Noticias

Loading...

2015/04/01

Why the Internet did not kill RadioShack

  • by 
  •  

  • Although the electronics retailer is the latest victim in the rise of e-commerce, several other missteps led to its demise.

    We’ve seen the downfall of many bricks and mortar stores over the last decade, including Borders, Circuit City, and most recently, RadioShack — to name just a few. As e-commerce continues to rise, it’s seemingly becoming more difficult for traditional stores to stay in business.
    It’s true that online shopping has significantly grown over the last 10 years. Even in the last year, we’ve seen a noticeable uptick. According to the U.S. Census, total e-commerce sales for 2014 in the U.S. were estimated at $304.9 billion, which is a 15.4% increase from 2013. However, plenty of bricks and mortar stores are still healthy. Is it fair to blame e-commerce for every store closing and bankruptcy?
    As a U.S. bankruptcy judge on Tuesday said he would approve a plan by the electronics retailer to sell 1,740 of its stores to the Standard General hedge fund and exit bankruptcy, it’s worth taking a closer look at why RadioShack failed. E-commerce wasn’t the only culprit. One big mistake involved poor strategic decisions over its financials. Feeling undervalued, the retailer bought back $400 million in stock in 2010 when its net profit was $206 million. It did something similar in 2011 when its net profit had declined to $72 million and it did another buy back for $113 million. In the end, it spent more than $500 million trying to push up the stock price.
    However, the company didn’t make enough money to finance the buy back and had to borrow money, which increased its debt-to- value ratio and left RadioShack vulnerable to a declining profits. Rather than buying back so much of the stock and taking on debt, it should have accepted the valuation, closed a few inefficient stores and avoided bankruptcy.
    Another significant mistake was its decision to change its product market strategy. In prior years, RadioShack was known as the place to go for hard-to-find parts and components needed to build things. It also had knowledgeable staff who could help customers with high-level customer service. Customers were willing to pay higher prices because of this additional value. After all, there is a difference between getting helpful information in person and trying to explain an issue via the phone, an online chat, or a Google search.
    When RadioShack changed its business model to sell finished products like laptops and phones, it lost that competitive edge. Customers could get those finished products from many other retailers and e-commerce sites at lower prices. And a higher-level of customer service wasn’t needed for those products.
    While it’s too late for RadioShack, its demise offers some important takeaways for other bricks and mortar stores:
    Find a competitive edge. If you offer a unique product, like RadioShack did with selling specialty components, don’t disregard that strength.
    Be aware of price sensitivities. A big challenge for bricks and mortar stores is that they have to pay for overhead whereas online retailers don’t, allowing them to charge lower prices. Customers are more likely to price shop for larger and more expensive items, especially ones readily available online like phones and tablets. They tend to be less price sensitive about small and specific goods like the components previously sold by RadioShack.
    Focus on customer experience. A big draw for RadioShack was its knowledgeable staff. When it moved to selling finished products, the need for that staff — and consumer willingness to pay higher prices — disappeared. Many people still value talking to a real person.
    Looking ahead, it won’t be smooth sailing for traditional stores. But it won’t be all doom and gloom either if they can learn from the mistakes of retailers like RadioShack.
    Andrey Malenko is the Jon D. Gruber Career Development Assistant Professor of Finance at the MIT Sloan School of Management.

    The ultimate sign you’re working for a great company

    The chefs and nap rooms are pretty nice perks, but that’s not what makes employees happy.
    Fortune’s annual “100 Best Companies to Work For” listprovides useful insights into how we collectively view corporate culture. Most of us flip through the pages or click through the screens hovering over pictures and blurbs highlighting gourmet chefs, nap rooms, yoga instructors and other signifiers of “great” workplaces.
    That said, the true “Best Companies to Work For” have the right culture and aren’t just great workplaces.

    Fortune itself is aware of this, even assigning one of its top writers to argue that being a “Best Company to Work For” has little to do with the jaw-dropping (and mouth-watering – trying biting into Google’s lavender pecan cornbread) employee perks these organizations offer.
    “Knockout perks aren’t the reason any company makes this list,” writes Fortune’s Geoff Colvin. “The essence of a great workplace is just that: an essence, an indispensable quality that determines its character.”
    Personally, I’m always thrilled to see the “Best Companies” list. I never stop being impressed that a publication like Fortune, which for decades has tracked companies based on “how much” (revenue, market capitalization, etc.), also makes such a sustained effort to measure the more human virtues of workplace quality.
    Being the “best” on Fortune’s list (or just aspiring to one day make it) means you’re on the right track. It shows you care about your people, appreciate their passions and want to make them comfortable in the workplace. Every yoga class and gourmet meal is an investment in doing business in a more human way, a big step toward having the right corporate culture.
    Merriam Webster’s 2014 “Word of the Year” – the most searched term on the dictionary’s website – was “culture.” Examining culture is deeply tied to the current moment. Why? In our era of ever-growing interconnection, we can peer deeply into an organization better than ever, learn about its past and present, discuss its behaviors and even advocate for change.
    Think about the way we react when something goes wrong within an organization today. People no longer tend to accept surface-level explanations. When a student is sexually assaulted on a college campus or an unarmed man is killed by police, people now talk about “rape culture” and “police culture.” We want to know about the larger context that’s informing individual thinking and the forces that animate individual behavior. We’ve come to understand that attitudes, actions, mindsets and beliefs come from a deep place in our collective character.
    We’ve grown less interested in bad apples and much more interested in the trees that create them. “Culture” is our word of the year because we want the deepest explanation possible. Although we don’t automatically ask the same questions when something goes spectacularly well, we ought to. In some realms, like sports, this shift has already started.
    The San Antonio Spurs have demonstrated an incredible and rare record of long-term success in professional basketball. Though other franchises want to imitate this, instead of rushing to poach the Spurs’ star players, smart teams are doing their best to reinvent their entire team system (e.g. how they hire, scout, coach, budget, train, play, recruit free agents, etc.) to emulate the Spurs culture, which values unselfish play above all else. While it’s impossible to duplicate the Spurs’ exact culture, learning from the Spurs is already paying off for this year’s regular season leader, the Atlanta Hawks.
    Organizational culture runs just as deep as individual human character. And character, in the words of Heraclitus, determines fate. Just as one family can never duplicate another family, no business can exactly replicate another company’s culture. Business is about gaining proprietary advantage by doing that which you can’t copy, right? Since culture is potentially the most differentiated asset a company owns, shouldn’t leaders get a lot more intentional and deliberate about shaping, nurturing and scaling it? Too often, we get stuck on shaping and managing the things – benefits, perks and workplaces – that exist only on the very surface of culture.
    That said, any emphasis on culture is a promising sign. The “Best Companies to Work For” list chronicles companies that care about their people and have taken immense strides toward humanity. But those of us in the corporate world have far more progress – and difficult culture-building work – ahead of us.
    The first step in this work is cleaning house and getting rid of the ghosts of old and outdated thinking.
    The words “how much” have always haunted business, politics and our personal lives: How much revenue can we squeeze into this quarter? How much debt can we tolerate? How much growth can we generate?
    But “how much” questions aren’t the right questions – not in an ever changing, increasingly interconnected world, and not in a business realm where competitive advantage cannot be sustained via out-producing, outspending or out-selling. Instead of reflexively asking “how much,” we should examine “how”. Not just “How much square footage can we afford for the new nap room?” but “How transparent is our company?” or “How fair is our decision making process?” If your company is really the “right” place to work, you don’t just measure “how much”, your measure “how” to create organizations, societies, institutions and businesses that mirror our deepest values: trust, collaboration, resiliency, and freedom.
    A growing body of research shows us that it is exactly the sort of work that is now more important than ever.
    In his article, Colvin points to a Wharton analysis showing that a portfolio of publicly listed organizations on Fortune’s Best Companies list (from 1984 until 2009) surpassed its expected rate of risk-adjusted return by 3.5 percent annually. My own firm LRN’s research into “How” metrics, indicates that 93% of employees at businesses with high-trust and values-based cultures observe financial performance greater than their competitors; only 48% of those at low-trust organizations observe the same.
    I appreciate that so many different entities—Big 4 accounting firms, tech giants, top B-schools, business publications and even dictionary publishers— are beginning to point to the importance of workplace environment and culture. But recognizing the importance of a great workplace is comparatively easy. Anyone can buy a Ping-Pong table for the break room or bring in a beer cart on Fridays. Building the right culture in your business takes years of hard work, because you have to build every facet of it for yourself— from the ground up. Leaders who commit to building the right culture better prepare to take their lumps: it isn’t easy, and it isn’t or the faint of heart.
    But we can, and need to, go deeper. Most of our collective thinking and doing has barely scratched culture’s surface; it focuses primarily on the relationship between employee and company. A great workplace does not guarantee that the company has great relationships with its customers, investors, communities or the environment. Nor does a high work/life quality (something nearly all of us would very much want) necessarily bring about a high-quality employee-employer relationship. For that, deep, uncomfortable questions need to be asked: how trustworthy is our company? How do we convey and instill a sense of values throughout our organization?
    Efforts like Fortune’s “Best Companies to Work For” list have helped show us that we can measure organizations in ways that extend beyond revenue, shareholder value and market share. Now that we’re doing this, we might as well go all the way to the core. Building the “right” kind of organizational culture requires us to recognize and measure the “right” foundational elements, such as:
    • An organizational purpose that inspires employees and animates the culture;
    • Leaders who also inspire employees and elevate their behavior;
    • The most human and sustainable organizational values that recognize business as a deeply human endeavor and that call for employees and stakeholders to endeavor together in a healthy and long-standing way;
    • Behaviors that generate trust;
    • A recognition that building the right kind of culture requires a journey, one worthy of the dedication and loyalty we ask of the humans who work for our companies.
    Managing culture in an intentional, strategic and deliberate way requires us to get to the human core: that which fundamentally and enduringly gets us out of bed in the morning and guides us through our days and lives. There is no short cut for building or rebuilding a corporate culture. You can’t just hold a seminar or put up a poster and call the problem solved. What Aristotle said about an individual’s excellence – that it is not a single act, but a habit – applies to organizations as well. The ultimate winners will start developing and strengthening these habits because most companies now know how to make great workplaces. What distinguishes the best organizations from the rest of the pack, are leaders who understand the depth that separates a great place to work from the right place to work.
    Dov Seidman is the chief executive of LRN, a company that helps corporations develop values-based cultures and leadership, strengthen their ethics and compliance efforts. He is also the author of HOW: Why HOW We Do Anything Means Everything.

    These are the wackiest April Fool's pranks so far

  • by 
  •  

  • Google has had the best one so far

    It happens every year — come April 1, companies pull out all the stops to try to trick, fool, and bamboozle any other gullible soul traipsing around the Internet. This year has been no different, with some brands putting out multiple tricks in what seems to be an attempt to look cool.
    For now, though, we chuckle. Here are five of the best April Fools pranks brands have pulled off on the web so far:
    T-Mobile Pets Unleashed
    T-Mobile “announced” a plan to add your pet to your wireless plan for just $5 a month, calling it “Pets Unleashed.” The wireless company did manage to do some good with the prank, though, encouraging people to donate to the Humane Society.
    Google goes backwards
    If you head over to com.google, you’ll see the entire Google search platform backwards. And when you search, it will turn up backwards too. Not much of a punchline on this one, but it’s kind of cool looking.
    The Google “Smartbox”
    In a slightly more elaborate prank, Google put out a video on the “Smartbox,” a melding of your physical mailbox with your Gmail account. See the video below:
    Galaxy for Chefs
    Have you ever looked at your phone and wished it could chop vegetables? Than Samsung’s Galaxy “Blade” prank is for you. Who knows how many tired cooks Samsung fooled with this one.
    Domino’s Driverless Deliver
    Here’s a prank that could actually come to fruition in a few years — Domino’s prank involves driverless delivery cars for your pizza. This one sounds like a pretty good idea, actually. Maybe it’s Tesla’s mystery project?

    Walmart tells suppliers to slash prices

  • by 
  •  

  • The retail giant is aiming for a tradeoff: less marketing, but more sales.

    To help fix disappointing sales numbers in the U.S., retail giant Walmart  WMT -1.20%  is putting pressure on suppliers.
    The company is looking to get pep back in its step by telling suppliers to cut their prices, the Wall Street Journalreported. How to do so? By cutting back on in-store and online marketing.
    The makers of consumer products sold at the retail giant’s 4,177 U.S. stores typically devote part of their marketing budgets to joint efforts with Walmart, such as in-store displays and banners, and online advertising programs. Now Walmart will aim for a tradeoff: less marketing, but more sales.
    Of course, Walmart squeezing its suppliers is nothing new, but this particular strategy—cut marketing budgets, use the savings for lower prices—is reportedly creating tensions. The mandate gives brands less control over how their products are presented in stores, and less opportunity to differentiate them from competitors that share the shelves.
    Competition in big-box retail, especially in the U.S., has heated up in recent years, and Walmart has lost some of its shine as the no. 1 low-cost retailer. Longtime competitors such as Costco  COST -0.54%  and Kroger  KR -0.42% have both eaten into Walmart’s market share, but so have surprising entrants like Amazon.com  AMZN -0.22% , which has thrived in an age when U.S. shoppers frequently forego brick-and-mortar store visits to buy online instead.
    The new request to suppliers likely comes from Walmart’s relatively new U.S. leadership: the company named Greg Foran, formerly CEO of Walmart China, its U.S. CEO in July, replacing Bill Simon. Foran is tasked with bringing the U.S. business back—sales were up some 3% last year, but the lion’s share of that was due to newly opened stores, not organic sales growth. Some of Foran’s tactics for the U.S. have involved opening smaller Walmart Express stores.
    This new mandate to suppliers is clearly another step toward that challenge.
    On Wednesday morning, in an informal discussion with analysts in New York, Foran was asked about the Journalarticle that reported the news regarding suppliers. “Gee, I’d be disappointed in a business of our scale and size that’s not on top of that—reaffirmation of everyday low prices—I’m a very strong support of that… and ensuring that we negotiate the very best price and then pass it on to our customers.”

    Directors—ahem—get a seat at the table

  • by 
  •  

  • In an age of disruption, investor activism, cyberwar, and regulator pressure, corporate boards are taking on ever more authority.

    Whether you like it or not—whether they like it or not—corporate directors are seizing control at major companies. Which raises an important question: Are they ready for the job?
    The latest reminder is a Wall Street Journal report that federal bank regulators are grilling individual directors of major Wall Street firms, sometimes monthly, as well as sitting in on board meetings and even instructing boards to add members with specific qualifications. It’s happening at the biggest firms—JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs—and at smaller banks. While regulators have met with bank boards for years, the current intensity of oversight is unprecedented.
    Not so long ago, it would have been unimaginable. Few directors possessed the competence or the information to conduct meetings with regulators in the absence of managers. Now they’re being pressed for detailed information on such issues as how a bank is managing its financial risks, which can be extremely complex. Under Dodd-Frank and Sarbanes-Oxley, regulators wield impressive power over a bank’s fortunes, so the directors had better be prepared with good answers.
    The larger trend is that many strong forces are pushing directors of all companies to assume more authority. In addition to stricter regulation worldwide, think of cyber-attacks, dramatic disruption of business models, the experience of the financial crisis, activist investors—all threaten the foundation of a company’s competitiveness. When threats are so dire, directors rightly feel they must involve themselves.
    The problem is that by the nature of their role—typically meeting six to ten times a year—they can’t manage the company, and in any case they often aren’t qualified to oversee operations in much detail. Tougher regulations mandate that nearly all directors be independent, not working for the company or suppliers, among other forbidden affiliations. As a result, many directors possess no deep understanding of the business. How could they? Independence sounds great, but there’s a theory that if more bank directors had known the banking industry, maybe the financial crisis wouldn’t have been quite so bad.
    And even when directors are knowledgeable and the board is well organized, they can’t be sure they’re getting the information they need. Why didn’t the Risk Policy Committee of J.P. Morgan Chase’s board realize in 2012 that an employee named Bruno Iksil, a.k.a. the London Whale, was placing huge bets that eventually cost the company $6.2 billion? Because even though the bank had an elaborate risk management system, reports of those bets never rose all the way up to the committee. The directors didn’t know what they didn’t know. More broadly, directors can never know as much as the managers they’re supposed to be overseeing.
    So directors are being squeezed in a vice: In a faster changing, riskier world, they may feel compelled to grab control and shove the CEO aside (or regulations may require them to do so), yet the nature of their position means that many of them can never be fully qualified to do that.
    Despite the increasing pressures and time requirements, plenty of people still want to serve as corporate directors. Whether they’re actually up to the job will increasingly differentiate winning companies from losers.

    Walmart CEO to Arkansas governor: veto ‘religious freedom’ legislation

  • by 
  •  

  • The retail giant is the just the latest to jump into the fray over state legislation that some say would allow discrimination.

    Walmart CEO Doug McMillon is asking Arkansas governor Asa Hutchinson to step up and veto a ‘religious freedom’ law, HB1228, that the state’s lawmakers approved on Tuesday.
    A great deal of Walmart’s  WMT -1.17%  corporate character is shaped by the state of Arkansas. It is where Sam Walton founded the retail giant in 1962, with the first store in the town of Rogers. It is home to the company’s “Home Office,” its U.S. headquarters, in Bentonville, where some 16,000 of of its 2.2 million employees are based.
    In a statement posted to the company’s Walmart Newsroom Twitter account, McMillion said that the legislation, “threatens to undermine the spirit of inclusion present throughout the state of Arkansas and does not reflect the values we proudly uphold.” Hutchinson has expressed concerns about the law, but has also said that he would sign it if it “reaches my desk” in a similar form to what has been passed in some 20 other states.View image on Twitter
    It is the same law that is causing trouble for Indiana and its governor Mike Pence, who passed the bill, which is seen as discriminatory, a week ago. Since then, Indiana has seen a public outcry from corporations, celebrities, and athletes.
    In speaking out against the law, McMillon joins other prominent executives, such as Salesforce  CRM -0.82% CEO Mark Benioff and Apple  AAPL -0.02%  CEO Tim Cook, who have voiced opposition to the legislation. In the sports world, the NCAA is set to hold the Final Four of its basketball tournament in the state, but NCAA president Mark Emmert has said that the law, “strikes at the core values of what higher education in America is all about.” ESPN’s Keith Olbermann, in his program on Tuesday, went further and suggested the NCAA ought to pull the Final Four from Indiana and relocate it immediately.
    “Every day, in our stores, we see firsthand the benefits diversity and inclusion have on our associates,” said the Walmart statement. “We are asking Governor Hutchinson,” it concluded, “to veto this legislation.”

    Nuera de Bachelet sería citada a declarar en querella por estafa

    En esta arista se investiga específicamente el perjuicio que habría sufrido la empresa Silca, y apunta directamente a los dueños de Caval.

    En el marco de la querella por estafa que interpuso el empresario de la VI Región Hugo Silva, dueño de empresa Silca, en contra de la empresa Caval, el fiscal de Rancagua, Luis Toledo, citará a declarar dentro de las próximas semanas a la nuera de la Presidenta, Natalia Compagnon, propietaria en un 50% de la empresa que le vendió los terrenos al empresario de la zona.

    Según consigna The Clinic, la solicitud para que la esposa del hijo de la mandataria -Sebastián Dávalos- fuera citada a comparecer, fue formulada por los abogados del estudio Phillipi, patrocinantes de Silva, por medio de un escrito enviado a la fiscalía.

    Así, junto con Compagnon también debería prestar testimonio su socio en Caval, Mauricio Valero. Ambos deberían aclarar cómo se gestó el negocio, los alcances de este y en qué momento prometieron a Silva que el uso de suelo cambiaría. Esto último porque en el marco de la querella que presentó el empresario rancaguino, asegura haber sido engañado con que el uso de suelo cambiaría al modo habitacional.

    Esta sería la primera vez que Compagnón se apersonaría en la fiscalía en lo que respecta a esta indagatoria, que fue separada de la investigación relacionada a la compra de los terrenos en Machalí, previo crédito del Banco de Chile por $6.500 millones.

    En lo que respecta a esa causa, el fiscal Toledo hasta ahora ha realizado una serie de diligencias, entre ellas allanamientos y confiscación de los computadores en la casa de Compagnón y Dávalos, y en la que fuera la oficina que el hijo de la mandataria ocupó en La Moneda, como director sociocultural.
    www.df.cl

    La estrategia de RN para diferenciarse de la UDI en los casos de corrupción

    En el partido de Monckeberg se niegan a dar cualquier señal que pueda ser considerada como un “arreglín” de los políticos.

    Por Claudia Rivas Arenas
    La estrategia de RN para diferenciarse de la UDI en los casos de corrupción
    En la casona de Antonio Varas 454 tienen una consigna en relación con los casos Penta, SQM y Caval: No hay disposición para un "arreglín" político y es necesario que la Justicia haga una labor profunda, pues consideran que es la única fórmula para tratar de recuperar la credibilidad perdida de la clase política ante la opinión pública. Por lo mismo es que en la reunión de mesa del lunes pasado Renovación Nacional (RN) acordó que desde la tienda no se darán señales de que se pretende "amordazar" a los fiscales.

    Se trata de una postura que no es arbitraria y apunta particularmente al hecho de que, desde hace un par de semanas, sus aliados de la UDI evalúan reactivar la tramitación de un proyecto que posibilita que los fiscales nacional y regionales puedan ser susceptibles de una acusación constitucional, lo que aún no ha ocurrido.

    En la tienda encabezada por el diputado Cristián Monckeberg explican que en esta materia tuvieron una fuerte diferencia con el gremialismo, ya que si bien el propio timonel presentó hace varios años una iniciativa en esta línea, tienen la convicción de que ahora no es la oportunidad para avanzar en este tipo de normativa.

    En ese sentido, el secretario general del partido, Mario Desbordes, plantea que si bien en el partido están "de acuerdo en que hay que hacerle contrapeso al Ministerio Público, pero no ahora, en el actual escenario político", porque eso podría resultar contraproducente.

    Esta línea fue también la que RN se trazó en medio del caso Penta, por lo que se le pidió la suspensión de la militancia al ex timonel y ex diputado Alberto Cardemil, y la que pretende mantener hasta que se cierren los casos que se están investigando, haciendo una diferencia tácita con sus socios de la Alianza, presumiendo que ocurrirá lo propio si, a raíz del caso SQM, aparecen políticos de la Nueva Mayoría involucrados.

    Molestia por dichos de Novoa
    Por lo mismo la dura reacción del partido en contra del ex senador de la UDI Jovino Novoa, cuando habló de la necesidad de un acuerdo para salir de la situación provocada por los casos de corrupción que se investigan. También molestaron en Renovación los dichos del presidente interino de la UDI, diputado Javier Macaya, en la misma línea del coronel más influyente en el gremialismo.

    Macaya no dudó en respaldar los dichos de Novoa e incluso fue más allá. El dirigente señaló derechamente que se debería legislar para sancionar casos futuros, pero buscar una salida política para lo que ocurre ahora. De hecho, ayer matizó sus dichos que causaron un fuerte revuelo, incluso en su propio sector, pues en RN discrepan con esa postura.

    Ayer Macaya señaló que "los acuerdos no se deben confundir con arreglín político. La gran mayoría de delitos asociados a campañas electorales tienen prescripción de un año y eso hay que cambiarlo, ponerle más exigencia, la pérdida del cargo, y es bueno tener esa discusión jurídica. Es importante mejorar, pero tampoco hagamos que la política sólo esté presente en los tribunales".

    En todo caso, en la UDI la postura de Novoa tiene gran aceptación y quienes se han declarado como disidentes han recibido un fuerte rechazo. De hecho en la Comisión Política del lunes hubo un fuerte altercado entre el vicepresidente José Antonio Kast y el alcalde Mario Olavarría. El primero le recriminó directamente su postura de sancionar a los militantes involucrados en los casos investigados, dado que el partido –le dijo- tuvo que defenderlo cuando fue acusado de recibir coimas.

    Otra señal de que los disidentes a la política de la directiva en relación con los casos Penta-SQM están cayendo en desgracia al interior del gremialismo es la reacción del senador Hernán Larraín al ser consultado por la renuncia del alcalde Francisco de la Maza a la mesa. El parlamentario, cuyo nombre genera más consenso para liderar a la UDI tras la salida de Ernesto Silva, le restó importancia a lo ocurrido señalando que ese hecho no es más que "una anécdota poco relevante" en el marco de la situación interna.
    www.df.cl

    Mercado reacciona al Central y eleva pronóstico de inflación

    Inflación implícita anotó incremento de 40 puntos en una semana y se ubica en 3,8%.

    Por Sebastián Valdenegro Toro
    Mercado reacciona al Central y eleva pronóstico de inflación
    El mercado reaccionó con fuerza ayer al escenario menos auspicioso que presentó el Banco Central para la inflación y la Tasa de Política Monetaria (TPM) al exponer el primer Informe de Política Monetaria (IPoM) del año ante la comisión de Hacienda del Senado.

    Mientras el instituto emisor revisó al alza en 0,8 puntos su estimación de IPC a diciembre para situarla en 3,6%, en el mercado financiero la respuesta fue notoria y se corrigieron con fuerza al alza sus proyecciones.
    De esta manera, los forwards de inflación a diciembre se incrementaron en 40 puntos básicos en relación a una semana atrás, situándose en 3,8%, superando levemente la estimación propuesta por el instituto emisor.

    Incluso, fue tanto el ajuste que se vio en el mercado, que los instrumentos financieros dejaron de esperar una convergencia bajo el 3% para este año, postergándola recién para fines de 2016.

    Hace siete días, los forward anticipaban que el IPC bajaría de 3% anual en octubre de este año, situándose en 2,78%.

    Para el economista jefe de Banco Penta, Matías Madrid, la revisión al alza en las proyecciones del mercado se debe a que los operadores estaban de alguna manera "subestimando" las proyecciones de inflación, por lo que fueron "sorprendidos" de alguna manera por el diagnóstico del Central en el IPoM.

    En Inversiones Security señalaron que no comparten la expectativa del ente autónomo respecto a una mantención en la dinámica actual de inflación, con precios internos ubicándose por un tiempo prolongado sobre el rango meta del ente autónomo (4%).

    "Si bien compartimos la aparente mayor preocupación por la inflación, en nuestro escenario se moderarían los salarios nominales por el menor dinamismo de la actividad y, por ende, la inflación subyacente", dijeron en un informe enviado a sus clientes.
    Tasas swap anticipan ajustes monetarios
    Otro de los mensajes que envió el Banco Central al mercado fue que, dada la alta dinámica inflacionaria, se descarta completamente nuevos recortes de la tasa durante el año, inclinándose -más bien- a un escenario de incrementos del interés rector hacia finales del actual ejercicio.

    Esto ya venía siendo interiorizado por los instrumentos financieros y se ratificó en la sesión de ayer.
    Es así como las tasas swap -que anticipan los movimientos de la TPM- anotaron un incremento de 4 puntos básicos en su medida a seis meses plazo, ubicándose en 3,14%.

    Por otra parte, los instrumentos a un año plazo registraron un avance de seis puntos básicos a 3,29% en la jornada de ayer, sugiriendo a lo menos un incremento de tasa al primer trimestre de 2016.
    Imagen foto_00000001

    www.df.cl