Sebi approves Unilever’s Rs 29,202cr share buyback plan

The Securities & Exchange Board of India (Sebi) has finally approved Unilever Plc’s open offer to buyback 22.52 per cent stake in its Indian subsidiary Hindustan Unilever Ltd (HUL), the Anglo-Dutch consumer goods giant announced on Thursday.

The proposed Rs 29,202-crore share buyback programme will allow Unilever to hike its stake in HUL from 52.48 per cent to 75 per cent.

Commenting on the development, Unilever CEO Paul Polman said, “This represents a further step in Unilever’s strategy to invest in emerging markets and offer a liquidity opportunity at what we believe to be an attractive premium for existing shareholders.”

Unilever will pay shareholders Rs 600 per share to buyback the stake. HUL shares closed trade on Friday on Bombay Stock Exchange at Rs 594.75 apiece, at a gain of 0.19 per cent, outperforming the benchmark SENSEX that lost 1.12 per cent to close at 18,827.16 points.

The open offer will be launched on 21st of June 21 through 4th of July.

HUL enjoyed double-digit growth in revenue as well as profit in the January to march quarter. The double-digit growth followed three quarters of poor results.

HUL is well-known for its widely popular brands like Lux, Sunsilk, Rin, Wheel, Lifebuoy, Surf Excel, Closeup, Bru, Kissan and Axe.

75 Percent of Nation’s Top Metro Areas Post Increasing Foreclosure Activity in First Half of 2010

IRVINE, CA, Jul 29 (MARKET WIRE) —
RealtyTrac(R) (www.realtytrac.com), the leading online marketplace for
foreclosure properties, today released its Midyear 2010 Metropolitan
Foreclosure Market Report, which shows 154 of the 206 U.S. metropolitan
areas with a population of 200,000 or more posted year-over-year
increases in foreclosure activity even while foreclosure activity
decreased in nine of the 10 metros with the highest foreclosure rates.

Four states — Florida, California, Nevada and Arizona — accounted for
all top 20 metro foreclosure rates. Florida led the way, with nine of the
top 20 metro foreclosure rates, followed by California with eight, Nevada
with two and Arizona with one.

“While we’re seeing early signs that foreclosure activity may have peaked
in some of the hardest-hit markets, foreclosures continued to rise in
three-quarters of the nation’s metropolitan areas in the first half of
the year,” said James J. Saccacio, chief executive officer of RealtyTrac.
“The fragile stability achieved in many local housing markets hinges on
improvements in the underlying economy, specifically job growth. If
unemployment remains persistently high and foreclosure prevention efforts
only delay the inevitable, then we could continue to see increased
foreclosure activity and a corresponding weakness in home prices in many
metro areas.”

Top 10 metro foreclosure rates
Las Vegas continued to post the nation’s
highest metro foreclosure rate in the first half of the year, with 6.60
percent of its housing units (one in 15) receiving a foreclosure filing
– more than five times the national average. A total of 53,525 Las Vegas
properties received a foreclosure filing during the six-month period, a
decrease of nearly 15 percent from the previous six months and a decrease
of nearly 9 percent from the first half of 2009.

Foreclosure activity in the Cape Coral-Fort Myers, Fla., metro area
decreased nearly 22 percent from the previous six months and was down
nearly 30 percent from the first half of 2009, but the metro area still
documented the nation’s second highest metro foreclosure rate — 4.98
percent of its housing units (one in 20) received a foreclosure filing
during the six-month period. Other Florida cities in the top 10 were
Orlando-Kissimmee at No. 8 (4.15 percent of housing units) and Miami-Fort
Lauderdale-Pompano Beach at No. 10 (3.89 percent).

With 4.59 percent of its housing units (one in 22) receiving a
foreclosure filing, Modesto, Calif., posted the nation’s third highest
metro foreclosure rate. Other California cities in the top 10 were Merced
at No. 4 (4.47 percent of housing units); Riverside-San
Bernardino-Ontario at No. 5 (4.37 percent); Stockton at No. 6 (4.37
percent); and Vallejo-Fairfield at No. 9 (3.91 percent).

The Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale metro area in Arizona posted the nation’s
seventh highest metro foreclosure rate, with 4.28 percent of its housing
units (one in 23) receiving a foreclosure filing in the first half of
2010.

Metros with highest foreclosure totals
More properties received a
foreclosure filing in the Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach metro area
during the first half of 2010 than any other metro area with a population
of 200,000 or more. A total of 94,466 properties in the Miami area
received a foreclosure filing during the six-month period, a decrease of
8 percent from the previous six months, but up nearly 11 percent from the
first six months of 2009.

A total of 93,263 properties in the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana
metro area received a foreclosure filing in the first half of 2010, the
second highest total of any metro area nationwide and 2.11 percent of all
housing units (one in 47) — ranking No. 35 in terms of foreclosure rate.

A total of 78,022 properties in the Chicago-Naperville-Joliet metro area
received a foreclosure filing in the first half of 2010, the third
highest total and 2.07 percent of all housing units (one in 48) –
ranking No. 37 in terms of foreclosure rate.

Other metro areas with the 10 highest foreclosure totals were
Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale (73,352), Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario
(63,717), Las Vegas-Paradise (53,525), Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta
(52,381), Detroit-Warren-Livonia (47,563), New York-Northern New
Jersey-Long Island (44,522), and Orlando-Kissimmee (37,352).

Report methodology
The RealtyTrac U.S. Foreclosure Market Report
provides a count of the total number of properties with at least one
foreclosure filing entered into the RealtyTrac database during the first
six months of the year for metropolitan statistical areas with a
population of 200,000 or more based on Census bureau estimates. Some
foreclosure filings entered into the database during a six-month period
may have been recorded in previous time periods. Data is collected from
more than 2,200 counties nationwide, and those counties account for more
than 90 percent of the U.S. population. RealtyTrac’s report incorporates
documents filed in all three phases of foreclosure: Default — Notice of
Default (NOD) and Lis Pendens (LIS); Auction — Notice of Trustee Sale
and Notice of Foreclosure Sale (NTS and NFS); and Real Estate Owned, or
REO properties (that have been foreclosed on and repurchased by a bank).
If more than one foreclosure document is received for a property during
the six-month period, only the most recent filing is counted in the
report. If the same type of foreclosure document was filed against a
property previous to the six-month period but within the estimated
foreclosure timeframe for the state where the property is located, the
report does not count the property in the six-month period.

Midyear 2010 U.S. Metro Foreclosure Market Data
—————————————————————————-
%Change %Change
Properties from from
Rate with %Housing 1/every Jul-Dec Jan-Jun
Rank Metro Name Filings Units X HU 09 09
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
— U.S. Total 1,654,634 1.28 78 -5.14 8.26
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
1 Las Vegas-Paradise, NV 53,525 6.60 15 -14.73 -8.80
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Cape Coral-Fort Myers,
2 FL 18,179 4.98 20 -21.69 -29.88
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
3 Modesto, CA 8,034 4.59 22 -15.24 -14.02
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
4 Merced, CA 3,742 4.47 22 -19.49 -34.64
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Riverside-San
5 Bernardino-Ontario, CA 63,717 4.37 23 -18.01 -22.62
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
6 Stockton, CA 9,999 4.37 23 -17.63 -21.80
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale,
7 AZ 73,352 4.28 23 -2.54 -0.95
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
8 Orlando-Kissimmee, FL 37,352 4.15 24 -13.78 -1.19
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
9 Vallejo-Fairfield, CA 5,885 3.91 26 -14.94 -12.24
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Miami-Fort Lauderdale-
10 Pompano Beach, FL 94,466 3.89 26 -8.28 10.62
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
11 Reno-Sparks, NV 6,804 3.76 27 -6.07 4.44
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
12 Bakersfield, CA 10,010 3.67 27 -18.69 -17.79
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
13 Naples-Marco Island, FL 6,251 3.23 31 -0.94 -10.57
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Sacramento-Arden-Arcade-
14 Roseville, CA 27,275 3.19 31 -12.38 -6.99
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Deltona-Daytona Beach-
15 Ormond Beach, FL 7,664 3.09 32 -8.16 15.51
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
16 Port St. Lucie, FL 6,343 3.05 33 -31.58 -23.11
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
17 Lakeland, FL 8,132 2.90 35 -12.15 9.79
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Palm Bay-Melbourne-
18 Titusville, FL 7,473 2.79 36 -0.44 18.32
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
19 Visalia-Porterville, CA 3,751 2.72 37 -7.93 -4.99
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Tampa-St. Petersburg-
20 Clearwater, FL 35,835 2.71 37 5.58 5.69
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
21 Fresno, CA 8,331 2.70 37 -15.13 -11.14
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
22 Boise City-Nampa, ID 6,420 2.67 37 -15.47 23.13
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Sarasota-Bradenton-
23 Venice, FL 10,359 2.65 38 -10.14 -0.05
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
24 Ocala, FL 4,250 2.63 38 0.54 4.01
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
25 Salinas, CA 3,611 2.58 39 -10.49 -16.78
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
26 Jacksonville, FL 15,286 2.57 39 -8.12 12.76
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
27 Prescott, AZ 2,708 2.56 39 -1.20 7.55
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Detroit-Warren-Livonia,
28 MI 47,563 2.50 40 8.42 34.54**
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
29 Greeley, CO 2,334 2.48 40 -10.13 8.26
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Atlanta-Sandy Springs-
30 Marietta, GA 52,381 2.43 41 9.41 22.39
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
San Diego-Carlsbad-San
31 Marcos, CA 26,135 2.30 44 -14.62 -13.74
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-
32 Ventura, CA 6,244 2.28 44 -11.91 -7.66
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
33 Provo-Orem, UT 3,318 2.26 44 -8.37 4.73
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Fayetteville-Springdale-
34 Rogers, AR-MO 4,114 2.20 45 0.39 7.19
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Los Angeles-Long Beach-
35 Santa Ana, CA 93,263 2.11 47 -17.13 -12.10
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
36 Salt Lake City, UT 8,276 2.08 48 5.86 55.51
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Chicago-Naperville-
37 Joliet, IL-IN-WI 78,022 2.07 48 -0.37 22.73
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
38 Flint, MI 3,880 1.97 51 3.74 28.14**
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
39 Tucson, AZ 8,371 1.96 51 10.16 17.79
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
40 Rockford, IL 2,805 1.94 52 12.97 38.25
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
41 Medford, OR 1,689 1.91 52 10.18 6.29
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
42 Santa Rosa-Petaluma, CA 3,732 1.88 53 -15.32 -10.37
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
San Francisco-Oakland-
43 Fremont, CA 31,612 1.86 54 -11.01 -2.55
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Santa Cruz-Watsonville,
44 CA 1,792 1.73 58 1.30 5.85
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Santa Barbara-Santa
45 Maria-Goleta, CA 2,586 1.70 59 -13.13 4.15
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa
46 Clara, CA 10,828 1.70 59 -16.34 -9.19
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Pensacola-Ferry Pass-
47 Brent, FL 3,332 1.67 60 -6.85 19.30
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
48 Chico, CA 1,569 1.64 61 -11.36 21.72
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
49 Denver-Aurora, CO 17,087 1.62 62 -10.77 9.32
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
San Luis Obispo-Paso
50 Robles, CA 1,823 1.56 64 -6.46 6.86
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
51 Indianapolis-Carmel, IN 11,694 1.55 64 -7.30 5.95
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
52 Toledo, OH 4,593 1.53 65 10.22 6.86
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
53 Colorado Springs, CO 3,835 1.48 67 -5.33 3.93
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
54 Ogden-Clearfield, UT 2,654 1.47 68 -1.37 10.72
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Charleston-North
55 Charleston, SC 4,249 1.47 68 24.93 17.08
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
56 Grand Rapids-Wyoming, MI 4,482 1.40 71 -0.97 7.28**
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
57 Atlantic City, NJ 1,770 1.39 72 -16.11 56.50
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor,
58 OH 12,903 1.36 73 -5.13 0.32
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
59 Savannah, GA 2,015 1.36 73 19.58 57.18
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
60 Dayton, OH 5,168 1.35 74 21.09 9.56
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
61 Columbus, OH 10,481 1.35 74 17.26 -6.68
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
62 Holland-Grand Haven, MI 1,353 1.34 75 1.88 26.69**
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
63 Lansing-East Lansing, MI 2,619 1.33 75 -5.38 -7.19**
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
64 Salem, OR 1,966 1.33 75 8.98 14.04
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
65 Memphis, TN-MS-AR 7,341 1.32 75 -16.71 -14.62
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Portland-Vancouver-
66 Beaverton, OR-WA 11,634 1.29 77 5.50 -0.11
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Washington-Arlington-
67 Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV 27,631 1.28 78 -17.98 -5.41
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
68 Albuquerque, NM 4,574 1.26 80 21.75 156.82*
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
69 Gainesville, FL 1,449 1.25 80 -2.75 18.77
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
70 Kansas City, MO-KS 10,719 1.24 81 14.56 51.25
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Milwaukee-Waukesha-West
71 Allis, WI 8,082 1.23 81 4.36 19.05
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
72 Macon, GA 1,277 1.23 82 6.59 12.21
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
73 Canton-Massillon, OH 2,178 1.22 82 2.30 -10.85
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
74 Ann Arbor, MI 1,731 1.17 85 11.25 20.21**
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
75 Tulsa, OK 4,715 1.17 85 11.02 66.31*
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Saginaw-Saginaw Township
76 North, MI 1,040 1.17 85 18.05 26.37**
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
77 Worcester, MA 3,684 1.16 86 -1.29 30.27
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
78 Kalamazoo-Portage, MI 1,651 1.14 88 17.51 26.22**
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Minneapolis-St. Paul-
79 Bloomington, MN-WI 15,230 1.13 88 -11.31 4.11
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Greenville-Mauldin-
80 Easley, SC 3,038 1.11 90 19.75 17.12
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
81 Trenton-Ewing, NJ 1,548 1.10 91 -12.84 61.92
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Little Rock-North Little
82 Rock-Conway, AR 3,229 1.08 92 3.33 42.62
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
83 Baltimore-Towson, MD 12,027 1.08 92 5.32 130.23
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Youngstown-Warren-
84 Boardman, OH-PA 2,837 1.08 93 7.95 17.91
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Virginia Beach-Norfolk-
85 Newport News, VA-NC 7,344 1.07 93 33.24 38.99
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Cincinnati-Middletown,
86 OH-KY-IN 9,777 1.07 94 -3.25 10.76
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
87 New Haven-Milford, CT 3,736 1.07 94 11.69 44.53
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
88 Tallahassee, FL 1,702 1.06 95 5.45 22.36
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Charlotte-Gastonia-
89 Concord, NC-SC 7,576 1.04 96 4.24 68.39*
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
90 Akron, OH 3,203 1.04 96 3.49 -0.59
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Bridgeport-Stamford-
91 Norwalk, CT 3,598 1.02 98 13.36 54.95
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
92 Richmond, VA 5,155 1.00 100 21.12 45.25
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
93 Green Bay, WI 1,357 0.99 101 -4.57 -1.67
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Dallas-Fort Worth-
94 Arlington, TX 23,378 0.97 103 5.91 29.61
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
95 Birmingham-Hoover, AL 4,857 0.97 104 -9.21 27.35
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
96 York-Hanover, PA 1,679 0.96 105 2.50 32.00
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue,
97 WA 13,483 0.94 106 7.17 2.31
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
98 Mobile, AL 1,659 0.92 109 1.28 26.35
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
99 Manchester-Nashua, NH 1,488 0.92 109 21.87 14.73
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Fort Collins-Loveland,
100 CO 1,168 0.91 110 -31.17 -0.93
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
101 St. Louis, MO-IL 11,233 0.90 111 1.17 15.65
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
102 Barnstable Town, MA 1,403 0.90 111 7.59 92.98
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
103 Columbia, SC 2,845 0.90 111 0.07 52.96
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
New Orleans-Metairie-
104 Kenner, LA 4,021 0.90 111 7.86 51.97
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Nashville-Davidson-
105 Murfreesboro-Franklin, 5,846 0.90 112 8.12 39.76
TN
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
106 Eugene-Springfield, OR 1,342 0.89 112 10.82 12.96
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
107 Chattanooga, TN-GA 2,054 0.89 112 4.85 16.77
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
108 Spartanburg, SC 1,054 0.86 116 217.47* 253.69*
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Houston-Sugar Land-
109 Baytown, TX 19,137 0.86 117 7.29 34.64
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
110 Reading, PA 1,342 0.83 120 0.45 25.30
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Myrtle Beach-Conway-
111 North Myrtle Beach, SC 1,429 0.83 121 -15.19 0.63
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
112 Honolulu, HI 2,784 0.83 121 9.78 72.28
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Augusta-Richmond County,
113 GA-SC 1,884 0.82 121 13.97 29.13
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Philadelphia-Camden-
114 Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD 19,659 0.82 122 -8.81 38.26
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
115 San Antonio, TX 6,217 0.81 124 6.42 19.90
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
116 Springfield, MA 2,299 0.81 124 -4.88 39.08
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
117 Austin-Round Rock, TX 5,251 0.80 125 2.32 42.34
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
118 Norwich-New London, CT 925 0.79 127 13.22 61.15
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Providence-New Bedford-
119 Fall River, RI-MA 5,261 0.78 129 -8.95 10.32
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Boston-Cambridge-Quincy,
120 MA-NH 14,177 0.77 129 -5.48 12.39
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Greensboro-High Point,
121 NC 2,449 0.77 129 6.66 33.53*
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
122 Appleton, WI 693 0.77 131 2.51 56.79
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
123 Columbus, GA-AL 989 0.77 131 11.75 44.17
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
124 Anchorage, AK 1,072 0.76 131 -10.29 47.25
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
125 Bremerton-Silverdale, WA 770 0.75 133 -6.44 35.80
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Hartford-West Hartford-
126 East Hartford, CT 3,705 0.75 133 11.80 47.14
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Hagerstown-Martinsburg,
127 MD-WV 853 0.75 134 -5.75 42.64
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
South Bend-Mishawaka,
128 IN-MI 1,046 0.75 134 -13.63 -7.10
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Louisville/Jefferson
129 County, KY-IN 4,117 0.75 134 2.01 40.90
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
130 Oklahoma City, OK 3,881 0.74 136 15.82 127.36*
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
131 Knoxville, TN 2,247 0.72 139 9.77 40.09
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
132 Winston-Salem, NC 1,467 0.70 143 -0.54 30.63
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
133 Montgomery, AL 1,104 0.70 143 -1.34 14.88
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Allentown-Bethlehem-
134 Easton, PA-NJ 2,331 0.70 144 6.54 23.46
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
135 Fort Wayne, IN 1,238 0.69 144 -11.63 -26.35
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
136 Boulder, CO 855 0.69 145 -22.41 13.40
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
137 Raleigh-Cary, NC 3,019 0.68 146 5.45 49.16
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
138 Madison, WI 1,680 0.68 148 -2.27 14.75
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
139 Olympia, WA 694 0.68 148 8.78 -14.22
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Killeen-Temple-Fort
140 Hood, TX 994 0.67 149 -1.97 12.70
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
141 Fort Smith, AR-OK 811 0.65 153 -5.15 32.08
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Davenport-Moline-Rock
142 Island, IA-IL 1,017 0.61 163 8.77 1.29
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
McAllen-Edinburg-
143 Mission, TX 1,551 0.61 163 -21.51 230.00
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
144 Springfield, MO 1,137 0.61 164 -10.47 0.71
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
New York-Northern New
145 Jersey-Long Island, NY- 44,522 0.60 167 -19.88 27.61
NJ-PA
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
146 Clarksville, TN-KY 653 0.59 170 8.29 31.12
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
147 Laredo, TX 405 0.57 175 21.26 44.13
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
148 Topeka, KS 590 0.57 176 1.20 50.51
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
149 Las Cruces, NM 435 0.56 179 -8.61 72.62*
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
150 Baton Rouge, LA 1,817 0.56 180 10.25 46.89
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
151 Amarillo, TX 544 0.55 183 6.04 16.49
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
152 Springfield, IL 526 0.54 184 11.68 41.02
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
153 Waco, TX 487 0.52 191 1.88 20.54
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
154 Pittsburgh, PA 5,744 0.52 193 12.54 -1.48
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
155 Corpus Christi, TX 898 0.51 198 5.52 41.19
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Brownsville-Harlingen,
156 TX 731 0.50 199 -45.24 -28.40
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
157 Roanoke, VA 701 0.50 200 5.26 -5.01
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
158 Gulfport-Biloxi, MS 528 0.50 201 54.84 152.63
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
159 Sioux Falls, SD 464 0.50 202 -16.85 97.45*
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
160 Lancaster, PA 924 0.47 211 7.69 16.08
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Scranton-Wilkes-Barre,
161 PA 1,214 0.47 213 80.39 73.68
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
162 Cedar Rapids, IA 520 0.46 215 30.65 49.86
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Des Moines-West Des
163 Moines, IA 1,092 0.46 215 -25.87 -22.77
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
164 Champaign-Urbana, IL 444 0.45 222 24.37 74.12
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Shreveport-Bossier City,
165 LA 739 0.43 235 -17.34 47.50
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
166 Peoria, IL 691 0.42 237 17.12 3.60
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Poughkeepsie-Newburgh-
167 Middletown, NY 1,041 0.42 238 -15.23 -23.12
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Omaha-Council Bluffs,
168 NE-IA 1,479 0.42 239 25.77* 94.61*
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
169 Huntsville, AL 701 0.41 244 -14.51 -14.41
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
170 Evansville, IN-KY 621 0.39 258 34.71 51.83
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
171 Lafayette, LA 430 0.38 261 -12.96 155.95*
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
172 Beaumont-Port Arthur, TX 611 0.37 267 76.08 77.10
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Portland-South Portland-
173 Biddeford, ME 933 0.36 275 14.62 44.88
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
174 Wilmington, NC 706 0.35 285 38.16 132.24*
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Hickory-Lenoir-
175 Morganton, NC 554 0.35 286 74.21 154.13*
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
176 Wichita, KS 908 0.35 287 -30.05 -25.94
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
177 Spokane, WA 675 0.34 292 -2.03 103.31
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
178 Duluth, MN-WI 461 0.33 299 4.30 48.23
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
179 Durham, NC 716 0.33 302 26.06 -3.24
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
180 Lynchburg, VA 361 0.33 303 159.71 88.02
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
181 Yakima, WA 276 0.33 303 -29.95 5.75
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
182 Harrisburg-Carlisle, PA 750 0.32 310 -4.94 30.89
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
183 Asheville, NC 645 0.32 314 125.52 270.69*
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
184 Tyler, TX 223 0.29 349 31.18 14.95
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
185 Erie, PA 338 0.29 350 2.11 -16.95
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
186 Rochester, NY 1,201 0.27 368 -15.48 -24.98
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
187 El Paso, TX 658 0.26 391 -33.67 -36.49
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Houma-Bayou Cane-
188 Thibodaux, LA 209 0.25 395 22.22 186.30*
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Kingsport-Bristol-
189 Bristol, TN-VA 354 0.24 413 25.09 34.60
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Kennewick-Richland-
190 Pasco, WA 206 0.24 422 13.81 216.92
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
191 Jackson, MS 527 0.24 423 -67.96 -39.08
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
192 Binghamton, NY 256 0.23 432 -26.22 -4.48
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
193 Longview, TX 191 0.22 446 34.51 -3.05
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
194 Lexington-Fayette, KY 428 0.21 479 -23.57 8.91
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
195 Lubbock, TX 221 0.19 539 11.62 20.77
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Huntington-Ashland, WV-
196 KY-OH 233 0.18 568 -19.38 1.75
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Buffalo-Niagara Falls,
197 NY 915 0.18 570 -41.53 -44.98
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Albany-Schenectady-Troy,
198 NY 592 0.16 644 -20.64 0.17
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
199 Tuscaloosa, AL 120 0.12 805 -21.57 66.67
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
200 Syracuse, NY 333 0.12 860 3.42 25.66
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
201 Fayetteville, NC 177 0.12 866 78.79 -9.23
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
202 Lincoln, NE 141 0.11 882 30.56* 314.71*
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
College Station-Bryan,
203 TX 95 0.11 933 5.56 21.79
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
204 Charleston, WV 52 0.04 2,799 -54.39 -53.57
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
Burlington-South
205 Burlington, VT 27 0.03 3,305 -25.00 145.45*
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
206 Utica-Rome, NY 28 0.02 4,859 -37.78 12.00
—- ———————— ———- ——— ——- ——– ——–
* Actual increase may not be as high due to data collection changes or
improvements
** Collection of records classified as NOD began in August 2009 because of
change in state law

About RealtyTrac Inc.
RealtyTrac (www.realtytrac.com) is the leading
online marketplace of foreclosure properties, with more than 1.5 million
default, auction and bank-owned listings from over 2,200 U.S. counties,
along with detailed property, loan and home sales data. Hosting more than
3 million unique monthly visitors, RealtyTrac provides innovative
technology solutions and practical education resources to facilitate
buying, selling and investing in real estate. RealtyTrac’s foreclosure
data has also been used by the Federal Reserve, FBI, U.S. Senate Joint
Economic Committee and Banking Committee, U.S. Treasury Department, and
numerous state housing and banking departments to help evaluate
foreclosure trends and address policy issues related to foreclosures.

Media Contact:
Michelle Sabolich
Atomic Public Relations
415.593.1400, ext. 233
michelle.sabolich@atomicpr.com

Copyright 2010, Market Wire, All rights reserved.

UPDATE 1-Informa beats H1 forecasts, hikes dividend 25 pct

LONDON, July 27 (Reuters) – British business media group Informa (INF.L) said delegates and sponsors returned to its core events and training courses in the first half, helping it beat sales and earnings forecasts and hike its dividend 25 percent.

Informa said on Tuesday publishing revenues remained resilient, with three-quarters now delivered electronically, and said it continued to benefit from cost-cutting programmes initiated in 2008 and 2009.

The company, whose exhibition portfolio includes Arab Health and Palm China, said it was confident about its balance of stable publishing revenues and cyclical event revenues, despite a fragile and uneven global economic recovery.

“While we remain cautious about the economic recovery, we are confident in the resilience, diversity and flexibility of our model,” it said in a statement. “We remain in line with our expectations for the full year.”

Revenues for the first half to end-June were down 0.5 percent organically to 624 million pounds ($964 million), beating the weighted average of 615 million pounds given by Thomson Reuters StarMine SmartEstimates.

Adjusted operating profit was up 5.6 percent to 153 million pounds, also beating the SmartEstimate of 146 million, while adjusted diluted earnings per share were 16.7 pence, compared with the SmartEstimate of 15.4 pence.

Informa raised its dividend to 4.5 pence. (Reporting by Georgina Prodhan; Editing by Mike Nesbit) ($1=.6473 Pounds)

Five Benefits of Data Center Energy ManagementFive Benefits of Data Center Energy Management

There are approximately 4.75 million servers worldwide being run, managed and upgraded without being actively used on a daily basis. Those unused servers cost $20.7 billion to run, plus consume another $3.7 billion in energy costs. Furthermore, around $21.4 billion is wasted each year on hardware, maintenance, management, energy and cooling for unused servers. This is roughly equal to the cost of the Apollo space program.

Managing energy actively results in 40 percent or more energy savings in the data center. When you consider that a data center can consume 10 to 100 times more energy per square foot than the average office building, and in some cases up to 40 percent of an organization’s carbon footprint, it is clear that managing energy in the data center is of paramount importance.

Data center executives generally do not have comprehensive management tools for monitoring and controlling energy. As a result, there’s a lack of systematic analysis of energy strategies to determine which will yield the greatest benefits or pose the greatest risk to ongoing operations. This impedes the decision making process, leaving many guessing or adopting ad-hoc strategies. Once you begin measuring the energy in your data center, you can expose the biggest offenders (high energy consumers), come up with a plan to reach your goals, implement this plan and document your progress.

These are some of the most common ways data center energy management reduces energy consumption:

1. Detecting unused equipment and turning it off or recommissioning it. 15-20 percent of all servers are never used. Idle servers still consume about three-quarters of the energy of a server at 100 percent utilization. However, most data centers do not have tools to uncover unused equipment. Look for an energy management solution that enables you to detect all idle or rogue machines and make decisions using a per-asset cost analysis.

2. Virtualization. A recent survey found that among data centers that claimed to have completed their virtualization process, only about 35 percent of their servers had been virtualized. In other words, this survey revealed that picking servers that are suitable for virtualization is still a very ad-hoc process. An energy management solution can profile assets and give data center executives a per-asset cost and utilization picture of the data center. Virtualization can then be geared toward assets with low-utilization or high energy consumption in a planned effort.

3. Storage consolidation. As for servers, some storage units are never used. By profiling storage usage, you can identify duplicate data, old data, unused data and inefficient tiering strategies. With the energy and cost profiles of storage equipment at your fingertips, you can make conscious decisions on consolidation.

4. Asset reconfiguration. Because emphasis on energy is a recent development, most IT equipment is still configured without energy efficiency in mind. For instance, Sentilla has observed savings of 33 percent by reconfiguring fileservers to go in a low-power mode at night and during weekends, and savings of a few percent by changing server power management settings to match workloads. Energy management software can identify the right assets for this operation and determine low-impact changes that net energy utilization improvements.

5. Finally, data center executives can delay capital expenditure. Many data center executives worry about capacity on their Uninterruptible Power Systems (UPSs) and Backup Generator Sets. This type of power equipment requires major capital investments and necessitates significant resources during installation (it most likely involves interruption of IT services). Energy management tools directly follow power demand on the UPS and track capacity. A good tool will continuously monitor capacity on the UPS and give data center executives all the information they need to reclaim stranded power (allocated but not being used).

Joe Polastre is the CTO and co-founder of Sentilla Corporation.

UK firms cut advertising spend in Q2 – survey

July 12 (Reuters) – British companies cut their marketing budgets in the second quarter and sentiment dropped to its lowest level for a year, a survey showed on Monday, suggesting the rebound in economic activity is waning.

The survey of around 300 British companies for the IPA/BDO Bellwether report found that advertising budgets for nearly all categories were revised down.

“The downward revision to marketing budgets in the second quarter is disappointing as it fails to build on the return to growth seen earlier in the year and highlights the fragility of the UK economic recovery,” said Chris Williamson, chief economist at Markit and author of the report.

“Companies are exercising increased caution in their expenditure in the face of likely slower economic growth in the second half of the year.

“However, it is encouraging to see that marketing spend is still set to increase for the year as a whole compared to 2009, albeit to a lesser extent than signalled in the first quarter.”

The report also said the rate that companies cut their budgets was much slower than that seen at the height of the economic downturn.

Almost 20 percent of the companies reported a cut to their spending, compared with 15 percent that increased the rate.

Some 25 percent of marketing executives described themselves as pessimistic about the financial prospects for their company, compared with 20 percent in the first quarter.

Of the different categories, main media spend was revised down in the quarter following a modest upgrade in the previous quarter. Spending on the Internet increased slightly however the rate of growth was the slowest for three quarters.

“The second quarter BDO/IPA Bellwether report reveals a cautious and uncertain picture,” Andy Viner, the head of media at BDO said. “After a strong rebound in Q1, optimism and confidence appear to be waning.

“It is clear that there are increasing signs that uncertainty over economic prospects continue and that corporates remain focussed on cost control against a backdrop of the risk of a double dip.”

(Reporting by Kate Holton; Editing by Erica Billingham)

Stocks, at crossroads, turn to earnings

(Reuters) – The U.S. stock market landed at a technical crossroads following its best week in a year, yet the potential for positive earnings surprises beginning next week could give an edge to the bulls.

Analysts turned increasingly bearish before the start of earnings season. Sentiment stands at its lowest since May 2009, according to a Bespoke Investment Group note that said analysts have lowered estimates for 572 companies in the S&P 1500 in the last four weeks, while they raised expectations for 396.

At the same time, bullish investor sentiment as measured by the American Association of Individual Investors fell to just 21 percent last week, the lowest since early March 2009 — right at the market’s bottom.

Equity funds worldwide saw more than $11 billion in net outflows in the first week of July, while money market funds attracted the biggest inflows in 18 months, fund tracker EPFR Global said.

“Expectations are low going into the results, so we could have some positive surprises there and the big test will be if we can get back above 1,100 (on the S&P 500),” said Paul Hickey, a co-founder of Bespoke, based in Harrison, New York.

The Standard & Poor’s 500 Index .SPX ended slightly higher on Friday at 1,077.95.

Even with signs of dwindling sentiment, analysts still expect 27 percent growth in earnings on the S&P 500 for the second quarter according to Thomson Reuters data. That is up from previous readings in the past three quarters, which hovered around 22 percent.

To be sure, beating top and bottom line expectations could still prove a Pyrrhic victory. chief executives must also provide outlooks that convince investors the U.S. economy does not face a double-dip recession or the European credit crisis will not damage future earnings.

“Everybody’s concerned about the economy and the market has reflected these concerns,” said Cleveland Rueckert, equity strategist at Birinyi Associates in Stamford, Connecticut.

“Right now the market has priced in a slowdown in earnings, so we’re going to see a lot of focus not only on the reports but also the guidance,” he said.

TECHNICALS: HALF FULL, OR HALF EMPTY?

After regaining the key 1,040 level earlier this week, the S&P 500 also generated a ‘buy’ signal in its moving average convergence-divergence, or MACD chart. But its 50-day simple moving average is still below the 200-day moving average. This so-called death cross is seen as a signal of further downward pressure.

The index also stands at its 20-day moving average, which leaves it right in the middle line of its Bollinger bands, meaning it technically has space to move in any direction, and leaves it susceptible to volatility.

“We’re seeing a tug of war between technical indicators,” said Brian Jacobsen, chief portfolio strategist at Wells Fargo Funds Management in Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin.

“You’re going to see people migrating toward one end of the camp or the other depending on how the earnings season plays out.”

Amid the lack of technical guidance, options traders seem to be hedging themselves for some volatility. On Friday, the most active trades on the SPDR S&P 500 fund (SPY.P) were the July $107 calls and the July $107 puts.

“The volume is nearly the same for calls and puts, so these just look like bets on volatility next week instead of a direction,” said Ryan Detrick, senior technical strategist at Schaeffer’s Investment Research in Cincinnati, Ohio.

BUSY EARNINGS WEEK

Big names like Google Inc (GOOG.O), Intel Corp (INTC.O), JPMorgan Chase & Co (JPM.N) and Bank of America Corp (BAC.N) will post their quarterly scorecards in a busy week that will see Alcoa Inc (AA.N) start the season after the market’s close on Monday.

JPMorgan will be in focus as many investors expect financials to lead or take part in a stocks comeback. But the bank is expected to post earnings of 67.9 cents per share according to StarMine’s SmartEstimate, which weights estimates according to analysts’ accuracy, versus the mean of 72 cents a share.

If JPMorgan does miss median expectations, it could threaten this nascent stocks rally.

More than a few Dow components posting earnings could overshadow the economic data, but the minutes of the latest Federal Open Market Committee meeting, expected Wednesday, will be closely watched as they will provide a window into the Fed’s take on the extent of the effect of the European credit crisis in U.S. growth.

Other data high points include business inventories Wednesday, the Producer Price Index and initial applications for unemployment benefits on Thursday and the Reuters/University of Michigan survey of consumers on Friday.

Overseas data includes Chinese gross domestic product due on Thursday and expected to show a slowdown to 10.5 percent year-on-year growth from 11.9 percent.

“If people see a higher number they might think China is going to really rein in their economic growth, which could then put downward pressure on commodity (and U.S. equity) prices,” Wells Fargo’s Jacobsen said.

(Reporting by Rodrigo Campos; Additional reporting by Angela Moon; Editing by Kenneth Barry)

(The Stocks Outlook column appears every Sunday. Comments or questions on this one can be e-mailed to rodrigo.campos@thomsonreuters.com)

Hedge funds see ‘trying’ year in 2010-survey

(Reuters) – Hedge fund managers feel they aren’t out of the woods quite yet.

Seven out of 10 said they expect a “trying” year as the industry faces regulatory oversight and competition picks up with more funds likely chasing investment dollars, according to a survey by accounting and audit firm Rothstein Kass.

“It is no surprise that the outlook for 2010 echoes the concerns of 2009 rather than the unbridled optimism of years past and reflects a more conservative approach to the future,” Rothstein Kass consultants wrote.

Hedge funds rebounded last year from 2008′s deep losses with an average 19 percent return. But this year’s market gyrations highlight the pitfalls that are still present two years after the financial crisis. Many prominent managers were caught off guard by May’s sharp sell-off and nursed heavy losses that left the funds, on average, roughly flat for the first five months of the year, data from Hedge Fund Research show. June’s performance numbers are expected next week.

At the same time though, there are some bright spots with almost three-quarters of the managers saying they expect investors to stick around longer as the pace of redemptions falls off.

Rothstein Kass surveyed 381 hedge fund firms in the first half of 2010 and will release the findings of its fourth annual survey on Tuesday. Reuters obtained a draft of the report.

Eight out of 10 managers also expect to see more new hedge funds launched this year by newcomers and by existing firms that are planning to roll out new portfolios.

Halfway through the year, prominent managers ranging from former Goldman Sachs partner Mark Carhart to former Atticus executive Dilan Siritunga are talking to investors about making commitments to new funds.

However, hedge fund managers also said it is tougher to raise money now because investors are more nervous and will be writing smaller checks to newcomers.

Eight out of 10 managers surveyed by Rothstein Kass think new hedge fund managers will have to rely more heavily on seed capital where backers often take a stake in the new company, instead of raising money mainly from institutions and wealthy investors.

“As they engage in capital-sourcing activities, hedge fund managers face greater competition from a variety of sources , including ETFs and mutual funds that purport to replicate hedge fund strategies,” Howard Altman, Rothstein Kass’ co-CEO said.

Other bigger changes also loom on the horizon for the $1.6 trillion industry.

Most managers resigned themselves long ago to the idea that their once largely opaque industry will soon face closer scrutiny from regulators. They are almost equally split on whether registration will come in the second half of this year or the first half of next year.

The U.S. House of Representatives gave final approval to a financial overhaul this week and the Senate will vote later this month.

Also roughly half of managers surveyed expect fees that hedge fund managers charge — often 2 percent of assets managed plus 20 percent of profits on investments — to come under pressure.

Newcomers who lack the track record and marquee name of established firms will be ready to compromise first in order to build their businesses, the survey found.

“When hedge funds are willing to negotiate fee arrangements, they have consistently received concessions from investors in return for this flexibility,” said Jeff Kollin, a principal in Rothstein Kass’ financial services advisory group.

Hedge funds see ‘trying’ year in 2010-survey

BOSTON, July 5 (Reuters) – Hedge fund managers feel they aren’t out of the woods quite yet.

Seven out of 10 said they expect a “trying” year as the industry faces regulatory oversight and competition picks up with more funds likely chasing investment dollars, according to a survey by accounting and audit firm Rothstein Kass.

“It is no surprise that the outlook for 2010 echoes the concerns of 2009 rather than the unbridled optimism of years past and reflects a more conservative approach to the future,” Rothstein Kass consultants wrote.

Hedge funds rebounded last year from 2008′s deep losses with an average 19 percent return. But this year’s market gyrations highlight the pitfalls that are still present two years after the financial crisis. Many prominent managers were caught off guard by May’s sharp sell-off and nursed heavy losses that left the funds, on average, roughly flat for the first five months of the year, data from Hedge Fund Research show. June’s performance numbers are expected next week.

At the same time though, there are some bright spots with almost three-quarters of the managers saying they expect investors to stick around longer as the pace of redemptions falls off.

Rothstein Kass surveyed 381 hedge fund firms in the first half of 2010 and will release the findings of its fourth annual survey on Tuesday. Reuters obtained a draft of the report.

Eight out of 10 managers also expect to see more new hedge funds launched this year by newcomers and by existing firms that are planning to roll out new portfolios.

Halfway through the year, prominent managers ranging from former Goldman Sachs partner Mark Carhart to former Atticus executive Dilan Siritunga are talking to investors about making commitments to new funds.

However, hedge fund managers also said it is tougher to raise money now because investors are more nervous and will be writing smaller checks to newcomers.

Eight out of 10 managers surveyed by Rothstein Kass think new hedge fund managers will have to rely more heavily on seed capital where backers often take a stake in the new company, instead of raising money mainly from institutions and wealthy investors.

“As they engage in capital-sourcing activities, hedge fund managers face greater competition from a variety of sources , including ETFs and mutual funds that purport to replicate hedge fund strategies,” Howard Altman, Rothstein Kass’ co-CEO said.

Other bigger changes also loom on the horizon for the $1.6 trillion industry.

Most managers resigned themselves long ago to the idea that their once largely opaque industry will soon face closer scrutiny from regulators. They are almost equally split on whether registration will come in the second half of this year or the first half of next year.

The U.S. House of Representatives gave final approval to a financial overhaul this week and the Senate will vote later this month.

Also roughly half of managers surveyed expect fees that hedge fund managers charge — often 2 percent of assets managed plus 20 percent of profits on investments — to come under pressure.

Newcomers who lack the track record and marquee name of established firms will be ready to compromise first in order to build their businesses, the survey found.

“When hedge funds are willing to negotiate fee arrangements, they have consistently received concessions from investors in return for this flexibility,” said Jeff Kollin, a principal in Rothstein Kass’ financial services advisory group. (Reporting by Svea Herbst-Bayliss; Editing by Steve Orlofsky)

UPDATE 1-Drax’s biomass ambition hampered by high price

LONDON, June 30 (Reuters) – Britain’s biggest power plant, coal-fired Drax (DRX.L), will run its new 400 megawatt (MW) biomass unit at no more than two-thirds of its capacity due to high biomass fuel prices caused by a lack of political support.

The 400 megawatt (MW) facility became operational in June but will only be running at 250 to 300 MW, Drax said Wednesday.

“The facility is operational, but we do not expect to use it at full capacity for the time being,” Chief Executive Officer Dorothy Thompson said at a media briefing in London. “It will instead run at 250 to 300 megawatts.”

Drax has called for Britain to increase its support for biomass power generation, arguing that the source was flexible, plentiful and, with government support, could become economical.

The new biomass facility is designed to substitute coal-fired generation in order to reduce carbon emissions at the coal-fired facility which has a total capacity of 4,000 MW, produced at six separate units.

Peter Emery, the company’s Production Director, said that the cost of producing heat from biomass was around two to three times more expensive than generating it from coal.

In order to make money, the price for biomass needs to be equal or lower than the generation cost of coal, including the price of carbon allowances under the European Union’s emissions trading scheme.

Thompson said that biomass carbon savings over coal generation were 75 to 95 percent and CO2 savings over gas generation were 50 to 60 percent.

FULL BIOMASS CONVERSION

Thompson also said that Drax had long-term plans to convert its entire generation into a biomass power plant, but that would only be possible with government support.

The company said that generation capacity relying entirely on biomass would reach around three quarters of its coal output capacity.

Under existing plans, the company is in partnership with Germany’s Siemens Project Ventures to develop three 290 MW biomass power plants at an estimated cost of two billion pounds.

But before such a conversion could take place, Drax said that Britain’s policy framework would have to change.

“The problem is that we are prone to policy changes every few years because in the current framework there are no long-term policy provisions like we have in the offshore wind sector, and that is a huge risk for potential investors,” Thompson said.

Under Britain’s renewable energy support scheme, the Renewables Obligation (RO), the amount of renewable energy that can come from burning biomass instead of coal is capped in a system designed to push big multi-plant utilities to invest in other types of clean energy projects.

Under current rules, operators are only allowed to receive 12.5 percent of their ROCs from biomass Drax.

Drax is attending a parliamentary hearing on Wednesday evening to discuss government support for biomass.

(Reporting by Henning Gloystein; additional reporting by Kwok W Wan; editing by William Hardy)

Obama to warn US health insurers against rate jumps

June 22 (Reuters) – President Barack Obama will warn health insurance industry executives at a White House meeting on Tuesday against imposing big rate increases ahead of tighter rules under the new U.S. healthcare law, The New York Times reported.

“Our concern is that they not try and, under the cover of the act, get in under the wire here on rate increases,” Obama’s senior adviser David Axelrod told the newspaper.

The White House is concerned insurers will blame the new law for premium increases that really are intended to maximize industry profits, the newspaper said.

“Our message to them is to work with this law, not against it; don’t try and take advantage of it or we will work with state authorities and gather the authority we have to stop rate gouging,” the newspaper quoted Axelrod as saying.

Provisions of the healthcare law, which aims to expand consumers’ coverage while cracking down on discriminatory industry practices, start taking effect this summer and fall.

On Monday, a survey released by a non-profit healthcare group said insurers are raising prices by an average of 20 percent for working age adults who buy their own policies.

Such premium cost increases affected more than three-quarters of the 14 million U.S. adults who buy their own health plans and caused some to either seek a cheaper option with fewer benefits or switch insurers altogether, the Kaiser Family Foundation study showed.

The Obama administration has blasted health insurance companies such as WellPoint Inc (WLP.N) for their premium increases in individual policies sold in California and other states. (Washington World Desk, 202-898-8457)

Low Stock Shares Prompt Fannie and Freddie to Act

In 2007 Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE) were trading above $60; now, with shares hovering around $1, the companies are delisting from the New York Stock Exchange, reports the Washington Post. While Freddie’s shares were trading above $1, Fannie has been below for 30 trading days. According to the NYSE rules, a company has to “take action to boost its shares or delist.” Shares for both companies tumbled more than 40 percent after the announcement. Both Fannie and Freddie plan to start trading on the Over-the-Counter Bulletin Board on July 8.

A complicated claims process helped bring about a new $20 billion fund set up by BP (BP) for damage claims related to the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, according to Reuters. The money would be paid into the fund over a period of four years. To help create the fund, BP agreed to “cut three quarters of dividends, significantly reduce its investment program and sell $10 billion of assets.” The company also has to pay $100 million to workers who are unable to work during the six months of halted deep-sea drilling. The deal seems to help both sides: Obama now has “his most tangible success since the crisis began 58 days ago,” and BP has little less pressure on it.

The $20 billion fund set up by BP could be dwarfed by potential criminal charges and rising civil fine estimates, according to the New York Times. For all the oil escaping into the Gulf, BP could owe $280 million. However, the real costs would come from legal costs and criminal fines that could reach $62 billion, according to Raymond James analyst Pavel Molchanov. Most likely, BP will be charged for environmental misdemeanors since “merely negligent actions can lead to misdemeanor penalties.” Any tougher penalties would require proving that BP “knew its actions would lead to the gushing well on the ocean floor.”

The circuit breakers put in place after May’s “flash crash” began operating this week and not a moment too soon: They were triggered Wednesday when the price of Washington Post Company (WPO) shares doubled in a second, reports the Financial Times. Three erroneous trades went through around 3 p.m., causing the breakers to kick in and halt trading on the company’s shares. The breakers were put in place to halt trading in an S&P 500 stock “if the price either rises or falls by 10 percent inside a period of five minutes.” Afterward, a total of 766 shares in three separate orders were determined to be incorrect.

Once again, AT&T (T) has proven itself incapable of handling the sheer amount of customers Apple (AAPL) brings in, according to the Wall Street Journal. The newest iPhone was available for preorder, but after 600,000 advance orders, AT&T had “difficulty processing orders.” The carrier had system malfunctions, and there were “reports that some customers had inadvertently gained access to others’ account information.” After the troubles AT&T stopped taking preorders yesterday but might take more orders before the phone is released on June 24. According to Apple’s site, “customers who preorder the iPhone 4 will receive their phones on July 14.”

After almost a week, Spirit airlines will no longer be grounded by a pilot strike when its planes take to the sky on Friday, reports the Wall Street Journal. The strike cost the airline “an estimated $2 million a day in lost revenue.” The airline left its passengers stranded—roughly 1 percent of U.S. passengers—even though it was supposed to “team up with other airlines to serve its customers in the event of a strike.” Spirit may have made the pilots happy, but it now has to work on winning back its customers.

Finally, companies that aren’t among the World Cup’s official sponsors are using “guerilla-marketing tactics” to get around FIFA’s restricted zones, according to the Wall Street Journal. The event is so exclusive that companies who didn’t pay the millions of dollars to become an official sponsor can’t advertise close to the venues. Despite the restrictions, companies have taken to plastering Johannesburg with advertisements. Others are resorting to drastic measures like the pair of women who supposedly were “involved in a large scale ambush marketing effort by Dutch brewer Bavaria NV.”

Germany will face tougher opponents, warns Loew

(Reuters) – Germany will face tougher World Cup opponents than Australia and must keep their feet on the ground despite crushing the Socceroos 4-0 in their opening match, coach Joachim Loew said Sunday.

Sports

The team’s defense was excellent and he was very happy with the attacking play, Loew said, but he felt Germany’s youngest World Cup squad for three-quarters of a century could have closed down spaces in the middle of the field better.

“This was the first match of our tournament and we know that Australia is not going to be the ultimate benchmark,” Loew told a news conference.

“There will be more difficult opponents to play. So this was a good warm-up. We will be happy about this win,” he said.

Germany face Serbia on June 18 and Loew said they could provide stiffer competition, given they lost to Ghana Sunday and will need to win to get their campaign back on track.

“Serbia lost today, so they will be quite a different benchmark,” he said. “What we need to do is remain focused.”

Loew defended his decision to play Lukas Podolski and Miroslav Klose, despite their goal drought last season. Both came through for their coach, each scoring to put Germany 2-0 up by half time.

“I didn’t have to stick to these players, they didn’t have to deliver on any promises,” he said.

“I simply know that I can fully rely on these players even though they might not score in one match, even if they go through a bad patch. I have full confidence in them.”

Australia’s resolute and well-organized defense had been expected to pose problems for the German attack, but Loew said he told his players to focus on pushing low balls forward to create gaps — a tactic that paid off well in the game.

“The way we set up our attacks, the way we passed balls to and fro, is something we have been working on very intensively,” he said. “We tried to play long straight passes … and keep the ball low. And that created problems for the Australians.”

“Everybody expects things to kick off nicely and well after a long preparation so we can be happy and confident,” he said.

“We want to reach the round of 16 at least so we can be satisfied.”

(Editing by Ossian Shine)

U.S. Q1 productivity growth revised to 2.8 pct

June 3 (Reuters) – U.S. non-farm productivity growth was much slower than initially estimated in the first quarter, government data showed on Thursday, as businesses started adding workers to maintain output.

Global Markets

The Labor Department said non-farm productivity rose at a 2.8 percent annual rate, instead of the previously reported 3.6 percent pace. It was the smallest advance in a year, following a 6.3 percent growth pace in the fourth quarter.

Analysts polled by Reuters had forecast productivity, which measures the hourly output per worker, rising at a 3.4 percent rate in the January-March period.

Following a rapid expansion in the previous three quarters as businesses squeezed more output from a small group of workers, productivity is slowing down and analysts expect the trend to continue as companies increase payrolls.

Some companies have held off hiring new workers, opting instead to add hours for the existing workforce, but analysts believe this policy cannot be adopted indefinitely.

The economy grew at an annual pace of 3.0 percent in the first quarter, slowing from a 5.6 percent rate in the fourth quarter.

Total non-farm output grew at a 4.0 percent rate in the January-March period, rather than the 4.4 percent pace previously reported, after a robust 7.0 percent pace in the fourth quarter, the Labor Department said.

Hours worked increased at a 1.1 percent rate, instead of 0.8 percent. The increase in hours was the highest since the second quarter of 2007 and marked an acceleration from the 0.7 percent pace in the fourth quarter.

Unit labor costs, a gauge of inflation and profit pressures closely watched by the Federal Reserve, fell a less steep1.3 percent rather than 1.6 percent. That follows a 7.8 percent drop in the fourth quarter.

Analysts had expected unit labor costs to fall 1.4 percent in the first quarter.

Weak unit labor costs still pointed to muted inflation pressures and augur well for the U.S. central bank’s pledge to keep benchmark interest rates low for an extended period (Reporting by Lucia Mutikani; Editing by Andrea Ricci)

Canada recovery zooms, rate hike widely expected

(Reuters) – Canada’s economy expanded at the fastest clip in more than a decade in the first quarter, fueling expectations that on Tuesday the Bank of Canada will become the first G7 country to raise interest rates since the start of the recession.

Statistics Canada said on Monday that consumer spending, a hot housing market and a return of business investment helped boost gross domestic product by 6.1 percent at an annual rate in the quarter, the biggest jump since the fourth quarter of 1999.

Analysts had predicted 5.9 percent annualized GDP growth following revised 4.9 percent growth in the fourth quarter of last year.

“It would take some fancy footwork for the Bank of Canada to pass on hiking rates tomorrow after the Canadian economy just doubled the U.S. first-quarter growth pace,” said Scotia Capital economists Derek Holt and Karen Cordes Woods in a note.

Two quarters of speedy recovery following three quarters of contraction have left real GDP about 0.5 percent lower than its prerecession levels, economists said.

The economy grew 1.5 percent compared with the fourth quarter of last year, Statscan said.

The GDP numbers were broadly in line with the Bank of Canada’s latest projections. Most forecasters polled by Reuters expect the central bank to raise rates by 25 basis points on Tuesday to 0.50 percent.

“Effectively for them this is no surprise,” said Doug Porter, deputy chief economist at BMO Capital Markets.

“I don’t think it really changes the mix for the Bank of Canada from a purely domestic standpoint. There is just no debate that the Bank of Canada should be raising interest rates.”

The Canadian dollar rose to C$1.0452, or 95.68 U.S. cents, after the data, up from Friday’s North American finish of C$1.0520 to the U.S. dollar, or 95.06 U.S. cents.

Yields on overnight index swaps, which trade based on expectations for the central bank’s key policy rate, now suggest there is a 83.6 percent chance of a 25 basis point hike on June 1, slightly higher than before the GDP report. Expectations for the July, September, October and December rate announcements have also risen, as have bond yields.

A second Statscan report on Monday showed producer prices continued to edge higher in April, by 0.3 percent, due to primary metals products prices. Crude oil prices drove raw materials up 1.7 percent in the month.

CONSUMER IS KING

Consumer spending continued to be a key driver of recovery from Canada’s mild recession, and while exports continued to recover in the period, they were outpaced by import growth.

The housing market remained hot in the first quarter because of heavy investment in new construction and home renovations by owners taking advantage of a tax credit that expired on February 1.

If there were any surprise, they were that inventories rose after being drawn down for the previous four quarters and that there appeared to be strong momentum in the economy even at the end of the first quarter.

Monthly GDP growth in March topped estimates at 0.6 percent from February. This suggests second-quarter growth may also be above expectations even though analysts expect the effects of government and central bank stimulus to fade somewhat in the second half of this year.

“We are of the view that much better-than-expected consumer spending and housing market performances so far this year came at the expense of future growth,” said economist Diana Petramala of TD Securities.

“The recent spending spree has left consumers even more fatigued and highly indebted than ever. As interest rates begin to rise and households have to devote a greater share of their income to servicing their debt, this may well constrain future consumer spending growth,” she said.

The Bank of Canada projects second-quarter growth of 3.8 percent.

(Reporting by Louise Egan; Editing by Padraic Cassidy and Peter Galloway)

Overwhelming Majority of Canadians Against Global Tax on Banks in Canada

TORONTO, ONTARIO, May 31 (MARKET WIRE) —
The International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) push to have Canada participate
in a punitive global bank tax has been soundly rejected by the vast
majority of Canadians. According to a new poll conducted by The Strategic
Counsel more than three-quarters of Canadians (76 per cent) report that
Canada’s banks should not be subject to the proposed global bank tax as
it unfairly punishes Canadian banks that performed well and remained
stable throughout the financial crisis.

Furthermore, more than eight-in-ten Canadians (85 per cent) agree that
Canada’s banks should not be required to pay for the mistakes of banks in
the U.S. and Europe that led to the recent financial crisis.

“These results show that Canadians strongly support the government’s
move to reject an unfair tax on Canada’s financial institutions,”
said Nancy Hughes Anthony, President and Chief Executive Officer,
Canadian Bankers Association. “We hope that the upcoming G20 meeting
will focus on developing effective, even-handed regulations that will
prevent a repeat of the global financial crisis.”

The Strategic Counsel survey also revealed that Canadians are concerned
about the impact of new international banking regulations on banks in
Canada. Eight-in-ten Canadians (80 per cent) agree with the view that
Canada’s banks were a major exception when it came to the problems in the
financial sector over the last year. As a result, Canada’s banks should
not be put at a disadvantage when it comes to new regulation.

“Those who are in favour of a bank tax see this as a way to recoup
the costs of bank bailouts in other countries and curb speculative
behaviour. It doesn’t seem fair to make the customers and shareholders of
financial institutions throughout the world fund the bailouts of a
handful of financial institutions,” said Ms. Hughes Anthony.
“What is important is stability in the financial sector and good
risk management, which you do not get by imposing a tax on financial
institutions.”

When asked about their impressions of Canada’s banks, 78 per cent of
Canadians registered favourable impressions. As well, more than
eight-in-ten (81 per cent) of Canadians believe that Canada’s banks are
more stable and secure compared to other banks around the world.

Survey Methodology

The survey findings are based on a national proportionate sample of 1200
adult Canadians 18 years or older who were interviewed by telephone
between May 5 and May 12, 2010. The results are accurate within +/-2.9
percentage points, 19 times out of 20.

The Canadian Bankers Association works on behalf of 50 domestic banks,
foreign bank subsidiaries and foreign bank branches operating in Canada
and their 263,400 employees. The CBA advocates for effective public
policies that contribute to a sound, successful banking system that
benefits Canadians and Canada’s economy. The Association also promotes
financial literacy to help Canadians make informed financial decisions.
www.cba.ca.

Contacts:
Canadian Bankers Association
Andrew Addison
(416) 362-6093, ext. 220 or Cell: (416) 587-7733
aaddison@cba.ca
www.cba.ca

Copyright 2010, Market Wire, All rights reserved.

Chinese parents fight over child surnames

Beijing, May 27 (IANS) Young parents in China are now faced with a unique problem – most of them do not agree with each other on following the ancient tradition of their child having the paternal surname.

A majority of women – about 80 percent – wanted their children to take the mother’s surname while about three quarters of male respondents opposed the idea, a survey by Phoenix News Media has said.

The survey that began Tuesday spoke to more than 20,000 respondents.

In another survey by cd.qq.com, around 70 percent of respondents said they would consider giving the mother’s surname to their kids. And, if a mother gave birth to twins, 65 percent said one twin should have the mother’s surname while the other should have the father’s.

‘It would be fair enough to have one twin use my surname because I work as hard as my husband to earn and raise the children. But he opposed, feeling that the twins only belong to his clan,’ a mother was quoted as saying by Xinhua.

Hu Guangwei, deputy director of the Sociology Institute of the Sichuan Provincial Academy of Social Sciences, said this change has come due to the rise of women’s rights issues and the increased open-mindedness among the new generation.

‘A name is just a person’s social label. But for thousands of years, the surname has had many connotations relating to familial lineage, blood relationship and patriarchal clan rules. Surnames thus have long been viewed as the marker for patriarchal lineage inheritance,’ Hu said.

Under the Chinese marriage law, a newborn may be given the surname of either the father or the mother.

However, to ease dispute, many parents chose to use double surnames or a combination of the surnames of both the father and mother, sometimes causing the child’s name to be as long as four Chinese characters.

The majority of Chinese full names involve two to three characters, with the first one representing the family name.

China adopted its one-child family-planning policy in the late 1970s to curb the rapid expansion of its population. The first generation born under the policy has reached child-bearing age, one of the surveys said.

Radio rules the roost as most trusted source of news in UK

London, May 19 (ANI): Video has not, after all, killed the radio star if a UK Office of Communications survey is to be gone by, as according to it, radio has emerged as the most trusted source of news in the UK ahead of TV and the Internet.

Ofcom, the independent telecom regulator for the UK, found that 66% of people considered radio to be reliable and accurate, compared with 58% for online, 54% for TV and just 34% for newspapers.

This year has been a lean one for the once infallible Television, with the Internet pipping it to bag the position of the second most trusted source for the first time.

However there was significant difference of opinion between adults and youngsters regarding the subject of reliability of news websites, with just 3 out of 10 adults rating them as “reliable and accurate”

According to the BBC, the survey, of 1,824 people over the age of 16, was conducted in 2009.

The survey also found the use of digital TV, Internet and mobile phones had increased since 2007.

About three quarters (73%) of adults used the Internet in 2009, up from two thirds (63%) in 2007, while 91% of the population used a mobile phone.

Half of all Internet users said that using the Internet had increased their contact with friends or family who lived further away, and about a quarter said it had increased their contact with friends who live nearby.

Social networking sites such as Facebook were among the most popular sites, with 35% of respondents regularly using the Internet to keep in touch with family and friends.

Reiterating the soaring popularity of online social networking, the survey found that twice as many Internet users had a social networking site profile (44%) compared with 2007, the BBC reports. (ANI)

Poor kids more vulnerable to poor sleep effects

Washington, May 14 (ANI): School kids from poor families are more vulnerable to the effects of poor sleep than their peers, concludes a new study.

The research, that assessed the ties between children”s sleep and their emotional development, by researchers at Auburn University, appears in the May/June 2010 issue of the journal Child Development.

The researchers looked at how sleep disruptions—namely, the amount, quality, and schedule of sleep—affect children”s adjustment.

They examined more than 140 children in third to fifth grades, of whom three-quarters were White and almost a quarter were African American. Families varied widely in terms of annual income and parents” education and jobs.

The study gathered information from parents” and children”s reports, as well as motion sensors worn by the children at night to examine their sleep. The researchers looked at relations between sleep and emotional development when children were in third and fifth grades; they also compared how children”s sleep when they were in third grade was related to their well-being when they were in fifth grade.

Findings indicate that children from poorer families had higher levels of externalizing symptoms (such as aggression and delinquency) and internalizing symptoms (such as depression, anxiety, and low self-esteem) when they slept poorly. Conversely, when these children slept better, their levels of symptoms were similar to those of other children from nonpoor families.

“The significance of children”s sleep to their development is receiving increased attention,” according to Mona El-Sheikh, Alumni Professor of Human Development and Family Studies at Auburn University and the study”s lead author.

“Our findings can inform intervention programs as well as parent education programs. Programs that are tailored to families” resources and challenges are likely to be more effective.” (ANI)

Low vitamin D tied to depression in older people

Reuters Older men and women with lower levels of vitamin D in their blood are more prone to become depressed over time, new research shows.

Many studies have been published recently on the potential health benefits of vitamin D, and the potential risks of deficiency. Low vitamin D levels have been linked to heart disease, stroke, high blood pressure, and more severe asthma.

In older people, insufficient vitamin D is quite common, and has been linked to fractures, worse physical function, greater frailty, and a wide variety of chronic illness.

In the current study, Dr. Luigi Ferrucci of the National Institute on Aging in Baltimore and colleagues looked at whether low vitamin D levels and depression in older people might be related.

They followed 531 women and 423 men 65 and older who were participating in the InCHIANTI Study, a long-term investigation of factors associated with loss of mobility in aging people, over six years.

At the study’s outset, 42 percent of the women and 18 percent of the men were depressed, while three-quarters of the women and half of the men had levels of vitamin D below 50 nanomoles per liter, which is generally considered insufficient.

Seventy-two percent of the depressed people and 60 percent of the non-depressed people had vitamin D insufficiency – the level above deficiency — the researchers found. Women with vitamin D insufficiency showed a worse decline in mood at three and six years into the study; their scores on a standardized test measuring depressive symptoms increased more at three and six years compared to the scores for women who had adequate vitamin D. This increase could have tipped the scale into a diagnosis of depression for some people.

Women with low vitamin D who weren’t depressed at the beginning of the study were also twice as likely to become depressed over the following six years as the women who had sufficient levels of the nutrient. While similar patterns were seen for men, the association wasn’t as strong, and in some cases could have been due to chance, according to the researchers.

The study does not prove that low vitamin D levels cause depression, the authors note; people with low levels of the nutrient might have other characteristics that predispose them to the blues.

Still, they suggest that preventing “vitamin D deficiency in the elderly may become in the future a strategy to prevent the development of depressive mood in the elderly and avoid its deleterious consequences on health. In addition, normalization of vitamin D levels may be part of any depression treatment plans in older patients.”

Vitamin D, produced by the body when skin is exposed to sunlight, is also found in certain foods such as oily fish. It helps cells absorb calcium and is important for bone health.

However, the authors conclude, before any strategies to boost vitamin D can be adopted they must be tested in larger and more rigorously designed trials.