McClendon’s behavior has been shamelessly greedy, as has that of many of his board members. Investors should hope that each is thrown out.

Icahn wrote in a SEC filing:

We are not alone in criticizing this board.  Shareholders have filed lawsuits, withhold campaigns and have otherwise voiced disapproval and all three major proxy advisory firms (i.e., ISS, Glass, Lewis and Egan-Jones) have advised shareholders to withhold votes from directors at the 2012 annual meeting.  Chesapeake shareholders will benefit neither from a constant stream of negative news reflecting upon the companies troubled past, nor from a half hearted attempt by the board to make the minimum possible number of changes to skate by for one more year.  The board must not only find a way to eliminate the enormous funding gap, but also the more substantial creditability gap.

And,

To engender any meaningful credibility among shareholders, corporate governance reforms cannot, in our view, be led by directors whose irresponsible actions have brought this company to the edge of the proverbial cliff.  Accordingly, we propose that at least 4 of the current directors (other than Louis Simpson) should be immediately replaced by two persons designated by us and two persons designated by another large shareholder such as Southeastern Asset Management, the company’s largest shareholder.  In our opinion, only when these changes are effectuated will the board be truly independent and more importantly will investors come to believe that promises made will be promises kept; when a capital plan is agreed upon it will be maintained, not diverged from as it has in the past.

Paul’s most recent knee-jerk reaction is to insist that Congress pass a law to “deter China’s currency manipulation”. He presses for this because the Administration–the Treasury Department in particular–did not name China as a currency manipulator in its semi-annual report to Congress (“Semi-Annual Report to Congress on International Economic and Exchange Rate Policies”) on the matter. Paul’s direct reaction was “We’re deeply disappointed by the Treasury Department’s decision not to name China as a currency manipulator.  America’s businesses and their workers depend on a level playing field to successfully compete, and they can’t halt unfair trade practices on their own.” Perhaps Paul thinks a trade war would solve the problem.

If China were to receive the “currency manipulator” tag, several things would happen immediately. Most of them are not good for America. China could stop its purchase of US sovereign debt. China is such a large buyer that the federal government would almost certainly have to raise rates to increase demand from other sources. Since many other rates used to charge consumers and businesses are pegged from federal rates, the American economy would be damaged by a rise in the cost of capital. Some economists believe that China would not hurt the value of its own currency reserves by taking this path, but this assumes that all political decisions are rational.

The “currency manipulation” tag would begin a series of sanctions between the US and China. The People’s Republic rarely takes aggressive actions towards its economy quietly. China could effectively put tariffs on US goods which might be so high that some American businesses would be severely damaged. The imports from China which America needs to keep the cost of living reasonable would in large numbers disappear. Wal-Mart’s “every day low prices” would be gone in a day. So would millions of goods built in China for export to the US. The by-products of Mr. Paul’s suggestion, if taken, would do incalculable damage to the American economy, and put a number of the workers at the companies that support the Alliance for American Manufacturing out of jobs. Perhaps those companies should pause to reconsider whether they benefit from what Paul has said.

The Administration knows full well that the China currency issue is a problem. In its report, Treasury said that China’s currency remains “significantly undervalued” and “further appreciation of the yuan against the dollar and other major currencies is warranted.” It is unfortunate that the US cannot immediately force China’s hand. But, China has a strong hand, too

Douglas A. McIntyre

Based on 2012 Harris Poll EquiTrend Rankings, 24/7 Wall St. identified the most popular coffee brands that people make themselves. The seven coffee companies with scores above the coffee product average measured by Harris, did well based on familiarity, quality, purchase consideration and the ability to generate buzz.

Green Mountain coffee brand topped the list. Its parent company, Green Mountain Coffee Roasters, is often viewed as a competitor to Starbucks, which did not make the list. In fact, the brands that are rated below average are probably better known than those rated above average.The losers include Chock Full O’Nuts, Nescafe, Newman’s Own, Seattle’s Best, and Starbucks.

Because Harris is not the only research firm that polls people on coffee preferences, we looked at other opinion studies, including one by Consumer Reports. Oddly enough, its preference ratings put Starbucks’ house blend as the highest rated brand. The differences in the results show how unpredictable research is when consumer preferences are considered.

Because of this, 24/7 also looked beyond subjective measures of preference. We looked at price, based on the assumption that many coffee drinkers consider value. We also examined annual revenue of each brand, as well as the number of bags sold last year. We discovered that the most favored brands are not inexpensive. Folgers Ground Coffee and Green Mountain, two of the most preferred brands, cost well over $7 per bag. Millstone and Eight O’Clock, while still popular, are less preferred, and each of these costs little more than $5 per bag

The relationship of price to quality perception should not come as a surprise. Starbucks has made a fortune selling expensive coffee at trendy stores. Its customers are not complaining that their $3 cup of coffee costs twice as much as it does at the neighborhood deli

24/7 Wall St. reviewed the 2012 Harris Poll EquiTrend Rankings of coffee brands, which quantifies brand strength among consumers, to identify the most popular coffees. We included dollar sales, change in dollar sales from one year ago and unit sales of bagged ground coffee over the latest 52-week period in the United States provided by SymphonyIRI Group, a Chicago-based market research firm. The group’s data reflects sales at supermarkets, drugstores, gas/convenience stores and mass market retailers, but excludes Walmart club stores, and liquor stores.

These are America’s favorite coffees:

7. Caribou
> Parent company: Caribou Coffee Company
> 1-yr. bags sold: 2,134,128
> 1-yr. sales: $16,793,690
> Price per bag: $7.87

Owned by the publicly traded Minneapolis-based Caribou Coffee Company, the Caribou brand comes in at seventh in the Harris poll. Founded in 1992, Caribou is the second most expensive coffee on this list at $7.87 a bag. The brand also has the second-lowest annual dollar sales of any coffee brand on the list at less than $17 million. In its most recently reported quarter, Caribou’s parent company sales were $80.5 million for all its brands, up 11% from the same quarter in the prior year. In its coffee blend reviews, Consumer Reports gave Caribou’s “daybreak morning” blend especially poor reviews.

6. Maxwell House
> Parent company: Kraft Foods, Inc.
> 1-yr. bags sold:73,285,570
> 1-yr. sales: $467,080,600
> Price per bag: $6.37

A Kraft Foods product, Maxwell House’s 52-week sales through April 15 was in excess of $467 million, making it the second best selling ground coffee in the U.S. Despite strong sales, Maxwell House has performed poorly in coffee blend ratings issued by Consumer Reports, as none of the four blends (decaffeinated, breakfast, original roast medium, and master blend mild) was given a “good” rating. However, at $6.37 a bag, Maxwell House’s brand value is likely bolstered by a middling price in conjunction with customer familiarity with both the brand and its parent company.

5. Eight O’Clock
> Parent company: Tata Global Beverages
> 1-yr. bags sold:13,519,080
> 1-yr. sales: $74,800,170
> Price per bag: $5.53

First sold in 1859 by the Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company (now A&P), the Eight
O’Clock brand’s longevity is unmatched by any other ground coffee on this list. The brand has been sold under the present trademark since 1919. In the 1920s through the 1950s, the company claims it was the most popular ground coffee brand in the U.S. Since then, however, its popularity has declined.  Since 2006, the brand has been owned by Tata Global Beverages and, as of 2010, was still the best-selling whole bean coffee, according to the company.

4. Millstone
> Parent company: J.M. Smucker Company
> 1-yr. bags sold: 3,469,959
> 1-yr. sales: $18,187,170
> Price per bag: $5.24

Millstone was started in 1981 by Phil Johnson, who sold arabica coffee beans to shops in the Seattle area. The brand offers a large variety of roasts, from espressos to French roasts and appeals to customers through organic and fair trade offerings. The brand has performed poorly in the last year, with dollar sales down 10.94% and bag sales down 19.69%. The brand’s average price per bag has risen 52 cents in this same time span.

3. Dunkin’ Donuts
> Parent company: J.M. Smucker Company
> 1-yr. bags sold: 21,499,550
> 1-yr. sales: $190,710,400
> Price per bag: $8.87

Well known for its restaurants, which offer breakfast, baked goods and coffee, the Dunkin’ Donuts brand is owned by the Dunkin’ Brands Group. Dunkin’ Donuts, which has 6,772 franchised restaurants in 35 states, has licensed J.M. Smucker to sell its ground coffee throughout the U.S. Dunkin’ is the most expensive coffee on this list. Its offerings have been given mixed reviews by Consumer Reports — its dark roast is well reviewed and its decaffeinated blend is poorly reviewed. In the last year, dollar sales have increased 11.03% as the average price per bag has risen by 83 cents.

2. Folgers
> Parent company: J.M. Smucker Company
> 1-yr. bags sold:114,784,800
> 1-yr. sales: $852,350,800
> Price per bag: $7.43

The best-selling ground coffee brand, Folgers sold over 114 million bags of coffee in the past year. The sales don’t include the “Gourmet Selections” and “Coffee Singles” products, which account for an additional $18.6 million and $19 million in sales, respectively. The brand’s offerings received mixed reviews from Consumer Reports, with its house blend receiving a “good” rating and its breakfast, classic and decaf blends receiving “fair” ratings. Though the brand was founded in 1850, it has been part of the J.M. Smucker Company only since November, 2008.

1. Green Mountain
> Parent company: Green Mountain Coffee Roasters
> 1-yr. bags sold:1,844,802
> 1-yr. sales: $14,422,080
> Price per bag: $7.82

Founded in Waitsfield, Vermont in 1981, Green Mountain has been manufactured in Waterbury, Vermont, since shortly thereafter. Its parent company, Green Mountain Coffee Roasters is better-known for its Keurig brands, which account for much of the revenue at the parent company. In the most recently reported quarter, revenue at Green Mountain’s parent company rose 37% to $885 million. Despite a relatively high price per bag of $7.82, Green Mountain’s 52 week sales are less than $15 million. This makes Green Mountain the smallest brand by sales of all brands studied by Harris. The single Green Mountain blend reviewed by Consumer Reports, its signature Nantucket blend medium roast, received the third-highest rating.

Douglas A. McIntyre

Toyota, Japan’s biggest car maker by volume, plans to sell more than 1 million subcompacts in more than 100 countries and regions, such as China, Southeast Asia, India and Brazil, by 2015.

Toyota does not have many other places to go for expansion. The European markets are nearly dead. China’s market has slowed considerably. Toyota’s sales have picked up a great deal in America, but the market has become progressively more competitive as U.S. car companies has been revived and large firms, including Volkswagen, BMW and Mercedes, have aggressively exploited the one region in which they have an ongoing chance for rising sales volume.

A New Web Browser

For some reason, Yahoo! (NASDAQ: YHOO) wants to be in the crowded web browser arena. Its new product is called Axis. It is meant to compete with Apple’s (NASDAQ: AAPL) iPhone, iPad and iPod Touch products. But Apple already has its own Safari browser. And the industry is controlled by Microsoft’s (NASDAQ: MSFT) Internet Explorer, Google’s (NASDAQ: GOOG) Chrome, and Firefox. It is a good guess that Yahoo! wants to use Axis to move further into mobile search, but it already has lost most of that market to Google. And there is no reason for the great majority of users to switch from their preferred browser when they move from computer to portable device.

Galaxy S3’s U.S. Launch

The wildly successful Samsung Galaxy S III will be available in the United States starting on June 1. But the first wave of handsets will not be sold by carriers. Amazon.com (NASDAQ: AMZN) will sell the new Galaxy without a wireless contract. Wireless companies underwrite the costs of smartphones because they get two-year subscriptions from customers. Amazon will sell the Galaxy S III for $800. The product will be “unlocked” so it can be used on a number of networks. There is some debate over whether its powerful processor is set to work on superfast 4G LTE networks, or if a less-powerful processor will be required to operate on those systems. The Samsung Galaxy is widely regarded as the primary competitor to the Apple iPhone 4S, so early sales in the U.S. will prove whether that perception is true.

MSNBC.com Buyout Talks

Comcast’s (NASDAQ: CMCSA) NBCUniversal operations is in talks with Microsoft to takeover the part of MSNBC.com that it does not already own. The rumor was reported in Adweek. Microsoft may not want to part with the stake. NBC could use it as a portal to increase traffic to its media sites. But Microsoft has its large MSN.com operation, which has a close relationship with MSNBC.com. As Microsoft works to drive traffic to its Bing search engine, MSNBC.com is strategically important.

Douglas A. McIntyre

Read: The Cities with the Most Homes Underwater

In some of America’s largest metropolitan regions, however, the housing crash dealt a far worse blow. In these areas — most of which are in California, Florida and the southwest — home values were cut in half, unemployment skyrocketed, and 50% to 70% of borrowers now find themselves with a home worth less than the value of their mortgage. 24/7 Wall St. reviewed the 100 largest housing markets and identified the 10 with the highest percentage of homes with underwater mortgages.

Svenja Gudell, senior economist at Zillow, explained in an interview with 24/7 Wall St. that the markets with the highest rates of underwater borrowers are in trouble now because of the rampant growth seen in these cities prior to the recession. Once home prices peaked, which was primarily in late 2005 through 2006, all but one of these 10 housing markets lost at least 50% of their median home value.

Making matters worse for families with high negative equity in these markets is the increased unemployment. “If you have a whole lot of unemployment in an area, you’re more likely to see home values continue to decline in the area as well,” says Gudell. While in 2007 many of these markets had average or below average unemployment rates, the recession took a heavy toll on their economies. By 2011, eight of the 10 markets had unemployment rates above 10%, and three — all in California — had unemployment rates of above 16%, nearly double the national average.

24/7 Wall St. used Zillow’s first-quarter 2012 negative equity report to identify the 10 housing markets — out of the 100 largest metropolitan statistical areas in the country — with the highest percentage of underwater mortgages. Zillow also provided us with the decline in home values in these markets from prerecession peak values, the total negative equity value in these markets and the percentage of homes underwater that have been delinquent on payments for 90 days or more.

These are the cities with the most homes underwater.

The Times-Picayune of New Orleans is owned by Advance Publications, which in turn is owned by the uber-rich Newhouse family. Advance announced it would cut back printing and delivery of the paper to three days a week — Wednesday, Friday and Sunday. Advance also will gut three other papers — the Birmingham News, the Press-Register of Mobile and the Huntsville Times. Advance has practice in “downsizing” papers. It made a similar move in 2009 in Ann Arbor, Michigan. The daily was cut in favor of AnnArbor.com.

The next move by the Newhouse family likely will be to take similar steps with three other big city dailies it owns — the Plain Dealer of Cleveland, the Star-Ledger of Newark and the Oregonian. In a little more than one wave of a hand, four large cities will be without dailies.

The notion that Internet versions of papers can tip the industry back toward success is a flawed. An examination of the financial results of the Washington Post Company (NYSE: WPO), the New York Times Company (NYSE: NYT), Gannett (NYSE: GCI) and deeply troubled McClatchy (NYSE: MNI) shows that online revenue remains a tiny part of overall sales. The New York Times newspaper operation announced a drop in digital sales of 2.3% last quarter. Digital advertising is now 22.5% of the group’s revenue. That is not nearly enough to stanch the sharp erosion of print ad revenue that has dropped sharply for a decade. And it is worth noting that the New York Times sites have by far the largest audience of any newspaper group in the country.

The impression that analysts who follow the industry have for now is that the biggest newspaper chains will not cut back the number of days they print their largest daily papers. Newspapers that are more than 100 years old can be maintained by plans to lower circulations and charge loyal customers more for their subscriptions. That is only a delaying tactic. Nothing can entirely offset disappearing print advertising.

It is inevitable that large dailies in more and more cities will cut the number of days that they print newspapers, except in metropolitan areas where Warren Buffett owns the properties.

Douglas A. McIntyre

Among firms that had IPOs recently, the short interest in Zynga (NASDAQ: ZNGA) rose 35% to 56.6 million. Shares sold short in Groupon (NASDAQ: GRPN) rose 19% to 20.7 million. Both companies have been under attack because many investors believe that they cannot sustain sales in a market in which the number of competitors is multiplying quickly.

Among Web 1.0 firms, the short interest in Yahoo! (NASDAQ: YHOO) was up 23% to 25.6 million. Although the firm has been able to make progress with its Asian assets, its core portal business is in trouble, and it recently replaced another CEO. Shares short in eBay (NASDAQ: EBAY) rose 19% to 16.6 million.

Among other tech stocks, the short interest in Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT), which continues to struggle in the critical mobile industry, rose 25% to 87 million. Shares sold short in badly wounded Research In Motion (NASDAQ: RIMM) rose 18% to 53.4 million. The short interest in Oracle (NASDAQ: ORCL) rose 8% to 35.4 million shares.

Other companies with weak prospects hit by short sellers included Chesapeake Energy (NYSE: CHK); shares sold short rose 27% to 85.2 million. There are questions about the CEO’s practice of investing individually in some of the firm’s drilling projects. Shares short in Sprint-Nextel (NYSE: S) rose 20% to 116.7 million. The third-largest wireless company continues to lose ground to AT&T (NYSE: T) and Verizon Wireless.

Short interest in major banks also rose as worries about Europe’s finances and new regulations pushed share prices down. Shares sold short in Bank of America (NYSE: BAC) rose 6% to 150.7 million. The short interest in Citigroup (NYSE: C) rose 16% to 35.5 million. Shares sold short in Wells Fargo (NYSE: WFC) moved higher by 11% to 36 million.

Douglas A. McIntyre

New car sales in May are expected to reach their highest level since 2007, according to auto research firm Truecar. The annualized pace will reach 14.5 million. This trend has helped many car companies, particularly those based in the United States, post strong profits.

As car sales rise, the complexion of brand preference has changed. Toyota (NYSE: TM) is the biggest beneficiary of new buying habits. Its market share is expected to reach 14.8% next month, up from 10.2% in the same month a year ago. Much of the reason for that is the recovery of its production facilities after the Japanese earthquake in 2011. But strong demand for its popular brands like the Prius is just as important. Production improvements could not increase sales by themselves.

The car company that has made the most extraordinary comeback from the recession is Chrysler. It is expected to have a U.S. market share of 10.9% next month. That will put it ahead of Japanese giant Honda (NYSE: HMC), which has had sales driven by high-quality ratings in the past. Chrysler has made an improbable comeback from Chapter 11. Many analysts believed it would lack the financial ability to produce enough new models to be competitive. Its management countered that by releasing relatively few cars that sold extremely well.

Against these improvements are Hyundai and Kia’s numbers. Their market shares are expected to fall to 9.3% next month from 10.1% last year. Hyundai got many of its sales from its pricing, and some from its aggressive warranty offers.

American taste in cars has returned to traditional brands. It is impossible to tell why for certain. But the trend has started to hurt Hyundai badly.

Douglas A. McIntyre

The second quarter will be two-thirds over when Memorial Day comes. Many economists believe that economic activity slowed in the quarter. Jobless rates on a national basis barely improved. Housing data show that home prices may have bottomed throughout much of America, but the bottom is a soft one. Americans also have started to think about whether Congress will allow tax cuts to lapse, which would hurt the spending power of much of the middle class. Deciding to spend money this weekend will not be easy.

Douglas A. McIntyre

EU concerns push the euro to close to a two-year low. (Reuters)

Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS) will invest $40 billion into alternative energy in the next decade. (Reuters)

TV networks battle with Dish Network (NASDAQ: DISH) over a DVR that can skip ads. (Reuters)

Apple (NASDAQ: AAPL) CEO Tim Cook gives up $75 million in dividends on his stock holdings. (Reuters)

Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE: BRK-B) may buy more newspapers. (Reuters)

Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley (NYSE: MS) loan shares to short sellers who want to hedge Facebook’s stock. (WSJ)

U.S. bank lending falls in the first quarter, a possible sign of economic slowing. (WSJ)

Toyota (NYSE: TM) will push further into emerging markets. (WSJ)

Comcast’s (NASDAQ: CMCSA) NBCUniversal division may buyout Microsoft’s (NASDAQ: MSFT) part ownership in MSNBC.com. (WSJ)

Japanese power companies invest in U.S. shale gas to help replace nuclear power. (WSJ)

Yahoo! (NASDAQ: YHOO) releases an Internet browser call Axis, which will compete with Google’s (NASDAQ: GOOG) product. (WSJ)

Spain is concerned about a run on its banks. (NYT)

Large European institutional funds begin to sell euro assets. (FT)

Italian Prime Minister Mario Monti says most leaders in the region back regionwide bonds. (Bloomberg)

Douglas A. McIntyre