperate to finally hear what Apple executives have to say, the company's earnings report scheduled after the market closes Wednesday has become one of its most pivotal and highly anticipated in years.


Ben Reitzes, an analyst at Barclays, sent a recent note about Apple's earnings to clients under the title "Preparing for the Most Important Conference Call in Years."


"We believe that investor sentiment is quite negative right now for Apple, with significant concerns around demand trends for the iPhone 5," he wrote.


How investors adjust to that reality of slower growth is hard to predict. Will it be interpreted as a sign of weakness? Or just the reality that as a company gets bigger its pace of growth will inevitably slow?


First, the numbers. In October, Apple told Wall Street analysts that for its first quarter, which ended in December, investors should expect the company to report $52 billion in revenue and earnings of $11.75 a share.


But Apple tends to be notoriously conservative in its own guidance. For the same quarter a year earlier, Apple beat revenue estimates by more than 25% and earnings forecasts by nearly 50%. The surprising quarterly performance sent its stock into the stratosphere over the next nine months, eventually hitting an all-time high of $702.10 in September.


Such a huge surprise seems unlikely this time around. The consensus among Wall Street analysts is that Apple will report $54.7 billion in revenue and $13.41 a share in earnings. If the latter figure proves correct, that would represent a decline from the $13.87 a share in earnings that Apple reported for the same quarter last year. Not only would it be the first drop in a decade, but it also could confirm fears that Apple's new mix of products, including the iPad Mini, are hurting the company's historically high profit margins.


Making this all the more complicated is a quirk in the calendar. Last year, the same quarter had 14 weeks. This year, it has only 13 weeks. That means once the numbers are released, analysts and investors will have to do some fast calculations to make comparisons that are truly apples to apples.


In addition to worries about profit margins, investors have been fretting over rumors that the iPhone 5 has not been selling as well as expected, that rival Samsung Electronics Co. is widening its lead in smartphone sales, and that Apple's product upgrades don't dazzle like they once did. Of course, much of this is conjecture. But it has muddled projections, with analysts predicting that Apple could report earnings from as low as $11.53 a share to as much as $15.50 a share.


That kind of uncertainty has made investors even more eager than usual to hear any news about Apple's performance. Even more important than the numbers, however, is what Apple executives say about the future.


Since last summer, analysts have been growing more pessimistic about the current fiscal year, which ends in September, lowering their earnings projections to $48.86 a share from $54.87 a share in July. Should Apple lower that outlook further in the conference call Wednesday, it could trigger panic among Apple's investors.


"I think the concerns being reflected in the stock today have more to do with the next quarter than this one," said Walter Piecyk, a research analyst at BTIG.


To some analysts, the gloom over Apple's prospect is simply absurd. The value of the stock, trading at about 11 times earnings, is low by historical standards. Its price-to-earnings ratio hasn't been this low in more than five years, a period in which it has hovered between 15 and 20 times earnings.


And according to research firm Bespoke Investment Group, Apple is currently trading further below the consensus target ($728.36) than any of the other 100 largest stocks in the S&P 500. Apple on Tuesday closed up $4.77, or 1%, to $504.77‎.


In this view, the world's most valuable company is trading at bargain basement prices.


"There's nothing wrong with their business," said Colin Gillis, director of research at BGC Financial. "It's just a question of whether growth is going to slow. That had to happen eventually."


chris.obrien@latimes.com





Read More..

Algeria hostage death toll rises to 37









CAIRO — Islamic militants who seized hundreds of hostages were "wild with their demands," forcing the Algerian military to act quickly in a standoff at a natural gas refinery that led to the deaths of 37 foreign captives and 29 extremists, the Algerian prime minister said Monday.


In a televised news conference from the capital, Algiers, that offered the country's official explanation for what happened at the remote compound in the Sahara desert, Prime Minister Abdelmalek Sellal said the attackers were rigging explosives throughout the complex and needed to be stopped before they blew it up.


The ordeal drew world attention to Algeria for five days, beginning with a predawn assault by militants Wednesday and ending Sunday when special forces captured five extremists amid booby traps and a landscape of charred vehicles and scattered, disfigured bodies.





The Algerian government moved to assure foreign energy companies, such as BP, which co-runs the refinery at In Amenas, that it would deal aggressively with terrorism. About 60% of the nation's revenue comes from oil and gas reserves, and it was reportedly the first time militants had targeted such a facility.


But the country's security and intelligence forces, among the harshest in the Arab world, appear to have been caught off guard. The prime minister said militants, including bomb makers, knew the layout of the plant and may have been assisted by a former refinery driver.


The death toll of 37 foreigners was up from an earlier estimate of 23. Seven of the dead have not been identified. Among the captives confirmed dead or missing are three Americans, seven Japanese, six Britons, six Filipinos, five Norwegians, one Colombian and nationals from other countries.


Some of them died when militants shot them in the head, Sellal said.


Three militants were captured in addition to the 29 killed. Earlier reports had put the number of captured militants at five. Some had been wearing Algerian military uniforms. Their nationalities, including Egyptian, Libyan, Tunisian and Mauritanian, indicated the spread of Islamic extremism across North Africa since the political upheaval of the "Arab Spring" began in late 2010.


Sellal said two Canadians were also involved in the attack. One of them — who spoke English and was identified only as Chedad — commanded the rounding up of foreign hostages.


The prime minister offered condolences to the families of victims, saying, "This is a terrorist act rejected by Algerians." He added that the militants, connected to a group that fought against the government in the 1990s civil war, "want to plunge Algeria back into terrorism."


The assault on the refinery was carried out by extremists who traveled from neighboring Mali, officials said. The mastermind of the plot was Mokhtar Belmokhtar, a longtime Islamic militant linked to the group Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb. Sellal said the Islamists headed east, crossing into Niger, Libya and finally into Algeria's desert. Their intent was to seize foreigners and hold them in Mali for ransom.


"But their original goal did not succeed," Sellal said.


Militants in pickup trucks ambushed a bus carrying foreign workers to a nearby airport. They encountered gunfire from security guards and drove the hostages to the refinery. There, they battled guards, including one who set off an alarm, alerting technical workers to stop the flow of gas through the refinery's labyrinth of pipes.


It was not clear, though, why the militants stormed the gas complex if their goal was only to kidnap foreigners. Such inconsistencies have frustrated foreign officials. Even after Sellal's comments, much of what unfolded remained opaque.


Western officials, however, have publicly supported Algeria's actions despite earlier suggestions that the military may have acted too quickly.


Once inside the compound, the militants split into two groups: One group secured the plant; the other rounded up hostages in the housing area. There were 790 workers on the site, including 134 foreigners, most of whom were separated from the Algerian workers.


"The militants knew very well the [gas complex] area and their primary goal was to take over and control the foreigners in the compound," Sellal said. "They had heavy arsenals."


Earlier accounts by freed hostages said captives were forced to wear explosives belts. Sellal said the militants set booby traps and "planted explosives everywhere." Negotiations proved fruitless when militants demanded that Islamic radicals held in Algerian prisons be released. They also said they would use hostages as shields to escape to Mali, where they would seek financial payments from the energy companies for their release.


The demands were "impossible to meet," Sellal said, "and it caused the military to intervene."


In a video statement Sunday, Belmokhtar, who is known for kidnapping for ransom to fuel militant plots, said the refinery attack was retribution for French airstrikes this month against Islamist rebels in Mali. Belmokhtar's whereabouts were unknown.


International officials said the attack appeared to have been planned before the French actions. The prime minister indicated that arrested militants said the operation took months to plan.


The prime minister said that by early Thursday the militants had threatened to kill their captives. They began putting workers inside bomb-laden vehicles and attempted to drive through the compound and flee toward Mali. Sellal said that after a "fierce response from the armed forces," two of the vehicles exploded and flipped over.


Accounts by hostages and claims by militants to a Mauritanian news organization indicate that a number of hostages died when military helicopters opened fire on the fleeing vehicles. Sellal described the army response as "very smart," saying soldiers and snipers had to act swiftly after the extremists threatened to execute captives and blow up the refinery, which could have killed people miles away.


A bomb detonated in one pipe but the explosion was limited. Hostages, mainly Algerians, including some who helped Westerners escape, cut holes through fences and slipped through gates during days of confusion and turmoil.


The U.S. State Department identified the Americans confirmed killed as Victor Lynn Lovelady, Gordon Lee Rowan — no hometown given for either — and Frederick Buttaccio, a Texas resident who was confirmed dead last week. A department spokeswoman, Victoria Nuland, said that seven U.S. citizens "survived the attack.... We have no further information to provide."


She added, "We will continue to work closely with the government of Algeria to gain a fuller understanding of the terrorist attack of last week and how we can work together moving forward to combat such threats in the future."


jeffrey.fleishman@latimes.com


Special correspondent Reem Abdellatif contributed to this report.





Read More..