Canadian Business Thread

[Waterlooson]

Originally Posted by Claeren

I don't think it means that much in the scheme of things and obviously a lot of shareholders agree with me.



Claeren.

Or it could mean that a lot of shareholders agree with me, and figure that Mike Lazaridis has enough brains for the two of them.

[WaterlooInvestor]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Out of curiousity, do you perchance work for RIM?

Nope, but as my name suggests I have an interest in both Waterloo and Investing. RIM is a major influence for both, hence my constant following.

Originally Posted by ReginaGuy

I've always wondered the same thing.. Either that or the chamber of commerce. His posts always seem to have an "advertisement" feel to them, the way he always includes pictures of company logos, etc

Nope. It's called taking a minute to make my posts have a better presentation. It doesn't take long to change a title's size and colour, and to underline and bold it. It doesn't take long to hit the 'insert image' button, so when a news article includes a photo, it seems natural to include it.

[WaterlooInvestor]

Good articles shreddog and raggedy13. shreddog, obviously the overall oil sector is much more important to Canada, but RIM being the most valuable Canadian company is still a significant milestone. Someone should post an article on the Financial Services sector.


Here's the Toronto Stock Exchange Stats for the Month of September 2007. They were released October 4, 2007; but this thread didn't exist at the time so I'm posting them now: http://tsx.com/en/news_events/news_r...sSept2007.html

[WaterlooInvestor]

Originally Posted by ScottFromCalgary

Let the Calgary/KW pissing match comence.

No need for a Calgary/KW fight. The Calgary oil sector and boom are both much larger than Waterloo's tech sector and boom. I can easily admit this. However, both cities are doing well and I think we can respect each other for our different business sectors. If Canada is to succeed and be a global leader, we need global companies in many different sectors.

Originally Posted by ScottFromCalgary

Seriously though RIM has an outrageous P/E multiple and is wildly overpriced by just about any metric IMO.
In regards to the talk about RIM being the largest company in Canada, perhaps it narrowly beats RBC in market cap, but take a look at real money:
RIM Q2 Revenue: $1.37B
Net Income: $287.7M
Royal Bank Q2 Revenue: $5.48B
Net Income: $1.395B

As Waterlooson mentioned, it's all about the growth rate.

Period - Revenue (US$millions) - Net Income (US$millions) - Subscribers (in thousands)
2003 - 306 - (148) - 534
2004 - 594 - 47 - 1,069
2005 - 1,350 - 205 - 2,510
2006 - 2,065 - 374 - 4,900
2007 - 3,037 - 631 - 8,000

2Q2008 - 1,372 or *4 = 5,488 annualized - 287 or *4 = 1,148 annualized - 10,500

Expected 3Q2008 - 1,600to1,670 or 6,400 annualized - 339to362 or 1,356 annualized - 12,000

As you can see, there's been large increases over the past 5 years and the trend continues with a jump between Q2 and Q3 (which ends soon ~December 1st). It's likely RIM currently has 11.5 million subscribers as of October 25, 2007. "Subscriber account additions in the third quarter are expected to be approximately 1.65 million." Since this is a city discussion forum, let's relate this growth to cities. RIM is growing by a:

• North Battleford every day.
• Thunder Bay every week.
• Waterloo Region every month.
• Calgary every two months.
• Inner Ring Golden Horseshoe (Toronto-Hamilton) every year.

So sure the stock is expensive with only 11.5million subscribers, but is it still expensive looking out two years from now with 25 million customers?

Originally Posted by ScottFromCalgary

You misunderstand my argument. I'm not saying the market got it wrong or that RIM does not deserve a large P/E. Clearly they have high growth rates. All I'm saying is that the law of large numbers has to come into play at some point and growth will slow, just ask Microsoft. At that point the P/E will drop and unless RIM has earnings numbers somewhere in the ballpark of RBC then their market cap will be lower. Yes RIM will diversify into other products and blah, blah, blah growth will continue and the market will probably always give them a higher multiple than a bank. But they have a long way to go to reach RBC's earnings.

I hear and understand what you're saying, but also realize the market is pricing in expectations that RIM will eventually match (or come much closer) to RBC's earnings. The market is willing to look ahead a bit, and can see the potential only two years in the future when RIM's customer base will be double the current level.

Originally Posted by ScottFromCalgary

The problem with momentum growth stocks like RIM is that eventually something happens that knocks down these precariously perched stocks. They break down real fast and as Kevin O'Leary says - "grown men will weep".

I watch SqueezePlay daily. Kevin wasn't on Wednesday, but he was there on Tuesday and mentioned how he'd been wrong on RIM. He went bearish on the stock back in 2005, but now admits his arguments back then didn't materialize.

Originally Posted by ScottFromCalgary

The implication behind the posts from the Waterloo forumers is that RIM's success is KW's success, and that is somewhat true. I'm just saying that a company with a huge market cap and relatively low earnings doesn't have the same amount of positive economic effect on its community as a company with tons of real earnings and investment. For example, according to the statement of cash flows in their most recently reported quarter:
Cash Used in Investing Activities (net of short term investments)
RIM: $ 105,830,000
Suncor: $1,322,000,000
Encana: $1,189,000,000

Once again I hear what you're saying, but please realize that the RIM numbers are growing very rapidly. 100million one year can quickly become 200 million the next or 500million in a few years.

Still though, market cap can have a very positive effect on a community as well. For example, the 3 RIM billionaires (and other millionaires) have invested a few hundred million of their own money into research institutes, schools, and other causes throughout the community. They also employ ~5,000 people in Waterloo Region with 408 openings as of today. It wouldn't surprise me to see their employee count in Waterloo hit 10,000 over the next few years.

Originally Posted by Waterlooson

I would estimate the combined net worth of RIM's top two executives (residents of Waterloo) at around $7 billion

Even better, I'd estimate:

Lazaridis (Michael) @ $4.475 billion
Balsillie (James L) @ $4.258 billion

so combined $8.733 billion. There's also a 3rd RIM billionaire in Waterloo.

Originally Posted by caltrane74

I will give WaterlooInvestor this, RIM is changing the way all Canadian businesses will be viewed in the future. They are truely on the leading edge of technology in a way Nortel could never say it was.

Awhile back on SSC, we were talking about Canada and a European mentioned Blackberry as one of our Canadian brands. If we want to be known as a nation of modern glass vibrant cities - being known as a country with technology helps. RIM is helping to boost Canada's image abroad.

Originally Posted by ScottFromCalgary

@Waterlooson: Yes I have heard of all of those facilities (only on this forum though - actually it seems like that's all I ever hear from the KW people), their is no doubt that RIM and its founders have been generous to Waterloo. Also, I really hope that RIM does become as large as Microsoft or Google some day, I just don't see it happening. Feel free to buy a whole swack of RIM stock, I just won't be joining you. I would consider having it as 1% of my portfolio at most.

Honestly it does sound beyond belief that Waterloo could have a $200-300 billion market cap company.

That said, tech companies are only as good as their workforce. There are many years when Microsoft hires more grads from the University of Waterloo than anywhere else in the world. Obviously RIM has home-field advantage in recruiting Waterloo students. Lazaridis is also the chancellor of the university.

Heck, if tiny Finland can build a Nokia ($160-billion market cap), surely a G7 country like Canada can do the same.

[WaterlooInvestor]

CBC's actually reporting RIM ended up ahead on Wednesday, although I've seen other sites where it's a bit less (including the TSX site). Since the margin is still so close I'll wait to announce #1 for sure. Here's what the CBC said though: http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2007/10/24/rim.html

"RIM's market capitalization — share price multiplied by the number of shares — reached $67.351 billion by the close of trading Wednesday. Royal Bank's market cap at the end of the day was close behind, at $67.343 billion, according to figures from CBCNews.ca's market data provider."


Although RIM's going to be much lower in the entire world (i have no clue on the exact rank), it does have a high ranking on the NASDAQ:

"RIM has also become the seventh most valued company on Nasdaq, behind Microsoft, Cisco, Apple, Google, Intel and Oracle."

[Waterlooson]

Originally Posted by WaterlooInvestor

.... I'd estimate:

Lazaridis (Michael) @ $4.475 billion
Balsillie (James L) @ $4.258 billion

so combined $8.733 billion. There's also a 3rd RIM billionaire in Waterloo.

How so? What percentage of RIM do the top 3 own? Who is the 3rd billionaire? Fregin?

[Waterlooson]

Originally Posted by WaterlooInvestor

... They also employ ~5,000 people in Waterloo Region with 408 openings as of today. It wouldn't surprise me to see their employee count in Waterloo hit 10,000 over the next few years.

.... those 408 openings in Waterloo (at RIM) doesn't include the 172 job openings for coop students, so the total is 580 openings @ RIM in Waterloo.

[caltrane74]

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

Edmonton tops for business
by Lawrence Herzog
Inside Edmonton | Vol. 25 No. 43 | October 25, 2007
Edmonton has been named the top metro area in Western Canada for business investment, based on the number of capital projects and expansions now underway in the region, according to Site Selection magazine. The Norcross, Georgia-based publication has also ranked Alberta as the most competitive province, ahead of Nova Scotia and Ontario.

Site Selection magazine, published by Conway Data Inc., delivers expansion planning information to 44,000 executives of fast-growing firms. The magazine’s inaugural set of Canadian rankings were based on project data collected between June 2006 and May 2007.

“Judging from the competitiveness we witnessed at every level, it’s no wonder that Canada as a whole earned our top spot among national-level investment promotion and business attraction efforts in rankings we published earlier this year,” says Site Selection’s managing editor Adam Bruns. “Energy resources and resourceful innovation are the ties that bind Canadian economic development, from the smallest of municipalities to the capitals of commerce.”

In the September 2007 issue, he wrote: “Imagine a territory nearly the size of Texas, with a similar mix of energy, agriculture and frontier culture but only one-eighth the population. That, in a nutshell, describes the economic juggernaut that is Alberta, our pick for Canada’s most competitive province.”

It’s lofty praise, indeed, and spread around the smiles at the Edmonton Economic Development Corp., (EEDC) which itself was also lauded for its contributions to the growth of Edmonton’s powerhouse economy. “We’ve known it for a long while, and now others are noticing, too,” says Ron Gilbertson, EEDC’s president and CEO.

“A hot economy, cost-competitiveness and support for research and innovation combine to make Edmonton an attractive location for businesses and careers to thrive,” Gilbertson says. “High-profile rankings from internationally distributed magazines like Site Selection help us share the Edmonton success story with potential business investors.”

As Bruns puts it: “It’s energy that energizes Edmonton, in the form of 10 oil sands upgrader projects being built between now and 2015 that will involve between C$40 billion and C$70 billion of investment and up to 4,000 workers per project at peak construction. Much of those projects’ spinoff economic impact will accrue to Edmonton.”

Alberta’s top ranking for the Canadian Competitiveness Award was based on the number of qualifying new facilities and expansions, projects per capita, project capital investment per capita, project job creation per capita and 100-plus-jobs projects per capita.


Just as the rankings were published, more than 40 business and government representatives travelled to the British Columbia coast to celebrate the opening of the $170-million container facility in Prince Rupert on September 12th. The port solidifies Edmonton’s emerging status as the North American hub for multi-modal transportation for trade to Asia-Pacific along this “corridor of opportunities” through Prince Rupert.

“Edmonton is not only the global port to the oil sands but also a natural gateway to the Asia-Pacific corridor,” Gilbertson observes. “This expanded deep-port facility will dramatically increase our region’s access and capacity to serve the lucrative Asian market.”

The Prince Rupert Port is ideally located on the closest land-sea link to Asia and offers sailing time 30 hours closer than other North American ports. For the industry, that means a tremendous cost savings. With the deepest harbour in North America, the new facility can accommodate the current generation of mega-sized container ships and offers high-capacity CN Rail connection to major Canadian and US markets.

The expansion comes as congestion worsens at North American Pacific ports. Over the next 20 years, global container traffic is forecast to more than double. The increasing volumes are already driving plans for a phase two development at the port that would quadruple its container traffic capacity in 2011.

Looking at the emerging opportunities is the goal of an Asia Pacific Shipping Forum conference November 13th through 15th at Edmonton’s Westin Hotel. The forum, hosted by EEDC and the Greater Edmonton Transportation and Logistics Cluster, will bring together shippers, transportation and logistics providers and government. They’ll gather to explore investment and partnerships opportunities with Asian shipping lines with the Port of Vancouver and Port of Prince Rupert.

For Alberta and its capital city, the opportunities are enormous, to be sure. However, as Site Selection magazine sagely observed, the province’s rapid pace of development isn’t necessarily beneficial, with corresponding strains on infrastructure, housing and water supplies, and shortages of skilled workers.

The entire Canada 2007 report, including an economic development directory, is available online at www.siteselection.com.
©Copyright 2000-2007, All Rights Reserved. All articles, text and photographic material presented here is copyright. Unauthorized copying or re-distribution is strictly prohibited.

from another thread.

[feepa]

This isn't the Canadian Business Thread, this is a waterloo / RIMM boosting thread. Please. Post this in the Ontario section under a proper title.

[nasdaq]

Potash 3Q Profit Rises 67 Percent
Thursday October 25, 3:24 pm ET
Potash 3rd-Qtr Profit Rises 67 Percent on Strong Demand in Developing World, Higher Prices

NEW YORK (AP) -- Potash Corp. of Saskatchewan Inc.'s profit rose 67 percent in the third quarter on strong demand for fertilizer in the developing world and higher pricing due to tight supplies, the Canadian fertilizer maker said Thursday.

Net income rose to $243.1 million, or 75 cents per share, from $145.2 million, or 46 cents per share, a year earlier. Sales climbed 36 percent to $1.3 billion from $954.5 million. The weakness of the U.S. dollar and a higher tax rate offset earnings by 7 cents per share and 10 cents per share, respectively.

Analysts polled by Thomson Financial expected earnings of 82 cents per share on revenue of $1.15 billion.

Potash Chief Executive Bill Doyle said tight global supplies, especially for potassium-based fertilizer called potash, helped lift product prices.

Though earnings fell short of expectations, Potash's "fundamentals (are) still strong," said RBC Capital Markets analyst Fai Lee in a note Thursday. Lee noted that had the effective tax rate been 30 percent -- as it was earlier in the year -- instead of 38 percent, the company would have posted earnings of 85 cents per share.

"Investors should not overreact to the lower-than-expected Q3/07 results and consider taking advantage of any potential declines in PotashCorp's share price," Lee wrote.

Potash shares gained $3.60, or 3.3 percent, to $112.83 in afternoon trading, after earlier hitting an all-time high of $116.77.

[WaterlooInvestor]

Flaherty tiptoes through the corporate tax cuts
Breaking News from The Globe and Mail
Neil Reynolds
Friday, October 26, 2007

OTTAWA — Let's assume that Finance Minister Jim Flaherty introduces corporate tax cuts in a mini-budget within the next couple of weeks. How deep a cut could he expect Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion to support? Would you believe 50 per cent?

Mr. Dion, in his speech earlier this month to the Economic Club of Toronto, championed a corporate rate well below the U.S. rate "to maintain competitiveness." The U.S. corporate rate is now 39 per cent, the Canadian rate 36 per cent. By inference, Mr. Dion argued, a Canadian advantage of three percentage points is not enough. How big an advantage would be enough? Mr. Dion did not say. Let's arbitrarily put it at six percentage points - producing a rate of 30 per cent - a modest rate cut of 15 per cent.

But the United States is getting ready to cut its own corporate tax rate, one of the highest in the world, to 25 per cent - a more ambitious rate cut of almost 40 per cent. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, Republican, has the strategic support of Congressman Charles Rangel, Democrat - a synchronized exhibition of bipartisan support. Mr. Rangel is chairman of the powerful, tax-writing House of Representatives ways and means committee. In exchange for the corporate rate cut, he would get higher tax rates on hedge funds, a fine villain for the Democrats in the 2008 presidential election year.

With the U.S. corporate rate at 25 per cent, however, Mr. Flaherty would need to cut Canada's corporate tax rate to 19 per cent to achieve the competitive advantage that Mr. Dion advocates. He would need to cut the corporate rate, in other words, by almost 50 per cent - which is precisely what he should do.

It won't happen, of course. Canada's corporate rate combines a federal rate (now 24 per cent) and a provincial rate (now, on average, 12 per cent). Were the federal government to cut its own rate by 50 per cent, it would cut the combined rate only by 33 per cent. To achieve a combined rate cut of 50 per cent, it would need to cut its own rate from 24 per cent to 6 per cent - a reduction of 75 per cent.

Corporations pay a bewildering array of provincial tax rates on profit, of course, ranging from 10 per cent in Alberta to 16 per cent in Prince Edward Island.

In his 2006 budget, Mr. Flaherty announced a series of tiny, incremental cuts that will reduce the federal rate from 24 per cent to 19 per cent by 2010. He subsequently announced a further tiny cut (to 18.5 per cent) in 2011. These cuts represent a 12-per-cent reduction in the federal rate but only an 8-per-cent reduction in the combined rate. They go in the right direction - but they go far too slowly. At this rate, it will take a decade or more to get a competitive rate, which by then (of course) will not have been remotely competitive for years.

With its 36-per-cent corporate rate, Canada has the fifth-highest rate in the world. But corporate rates are falling fast - everywhere. Mexico cut its rate this year to 29 per cent (down from 35 per cent in 2000). China will reduce its rate from 33 per cent to 25 per cent, effective Jan. 1, 2008 (although China negotiates much lower rates to attract specific enterprises). Within the 30 member nations of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), five cut corporate tax rates last year, seven cut them this year and eight will cut them at the beginning of 2008.

The OECD reductions are getting bigger - accompanied by increased urgency.

Famous for its high corporate taxes, Germany has now slashed its federal rate aggressively for a second time. Once the OECD leader in corporate taxes (with a rate of 52 per cent), Germany reduced its rate first to 39 per cent; in the new year this rate falls to 30 per cent. Some of the OECD rate cuts are truly Dionesque: Germany, 40 per cent; Turkey, 33 per cent; Iceland, 40 per cent; Ireland, 48 per cent.

We'll know soon what Mr. Flaherty meant when, in the Throne Speech, the government promised "long-term, broad-based tax relief." Long term is highly ambiguous. Long term, we are dead. The relevant adjectives that we need from Mr. Flaherty are "big" and "now" - if only to engage Mr. Dion's dare.

[WaterlooInvestor]

Alberta royalty grab stuns oil industry
Stelmach unveils new regime that will mean a potential windfall of $1.4-billion for the provincial treasury beginning in 2010
Breaking News from The Globe and Mail
DAVID EBNER AND KATHERINE O'NEILL
Friday, October 26, 2007

CALGARY AND EDMONTON — Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach infuriated the province's oil industry Thursday with surprisingly aggressive plans to take more money from the energy business, but the increases are less than a government-commissioned panel recommended last month.

The government said that under the new regime, money collected from the energy business could be 20 per cent higher in 2010 than forecast, potentially bringing an additional $1.4-billion to the treasury. That figure is nearly half a billion dollars less than the expert review panel wanted.

Starting in 2009, royalty rates will be increased across the board – for example, in the oil sands, rates will start rising when the price of oil is higher than $55 a barrel, with a new maximum of 40 per cent of a company's net revenue, up from a fixed rate of 25 per cent.

“As future generations look back at today, I believe they will see we were fair and reasonable, not greedy or short-sighted,” the rookie Premier said after the Progressive Conservative government released details of how it will redraw the royalty rules for oil, natural gas and oil sands in the debt-free province.

“I'm confident we've made the right decisions for today and for Alberta's future,” Mr. Stelmach said, on the same day as the price of oil climbed past $90 a barrel.

The issue has sparked a major political debate in Alberta in recent months, and is considered to be the watershed for the province and Mr. Stelmach's government.

The industry had threatened billions of dollars of capital spending cuts if increases were too high, saying thousands of jobs are on the line.

“You will see an impact. It's not going to be positive,” said Pierre Alvarez, president of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers.

George Gosbee, chairman of Tristone Capital Inc., said the industry will do some “aggressive lobbying” to fight the changes.

Non-industry players were upset, too.

Chris Severson-Baker of the Pembina Institute, a left-leaning research group, criticized Mr. Stelmach for stopping “far short” of the panel's recommendations.

“It's extremely disappointing. This is a status quo unless prices get very high,” he said.

Mr. Stelmach said his government's response isn't a compromise. “Please don't say it's a compromise,” he told reporters in Calgary.

The government plans to use the extra money to fund infrastructure projects and for savings. The plan is more aggressive than Mr. Stelmach hinted at on Wednesday.

The Premier spoke with Prime Minister Stephen Harper Thursday, trying to assure him that higher royalties would have a “minimal” impact on Ottawa, although he told reporters there would be “less revenue” for the federal government. Energy companies can deduct royalties from federal taxes, meaning higher rates in Alberta cut into money paid to Ottawa.

In the 1970s, when Alberta raised royalties, Ottawa struck back by disallowing royalties as deductions from corporate taxes, a double blow for industry. An estimate suggested Ottawa could lose several hundred million dollars annually.

The Premier played down rumours of a fall election yesterday. “I'm not doing this because I'm going to an election. I'm doing this because it's right for Albertans,” he said.

However, Keith Brownsey, a political scientist at Mount Royal College in Calgary, said it's possible that if the government's internal polling indicates the new royalty regime is embraced by voters, Mr. Stelmach may opt for a December election.

Since Mr. Stelmach became Premier last December, the Progressive Conservatives' 36-year-old dynasty has struggled, with popularity plummeting below 50 per cent amid widespread criticism the government hasn't dealt well with boom-related issues.

David Taras, a University of Calgary political analyst, said the government's new royalty rules are “muddled” and “confusing” to the point that most Albertans won't understand them and Mr. Stelmach might appear weak compared with Danny Williams, premier of Newfoundland.

“He's kind of like a Danny Williams on Valium. He's going ahead with all these changes, but they don't look very aggressive.

[WaterlooInvestor]

Originally Posted by Waterlooson

.... those 408 openings in Waterloo (at RIM) doesn't include the 172 job openings for coop students, so the total is 580 openings @ RIM in Waterloo.

Originally Posted by Waterlooson

How so? What percentage of RIM do the top 3 own? Who is the 3rd billionaire? Fregin?

CNBC reports Lazaridis @ 37.2M shares (6.7%) and Balsillie 35.4M shares (6.3%). Do you have more up-to-date/accurate figures? Yes Douglas Fregin is the other RIM guy. Back in 2005 he held 2.7% (~15.1M current shares adjusted for the stock split) of the company's shares. That would put him around $1.736 billion at the October 25, 2007 close (RIM shares sold off yesterday - likely a bit of profit taking after this run-up). He's likely sold some shares in the last 2 years, but probably not enough that he's no longer be a billionaire. Here's a Canadian Business magazine article from 2005: http://www.canadianbusiness.com/afte...05_72913_72913

[Waterlooson]

That's interesting... thanks. I don't have more up-to-date info.

[SteelTown]

Applause for Stelco takeover

The Canadian Press
TORONTO

After years of financial problems and restructuring, Hamilton-based Stelco Inc. moved closer to the end of its life as an independent Canadian company with little pomp other than a round of applause yesterday as shareholders formally approved a takeover by Pittsburgh-based U.S. Steel.

At the big steelmaker's last meeting, 88 per cent of shares were voted, with virtually all in favour of the $1.1-billion US deal.

The five-minute meeting in Toronto didn't include any questions. "U.S. Steel is the right company to come in and provide a lot of security for the people (at Stelco)," CEO Rodney Mott said after the meeting.

He said he wasn't aware of any "concrete" plans for Stelco once it's merged into U.S. Steel, but expected the new owners would focus on the $100 million US in possible synergy savings previously discussed.

"They'll probably want to take a bit more time to evaluate the facilities and really work on their strategic plan before they announce anything," he said. But, he added, he expects the new owner to continue running Stelco's two Ontario plants "to get the highest level of productivity they can."

"There's two main things that they like about Stelco -- obviously the Lake Erie plant is a very fine operation -- but they're also looking within U.S. Steel (because) they need additional steelmaking, and the additional steel-making is available out of Hamilton."

Stelco had sought potential bidders since emerging from bankruptcy restructuring nearly two years ago, cutting costs, reducing debt and improving its efficiency to make itself more attractive to potential bidders.

In its last earnings report as a Canadian-owned company Wednesday, Stelco reported a net profit of $38 million or $1.26 per share in the third quarter, reversing a loss of $25 million or 93 cents a share for the same period a year ago.

The gains were due in part to $5 million in savings from job cuts and other streamlining and foreign-exchange increases of $36 million.

[401_King]

thoguht i'd add some stuff to this thread that was discussed in another

Market Caps today:


RBC 71 billion USD
TD 52 Billion USD

Citigroup 166 Billion USD
Goldman Sachs 85 billion USD
Morgan Stanley 54 billion USD
Merrill 46 billion usd
Lehman 30 Billion USD

[big W]

Hey RBC go and buy a US bank already. expand your business now that they are low and your stock price and currency is high. Canadian Insurance companies do the same.

[shreddog]

Originally Posted by WaterlooInvestor

CBC's actually reporting RIM ended up ahead on Wednesday

Well, was that a short run at the top or just a breather?
===============

RIM shares again drop on heavy trading
Canadian Press

November 9, 2007 at 4:53 PM EST

Shares of BlackBerry maker Research In Motion Ltd. fell again Friday, the second straight day of big declines that have lopped about 15 per cent off the value of Canada's most valuable technology company.

RIM stock dropped $10.34 a share to close at $106.76, a one-day decline of nearly 9 per cent, in heavy trading of more than three million shares on the Toronto Stock Exchange. On Thursday, the company dropped $6.42 per cent to $117.10, a decline of 5 per cent.

In total, it has fallen nearly $20 from an all-time high of $126.34 set in intraday trading on Wednesday. (Hmm, didn't Nortel reach its all time high at $126 ??)

RIM's stock has now given up all of the gains since Oct. 4, when the Waterloo, Ont.-based company issued its latest financial report and issued a bullish outlook on its growth prospects for its current quarter.

One reason for RIM's stock decline is that investors are worried that the e-mail device maker could be hurt by a decline in orders from the U.S. banking sector, which has been squeezed by big losses linked to the subprime housing market.

Another underlying factor is that some investors are cashing in on the huge runup in RIM's shares in recent weeks since the company issued its second-quarter financial results and third-quarter outlook.

Earlier this week, network gear maker Cisco Systems Inc. revealed in its quarterly financial report that it had seen a dramatic drop in orders from U.S. banks.

Nearly 15 per cent of RIM's subscriber base is from the financial services sector and investors appear worried the same decline could hit the company.

Government represents 20 per cent of RIM's business and consumers another 30 per cent.

Meanwhile, the BlackBerry, one of the world's most popular e-mail devices, is facing ever-more rival wireless devices with keyboards suited to heavy messaging.

RIM sued LG Electronics Inc. this week, claiming the South Korean company's Black Label, Strawberry and Black Cherry mobile phones are sold under a name similar to the BlackBerry.

=============

As of close Friday, RBC had a mkt cap of $64.5B, whereas RIM is at $59.6B. Better be careful RIM, ECA is sneaking up behind you at $51B!

[b13]

just wondering what company is ECA?

[401_King]

^ Encana