19 Apr, 2006
Info On Square D & Juno
Back in mid-2005, Schneider Electric’s North American Operating Division (SENAOD) bought Juno Lighting. SENAOD essentially = Square D and a few other moving parts. Square D is, of course, “the contractor brand” of electrical construction products. Schneider is based in Paris.
Recently, in clearing out various files, I found a transcript of a Schneider conference call held about its acquisition of Juno back in mid-2005. I never put it to any use, probably the result of an overwhelming influx of information at the time.
But there’s some stuff worth knowing in there. Before I pitch it, here are some slices, all quotes from Dave Petratis of SENOAD:
“Clearly, Juno is is the industry reference in the
U.S. down-lighting market, with a total market share of 18% and it ranks number 2.” “Very clearly, obviously, Juno will enhance our position in the residential market in the
U.S., since Juno’s sales breakdown is 45% in the residential market. And you know that this has been one of Schneider’s goals, to rebalance its sales breakdown in the residential markets.” “If we look at the lighting segment or the available market in lighting . . . we see it’s a $12.4 billion market in
North America. Juno brings us the opportunity access $4.8B of this $12B market. . . . we calculate [the down-lighting segment] at about $1.3B, in which Juno has an 18% market share.” “30% of [Juno’s] business is in track lighting . . . overall sales for Juno in 2004 was $242M. They have an operating margin of 21% and 1,000 employees.”
“ . . . from an opportunistic standpoint . . . Juno can be more aggressively developed in
Canada . . . as well as Mexico. The down-lighting market is present in Mexico, not well-developed by Juno. Schneider Electric, under its Square D brand, has been in Mexico for over 60 years. And in the residential segment, we have over 50% market share.” “ . . . to give you an idea, in the contractor segment, residential and industrial construction, we have about a 38% market share.” – the context here suggests he’s talking about SENAOD and Square D, not Juno.
“Today, in an average home in the
U.S., Schneider Electric provides about $250 per home. We [can] more than quadruple this . . . when you add the down-lighting piece, we clearly get a bigger part of the purchase in residential and commercial construction.” The Juno buy “puts us in a position to understand and participate very intimately as LEDs are introduced.”
“We will increase Juno sales through electrical contractor promotion, where we have tremendous relationships with large builders, where we have tremendous relationships with large builders, focused not only on commercial construction but residential. I would remind you that residential construction today has really consolidated over the last decade . . . the developing of cross-selling to national accounts is clearly attractive for us.”
In the Q-and-A, an analyst asked about Juno’s Modulight product. Here’s what Petratis said about that: “Juno, through its Modulight business development, is creating a rupture in what we call the traditional trapper space. So it’s really a business in its infancy. But it addresses about a $1.8B market, in what we would call fluorescent lighting systems.” I’m not sure that “trapper space” quote wasn’t misquoted by whoever typed up this transcript.
Another analyst Q asked about what portion of Juno’s sales were going through big-box retailers (Home Depot, Lowe’s). Petratis: “It’s less than 1%. Juno has been very loyal to their wholesale distribution. And we clearly see that there’s an opportunity for us to help facilitate that in the right way.”
Another Q was about the profit margins of different lighting suppliers. What’s the difference? Why do some make more than others? The difference, Petratis said, was; “Focus – Juno are a focus player. And as we know, focused players tend to be more profitable. It’s this very efficient business model, which takes advantage of 40% outsourcing [to
Asia] and variable sales compensation [Juno uses reps]. And it’s an excellent model.”
Much of what’s above is background information -- selected details about SENAOD, Juno, and Square D of which you perhaps were not aware. I certainly didn’t know that the Square D brand had a 50% market share in
NEWS in what’s above – albeit more than 9 months old at this point (the conference call took place 6/30/05) – includes:
- Plans to expand Juno’s presence on the shelves of big box retailers.
- Scheider gets about $250 in sales per new
U.S. home. - All of the market share and background figures about Juno, including it’s 18% share of the downlighting market.
- Petratris’s remarks about Modulight – specifically, use of the word “rupture.”
Note: Power Outlet magazine, which is published by large distributor Rexel, has run a few articles about Modulight. I’m the Editor of Power Outlet. If you don’t know about Modulight, you probably should (as a user, contractor, distributor, competitor, or whatever) – take a look at this two-page PDF of an article which appeared in the Spring 2005 issue.
# # #
19 Apr, 2006
Crack Me Up!
I know (and like) Joe Freeman. He's a brilliant man, THE expert on the place where home networking and the security industry intersect. Joe has a doctorate, yet he can speak to common folk (like me). He is the JP at J.P. Freeman Inc., which you'll find by clicking here.
In the April issue of Fast Company magazine, I found a 2-page article (words = 1 page) that says "the state of statistics is dreadful." They contacted Joe for information on the security market. His response resonated so much that they included it in large type (as a pull quote) on page 30.
" . . . there's a robust trade in supplying current, relevant statistics and forecasts for, well, money. 'Do you have projected data for the number of surveillance cameras in the United States?' we asked Joe Freeman of J.P. Freeman, a security industry researcher. 'Do you have $5,000?' he snapped."
EleBlog's take:
a. I don't believe that Joe Freeman snapped at the Fast Company intern who called without being provoked.
b. One thing you learn (long before you get to Joe's level of experience) -- if you develop "market expertise" of some kind on almost anything -- is that folks will call and seek information for free. I learned all about this in the 1980s when I served as Editor of Waste Age magazine. The garbage/toxic waste industry was HOT in the 1980s. I would get at least one call per week from someone seeking to pick my brain.
STUPIDLY, I allowed this -- probably an ego thing; I guess I was excited by the fact someone wanted my opinion. It was idiotic to give information for free to strangers. It was dumb to spend 15 or 30 minutes on the phone with someone, giving them information they would re-sell . . . with the only concrete result of that I spent 15 or 30 minutes less at the end of the day with my wife.
c. Read the Fast Company article (link here) . . . just read the thing for content and tone. It's a sucky piece. It's a waste of space. It adds nothing to your knowledge. It's written to be "cute," but it's dumb. I'm not talking about the part about Joe, read the whole piece. It blows dead bears!
If you trouble to read it, you might well come to respect Joe's "snap" instinct. It appears that NO ONE at that magazine, including the writers of that crap (three of 'em) and the editor or editors who allowed it to get into print, is worth speaking with on any matter.
19 Apr, 2006
320 Cities With Networks
According to an article I found online, folks at The Yankee Group say "there are some 320 U.S. municipalities that have or are planning to cover themselves with broadband wireless networks." As the article's writer comments, "zero to 320 in less than two years is remarkable."
Click here to read the thing. If you get interested, note that the article you see there covers 3 Web pages; you need to click on the bottom to see more of it.
18 Apr, 2006
EC Employment: Quick Look
Electrical Contractor employment data for the first 2 months of 2006 shapes up like this:
January: 667,300 field (production) workers. Up 2.8% from 2005. Highest figure since 2002 (709,700) – which was posted in the “cooling off” period from the 1998-2001 insanity.
February: 671,000. A prelim number, subject to revision. It’s up 4.63% over Feb. 2005 and 0.55% over January 2006. Also the highest February number since 2002 (701,000).
18 Apr, 2006
Bogus Employment Data
According to the Department of Labor, our country has added 4.27 million jobs since the end of December 2002. That sounds pretty good.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Web page on the “birth/death model,” more than 2.5 million of these jobs were added via the “scientific wild-ass guess” route. Yes, more than half.
Here’s the deal: The BLS every month adds (or subtracts) a number of jobs to those it can identify, on the basis that folks are starting small businesses that it can’t find. Some of these, of course, go out of business.
Click here to get to historical Birth/Death data. BLS has added in excess of 800,000 jobs via this “estimate” route in each of 2003, 2004, and 2005.
Click here to get to the past 12 months word of B/D data, including the first three months of 2006. Last month, Labor reported the nation gained 211,000 jobs. Almost 64% of those were created via the Birth/Death estimate route!
And we’re coming up on the three months in which BLS might – if it repeats 2005 – add a big bunch of jobs. In its reports on April-May-June of 2005, BLS added 573,000 jobs to the national total via Birth/Death estimates. That means BLS conjured up 13.4% of the jobs the nation has allegedly created over the past three years . . . in just three months of 2005!
EleBlog take: My strong belief is that the B/D estimates should be reported but NOT added to the totals. BLS should report only what it knows.
I don’t think this is a case of political manipulation; I’m not accusing the Bushites of doing anything that the Clinton Administration didn’t also do.
It’s misleading. It could be (very) wrong. And it distorts a number that a lot of people follow.
# # #
15 Apr, 2006
Trade Deficit BS
No one -- not even those who are spozed to have some sort of idea -- knows what’s really going on. Either that, or things are totally out of control. The most recent example came in the past week, when news that the February trade deficit for the
Here are the numbers:
2004, Jan + Feb = $91.9 billion
2005, Jan + Feb = $118.4 billion
2006, Jan + Feb = $134.3 billion
February’s $65.7B trade deficit WAS down a bit from $68.6B in January.
However:
- February is a month with 28 days. January is a month with 31.
- February 2006 had 19 working days. January had 22.
- February’s trade deficit was 9.3% higher than Feb. ’05.
- As seen above, the Jan+Feb deficit was 13.4% higher this year than last.
- If you take the 1/06 and 2/06 deficits and divide them by the number of calendar days in each month, January’s daily deficit was $2.213B, February’s was $2.346B. February’s was 6% higher!
- If you take the 1/06 and 2/06 deficits and divide them by the number of working days in each month, January’s daily deficit was $3.118B, February’s was $3.458 billion – 10.8% higher.
- February marked the 6th consecutive month that the trade deficit figure started with a “6” handle.
- In the past six months, the accumulated trade deficit is $397.3B. We’re running at an $800 billion/year annual rate!
- In 2004, we imported $1.47 trillion worth of goods. In 2005, we imported $1.67 trillion of goods ($200B more). Thus far (2 months) into calendar 2006, our imports are $305.7B – up more than 13.5% from the first two months of 2005!
- From Jan-Feb 2004 (two years), our progress is such: Total imports (goods + services) up 32%, total exports up 25%.
- February’s trade deficit was the third-highest ever. We ran bigger negatives in January 2006 and October 2005.
- The
U.S. deficit in February with China fell by 22.7%. To my way of looking at things, that makes February’s figures WORSE. We improved with China, and our deficit in February was still . . . up!
Those are 12 mighty huge “howevers,” ain’t they? To get the official figures, click here to download a 47-page PDF (see especially page 4).
Now, against these mighty powerful facts, what was the gist of reporting on February’s godawful trade deficit?
Headline: “
U.S. Trade Deficit Narrows.” Headline: “
U.S. Trade Deficit Improves.” Headline: “DEFICIT NARROWED IN FEBRUARY AS IMPORTS DROP BY MOST IN A YEAR.”
Lead on a story: “
US stocks ended a quiet session with a moderate gain yesterday on strong earnings news and a decline in the trade deficit.” From a foreign exchange site: “The major currency pairs continue to consolidate within ranges ahead of the long holiday weekend. While yesterday’s smaller than expected
US trade deficit provided a boost for the dollar, the majors have returned to their recent levels amid a dearth of fresh news to digest.”
There’s plenty more. One could be forgiven for coming to the assumption that the trade deficit improved in February.
Here’s how a decent report might have read, based on the 12 bullet points above – in only 97 words:
* * * * * * * * *
While the
Additionally, February’s deficit is the third-highest on record. The
What’s more, the trade deficit for this year’s first two months is 13.4% higher than 2005’s January-February period.
# # #
13 Apr, 2006
New Owner For 5th Biggest EC
According to the Engineering News-Record ranking of 2004’s Top 50 Electrical Contractors (printed in one of that weekly’s 10/05 issues), MYR Group was #5. The weird MYR name stems from this company's inclusion within itself of L.E. Myers, an old (and somewhat famous) electrical contracting company. Most of Myers' work involved/involves utility (power line) construction, which is also called "T&D" (electrical power transmission and distribution lines).
MYR included a few other contractors beneath its banner, including Harlan and Sturgeon.
MYR was an independent company, and then was owned by "the public" (stock in MYR was traded on the NYSE). Just before Xmas 1999 -- as part of the roll-up boom -- it was acquired (in a friendly transaction) by the acquisitive
“Acquisitive” is the operative word for FE. In the time period around its acquisition of MYR, FirstEnergy acquired a bunch of (smaller) contracting companies, including HVAC specialists, over a 13-state region. The plan was to have a service arm, to capitalize on the ute ops + branding FE’s utility subsidiaries had going in that area.
I’m not sure anyone can say it didn’t work. But we can judge from the evidence: FE has been in the process of shedding these companies for a while now.
In March, FE sold 60% ownership of MYR Group to ArcLight Capital Partners. See www.arclightcapital.com for background info. FE holds the minority portion (40%). The purchase price was face down.
I’ve been poking around for two weeks, trying to find out what’s happened here. FE did not post a press release on this divestment; ArcLight’s release is terse. I was unsuccessful in my search for an SEC filing on this matter by FE (or ArcLight). There's nothing on the MYR Web site, either.
Some stuff I did find:
- ArcLight says it “has extensive energy investing experience, industry relationships, and asset-level knowledge.”
- ENR says MYR’s contracting revenue was $320.4 million (in 2004).
- ENR says FE has sold off Elliott-Lewis Corp., Spectrum Control Systems, L.H. Cranston and Sons, and Power Piping Co., all in 2005.
Finally, The Daily Deal (4/4) carried info about ArcLight Capital Partners. The company has created three private equity funds (pools of money to be put to work investing in energy companies). Together, those three amassed $4.6 billion. The most recent fund raised $2.1 billion in just three months, with $ from 90 investors (including the California Public Employees’ Retirement System, or CalPers).
Specifics on which funds invested in the MYR acquisition, and how much, were not provided.
* * * * * * * * * *
Bottom line: ArcLight, which claims it generally “realizes” its investments (i.e., sells them off to get a cash return) inside of five years, now owns 60% of MYR Group. The big contracting company’s controlling owner is now a private equity group, instead of a public utility.
Does this mean something? I don’t know. But it might turn out to be fun to watch. Here’s a bunch of meaningless blather (speculation) from the EleBlog:
1. An “instant analysis” might be that ArcLight is “getting in at the top” – tout le monde believes there is an electrical transmission & distribution infrastructure boom ahead of us. Without knowing what ArcLight paid for 60%, no one can even guess at whether ArcLight overpaid.
2. I’ve written many times previously (during the roll-up boom) about what idiots electrical utilities are – at least, when it comes to practical things like acquiring companies and, well, managing them. I’ve been right. Perhaps FE was looking to get MYR Group’s results off of its books, and ArcLight came along with a cash offer that was not necessarily lucrative (compared to what FE paid in 1999) . . . but sufficed.
3. Another way of looking at it: Thanks to this sale, FE has
a. Turned a bit of its 1999 investment in MYR into cash (whether at a profit or loss, only FE knows).
b. Plus, FE now has gotten the lumpy (up-and-down) results of contractor MYR off its earnings statements.
c. Plus, FE remains an owner (albeit a minority owner) of MYR. This entitles FE entitling it to potential future profits if and when ArcLight takes MYR public (or sells it off in some other manner).
d. Another plus: FE now has ArcLight running MYR, which is probably superior to FE running it on several angles (less of a burden on FE’s execs, who know utilities but don’t know construction – and better managers for MYR, which could ultimately redound to FE’s benefit, as noted in #3).
e. From ArcLight's perspective, no matter what price was paid, the fellas there perhaps figure they've got to be able to do a better job of managing an operating asset than a bunch of electric utility execs!
If this last bit of totally speculative and fact-free analysis (#3) is correct, selling off MYR might yet prove a very smart move by these utility fellas, and the buy might work for ArcLight and its capital providers.
13 Apr, 2006
IES: Valuation At Issue
It’s tough for me to know what’s going on most of the time. I did extensive reporting here about the bankruptcy of Integrated Electrical Services – but it was surface reporting. I did not dive into the 385-page documents filed with the SEC.
I did write a column, for TEDMAG.com, which posted there 1/26/05. (Yes -- in early 2005, 10+ months before IES pulled the plug on itself). The column basically asked: Why doesn't IES just liquidate itself? Here’s an excerpt:
Like the rube at a poker game, the IES board continues to yell, "Deal!" The smart move would be to let the thing go bust, sell off all operations to any buyers, and try very hard to forget the whole thing. Smart players know when to raise the stakes -- and they also know when to walk away from the table.
To see the whole column, click here.
Recently, of course, IES finished selling off various parts of itself and declared bankruptcy. I thought it was weird and premature (the company was NOT in awful financial trouble).
As it turned out, what IES did was a “prepack” – a prepackaged bankruptcy, with a plan for emerging as a whole company, with new owners. Stockholders (those who owned 100% of the company before the bankruptcy) were relegated to the back of the line, and were to end up with 15% of the new company.
Boiled down to its essentials, the bankruptcy got IES out from under $170-million-plus in debt. The folks who loans that money are (in the plan) to get 82% ownership of the new IES. Here’s a selection of IES news that’s appeared here in recent months:
12/15/05 – IES Agreement With Note Holders
1/2/06 – IES: Here’s the Situation (with links to various docs)
2/15/06 – IES Goes For It (link to press release on bankruptcy filing)
What’s New As Of 3/31
The “official committee of equity security holders” of IES has issued a document, dated 3/31. It is devastating. If you think markets and legal activities are rigged, this four-page document will convince you. Download the 4-page PDF from here.
You should read it, whether you hold IES stock or debt or compete with IES or sell to IES – or not. You should read it because you are (I think) a Capitalist, and it appears that what’s gone on here . . . might smell a bit.
I’m not going to quote the entire document, but let me summarize three devastating bullet points from the 4-page doc:
- An expert hired by the committee “believes that the projections of EBITDA and free cash flow through 2010 . . . may be understated.” If this understatement is corrected, the expert says, the result would be “a significant increase in enterprise value.”
- Cash on the IES balance sheet was ignored in valuing IES as it approached bankruptcy. How much cash? The report says this “results in a $32.5 million understatement of value.”
- Net operating loss carry-forwards (translation: potential future tax reductions) were ignored in valuing IES. The committee says these losses have “a present value in excess of $18 million.”
There’s more, but let’s ignore another 4th bullet point and cut to the chase.
“The committee believes the Debtors have so understated the value of the New Common Stock upon the Debtors’ emergence from chapter 11 that the allocation of 82% to holders of the Senior Subordinated Notes constitutes a material overpayment of those claims to the detriment of existing shareholders.” (emphasis added by EleBlog)
# # #
10 Apr, 2006
Our Bumpkin Heritage
In times of great stress and lackluster leadership, the Romans told each other (and their children) stories of mythical and legendary (real) heroes – exemplars. You’ve perhaps heard the story about Horatius at the bridge? A myth. But not so the tale of Lucius Quintus Cincinnatus, a general.
He left the army to resume civilian life as a farmer. When
We Americans, in this time, look right and left (and up and down) to find leadership. We are unable to find any; we find ourselves in a sorry state of affairs. BUT: Instead of bemoaning our current fate, we need to remind ourselves of our history. Sure, it’s not perfect; but some of it is glorious!
There Was Caption
Consider something I stumbled over recently – the tale of Yankee Doodle Dandy. It’s a song. The British created it (during the French and Indian War) to make fun of the colonists. There were a lot of versions and verses; they updated it regularly! They loved to sing it:
Yankee Doodle went to town
A-riding on a pony
Stuck a feather in his hat
And called it macaroni.
Yankee Doodle, keep it up
Yankee Doodle dandy
Mind the music and the step
And with the girls be handy.
Father and I went down to camp
Along with Captain Gooding
And there we saw the men and boys
As thick as hasty pudding.
Yankee Doodle, keep it up
Yankee Doodle dandy
Mind the music and the step
And with the girls be handy
There was Captain
Upon a slapping stallion
A-giving orders to his men
I guess there was a million.
Yankee Doodle, keep it up
Yankee Doodle dandy
Mind the music and the step
And with the girls be handy.
First, I had no idea that George Washington was IN that song (did you?). Second, you can find more about the song – and meaning of “called it macaroni,” which has always been mysterious to me (and, it turns out, is also derisive) – by clicking here.
Singing It Back At ‘Em!
There’s more. In a book called The Greatest War Stories Never Told, I learned that the British troops headed from
Of course, the Brits weren’t all that merry as they returned – a retreat made in bloody disarray. Colonists were coming out of the woods (irregularly) and shooting the British to pieces. The original detachment had to be rescued, literally, by more troops sent from
Here’s the delicious part: As the colonists shot at the British, they were singing “Yankee Doodle Dandy” back at them. The book quotes a British officer: “Damn them, they made us dance it till we were tired.”
The colonists originally renamed the song, “
10 Apr, 2006
Morgan Stanley's Online Analyses
Morgan Stanley's economics team, which is spread around the world, writes daily (or thereabouts). There are posts from all over. The most famous MS economist is Stephen Roach. He's worth reading, as his perspective on global economic imbalances is not represented at all in the general business media. You'll learn something from Roach's analysis, and from that of Andy Xie, and also from the other folks who write for the MS Global Economic Forum each day.
Find the archives by clicking here. You can go to new posts by clicking on the link for today's date (whatever today is).
10 Apr, 2006
Oil $$$ In Perspective
You hear a lot about how the price of oil isn't yet at the all-time high -- inflation-adjusted -- that it hit in 1980-81. That happens to be true, but it also happens to be irrelevant. Such items are "factoids." By definition, a "factoid" is totally bogus -- the word "factoid" insults the item that you are quoting.
That's why I invented the term "factolito" -- butchered Spanglish for "little fact." I like factolitos. Here's another one, which I found in reading (very late) a bunch of January columns from Morgan Stanley's free analyses online. This one is from Andy Xie, who's got a brain in his head, he has!
Gold is small beer in the context of global commodity markets. The juggernaut is oil. At today’s price of US$65/bbl for Brent crude, the consumption of oil at 83.3 mn bbl/day is worth US$5.4 billion/day or US$2 trillion per annum (5% of global GDP). Compared with the average price of US$24.9/bbl for Brent crude in 2002, oil producers are making US$3.3 bn/day or US$1.2 trillion extra (55% of
China’s 2005 GDP) per annum.
Find Xie's column by clicking here.
See the next item for perspective on Morgan Stanley's free online stuff.
10 Apr, 2006
Who Plays Video Games?
I had other work responsibilities at the end of March, so I missed the spring Electronic House Expo in Orlando. I am trying to catch up online, and there's some interesting stuff that probably will end up here.
In so doing, I stumbled across a factolito that needed posting here, from a 3/21 Consumer Electronics Association press release:
Roughly one-third of adult gamers spend 10 hours or more per week playing console or PC games compared to just 11 percent of teens, according to results from a new study released by the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA®). The surprising results are part of CEA's 2006 Gaming Technology Study, which surveyed adults via online survey and teens (ages 12-17) via telephone interview.
Click here to see the CE release.
07 Apr, 2006
Commodity Prices, Updated Weekly
TEDMAG.com, which employs me as a writer, added a new item to its weekly news updates – commodity prices. Go to www.tedmag.com, and look for it. To be updated each week.
07 Apr, 2006
April's IBEW Journal
The IBEW recently (I’m not sure when) began posting the full text of its magazine, The IBEW Journal, online. IBEW = International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. There are more than 750K members, of which roughly 1/3rd are involved in electrical construction (working for contractors).
April’s magazine includes the following stuff EleBlog readers might want to read:
Page 4 – one-page message from President Ed Hill. On construction.
Pages 16 + 17 – an explanation of the new Mechanical Allied Crafts union construction group.
Download the 32-page, 4.78MB document by clicking here
07 Apr, 2006
Wind, Birds & Cats
Red Herring, now a weekly bizmag, printed a full-page Q&A with Quayle Hodek, CEO of Renewable Choice Energy, in its 4/3/06 issue. Question: How do you respond to critics of wind power? Part of Quayle's answer contained a data point I'd not previously seen expressed in precisely this way:
"The other criticism is that [wind turbines] have an impact on bird life. But cats actually kill 20 times more birds than wind turbines."
05 Apr, 2006
March EleBlog Posts
What was here in March:
- 36 posts.
- 10,600 words.
- Collected in one MS Word document, it prints out at 30 pages.
You can download the whole shebang from this page.
05 Apr, 2006
ECs & IBS
AutomatedBuildings.com just posted a 656-word piece by a guy from Continental Electrical Construction (of Chicago). The guy's title is "IBS Sales Engineer."
IBS = integrated building systems. These are the initials that NECA hung on its "VDV Expo" when it changed the event from voice-data-video to cover building systems, too.
Continental is an old-line Chicago-area electrical contractor. The Witz family owned the company, sold it off in the roll-up boom, and then bought it back when the roll-up that owned it (Encompass) blew up. Yes, it was the boom went "boom," so to speak!
Here's what the writer says:
"The electrical contractor is currently installing the IP cabling infrastructure. The electrical contractors are being subcontracted to install the wiring for these low voltage systems now; doesn’t it make sense for them to expand their offering to the actual systems being installed?
"Who better to engineer a structured cabling system that truly encompasses all of the low voltage subsystems? Wouldn’t an owner feel more comfortable having one source of responsibility for the turnkey installation of the best available systems across all of the low voltage subsystems?"
That last bit -- about single-source responsibility -- is something I've been saying in presentations and writing in articles and opinon pieces for roughly 14 years. I'm thrilled to have someone else out there saying it now. See John C. Greenwell's piece -- click here.
# # #
05 Apr, 2006
Where Have I Been?
Two things put me off my Blog feeding habits of late:
A. Some kind of computer disease hit, and I couldn't access the place where I post this stuff. I ran a nearly-all-day diagnostic on this infernal machine, and it is (apparently) fixed.
B. Right after I did that, I had to leave for Las Vegas -- my least favorite place -- for a business confab (with my sheet metal clients). I got back on Saturday night. Lost 3 hours in the switcheroo, of course, plus one hour to the Daylight Savings Time game-playing.
To sum up: I've been intellectually stagging around like a duck that was hit in the head by a baseball bat. But it's wearing off -- and there's plenty to say. It's coming!
