Satyam Computers to axe 4,500 employees

Satyam Computers, which has just started giving pink slips to its employees, could potentially downsize its workforce by a whopping 4,500 employees. This translates to a little less than 9% of the 51,000 employees that the company employs. Company sources say 1,500 employees have been put under the performance improvement plan (PIP), euphemism for employees put on watch list and asked to shape up or ship out.

Apart from this, 3,000 others have not been given any increment in the last appraisal cycle, thereby indicating that their services are dispensable. “This 1,500 plus 3,000 equals 4,500, which indicates the total number of persons who could be eased out of the company,” the source said.

On Friday, all employees received an e-mail from the company chief Ramalinga Raju warning them, especially the ones on the bench, to not bunk office and be in their best dress code, failing which they may face strict disciplinary action. Last week, some 400 employees from across different locations were given the pink slip. Sources also indicated that after getting the message many among the 3,000 have also started leaving jobs. But an estimate of the employees who have left is not known.

top 10 batsmen intest

ID	Rat.	Name	Nat.
1	900	S. Chanderpaul
2	880	Mohammad Yousuf
3	859	K.C. Sangakkara
4	832	K.P. Pietersen
5	825	M.J. Clarke
6	819	D.P.M.D. Jayawardena
7	810	R.T. Ponting
8	799	Younis Khan
9	797	G.C. Smith
10	771	G. Gambhir

TOP BILLIONARIES

#1 Warren Buffett

Age: 77

Fortune: self made

Source: Berkshire Hathaway

Net Worth: $62.0 bil

Country Of Citizenship: United States

Residence: Omaha, Nebraska , United States, North America

Industry: Investments

Marital Status: widowed, remarried, 3 children

Education: University of Nebraska Lincoln, Bachelor of Arts / Science
Columbia University, Master of Science
America’s most beloved investor is now the world’s richest man. Soared past friend and bridge partner Bill Gates as shares of Berkshire Hathaway climbed 25% since the middle of last July. Son of Nebraska politician delivered newspapers as a boy. Filed first tax return at age 13, claiming $35 deduction for bicycle. Studied under value investing guru Benjamin Graham at Columbia. Took over textile firm Berkshire Hathaway 1965. Today holding company invested in insurance (Geico, General Re), jewelry (Borsheim’s), utilities (MidAmerican Energy), food (Dairy Queen, See’s Candies). Also has noncontrolling stakes in Anheuser-Busch, Coca-Cola, Wells Fargo. Insurance operations flourished in 2007. “That party is over. It’s a certainty that insurance-industry profit margins, including ours, will fall significantly in 2008.” The Oracle of Omaha issued a challenge to members of The Forbes 400 in October; said he would donate $1 million to charity if the collective group of richest Americans would admit they pay less taxes, as a percentage of income, than their secretaries. Had long promised to give away his fortune posthumously. Irrevocably earmarked the majority of his Berkshire shares to charity in 2006, mostly to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Gift was valued at $31 billion on day of announcement; donation will far exceed that sum so long as Berkshire shares continue to rise.

#2 Carlos Slim Helu & family

Age: 68

Fortune: self made

Source: telecom

Net Worth: $60.0 bil

Country Of Citizenship: Mexico

Residence: Mexico City , Mexico, Latin America

Industry: Communications

Marital Status: widowed, 6 children

Education: NA

Second-richest man in the world this year; even richer than Microsoft’s Bill Gates, at least for now, thanks to strong Mexican equities market and the performance of his wireless telephone company, America Movil. The son of a Lebanese immigrant, Slim made his first fortune in 1990 when he bought fixed line operator Telefonos de Mexico (Telmex) in a privatization. In December, America Movil struck a deal with Yahoo to provide mobile Web services to 16 countries in Latin America and the Caribbean. A widower and father of six, Slim is a baseball fan and art collector. He keeps his art collection in Mexico City’s Museo Soumaya, which he named after his late wife. In recent years, he has donated close to $7 billion worth of cash and stock to fund education and health projects, and to the revitalization of Mexico City’s downtown historical district.

#3 William Gates III

Age: 52

Fortune: self made

Source: Microsoft

Net Worth: $58.0 bil

Country Of Citizenship: United States

Residence: Medina, Washington , United States, North America

Industry: Software

Marital Status: married, 3 children

Education: Harvard University, Drop Out

Harvard dropout and Microsoft visionary no longer the world’s richest man. Blame Yahoo: Microsoft shares have fallen 15% since the company boldly attempted to merge with the search engine giant to better fight Google for Internet dominance. Gates is preparing to give up day-to-day involvement in the company he cofounded 33 years ago to spend more time focused on his philanthropic endeavors. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has $38.7 billion in assets, donates to causes aimed at bringing financial tools to the poor, speeding up the development of vaccines (for AIDS, malaria, tuberculosis), bettering America’s lagging high schools. Sells 20 million Microsoft shares every quarter, proceeds going to private investment vehicle Cascade; more than half of net worth now outside of Microsoft. Company spent $6 billion to land Web ad firm Aquantive last May. Would-be rival to Apple’s iPod, the Zune, not yet a hit. Believes Microsoft’s far-flung bets, including 10-year affair with Internet-based television, may soon pay off; says next 10 years will be the “most interesting” in software history.

#4 Lakshmi Mittal

Age: 57

Fortune: inherited and growing

Source: steel

Net Worth: $45.0 bil

Country Of Citizenship: India

Residence: London , United Kingdom, Europe & Russia

Industry: Manufacturing

Marital Status: married, 2 children

Education: St Xavier’s College Calcutta, Bachelor of Arts / Science

Heads world’s largest steelmaker, $105 billion (sales) ArcelorMittal, which accounts for 10% of all crude steel production. Just delivered 580 tons to be used in construction of the World Trade Center memorial in New York. With 44% stake, is the company’s largest shareholder. Longtime resident of London is Europe’s richest resident.

#5 Mukesh Ambani

Age: 50

Fortune: inherited and growing

Source: petrochemicals

Net Worth: $43.0 bil

Country Of Citizenship: India

Residence: Mumbai , India, Asia & Australia

Industry: Manufacturing

Marital Status: married, 3 children

Education: University of Bombay, Bachelor of Chemical Engineering
Stanford University, Master of Business Administration
Asia’s richest resident heads petrochemicals giant Reliance Industries, India’s most valuable company by market cap. His fortune is up $22.9 billion since last year, making him the world’s second biggest gainer in terms of dollars. The biggest gainer was his estranged brother Anil, who ranks 6th in the world just behind his older brother. The sons inherited their fortune from their late father, renowned industrialist Dhirubhai Ambani. But they couldn’t get along and in 2005 their mother brokered a peace settlement breaking up the family’s assets. Mukesh is using some of his money to build a 27-story home.

TOP BILLIONARIES

Rank	Name	Citizenship	Age	Net Worth ($bil)	Residence
1	Warren Buffett	United States	77	62.0	United States
2	Carlos Slim Helu & family	Mexico	68	60.0	Mexico
3	William Gates III	United States	52	58.0	United States
4	Lakshmi Mittal	India	57	45.0	United Kingdom
5	Mukesh Ambani	India	50	43.0	India
6	Anil Ambani	India	48	42.0	India
7	Ingvar Kamprad & family	Sweden	81	31.0	Switzerland
8	KP Singh	India	76	30.0	India
9	Oleg Deripaska	Russia	40	28.0	Russia
10	Karl Albrecht	Germany	88	27.0	Germany
11	Li Ka-shing	Hong Kong	79	26.5	Hong Kong
12	Sheldon Adelson	United States	74	26.0	United States
13	Bernard Arnault	France	59	25.5	France
14	Lawrence Ellison	United States	63	25.0	United States
15	Roman Abramovich	Russia	41	23.5	Russia
16	Theo Albrecht	Germany	85	23.0	Germany
17	Liliane Bettencourt	France	85	22.9	France
18	Alexei Mordashov	Russia	42	21.2	Russia
19	Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Alsaud	Saudi Arabia	51	21.0	Saudi Arabia
20	Mikhail Fridman	Russia	43	20.8	Russia
21	Vladimir Lisin	Russia	51	20.3	Russia
22	Amancio Ortega	Spain	72	20.2	Spain
23	Raymond, Thomas & Walter Kwok	Hong Kong	NA	19.9	Hong Kong
24	Mikhail Prokhorov	Russia	42	19.5	Russia
25	Vladimir Potanin	Russia	47	19.3	Russia

Global Finance After The Crisis

Taken together, European nations have put together a bailout for financial institutions three times bigger than the U.S.–$2.25 trillion vs. $700 billion. The goal, though, is the same: recapitalization of troubled banks to improve liquidity and help boost interbank lending.

Coordination across the Atlantic is growing–and may do so further after this weekend’s meeting at Camp David between Presidents George W. Bush and Nicholas Sarkozy of France. Sarkozy will press the case for a summit on global financial regulation on behalf of the E.U., which France currently chairs.

His host will probably politely decline and say the U.S. must put its financial house in order first, and that won’t happen before he leaves the White House in January.

The meeting takes place against a backdrop of weakening economies that look set to continue to decline over the next few months regardless of the success of the recapitalization of the global banking system, a result that still isn’t assured.

Economists at the international monetary fund now predict that the growth in world output will slow to 3.9% this year and 3% in 2009. It hit its cyclical peak in 2006 at 5.1%.

More gravely, the IMF forecasts that global-trade growth will slow even more rapidly–to 4.9% this year and 4.1% next, from its 2006 rate of 9.3%–as barely growing developed economies lessen their appetite for imports and commodity prices fall. Continuing, albeit slower, growth in emerging economies won’t make up the shortfall.

This general global gloom will reinforce policy shifts in the developed economies that the financial crisis has already got underway, particularly in Europe. But on both sides of the Atlantic, the culture of light-touch regulation and corporate self-regulation has given ground to firmer government-driven regimes.

The clearest example of this shift is in the financial sector, where governments are taking ownership stakes in firms and injecting new capital. But this new regime brings with it new expectations and requirements regarding a broad range of corporate governance issues from risk-tolerance to reserve ratios to executive compensation.

Even countries that haven’t taken stakes in banks have taken initiatives to put themselves on banks’ boards. Ireland, for example, made the appointment of two government-nominated directors a condition of banks getting deposits fully state insured.

This is being matched by more national and international coordination among fiscal and monetary authorities. How far this will go remains debatable. Intergovernmental and supranational institutions still seem far from reach, despite Europe cheering on the International Monetary Fund’s desire to play global financial cop.

America isn’t anywhere close to being ready for that, and maybe never will be–just as it isn’t ready to accept global accounting standards. There are too many vested domestic interests at risk.

But some of the coordination across international borders seen during the current crisis will continue in a more formal way, particularly between central bankers and bank regulators. Also likely: consolidation of regulatory agencies within countries to give governments a more holistic view of the risks to their financial systems.

In Europe, certainly, this financial crisis will have advanced the cause of harmonization of fiscal policy. Monetary policy, too, is changed, with European central bankers becoming more pragmatic and less single-minded about fighting inflation. They will take on a broader remit, much like the Federal Reserve.

Other changes, more embryonic at this point, include an intent to re-couple Wall Street with Main Street, getting financial institutions to return to focusing on financial services for real investment, production, distribution and consumption, instead of on speculative financial engineering.

That may prove less than lasting once profits return and capital is flowing freely again.

Global Finance After The Crisis

Taken together, European nations have put together a bailout for financial institutions three times bigger than the U.S.–$2.25 trillion vs. $700 billion. The goal, though, is the same: recapitalization of troubled banks to improve liquidity and help boost interbank lending.

Coordination across the Atlantic is growing–and may do so further after this weekend’s meeting at Camp David between Presidents George W. Bush and Nicholas Sarkozy of France. Sarkozy will press the case for a summit on global financial regulation on behalf of the E.U., which France currently chairs.

His host will probably politely decline and say the U.S. must put its financial house in order first, and that won’t happen before he leaves the White House in January.

The meeting takes place against a backdrop of weakening economies that look set to continue to decline over the next few months regardless of the success of the recapitalization of the global banking system, a result that still isn’t assured.

Economists at the international monetary fund now predict that the growth in world output will slow to 3.9% this year and 3% in 2009. It hit its cyclical peak in 2006 at 5.1%.

More gravely, the IMF forecasts that global-trade growth will slow even more rapidly–to 4.9% this year and 4.1% next, from its 2006 rate of 9.3%–as barely growing developed economies lessen their appetite for imports and commodity prices fall. Continuing, albeit slower, growth in emerging economies won’t make up the shortfall.

This general global gloom will reinforce policy shifts in the developed economies that the financial crisis has already got underway, particularly in Europe. But on both sides of the Atlantic, the culture of light-touch regulation and corporate self-regulation has given ground to firmer government-driven regimes.

The clearest example of this shift is in the financial sector, where governments are taking ownership stakes in firms and injecting new capital. But this new regime brings with it new expectations and requirements regarding a broad range of corporate governance issues from risk-tolerance to reserve ratios to executive compensation.

Even countries that haven’t taken stakes in banks have taken initiatives to put themselves on banks’ boards. Ireland, for example, made the appointment of two government-nominated directors a condition of banks getting deposits fully state insured.

This is being matched by more national and international coordination among fiscal and monetary authorities. How far this will go remains debatable. Intergovernmental and supranational institutions still seem far from reach, despite Europe cheering on the International Monetary Fund’s desire to play global financial cop.

America isn’t anywhere close to being ready for that, and maybe never will be–just as it isn’t ready to accept global accounting standards. There are too many vested domestic interests at risk.

But some of the coordination across international borders seen during the current crisis will continue in a more formal way, particularly between central bankers and bank regulators. Also likely: consolidation of regulatory agencies within countries to give governments a more holistic view of the risks to their financial systems.

In Europe, certainly, this financial crisis will have advanced the cause of harmonization of fiscal policy. Monetary policy, too, is changed, with European central bankers becoming more pragmatic and less single-minded about fighting inflation. They will take on a broader remit, much like the Federal Reserve.

Other changes, more embryonic at this point, include an intent to re-couple Wall Street with Main Street, getting financial institutions to return to focusing on financial services for real investment, production, distribution and consumption, instead of on speculative financial engineering.

That may prove less than lasting once profits return and capital is flowing freely again.

The Future of Kapitalism

Forget Adam Smith, Whatever Works.

Washington’s partial nationalization of banks marks a fundamental shift in thinking about the relationship of the public and private sectors.

A week of astonishing developments in the global stock and credit markets, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas President Richard W. Fisher addressed the high and mighty of global finance in Washington during pivotal meetings of the Group of Seven and the International Monetary Fund. The gravity and complexity of the 15-month-old credit crisis called for action that transcended familiar ideological categories, he hinted, such as free markets vs. state intervention. Fisher even borrowed a Chinese proverb popularized by the late Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping: “No matter if it is a white cat or a black cat, as long as it can catch mice, it is a good cat.”

Back in the late 1980s, Deng meant that China needed to abandon basic tenets of socialist orthodoxy that stood in the way of prosperity. In these tough times, the proverb resonates in another way. The Bush Administration, by committing $250 billion to buy equity stakes in a huge swath of the U.S. banking system and extending all manner of financial guarantees to depositors and money-market investors, has just violated some enshrined principles of American-style, free-market capitalism.

You might dismiss all this as extreme measures for extreme times, a pragmatic adjustment that will be quickly undone once order is restored. But the significance, not to mention irony, of a Republican Administration partially nationalizing the U.S. banking system cannot be overstated. It could well go down as an important turning point in postwar American economic history, the beginning of a fundamental rethink of the proper boundaries between the public and private sectors. “The pendulum between the state and markets is swinging back before our eyes,” says Daniel Yergin, co-author of the 1998 book The Commanding Heights, which chronicled the triumph of market capitalism over state-led economics since World War II. “And it is happening a lot faster than anyone expected.”

As America struggles to recover from the deep recession that likely lies ahead, a new economic model could take shape that would involve a great deal more than direct government involvement in the world of Wall Street. It could mean greater support of such industries as autos, nanotech, and renewable energies, which face fierce global competition. And it certainly spells a return of heavier regulation. It is far too early to predict that the U.S. is headed down the road of Asia-style industrial policy or the kinds of interventions imposed during the Great Depression, when bureaucrats seized and micromanaged entire industries. The U.S. won’t have voting rights on the preferred shares it bought in Bank of America, Citigroup (C), JPMorgan Chase (JPM), and others. And analysts doubt Washington will dictate lending. But as Yergin notes: “The political process has not even begun to get ahold of this.” If Barack Obama wins the Presidency, possibly with a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, the next Administration could have a mandate for sweeping change.

Unlike many other recessions, this one wasn’t caused by a downturn in a few specific industries. It started with a housing bust and then metastasized into a full-blown credit crisis that eventually destabilized the entire U.S. financial system. As previous financial crashes in nations such as Japan and Mexico have shown, recovery can take years. “We will see de-leveraging on such a scale that we are in uncharted waters,” says economist Hung Tran of the Institute of International Finance, a Washington think tank.

In fact, the crisis has been so devastating that once-cherished assumptions about the superiority of the U.S. economic model are now in doubt. Take the notion that the American economy could keep flying high as its manufacturing base withered. The idea presumed that innovation and productivity alone would create the wealth and high-paying jobs needed to boost U.S. living standards.

The Future of Kapitalism

Forget Adam Smith, Whatever Works.

Washington’s partial nationalization of banks marks a fundamental shift in thinking about the relationship of the public and private sectors.

A week of astonishing developments in the global stock and credit markets, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas President Richard W. Fisher addressed the high and mighty of global finance in Washington during pivotal meetings of the Group of Seven and the International Monetary Fund. The gravity and complexity of the 15-month-old credit crisis called for action that transcended familiar ideological categories, he hinted, such as free markets vs. state intervention. Fisher even borrowed a Chinese proverb popularized by the late Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping: “No matter if it is a white cat or a black cat, as long as it can catch mice, it is a good cat.”

Back in the late 1980s, Deng meant that China needed to abandon basic tenets of socialist orthodoxy that stood in the way of prosperity. In these tough times, the proverb resonates in another way. The Bush Administration, by committing $250 billion to buy equity stakes in a huge swath of the U.S. banking system and extending all manner of financial guarantees to depositors and money-market investors, has just violated some enshrined principles of American-style, free-market capitalism.

You might dismiss all this as extreme measures for extreme times, a pragmatic adjustment that will be quickly undone once order is restored. But the significance, not to mention irony, of a Republican Administration partially nationalizing the U.S. banking system cannot be overstated. It could well go down as an important turning point in postwar American economic history, the beginning of a fundamental rethink of the proper boundaries between the public and private sectors. “The pendulum between the state and markets is swinging back before our eyes,” says Daniel Yergin, co-author of the 1998 book The Commanding Heights, which chronicled the triumph of market capitalism over state-led economics since World War II. “And it is happening a lot faster than anyone expected.”

As America struggles to recover from the deep recession that likely lies ahead, a new economic model could take shape that would involve a great deal more than direct government involvement in the world of Wall Street. It could mean greater support of such industries as autos, nanotech, and renewable energies, which face fierce global competition. And it certainly spells a return of heavier regulation. It is far too early to predict that the U.S. is headed down the road of Asia-style industrial policy or the kinds of interventions imposed during the Great Depression, when bureaucrats seized and micromanaged entire industries. The U.S. won’t have voting rights on the preferred shares it bought in Bank of America, Citigroup (C), JPMorgan Chase (JPM), and others. And analysts doubt Washington will dictate lending. But as Yergin notes: “The political process has not even begun to get ahold of this.” If Barack Obama wins the Presidency, possibly with a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, the next Administration could have a mandate for sweeping change.

Unlike many other recessions, this one wasn’t caused by a downturn in a few specific industries. It started with a housing bust and then metastasized into a full-blown credit crisis that eventually destabilized the entire U.S. financial system. As previous financial crashes in nations such as Japan and Mexico have shown, recovery can take years. “We will see de-leveraging on such a scale that we are in uncharted waters,” says economist Hung Tran of the Institute of International Finance, a Washington think tank.

In fact, the crisis has been so devastating that once-cherished assumptions about the superiority of the U.S. economic model are now in doubt. Take the notion that the American economy could keep flying high as its manufacturing base withered. The idea presumed that innovation and productivity alone would create the wealth and high-paying jobs needed to boost U.S. living standards.

"TOP MBA COLLEGES IN INDIA"

Name of institute	Location	Website
Indian Institute of Management	Ahmedabad	www.iimahd.ernet.in
Indian Institute of Management	Bangalore	www.iimb.ernet.in
Indian Institute of Management	Kolkata	www.iimcal.ac.in
Indian Institute of Management	Kozhikode	www.iimk.ac.in
Indian Institute of Management	Indore	www.iimidr.ac.in
Indian Institute of Management	Lucknow	www.iiml.ac.in
Xavier Labour Research Institute (XLRI)	Jamshedpur	www.xlri.edu
Faculty of Mangement studies, Delhi University (FMS)	New Delhi	www.fms.edu
Jamnalal Bajaj Institute of Management Studies	Mumbai	www.jbims.edu
Narsee Monjee Institute of Management Studies	Mumbai	www.nmims.edu
SP Jain Institute of Management & Research	Mumbai	www.spjimr.org
Institute of Management Technology	Ghaziabad	www.imt.edu
Management Development Institute	Gurgaon	www.mdi.ac.in
Xavier Institute of Management	Bhubaneshwar	www.ximb.ac.in
International Mangement Institute	New Delhi	www.imi.edu
FORE School of Management	New Delhi	www.fsm.ac.in
Symbiosis Institute of Business Management	Pune	www.sibm.edu
Symbiosis Centre for Management and HRD	Pune	www.scmhrd.edu
Indian Institute of Forest Management	Bhopal	www.iifm.org
Indian Institute of Foreign Trade	New Delhi	www.iift.edu
Tata Institute of Social sciences.	Mumbai	www.tiss.edu
Institute of Rural Management	Anand (Gujarat)	www.irma.ac.in
Mudra Institute of Communications	Ahmedabad	www.mica-india.net
National Institute of Fashion Technology	New Delhi	www.niftindia.com
Bharatidasan Institute of Management	Tituchirapalli	www.bim.edu
National Institute of Industrial Engineering	Mumbai	www.nitie.edu
Indian Institute of Technology – school of Management	Mumbai	www.iitb.ac.in/~som
Indian Institute of Technology department of Management Studies	New Delhi	www.iitdmba.org
Indian Institute of Technology – Vinod gupta school of Management	Kharagpur	www.som.iitkgp.ernet.in

"COLLEGES OFFER ENTREPRENEURSHIP COURSE IN INDIA"

• IIM, Ahmedabad, Bangalore & Kolkata
• All India Management Association Center for Management Education, New Delhi
• Indian Institute of Foreign Trade (IIFT), New Delhi
• Entrepreneurship Development Institute of India, Gujarat
• FICCI, New Delhi
• Small Industries Service Institute, New Delhi
• National Science and Technology Entrepreneurship Development, New Delhi
• National Institute for Entrepreneurship and Small Business Development (NIESBUD), New Delhi
• ASEED and Entrepreneurship Development Institute of India (EDII), New Delhi
• Indian Institute of Planning and Management (IIPM), New Delhi
• Institute of Marketing and Management (IMM), New Delhi
• Xavier Labour Relations Institute (XLRI), Jharkhand
• Xavier Institute of Management (XIM), Orissa
• Management Development Institute, Haryana
• Indian Institute of Information Technology and Management (IIITM), Madhya Pradesh
• Symbiosis Center for Management, Maharashtra
• Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi.