A federal mortgage deal with banks over mortgage fraud would give states enforcement power. (Reuters)

Sony (NYSE: SNE) expects a $2.9 billion loss. (Reuters)

Long-term investors continue to reject investments in long-term Italian bonds. (Reuters)

The House votes to extend a pay freeze for federal employees. (Reuters)

Deutsche Boerse and NYSE Euronext (NYSE: NYX) will consider alternatives now that their merger has collapsed. (Reuters)

The size of Facebook’s IPO would top Google’s (NASDAQ: GOOG). (WSJ)

January car sales rose 11% to the fastest pace in four years. (WSJ)

AMR will cut 13,000 jobs. (WSJ)

Deutsche Bank posts a loss. (WSJ)

Pfizer (NYSE: PFE) recalls a number of birth control pills. (WSJ)

Samsung says a German court rejected an Apple (NASDAQ: AAPL) request to stop the sales of Galaxy tablets and Nexus phones. (WSJ)

States with energy exploration businesses did well during the recession while manufacturing states are still struggling. (WSJ)

Many in Congress have rejected Obama’s new mortgage relief plan. (WSJ)

Disagreements between Germany and the IMF have slowed Greek bailout talks. (WSJ)

Kodak wants out of a deal that puts it name on the location where the Oscars are held. (WSJ)

Whirlpool’s (NYSE: WHR) cost cuts helped drive its profits. (WSJ)

Regulators are worried that a marketing deal between Verizon Wireless and Comcast (NASDAQ: CMCSA) would be anticompetitive. (WSJ)

EU regulators may back down on plans to make banks keep large amounts of safe assets. (WSJ)

Spain announces plans to improve its troubled bank sector. (WSJ)

Petrobras (NYSE: PBR) sold $7 billion in bonds, near a record for emerging market companies. (WSJ)

A deal over Greek debt raises concerns that a rescue of Portugal will follow. (NYT)

Large U.S. companies have raised money at record low rates. (FT)

CDS on both corporations and sovereign debt show less concern about financial troubles. (Bloomberg)

The number of people who filed for unemployment benefits in Spain during January reached a record. (Bloomberg)

Douglas A. McIntyre

Hulu is a relatively small premium content site that is owned by Walt Disney (NYSE: DIS), Providence Equity Partners, News Corp. (NYSE: NWS) and the NBCUniversal unit of Comcast (NASDAQ: CMCSA). Hulu says it will press into the paid content business as well. Hulu’s CEO, Jason Kilar, said at a recent AllThingsD conference that, “It is important that we deliver great content and stories that aren’t being told right now. And that serves two purposes. One, consumers are asking for it. And second, it does build up healthy differentiation versus other services.” What stories and what differentiation?

The major internet content and traditional VOD services have most of what consumers want. Otherwise, they would have no chance at success in the industry. It is important to have Saving Private Ryan in inventory. It is not important to have a French period piece from the 1930s — particularly if it does not have English subtitles. Kilar knows that. His chances of success are tiny.

No one will entirely elbow aside the cable box on the top of most TVs, whether that box is from a cable company, satellite company or telecom operator. Netflix forced its way into the home through its initial DVD business. No other competitor had that early advantage, least of all Hulu.

Hulu also has to compete with several extremely well-financed businesses that nonetheless are likely to fail because they are late to market. First among these is the largest video site in the world — Google’s (NASDAQ: GOOG) YouTube. Despite its size and the size of Google’s balance sheet, Hollywood studios have been wary of YouTube’s hundreds of millions of amateur clips and its reputation as a site on which premium content is sometimes found without the permission of the owner.

Hulu is among of the last premium video companies to try to bring content to the living room. Even if it was not too late, it is too small and has no competitive advantages.

Douglas A. McIntyre

Yahoo!’s revenue fell 13% to $1.324 billion in the fourth quarter. Net income dropped 5% to $296 million. Even with its new CEO, almost no one who watches the company thinks there is a solution to the ongoing shrinkage of sales.

Yahoo! will somehow add cash, perhaps over $10 billion, to its balance sheet through the sale or spinoff of Yahoo! Japan and its stake in Alibaba. The means by which it will handle those transactions are still an open question because of tax issues and the difficulties of negotiations with the two Asian companies. Neither of them has to make a transaction with Yahoo! now.

MSN and Aol already have huge online audiences. They have to find ways to increase sales from these visitors, but there is no proof that combining with Yahoo! will do that.

Companies that lack the scale that they need to augment their traditional media sales with larger online ones would find Yahoo! an important acquisition. It would allow them to marry their old world TV or print sales with a larger online audience. CBS had 79 million unique visitors in December, according to research firm Comscore. Viacom’s digital properties had about the same number. Comcast (NASDAQ: CMCSA) had 50 million and Gannett (NYSE: GCI) had 44 million. None of these figures comes close to Yahoo!’s 176 million.

The troubles of traditional media are well understood. Public firms like CBS and Gannett face the erosion of television and print ad sales. Right now, their digital sales are insufficient to make up for that attrition. The chance to go to advertisers with packages that combine old media marketing with new may be their only chance to keep revenue advances — and happy shareholders.

Yahoo! has a market cap of $19 billion. Much of that is based on the value of Alibaba and Yahoo! Japan. Yahoo!’s core business may be worth less than $10 billion. That makes it an affordable purchase or merger candidate for most large traditional media companies, which have larger market values than Yahoo!.

The argument against a the ownership of Yahoo! by a traditional media company is that the older company would have no better chance to increase the portal’s revenue than MSN would. That is not true. Large advertisers continue to look for ways to reach huge audiences, some of which consume most media through traditional channels and some of which spend much of their time online. Yahoo!, in combination with a traditional media company, would offer the world’s largest marketers a chance to gain both through one firm.

Douglas A. McIntyre

Verizon Wireless, the joint venture between Verizon Communications Inc. (NYSE: VZ) and Vodafone Group plc (NASDAQ: VOD), did not just sit on its hands while AT&T tried to push through the T-Mobile deal. The company paid $3.6 billion for unused spectrum owned by SpectrumCo, a consortium of Comcast Corp. (NASDAQ: CMCSA), Time Warner Cable Inc. (NYSE: TWC), and Bright House Networks.

Other potential AT&T acquisitions include MetroPCS Communications Inc. (NYSE: PCS), Leap Wireless International Inc. (NASDAQ: LEAP), and even Sprint Nextel Corp. (NYSE: S). But none would be as good as a deal for Dish.

AT&T’s main problem is that it would have to pay a premium price for Dish — perhaps as much as $50/share, or about 70% above today’s share price. That would value Dish at around $22 billion, a steep price given that AT&T just paid out $4 billion to T-Mobile in break-up fees. Even Ma Bell can’t afford to pay that kind of money too often for nothing in return, and it’s a sure bet that Dish would want a substantial break-up fee as part of any deal.

A report at Bloomberg News notes that Verizon Wireless owns 56 percent more 4G spectrum than AT&T in the top 10 markets and 46 percent more in the top 100. Verizon Wireless also claims 107.7 million subscribers compared with AT&T’s 100.7 million. Had AT&T been able to acquire T-Mobile, it would have increased its spectrum by 62%, leveling the playing field.

Dish recently acquired wireless spectrum from two bankrupt satellite television companies for about $2.8 billion in a deal that is still awaiting FCC approval. Verizon’s deal with SpectrumCo also needs regulatory approval, and so far there is no indication that either approval is in trouble.

But what does AT&T want with a satellite TV business? Of course it could hive it off once the deal is done, but it might make more sense to go after MetroPCS or Leap, both of which are simply wireless carriers. Or AT&T might be able to get Dish to sell just the spectrum. That would not be the best deal for Dish shareholders, but the company’s management would certainly be able to retire following such a transaction.

Dish shares are trading up more than 2% today at $29.34 in a 52-week range of $20.85-$32.56. Shares of AT&T are up almost 1% at $30.30 in a 52-week range of $27.20-$31.94.

One issue to consider… Dish would have every right in the world to demand another massive deal break-up fee in case the telecom giant could not convince regulators that this is good for consumers.

Paul Ausick

Nuance has been thought of as a potential takeover name for Microsoft Corporation (NASDAQ: MSFT) and for Apple Inc. (NASDAQ: AAPL) on and off for some time.  This may not change the speculation status much.  But what this does accomplish is a new platform to “easily find content by speaking channel numbers, station names, show and movie names.”  This would allow for searching by content, actor, and genre.  The notion that this allows for staying connected through Twitter, Facebook and Skype may just be gravy.

Dragon TV was unveiled as a voice and natural language understanding platform for TV, device and set-top box OEMs and service operators geared toward making it easy to find and access the TV show that a subscriber wants to watch.

If Nuance can open this up to cable outfits Comcast Corporation (NASDAQ: CMCSA) and Time Warner Cable Inc. (NYSE: TWC), and to AT&T INc. (NYSE: T) for its uVerse, let alone DIRECTV, Inc. (NASDAQ: DTV) and Dish Network Corporation (NASDAQ: DISH) for satellite, then Nuance may get a much wider footprint.

How this gets monetized is up for anyone’s guess.  Nuance projected that about 1.6 billion TVs should be connected to the web by 2014 according to Strategy Analytics.  It even notes the difficulty in finding what is on television.  How many times have you been looking for a televised game or show and have no idea what channel it is on?

This will allow OEMs and service operators to deliver TVs, set-top boxes and applications that let consumers find and experience content with Nuance’s leading voice technologies.

Again, the trick is on the monetization.  If it can get a piece of a upcharge for the service then this may open up millions and millions more in revenues per month.  If it is a promotional feature, then this may just be a another brand building effort.

JON C. OGG

The US Federal Communications Commission is reviewing the purchase now, and the regulatory body is reportedly concerned about two major aspects of the deal: first, what happens to Verizon Wireless’s fibre-optic service, FiOS; and second, what effect will the cross-marketing agreements that were part of the deal have on competition?

Analysts at Goldman Sach have a suggestion, according to a report at Bloomberg News. Verizon should dump its wireline business and merge with Vodafone in the wireless business. A Goldman analyst claims, “[The] agreement on a frequency purchase and marketing cooperation that Verizon’s mobile-phone unit reached in December with U.S. cable operators led by Comcast would make separating [Verizon’s] divisions easier.” Vodafone shares jumped more than 2% in the UK on the news.

There are a couple of problems with Goldman’s analysis. First, the “separation” the firm is recommending is very likely the single thing that Verizon could do to assure that the FCC rejects the SpectrumCo deal. The only way the FCC would approve a “separation” is if Verizon found a buyer for its wireline business and the pension liabilities that would tag along.

That’s the second problem. Goldman’s analysts appear to think that there are potential buyers lined up for this. Verizon’s wireline business is likely to post revenues of more than $40 billion in 2011. A buyer would have to have pretty deep pockets. And then there’s this tidbit from Verizon’s third-quarter Form 10-Q:

Net cash provided by operating activities during the nine months ended September 30, 2011 decreased by $3.6 billion compared to the similar period in 2010 primarily due to inventory purchases for wireless devices and higher pension plan contributions.

The lion’s share of that $3.6 billion was certainly in pension plan contributions. What buyer is going to want to take over that part of the wireline business?

A cynic might say that Goldman’s analysis is not much more than beating the drum for some nice advisory, management, and underwriting fees should Verizon choose to follow this advice. A realist might say that Goldman’s proposal is a nominee for this year’s Mr. Dumas Award.

Paul Ausick

The EU agrees to an embargo on Iranian oil. (Reuters)

Citing defense cuts, Boeing (NYSE: BA) closes it plant in Wichita. (Reuters)

Japan Air plans to list its shares in a $13 billion IPO. (Reuters)

Apple (NASDAQ: AAPL) hires an Adobe (NASDAQ: ADBE) executive to run its iAd business. (Reuters)

Fiat raises its ownership in Chrysler to 58.5%. (Reuters)

Eastman Kodak (NYSE: EK) to declare bankruptcy later this month. (WSJ)

Congress will examine which ratings firms failed to do more to warn on MF Global’s European investments. (WSJ)

Apartment vacancy rates fall as people prefer renting over buying. (WSJ)

Comcast (NASDAQ: CMCSA) and Walt Disney (NYSE: DIS) will put more video from TV behind pay walls on the web. (WSJ)

Farmers face a shortage of corn. (WSJ)

BMW sales top Mercedes in the U.S. for 2011. (WSJ)

The Federal Reserve calls on Congress to do more about the battered housing market. (WSJ)

Prime Minister Lucas Papademos says Greece faces default if it does not receive a second bailout. (WSJ)

Verizon Wireless sells 4.2 million iPhones in the fourth quarter, which will damage its margins. (WSJ)

U.S. auto sales rise strongly in December. (WSJ)

Chevron (NYSE: CVX) faces a decision from an Ecuador court on environmental issues that may dog the U.S. company for years. (WSJ)

Barnes & Noble (NYSE: BKS) puts its Sterling Publishing unit up for sale. (WSJ)

Auto lenders target people who fall behind on home mortgages. (WSJ)

China will create new measures to make it easier for banks to clear yuan across borders. (WSJ)

Nielsen SoundScan says sales of full albums rose 1.3% last year to 330.6 million. (NYT)

If the Strait of Hormuz is closed, oil prices could quickly rise 50% and gas to $4. (NYT)

Americans have less economic mobility than people in many other nations. (NYT)

Spain says that its banks would need 50 billion euro to clean up their balance sheets. (FT)

France will try to raise $10.4 billion at low rates to demonstrate confidence in its economy. (Bloomberg)

Toyota’s (NYSE: TM) sales in China rose only 4% last year, underperforming the market. (Bloomberg)

Apple’s profit margins probably rose because of pressure it put on supplier Foxconn. (Bloomberg)

Douglas A. McIntyre

The US Department of Justice is investigating the spectrum deal to determine whether or not it is anti-competitive and could jeopardize competition in the telecommunications industry. AT&T Inc. (NYSE: T), Deutsche Telekom AG (OTC: DTEGY), and Sprint Nextel Corp. (NYSE: S) will be watching this very closely.

The Washington Post reports that the DoJ has confirmed the investigation, and an unidentified official has said that the department is most concerned about the cross-marketing aspects of the deal. In the press release announcing the deal, Verizon Wireless had this to say about the cross-marketing arrangement:

The companies also announced that they have entered into several agreements, providing for the sale of various products and services. Through these agreements, the cable companies, on the one hand, and Verizon Wireless, on the other, will become agents to sell one another’s products and, over time, the cable companies will have the option of selling Verizon Wireless’ service on a wholesale basis. Additionally, the cable companies and Verizon Wireless have formed an innovation technology joint venture for the development of technology to better integrate wireline and wireless products and services.

The DoJ does not want Verizon to give up on its fibre optic network, called FiOS, and focus entirely on the wireless market. The cross-marketing agreements also gives former competitors little reason to keep competing. Verizon gets to continue building out its 4G LTE network and to add value by getting access to Comcast and Time Warner content. The cable companies get to expand into wireless services without having to build a costly physical network. The spectrum licenses held by SpectrumCo were sold with the intention that they would spur competition, not kill it.

A month ago we could have said that it is unlikely that the DoJ will kill this deal. But now that the AT&T/T-Mobile USA merger is dead due to the mere threat of anti-trust litigation, it’s not out of the question that the DoJ will at least force some changes to the Verizon-SpectrumCo deal.

Paul Ausick

Barron’s listed  Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (NYSE: BRK-A), Comcast Corporation (NASDAQ: CMCSA), Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold Inc. (NYSE: FCX), Metlife, Inc. (NYSE: MET), and Procter & Gamble (NYSE: PG).  The list also includes some ADRs via Seagate Technology PLC (NASDAQ: STX), Royal Dutch Shell (NYSE: RDS.A), Vodafone Group PLC (NYSE: VOD), Sanofi (NYSE: SNY), and Daimler (DDAIF).

The aim was companies with low P/E ratios, somewhat high dividends, and companies with an expected upside of potentially 15% to 20%.  This won’t excite many investors.  Apple Inc. (NASDAQ: AAPL) was not in the list nor was Google Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG).  Neither pays a dividend, but both have relatively low P/E ratios considering the recent growth (14 for Apple and about 17 for Google).  If you use the Thomson Reuters consensus analyst price target, Apple has 29% upside and Google has 16% upside.

Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (NYSE: BRK-A) is interesting now that it has added International Business Machines Corporation (NYSE: IBM) and Intel Corporation (NASDAQ: INTC) to its portfolio.  IBM yields a low 1.5% today and is buying back stock despite trading at all-times highs.  The company’s goal is $20.00 in earnings per share by 2015.  Intel just warned about a large revenue shortfall but its dividend yield is now about 3.5%.

Comcast Corporation (NYSE: CMCSA) is actually still interesting because of its growth and value and because it is changing its mix to include content.  The 2% yield is one which has room for further dividend growth and the cable giant’s share price actually offers almost 30% to the Thomson Reuters consensus price target.

Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold Inc. (NYSE: FCX) and Seagate Technology PLC (NASDAQ: STX) are both very opportunistic calls.  Hard disk drive troubles around the globe, a prior discount to highs, and a dividend north of 4% helped Seagate.  Freeport-McMorRan is an opportunistic call now that global growth has brought down shares of metals companies drastically.  It has a 2.5% yield, which is not bad for a metals company, and at $39.00 the Thomson Reuters consensus price target is actually 30% higher than the current share price.

Perhaps the ADRs and European plays of Daimler (DDAIF), Royal Dutch Shell (NYSE: RDS.A), Sanofi (NYSE: SNY) and Vodafone Group PLC (NYSE: VOD) are opportunistic around the weakness of Europe today.  After all, if the Euro Zone continues its downward trajectory and with the Euro currency at an 11-month low it would seem that the article could blame a worsening effect if these positions do not work out.

24/7 Wall St. has recently announced a couple of key lists with predictions and expected upside.  Our DJIA Stocks Soon To Raise Dividends has already seen some come to fruition even sooner than expected, and we have released to our free email subscribers the 24/7 Wall St. 2012 Model Dividend Portfolio.

If you want to receive the full 24/7 Wall St. 2012 Model Dividend Portfolio you can sign up in the email submission below.  Each morning we send our free email list subscribers a snapshot of the key feature stories, the top daily analyst upgrades and downgrades, previews for key events, and many other aspects governing your finances.

Your email address

subscribe

terms and conditions

Barron’s noted a 6.9% drop so far in 2011 for its Favorite Stocks for 2011 versus a 1.9% drop in the S&P 500 Index.

JON C. OGG

The biggest problem with the cable companies’ set top boxes is the nearly impenetrable user interface. The new Xbox Live software completely changes that, replacing the hierarchical menus with a graphical interface that can accept voice, touch, and motion commands as well as commands from a smartphone or other handheld device. The idea is to make the TV interface as intuitive and easy-to-use as a smartphone.

Apple’s latest Apple TV offering lets users stream content from the iPhone to a TV set through its AirPlay feature. Google is working with Samsung Electronics (OTC: SSNLF) to integrate Google TV directly into a TV set. Users will still need a cable TV subscription to gain access to cable programming through the Xbox or other TV device.

One interesting thing about all this is that Microsoft, Apple, and Google are very likely to take over the distribution of content from cable companies like Comcast and Verizon Communications Inc. (NYSE: VZ). Not having to design, build, and market a set top box with a modern interface is not a bad thing for the cable guys, who will still make money by requiring users to pay for the cable subscription. Customers, of course, will very likely have to pay a (modest) fee to Microsoft, Apple, or Google for the privilege of connecting to the TV through another device. Xbox Live, for example, requires a $5/month fee for its premium service which allows users to control the TV.

Another possibility is that the TV control software will be paid for by advertising. Xbox Live does include advertising, and although Google has not revealed what it plans to do with its software, the company could choose to offer the TV software on an ad-supported basis.

A second interesting thing about Microsoft’s announcement is that this is one area in which Microsoft could actually be leading both Apple and Google. The Xbox Live interface is consistent with the Windows Phone 8 interface and will be the same as the user interface on Windows 8 which is due in the second half of next year. Apple was first to integrate handheld smartphones and tablets with a TV, but the Microsoft offering is far more mature than Apple’s offering. Google got sidetracked on a failed try with Logitech International SA (NASDAQ: LOGI), but its TV deal with Samsung could change things around because Samsung also sells more Android-based phones than any other company. Integrating Android with a TV is natural extension, but Google and Samsung are getting a bit of a late start.

The Xbox Live announcement could usher in the next big thing or it could just be another swing and miss at the integration of computing devices and TV sets. This time does look like it will be different.

Paul Ausick