‘Given the importance of economic development, … I have expanded my thinking,’ Robert A. DeLeo said.

The 25 Most Powerful Women In Banking

There’s been a lot to mull over this year about gender equality in finance and business.

One recent survey by Catalyst, a nonprofit group that promotes women in business, found that 19% of women have lost their jobs in the past two year, compared with 6% of men. Then, there was Jack Welch’s comment a few months ago that women who take time off for their family are doomed to been passed over for high power jobs.

Other studies are more upbeat. The Boston Consulting Group says women will drive the post recession economy because of rising female employment and because women are narrowing the wage gap with men.

Now US Banker magazine is finding some bright spots in its annual “25 Most Powerful Women in Banking” issue. Calpers, the giant California pension fund, hired the first female CEO, Anne Stausboll, in its 77 year-history, while Bank of America is said to be grooming Sallie Krawchek, who was recently hired as head of the bank’s Global Wealth and Investment Management unit, as a possible successor to CEO Ken Lewis.

At the top of the US Banker list, for the third straight year, is Heidi Miller, J.P. Morgan’s CEO of Treasury and Securities Services. One notable newcomer to the list is BBVA Compass retail chief Shelaghmichael Brown, who helped with that bank’s recent acquisitions in the US.

The magazine editors rank the women based criteria such as one-year performance, the results of business initiatives, management style and overall influence.

Here’s the full list, and for more rankings click here.

The 25 Most Powerful Women in Banking 2009

1) Heidi Miller, JPMorgan Chase & Co.

2) Karen Peetz, BNY Mellon

3) Pamela Joseph, U.S. Bancorp

4) Barbara Desoer, Bank of America

5) Carrie Tolstedt, Wells Fargo

6) Peyton Patterson, NewAlliance Bancshares

7) Deanna Oppenheimer, Barclays PLC

Mary Callahan Erdoes, JPMorgan Chase

9) Diane Thormodsgard, U.S. Bancorp

10) Julie Monaco, Citigroup

11) Lynn Pike, Capital One Bank

12) Cara Heiden, Wells Fargo

13) Avid Modjtabai, Wells Fargo

14) Donna Demaio, MetLife Bank

15) Mollie Hale Carter, Sunflower Bank

16) Diane D’Erasmo, HSBC USA

17) Ellen Alemany, Citizens Financial Group and RBS Americas

18) Anne Arvia, Nationwide Bank

19) Anne Finucane, Bank of America

20) Ellen Costello, Harris Bankcorp

21) Colleen Johnston, TD Bank Financial Group

22) Shelaghmichael Brown, BBVA Compass

23) Diane Reyes, Citigroup

24) Kay Hoveland, K-Fed Bancorp & Kaiser Federal Bank

25) Leeanne Linderman, Zions First National Bank

By Julianne Pepitone, CNNMoney.com staff writer

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) — A key measure of consumer confidence jumped much more than predicted in August, as the job market outlook and business expectations improved, said a report released Tuesday.

The Conference Board, a New York-based business research group, said Tuesday that its Consumer Confidence Index rose to 54.1 in August from an upwardly-revised 47.4 in July.

Economists were expecting the index to increase to 48, according to a Briefing.com consensus survey. The measure is closely watched because consumer spending makes up two-thirds of the nation’s economic activity.

The index posted declines in June and July, but the reading “appears to be back on the mend,” said Lynn Franco, a director at The Conference Board, in a prepared statement.

“Consumers were more upbeat in their short-term outlook for both the economy and the job market in August,” Franco added. But the reading for income expectations rose only slightly.

Despite August’s increase, the index remains at historically low levels. An overall reading above 90 indicates the economy is solid, and 100 or above signals strong growth.

The report is based on a survey mailed to a representative sample of 5,000 U.S. households. The questionnaire asks whether respondents think current business conditions are good, bad or normal, about employment conditions, as well as if they expect employment or income levels to improve or deteriorate over the next six months.

Job market outlook. The percentage of respondents expecting more jobs in the next six months rose to 18.4% from 15.5%.

Similarly, those saying jobs are “hard to get” slipped to 45.1% from 48.5% in August, while responses that jobs are “plentiful” ticked up to 4.2% from 3.7%.

Earlier this month the Labor Department reported that 247,000 jobs were lost in July and the unemployment rate fell to 9.4% from 9.5% in June — the first decline in more than a year.

According to government figures, 237,000 fewer people were unemployed last month. That decline could be due to discouraged job seekers who have stopped looking, people who have now retired, or those have gone back to school. But the rate does include people who have exhausted their unemployment benefits or do not collect them.

Income expectations. Consumers were only slightly more positive in their income expectations, Franco noted. Those expecting an increase in their incomes jumped to 10.6% from 10.1%.

“As long as earnings continue to weigh heavily on consumers’ minds, spending is likely to remain constrained,” Franco said.

Business conditions. Consumers anticipating business conditions to improve over the next six months increased to 22.4% from 18.4% in July, the report said.

Conversely, respondents expecting conditions to worsen in the months ahead slipped to 15.8% from 19%.  

By Kyle Cheney
Published: August 13, 2009

Innovative finance strategies for startups

Lawrence Gennari, partner at Choate, Hall & Stewart, LLP

With the stock market entering a modest equilibrium, many emerging growth companies, whether venture-backed or privately funded, are reconsidering financing strategies and looking at their next steps.

Yet, bank financing remains elusive, and many venture capitalists, particularly those previously funding Series A and B rounds, seem to be focused on stabilizing their existing portfolio companies or investing in later stage enterprises. So what’s a technology company to do if it needs financing and hopes to be sold or go public within two years? Consider the following:

Doing more with less. Financings are still getting done, even in this environment. The key is adjusting financing strategy to what is available — and from whom — in the near term. For example, a planned venture round for $7 million may need to be scaled back to a $3 million targeted angel investor offering. Angel investors, both in groups and as individuals, ­still are reviewing business plans from local companies in compelling industries or with demonstrable near-term financial success, such as achievement of break-even cash flow. Any management team that is formulating plans and presentations for institutional investors should have a parallel plan to reach out to angels.

Milestones matter. Whether the target investor is large or smaller, the questions will be the same. How have you spent existing cash, and how will you apply proceeds from the new financing? Be prepared to demonstrate how past investment led to objective milestones, such as a new upgrade or version of software, registration of unique users, or achievement (or near achievement) of break-even cash flow. For any new offering, you’ll need to show cash outlays that are real, achievable and narrowly tailored to meet near-term milestones. Remember, even if you can’t raise all of the money you ultimately need right now, you’ll position the company for a greater financing valuation later — perhaps in a better or more hospitable economic environment — if you can execute on meaningful milestones this year.

Consider the audience. No financing is “typical” or “standard,” and today, more than ever, investment documents must fit investor objectives. If valuation is stalling discussions, would the investor take convertible debt with a right to participate in future equity rounds at a discount? If future upside protection is the issue, would investors be satisfied with preferred shares carrying an agreed-upon liquidation preference on any future sale? Flexibility and fitting documents to meet stated investor needs is critical — do not draft or present “standard” documents at initial meetings. Angel investor groups will have their own term sheets and documents, while individual angel investors will rely on the company to generate documents later to fit specific discussion points.

Don’t wait to approach investors. How does a promising company with customers, revenue and real prospects find investors, and are any angels still writing checks? The answer is “yes.” Granted, angel investments overall fell in 2008 compared with the year before. Yet the number of deals was relatively unchanged, with 55,480 startup companies raising angel capital, according to the Center for Venture Research at the University of New Hampshire. Most angel investor groups have websites and will respond to online inquiries. The best approach, however, is to approach groups or individual investors through an introduction from someone they trust, which includes fellow investors, an accountant, a lawyer or a banker. The party providing the introduction also might prove to be an important source of information regarding the investor’s preferences, investment appetite and co-investing circle of friends.

Bottom line. Whatever financing strategy you choose, be prepared to think, resize and readjust creatively based on today’s market realities. An innovative and flexible approach is key to raising money now — and for the foreseeable future.

Lawrence Gennari is a partner in the business and technology group at Choate, Hall & Stewart, LLP and an adjunct professor at Boston College Law School. He can be reached at lgennari@choate.com.

Posted by: tplatt@p… / Friday, July 17th, 2009 – 8:36 am EDT

Sitting in Harvard amongst the teachers of my teachers, I felt humbled by the collective brain power that gathered there. After all, the former Harvard president is now chief economic adviser to the US President and running the show to rescue the US economy.

There was one consensus – without the US economy recovering, it would be difficult to see a global recovery, but probably, the Chinese economy may be the first to recover.

Let me explain the role of the IMF (International Monetary Fund). Most people don’t understand the idea of the SDR (special drawing rights) and what the IMF does.

In Asia, the IMF is famously remembered for its role in trying to solve the Asian crisis, but many remembered the initials stood for I AM FIRED, because its recommended tough medicine initially created more deflation than easing the pain. Asian crisis countries could not print foreign exchange that they owed, whereas the West can print their own currencies and so ease the pain of crisis.

But so far, the IMF has not played a role in either providing finance nor advice to the large countries, such as the US, UK and European Union, where the banking losses are the most severe.

The IMF medicine will be given to the smaller members who unfortunately repeated the mistakes of Asia to borrow foreign currency more than they could afford.

We have to understand a bit of history to understand the IMF. The IMF and the World Bank were created in 1945 under the famous Bretton Woods Conference. There was a famous debate between the economic adviser to the US Treasury, Harry White and Lord John Maynard Keynes, the most famous economist of his generation, who wanted a global central bank and a global development fund.

In the end, the US Treasury view prevailed – the power of money creation was too important to give to a global agency; it was retained in the hands of the sovereign powers, of which the US was the dominant power after two World Wars.

The present Global Financial Structure was the direct result of Pax Americana, under which the US provided monetary stability and liquidity through the US dollar and a nuclear umbrella for global peace and security.

In exchange, countries opened up trade and investments, following the principles of free trade. Bretton Woods opened up free trade and broke the power of the British Empire to operate under a tariff barrier.

The post-war global development is the direct consequence of the Bretton Woods strategy, just as the present crisis demonstrated its inadequacies and flaws.

Can the IMF be a global central bank? The common definition of a national central bank is that it is an issuer of the national currency, responsible for monetary stability, systemic financial stability and domestic payment system and also financial adviser to the government. Based on this definition, the IMF is not an issuer of global currency, it has some role in global monetary stability, it failed to stop recent systemic financial instability and is not responsible for global payment systems.

It does surveillance work on global standards, provide advice to member countries and did give some useful warning on the recent crisis, but was ignored. So it is not the global central bank. Indeed, the IMF is not even the central bank of central banks. That is the role of the Bank for International Settlements, based in Basel, which is the secretariat for central bank discussions, the Financial Stability Forum (now Board), the Basle Committee for Banking Supervision, the International Association of Insurance Supervisors and other central bank committees.

Basically, the IMF has a balance sheet of about US$350bil (available resources of US$225bil) and a staff of 2,600, based mainly in Washington DC.

It is remarkable how the IMF almost had no lending to its members by 2007 and just laid off a lot of its experienced staff. By 2009, it was scrambling to give loans to several crisis economies and the G20 had just promised to increase its resources to US$1 trillion.

Is it enough? If you think that the IMF has just announced that Western banks probably lost US$4.2 trillion, and that global cross border banking is US$4.5 trillion, the new resources are helpful, but the task is huge.

Life cannot be easy for the deputy sheriff responsible for global financial stability, since he cannot influence the sheriff who hired him in the first place. The deputy gets blamed for the tough medicine applied to the smaller members, but he cannot apply the same medicine for the sheriff. It is not an equal world.

Don’t get me wrong. The IMF did not cause the financial crisis and can do a lot to ease the pain. It is an important provider of global public goods. But until its legitimacy and credibility is given to it by its dominant shareholders, it cannot be the global central bank, which is probably what the world really needs.

? Think Asian – Datuk Seri Panglima Andrew Sheng is adjunct professor at Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, and Tsinghua University, Beijing. He has served as adviser and chief economist to Bank Negara, deputy chief executive of the Hong Kong Monetary Authority and chairman of the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission.

Ruth and Carl Shapiro, in an undated photo. (The Nourses)

By Beth Healy and Steven Syre Globe Staff / July 6, 2009

Shapiro, who has lost at least $545 million to Madoff, is one of numerous large investors who are under investigation by US authorities.

And now, as a client who has known Madoff for five decades, Shapiro has to worry if the court-appointed trustee recovering funds for victims will try to seize any profits he or his charitable foundation received from him over the years, as the trustee has sought to do with other large clients.

“There’s a significant risk for people who had substantial accounts for many, many years, who were looking at the supposed performance regardless of what the market was doing and seeing gains year after year,’’ said Boston attorney Harry Miller, who represents a number of Madoff victims. “The trustee is going to take the position that they should have known, and could hold them responsible for that.’’

And if regulators determine he received unusually large returns over his many years with Madoff, the consequences could be tougher still.

Irving Picard, the Madoff bankruptcy trustee, is pursuing a number of large investors for “clawbacks,’’ or demands they return profits from Madoff because the money, in effect, belonged to other investors.

He is limited to the past six years of gains; the Securities and Exchange Commission has no time limit on how far back it can go to recover what it calls “ill-gotten gains.’’

Picard and the Shapiros have not commented on whether the family has received a clawback demand.

In some ways, life continues as usual for two of the men closest to the Wall Street swindler. They have returned from Palm Beach to the Boston area for the summer, as they typically do. There was the recent wedding of the Jaffes’ son Steven, and they recently attended the bar mitzvah of the child of some friends.

But in other ways, life is changing in ways big and small. Jaffe will not be a regular at the Pine Brook Country Club in Weston this season; he’s taken a year off from the golf club “for financial reasons,’’ his spokesman said.

Meanwhile, Shapiro, 96, has been pained to see a large part of his personal fortune wiped out, along with half of the charitable foundation that has donated in his family’s name to hospitals, art museums, and schools in Greater Boston and Palm Beach. He has said he was as shocked as anyone by the scandal.

The Shapiros have donated $196 million to the Carl and Ruth Shapiro Family Foundation over the past decade, according to the foundation’s tax records filed through 2007. More than half of that, $111.5 million, was donated in 2007.

The family uses another entity to sometimes direct contributions to the foundation: Wellesley Capital Management Inc., which accounted for $49 million of the donations during the 10-year period. The firm was established in 1975 to handle tax and accounting services for the family fortune and keeps the books for the foundation, according to tax records and state filings. It is also listed as a client on Madoff customer lists.

Through a spokesman, the Shapiros declined to say if the money they gave the foundation came from Madoff or other sources.

Last week, a Shapiro family confidant who asked to remain anonymous confirmed that both the US attorney in New York and the bankruptcy trustee are examining Shapiro’s investments with Madoff.

Wellesley Capital did not have oversight of Shapiro investments, said the family spokesman, Elliot Sloane, but is a “bookkeeping and accounting office serving the needs of the Shapiro family investments.’’ It has a small staff, and its officers are Shapiro’s three daughters: Linda Waintrup, listed as president; Rhonda Zinner, and Ellen Jaffe, Robert’s wife.

On Madoff’s customer list – flawed and error-ridden though it is – no entity is mentioned more times than Wellesley Capital Management. The firm, or the address and suite number of its office, appears 129 times, with clients that include Shapiro family trusts and two of the Jaffes’ sons.

Other investors with longtime relationships with Madoff also appear multiple times on the list: Jeffrey and Barbara Picower and their foundation, which Picard has alleged took billions more in money out of Madoff accounts than they put in, show up 10 times, and New York money manager Ezra Merkin, who funneled $2.4 billion in client money to Madoff, shows up eight times. Stanley Chais, the Beverly Hills money manager charged with fraud by the Securities and Exchange Commission, is listed 68 times.

One possible explanation for the large number of Shapiro family accounts on the client list is that Carl Shapiro’s relationship with Madoff dates back to the 1960s.

People who know Shapiro said he thought of Madoff as a son. In the days before the collapse of his scheme in December, Madoff asked Shapiro for $250 million, which his friend gave him. Shapiro learned of Madoff’s confession on the television news, say people who know him.

Known for an exacting attention to detail, Shapiro has kept a firm hand in the workings of his charity and his finances, according to people who know the family. He takes a personal interest in many of the nonprofits the foundation funds. He set up Wellesley Capital rather than hire an outside firm to manage his affairs. And for years he used a New York accounting firm run by a friend of Madoff’s to prepare the foundation’s taxes, which often were filed late.

The question many are asking is this: How could Shapiro or other Madoff investors have failed to see that something was amiss when they received returns that beat the market so consistently?

Miller said part of the answer lies in human nature. “If things were really good, you might look the other way and not look into what was going on,’’ he said.

It appears the Shapiros are cutting their Madoff ties one by one. The foundation has fired the accounting firm Konigsberg Wolf & Co., the family’s spokesman said.

Neither Shapiro nor Jaffe attended Madoff’s court appearances, nor did they submit character references to the judge who sentenced Madoff.

Indeed, not a single person did so on his behalf.

Beth Healy can be reached at bhealy@globe.com. Steven Syre can be reached at syre@globe.com.