mattel announcement of share buyback August 28, 2007
Posted by admin in : offshoring , add a commentToday’s Mattel Press release:
Mattel, Inc. [NYSE:MAT] announced today that the Mattel Board of Directors has authorized the company to increase its previously announced share repurchase program by an additional $500 million. Repurchases will take place from time to time, depending on market conditions.
The share repurchase program is one component of the company’s capital and investment framework, which was announced in February 2003. Under this program, Mattel has repurchased 81.4 million shares of common stock for an aggregate of $1.5 billion.About Mattel:
Mattel, Inc., (NYSE: MAT, www.mattel.com) is the worldwide leader in the design, manufacture and marketing of toys and family products. The Mattel family is comprised of such best-selling brands as Barbie®, the most popular fashion doll ever introduced, Hot Wheels®, Matchbox®, American Girl®, Radica® and Tyco® R/C, as well as Fisher-Price® brands, including Little People®, Power Wheels® and a wide array of entertainment-inspired toy lines. Mattel is recognized as one of the 100 Most Trustworthy U.S. Companies by Forbes Magazine and is ranked among the 100 Best Corporate Citizens by CRO Magazine. Committed to ethical manufacturing practices, Mattel marks a 10-year milestone in 2007 for its ever-evolving Global Manufacturing Principles and focus on sustainable business practices. With global headquarters in El Segundo, Calif., Mattel employs more than 30,000 people in 43 countries and territories and sells products in more than 150 nations. Mattel’s vision is to be the world’s premier toy brands—today and tomorrow.
Is this a sign that management believes it will get through this sticky patch despite some doubts expressed in recent news stories ? Commentators are sceptical.
eu-china relations August 21, 2007
Posted by Bradley in : consumers, offshoring , add a commentPeter Mandelson, the EU’s trade commissioner, issued a statement yesterday responding to suggestions that the EU was engaging in protectionism with respect to China:
As Trade Commissioner, I will not accept claims of toxicity being used as a pretext for protectionism. Equally, I will give firm backing to European companies having to reject goods that are dangerous to consumers, including young children. This is not a question of trade but of health.
If some in China want to create the pretext for retaliatory action, the EU will contest this in the strongest terms. Action should be taken where this is needed but otherwise the bulk of our trade should continue as normal.
outsourcing and legal standards August 16, 2007
Posted by Bradley in : offshoring , add a commentWhen firms outsource functions to other jurisdictions they may incur new risks. Recent recalls by Mattel of toys produced in China, and distributed around the world, illustrate this problem. Mattel had attempted to shield itself from risks that local manufacturing standards might not be consistent with toy safety requirements around the world by imposing its own standards by contract. In a filing with the SEC, Mattel said that:
Mattel believes that it has some of the most rigorous quality and safety testing procedures in the toy industry. Consistent with this, Mattel has launched a thorough investigation and expanded its testing programs to ensure that painted finished goods, at third-party contract manufacturers and facilities operated by Mattel, are systematically tested prior to being shipped to customers.
Mattel’s 2007 Global Citizenship Report describes Mattel’s Global Manufacturing Principles. Despite these GMPs, some products were produced for Mattel in China using lead paint, and distributed for sale to consumers. Mattel recognises in its most recent form 10Q that these developments may have an adverse impact on demand for Mattel’s products.
According to an EU Commission Press Release, the EU’s Consumer Protection Commissioner, Meglena Kuneva, “expressed her satisfaction that the danger posed by these toys was detected by the producer in its own audits and that the company acted responsibly.”
Some consumers are less sanguine: