nyt

It must be something in the water in Bentonville, Arkansas. The tiny town is home to Wal-Mart (NYSE: WMT), of course, but also the less famous America's Car-Mart (NASDAQ: CRMT), which operates 92 used car dealerships in the South-Central United States.

While the auto industry is mired in the biggest downturn in its history, America's Car-Mart is posting some pretty impressive numbers.

The company reported its second quarter results today, and achieved same-store sales growth of 5.3%. That compares quite nicely to Carmax's (NYSE: KMX) 17% decline for its second quarter.

Everyone cheered when Countrywide Financial, owned by Bank of America (NYSE: BAC), agreed to modify loans under a settlement with 11 state attorneys general reached in October.

Everyone, that is, except the people who held those mortgages and stood to lose hundreds of millions of dollars as a result of slashed balances and reduced interest rates. So Greenwich Financial Services has filed a lawsuit in a New York state court, arguing that Countrywide does not have the right to unilaterally modify as many as 400,000 loans.

"Loan modifications have been occurring for decades without objections or challenges, so we are especially troubled at the timing of this complaint," Countrywide said in the statement. "We are confident any attempt to stop this program will be legally unsupportable."

It's easy to blast Greenwich Financial as the bad guy -- I was kidding in my headline -- but it's also wrong. The fact is that these modifications to previously agreed to contracts are coming out of the pockets of investors, including pension funds and investments held in 401(k) plans. There truly is no free lunch, and people should keep that in mind as they hear self-serving politicians brag about measures that help keep people in their homes.

You knew it would happen. When a company as controversial as Wal-Mart (NYSE: WMT) has one of its employees killed in a Black Friday melee, it's only a matter of time before the company starts getting the blame.

Long Island police and a lawyer hired by the deceased worker's family have concluded that the company should have had better crowd control.

"Hundreds of stores around the country have these kinds of sales, but a tragedy only happens if you don't prepare," attorney Jordan Hecht told (subscription required) The Wall Street Journal. "You need to have people line up in a queue in an orderly fashion, with people giving them updates."

Wal-Mart defended itself by saying that it had set up barricades, hired third-party security guards and had extra staff on hand.

And what of the police's contention that the security was inadequate? It turns out that the police were called to the store before the victim was trampled to death because of the large crowds, but they quickly left before the doors opened. (Read more about that in this Newsday story.) So the police seemed to think everything was fine at the time but are now blaming inadequate security after the fact. I'm not sure that makes sense.

The real blame here falls on the people who trampled someone to death. The victim's family should sue Wal-Mart for whatever they can get, but it's pretty tacky for the police to be blaming Wal-Mart for a tragedy that happened after they left.

As Douglas McIntyre wrote earlier, the United Auto Workers union is in talks with some of Detroit's big three automakers to put an end to the infamous "job bank" -- a program that allows laid off factory workers to report to work and play cards, read the newspaper, and maybe do a little volunteer work while continuing to be paid full wages and benefits. (Read more about it in this 2005 piece from The Detroit News.)

In defending the job bank before Congress, UAW president Ron Gettelfinger said that, "Since September of 2005 through September of 2008, we have lost 47,000 workers at General Motors. By the same token, during that period of time and with that loss, we have all but virtually eliminated our jobs banks at all three companies."

But The Wall Street Journal reports (subscription required) that there are about 1,400 workers in the Ford (NYSE: F) job bank, 1,000 at General Motors (NYSE: GM) and 500 at Chrysler.

That's down by a lot from the numbers of a year or two ago, but the point is this: before we start asking taxpayers who have nothing to do with the problem to start peeling 25 billion dollar bills, wouldn't it be a good idea to, oh, I don't know, make sure that all the people who are on the payroll are working?

It's easy to blame the unions for the company's woes, but the bottom line is that the fault lies with the corporate management, which agreed to outrageous programs and saddled the industry with enormous legacy costs because it had no impact on the company's short-term earnings and stock price.

In 2007, Fortis was the 20th largest business in the world by revenue but a risky and overly leveraged acquisition of ABN Amro led to the bank's demise and government-led selloff that left shareholders all but wiped out.

It's too late to do anything about the massive losses, but some angry shareholders did show up at the company's board meeting in the Netherlands to give the brass a piece of their minds. The Associated Press has some great quotes from shareholders. They shouted "for shame!" as the board walked in, and one shareholder referred to the directors as "corpse robbers." Chairman Jan Michel Hessels was accused of having "no understanding of business."

To its credit, the board of directors stood there and took it like men, but like American CEOs, Mr. Hessels was unwilling to really cop to any personal responsibility: "I can't see that we should have done things very differently."

How a guy could lead a company from being one of the largest and most respected institutions in the world into liquidation with the help of an ill-advised acquisition and not see what should have been done differently is pretty appalling.

Deutsche Bank AG (NYSE: DB) has sued Donald Trump, demanding that he pay a $40 million personal guarantee that was part of a $640 million construction loan that Deutsche Bank originated in 2005. The loan came due on November 7th with an outstanding balance of $334 million.

The loan is related to the development of the The Trump International Hotel & Tower in Chicago. The building is expected to be finished in early 2009, and the lower floors are already open for business. According (subscription required) to The Wall Street Journal, the building will be the second largest in the United States. Last month, Trump sued Deutsche Bank for an extension on the loan, claiming that the financial meltdown had triggered the force majeure clause of the contract that normally applies to wars, riots and acts of God.

A New York State Court rejected Trump's argument, but apparently he still hasn't coughed up the money. Now he's being sued for it.

It appears that Trump is back in trouble with lenders. Last week, Trump International Resorts (NASDAQ: TRMP) disclosed that it had missed an interest payment.

CableOrganizer.com recently announced that it had outperformed General Motors (NYSE: GM) by $21.2 in net income over the first nine months of 2008.

In a hilarious press release, senior vice president Paul Holstein noted that "Obviously we couldn't match their revenue, but we were able to beat them handily on costs and expenses. For example, we put off buying a fleet of Gulfstream G5 private jets. That, right there, saved us millions of dollars."

When asked what the secret was to their success, Holstein said that "It's important to spend less money than you make."

Unfortunately CableOrganizer is not publicly traded.

It's unfortunate that General Motors' profitability has been reduced to a source of cheap laughs, but at least we'll be getting something in exchange for our bailout.

Trump Entertainment Resorts (NASDAQ: TRMP) disclosed on Friday that it would delay making a $53.1 million interest payment on its senior secured notes due 2015 as it looks to restructure.

The company owns and operates the Atlantic City's Trump Taj Mahal Casino Resort, Trump Plaza Hotel and Casino, and the Trump Marina Hotel Casino. The Donald serves as the nonexecutive chairman of the board and his daughter Ivanka is also a director.

The company's results have suffered along with the broader tourism economy, but the Trump properties in Atlantic City have also been hurt by their dated feel and the company's lack of cash that has made necessary updates difficult.

As I wrote back in March, Donald Trump has continued to loot this sinking ship: In 2007 he was paid $2 million for serving as chairman of the board in addition the company's purchases of Donald Trump-branded water and other goodies.

The stock closed at 31 cents per share on Friday.

As General Motors (NYSE: GM) works overtime to create the illusion of progress that might lure in skeptical lawmakers, it's making its debt holders an offer that will probably be easy to refuse: Swap your debt in for equity.

If I'm a GM creditor I'm saying, "No deal, Howie!" By swapping their debt for equity, bondholders will position themselves to be completely wiped out in a bankruptcy filing. Even if the company avoids bankruptcy, that equity will represent a claim on the future cash flows of a company that is burning through billions of dollars each month.

The Wall Street Journal reports (subscription required) that "GM's debt load, estimated by J.P. Morgan to total $43.3 billion at an annual interest expense of about $2.9 billion, has been a primary culprit in the company's deterioration in recent years. Many analysts have suggested GM needs to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy-court protection in order to force creditors to renegotiate."

That still seems like the most likely outcome for the company, and as long as bankruptcy remains a likely outcome, creditors are unlikely to swap senior debt for equity that will have last dibs in a Chapter 11 scenario.

And that's the ultimate catch-22 for GM: Congress is unlikely to provide the financing that would stave off a bankruptcy unless the company is able to restructure its debt to reduce its interest obligations. But that restructuring is unlikely to happen until GM can convince creditors that bankruptcy isn't a possibility.

Bankruptcies, liquidations, and layoffs are never fun for workers, but it's good to see that someone at Circuit City hasn't lost his or her sense of humor.

With the company deep in slash-and-burn mode, someone decided to slap a "DO NOT SELL" sign on a fire extinguisher.

Just a few days after General Motors (NYSE: GM) broke the news that it was ending its endorsement deal with Tiger Woods, NBA phenom LeBron James' agent told reporters that Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT) would not be renewing its two-year old marketing deal with the Cleveland Cavaliers forward.

King James, as he is known, appeared in commercials for the Windows Vista operating system, but very little else came of the partnership. According to The Associated Press, "The partnership faltered when Microsoft executive Joanne Bradford, who struck the deal with James, resigned as head of the company's media network this year."

These celebrity endorsement deals attract little attention from investors when times are good, but with most companies faltering now, they seem to be attracting more ire. James' seven-year, $90 million deal with Nike (NYSE: NKE) makes sense: LeBron James is a powerful force in selling basketball shoes. The terms of the Microsoft deal were not disclosed, but it seems unlikely that James contributed to any increase in sales of Microsoft products -- would anyone choose their operating system based on a basketball player in a commercial?

I can't help but question the motives behind these kinds of endorsement deals: are they inspired by a desire to drive sales and create shareholder value or a desire to hobnob with celebrities?

A few days after Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim reported an 18% stake in the company, Saks (NYSE: SKS) adopted a poison pill, disclosed in a filing with the SEC.

Under the terms of the "shareholder rights plan," if Carlos Slim or anyone else acquires a stake of 20% in the company, other shareholders will be able to acquire shares at half price. The company said that the plan will "impose a significant penalty upon any person or group which acquires beneficial ownership of 20% or more of the Company's outstanding common stock without the prior approval of the Board of Directors."

Shareholders should be appalled. Shares of Saks closed at $4 on Wednesday, down from a 52-week high of $22.19. In 1993, the stock traded north of $15 per share.

So shareholders should not be happy with any plan that gives the company's current management and directors more control over the future: Their track record is one of miserable failure. Given Mr. Slim's track record of creating enormous wealth, shareholders would likely be better off with whatever plan he has up his sleeve.

The Wall Street Journal reports (subscription required) that "Saks spokeswoman Julia Bentley declined to comment on the timing of the announcement, but said that Saks had a rights plan for more than a decade that expired in March 2008."

It must be illustrative to look at the returns that shareholders have received over that period.

In a move that comes as somewhat of a surprise, Carl Icahn spent the first three days of this week spending $67 million on shares of Yahoo (NASDAQ: YHOO). He bought 6.8 million shares for an average of $9.92 bringing his total stake to 75.6 million million shares -- roughly 5.5%of the company.

Given that Icahn's nemesis, Yahoo CEO Jerry Yang is on the way out, Icahn may be positioning himself to have considerable say in the company's choice of successor. Icahn controls three seats on the company's board of directors.

The market value of the company has taken a beating since Icahn got involved. Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT) had offered to acquire the company for $33 per share. Yang spurned that offer and it was withdrawn in May. The stock now sits right around the $10 mark.

Icahn's decision to up his stake in the company signals some level of long-term confidence now that any kind of major deal with Microsoft seems like a remote possibility. But the question shareholders have to ask is, as valuable as Icahn is on matters of corporate governance, does he really have the expertise that will make him a valuable contributor to the internet company's search for a CEO?

Even chief financial officers at public companies are concerned that TARP funds will be used for something other than stabilizing the economy.

A poll of CFOs conducted by CFO.com found that top financial officers are skeptical about how the funds will be used:

• 40% said that too much of the bailout funds will flow into the pockets of executives.
  
• 58% think that too much of the money will be used to finance acquisitions.
• 48% think that banks will use a larger than necessary chunk of the money to strengthen their reserves instead of lending it out.

When CFOs are questioning the bailout just as much as Average Joe's, it's time for the federal government to rethink what it's doing. The New York Times reports that the first Government Accountability Office report on the implementation of the $700 billion bailout is "expected to be critical of the Treasury Department's failure to set up ways to track how its bailout money is being used in the marketplace."

Add the lack of oversight to the fact that the dispersal of being funds is being managed by a former CEO of Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS) and others with strong ties to Wall Street, and it's amazing that there hasn't been even more outrage than there is.

WIth the market tanking, short sellers have become a popular scapegoat. Some observers whine about naked short selling while others lament the end to the uptick rule, suggesting that that has been a driving force behind the market turmoil.

Vanguard Group founder John Bogle, one of the few heroes in a financial services industry filled with villains, has a letter in today's Wall Street Journal explaining why the "blame the shorts!" explanation is wrong. He states it simply:

The uptick rule will not prevent price declines or bear raids. These events can and will continue to occur when security prices are too high compared with a company's earning prospects and risk.

Exactly!

The reality is that bubbles in equities form, and policies that make short-selling more difficult allow markets to overheat and inflate. Now that the party is over, angry investors are lashing out at short sellers.