i.justrealized

Okay, I just realized Panasonic is under Matsushita. I guess the name change is good.

Matsushita Electric Industrial Co. discards its 90-year-old name Wednesday and recasts itself Panasonic Corp., a change that comes as the electronics giant moves to lessen its reliance on the stagnant Japanese market to focus more overseas. (Source: WSJ)

This change to Panasonic Corporation would unify the Matsushita, National and Panasonic brands under the new corporate name.

(Panasonic ideas for life.)

I have to say this - Wikipedia updates really quickly. The articles seemed to have been redirected and Matsushita related articles seem non-existent. The power of collaboration?

I didn’t know IKEA is perceived as a charity. Interesting.

Is IKEA the World’s Largest Charity?

IKEA’s technically a charity. But before you write down the umlaut-riddled name of your most recent dresser purchase as a charitable donation on your next tax return, it’s worth exploring this ownership structure, which was brought to light by a 2006 article in The Economist.

Ingvar Kamprad founded IKEA in Almhult, Sweden in 1943 when he was just 17 years old. Kamprad originally sold low-priced consumer goods from his home and by mail, but added a furniture line in 1948. As the company began opening its trademark sprawling stores, Kamprad grew fabulously wealthy, although he retained frugal tastes like driving an aging Volvo and always flying economy class. By some debated estimates, Kamprad is the world’s richest man, and even Forbes’ more conservative accounting pegs him as the seventh-richest person in the world with a net worth in the neighborhood of $31 billion.

Why can’t anyone agree on how much Kamprad’s worth? Well, for one he doesn’t technically own IKEA anymore. In 1982, his ownership stake in the company was given to the newly formed Stichting Ingka Foundation, a Dutch charity. The foundation in turn administers the stores through Ingka Holdings, a wholly owned subsidiary that operates as a for-profit company.

It would seem that the entire charitable foundation is a clever, if dubious, way for IKEA to avoid paying taxes. In 2004, the company pulled in a 1.4 billion euro profit, but since it’s owned by a tax-exempt charity, it didn’t pay a dime. (Source: mental floss blog)

I still like IKEA though. Probably not the corporate side anymore but they make nice furniture.

A piece of really old news but I thought the following paragraph’s a little funny.

Beginning in 2003, PeopleSoft battled with Oracle over control of the PeopleSoft company. In June 2003, Oracle made a $7 billion bid ($19.50/share) in a hostile corporate takeover attempt. In February 2004, Oracle increased their bid to approximately $9.4 billion ($26/share), a 33% increase; this offer was also rejected forthwith by PeopleSoft’s board of directors. Later that month, the U.S. Department of Justice filed suit to block Oracle, on the grounds that the acquisition would break anti-trust laws; however, in September 2004, the suit was rejected by a U.S. Federal judge, who found that the Justice Department had not proven its anti-trust case; in October, the same decision was handed down by the European Commission. (Source: Wikipedia)