British press turns on Hayward, with plenty of anti-Obama rage thrown in for good measure AP – BP CEO Tony Hayward testifies during a House Oversight and Investigations subcommittee hearing on the … More from The Newsroom:
Many in the British press have slammed the U.S. government lately for demonizing BP, instead of simply holding the company accountable for the Gulf oil spill. But that sentiment has shifted noticeably since BP CEO Tony Hayward's testimony before the House Energy and Commerce committee Thursday. Hayward's inability (or unwillingness) to answer a number of direct questions about the decision-making that preceded the spill cost him many of his job responsibilities today — together with a good deal of his erstwhile cheering section in the British press. The Times (of London) didn't go easy on the oil executive, summing up its analysis of his performance in Washington with the headline: "From Mr. Bean to Mr. Has-been for BP's Tony Hayward." The Times' Giles Whittell wrote that Hayward "had a chance to save his career and the good name of his company by giving forthright, detailed answers to highly specific questions submitted in advance by two of the most astute and enlightened men in Congress." Instead, Hayward, he wrote, "seemed to have prepared by taking beta blockers." Whittell argued that Hayward stonewalled congressional interrogators, despite the executive's claims to the contrary. The Guardian clearly agreed with that assessment in its own piece on the hearing: "BP oil spill: Tony Hayward stonewalls Congress." Although Hayward was "carefully coached by legal and media teams and was testifying under oath," the Guardian noted, he "failed to satisfy." Also, according to the Guardian, Hayward delivered his answers "in flat, impassive tones." In the Telegraph, PR branding specialist Mark Borkowski wrote that "Hayward's communication skills didn't rival those of a tax inspector." "The new age demands a front-and-centre spokesman who can make the audience feel like he is listening and actually gives a damn," Borkowski wrote. "But Tony Hayward doesn't seem to have learned a great deal about being inclusive, about engaging with the public." "Accused of stonewalling, he stonewalled," Borkowski continued. "He couldn't, or wouldn't, answer most of the questions. In fact, he looked like a tired undertaker who was rather bored with having to look mournful." [PHOTOS: Haunting images of the oil disaster] Still, other British commentators had plenty of rancor left for the United States and its political leaders. Rupert Cornwell, a columnist for the Independent, added to the criticism that others in the British press have leveled against the Obama administration and Congress — that they're unfairly piling on BP even as the company tries to clean up its mess. Cornwell wrote that "yesterday's grilling of Mr. Hayward ... is a 21st-century version of the medieval stocks, public disgrace for the public villain of the moment." While Cornwell harkened back to medieval times to describe Hayward's treatment on Capitol Hill, the Daily Mail went back even further for a historical comparison. The British paper reported that Hayward was "subjected to a grilling so savage yesterday it was more like ancient Rome than Capitol Hill." "Wave after wave of criticism flew the way of the hapless boss and his company," the Daily Mail continued, "confirming them both as Public Enemy No. 1 in the U.S." The Economist, more highbrow than the typical Fleet Street tabloid, came out swinging at the Obama administration in the issue on newsstands Friday. However, the Economist's ire isn't motivated by jingoism or knee-jerk America-bashing — it's far too genteel for such tabloid sport. Instead, backed by its faith in free markets and neo-liberal trade policies, the Economist came out in support not just of a British company but of business itself, which it judged to be unfairly maligned in the spill fiasco. "America's justifiable fury with BP is degenerating into a broader attack on business," the Economist's editors wrote in today's lead editorial. The Economist expressed concern that business leaders who are "already gloomy, depressed by the economy and nervous of their president's attitude towards them" will likely not be encouraged by the treatment of BP. Because Obama's now pushing "firms into doing his bidding" — the magazine's characterizaion of efforts to hold BP responsible for an environmental catastrophe of its own making — the Economist draws parallels between the president and Russia's strong-armed former president and current prime minister. Hence the editors' new nickname: "Vladimir Obama." So while Tony Hayward is now a tarnished British hero in the Tony Blair vein, national morale may well rebound with the prospect of a good old colonial trade war — or Cold War, as the case may be. — Michael Calderone is the media writer for Yahoo! News. |
If you plan to sell your home in the next year, you're probably keen on finding a few ways to gin up its value. For many people that means donning an old pair of overalls, pulling out the power tools and going to work on some ambitious renovation projects.
Here's a smarter idea: Leave the work duds in the closet, the tools in the garage and the renovation plans on hold. Instead, get out a large trash can and a dust rag.
"Just clean up your act," says Chicago real estate agent Zack Sudler. "Put your junk in a storage locker, neaten, fix the wobbly ceiling fan--and do it before you call your Realtor."
An important point that many home sellers fail to realize: Their first sales job involves hiring a top-notch agent. Many of the best professional home sellers will shy away from putting a lot of time into selling your home if it's a mess.
The only home improvement Sudler recommends is painting. Even there, he advises limiting the work to covering blemishes and repainting any rooms that have overly bright or outdated colors.
On the bigger pre-sale improvement projects, real estate pros tend to have a fairly uniform view: They're rarely worth the money and effort. For most, the value added is a mere fraction of the cost.
To be sure, home renovations can have enormous benefits--to residents rather than sellers. Air conditioning or a new kitchen might dramatically improve your lifestyle. But the incremental amount a buyer will pay for a home after such projects are completed is likely to be well below the seller's cost.
"We've seen homes where sellers have contractors still toiling away when the open houses start," says Patrick Lashinsky, chief executive of San Francisco-based realty agency ZipRealty. "It's a nightmare."
The National Association of Realtors conducts an annual survey of its members in 80 cities that is created by Remodeling magazine and used to estimate the return on investment for 33 home improvement projects. The 2009 report concluded that, on average, for every $1,000 homeowners spend on projects, they get back $638.
Even projects normally hyped as sure bets for adding value generate surprisingly weak gains, NAR reports. Converting an attic into a bedroom, for example, is typically regarded as garnering interest among potential buyers who might have otherwise disqualified the home from their search. An extra bedroom will indeed add value--just not for the majority of people who spend on the conversion. NAR figures homeowners recoup $831 on average for every $1,000 they invest.
Kitchens and bathrooms remain two of the most popular upgrades, and do have among the best returns on remodeling investments. But even for these rooms, mid-range jobs, which offer the highest returns, yield only about $720 and $710, respectively, on average, for each $1,000 invested.
The only investment that tends to get more out of buyers than sellers put into it is a heavy, insulated steel entry door, according to the NAR/Remodeling survey. Spend $1,000 on such an upgrade and you're likely to add $1,289 to your sale price.
If you're looking for examples of ways to waste money on renovations, there are lots of choices. Remodeling a home office yields just $481 for every $1,000 invested. Buying a backup power generator (perhaps from the likes of Honda or Briggs & Stratton) will add only $589 for each $1,000 invested.
All this is anathema to retailers like Home Depot, Lowe's, Bed, Bath & Beyond, Williams-Sonoma and Lumber Liquidators. They all benefit from the myth that pumping money into your house pays off later on the auction block. So do buildings materials firms like Chicago-based USG, maker of the popular Sheetrock brand of gypsum wallboard.
Lashinsky says that on occasion, buying a new appliance for your home can pay off--if the one being replaced is so horribly out of date that it unsettles potential bidders. The agent has a long list of bad ideas to avoid. Among them: Converting a bedroom into a home office and yanking out the closet to make the room look bigger.
"In quite a few states, you're not allowed to list that as a bedroom anymore," he says. Such renovations can be expensive and result in the loss of bidders who need the extra bedroom.
Lashinsky's choice for all-time worst renovation: A family that tore out a long wooden stairway leading up to their lovely hillside home and replaced it with a newly paved path. They made the change right before putting the home on the block in mid-winter, and the path kept icing over.
"People who wanted to see the house literally couldn't get up the path," says Lashinsky. "They kept sliding back down every time they got near the place."
10 Best And Worst Home Improvements For The Buck
Best Improvement: Clean Up
Cost: Negligible
Give your home a top-to-bottom cleaning or, better yet, hire a pro to do a deep clean. Do it even before you hiring a real estate agent. If you don't have a regular cleaner, hire one to keep the place tidy until your house is sold.
Good Improvement: Simple Repairs
Cost: Negligible
It is well worth the modest cost to fix broken outlets, tiles, light switches, door latches, folding doors and ceiling fans. Buyers view such flaws as signs of deeper problems--and may lower their bids accordingly.
Good Improvement: Store Your Clutter
Cost: $100 a month
A 10-foot-by-10-foot locker at Public Storage or one of its competitors is likely to cost you less than your phone and cable bills. Move out unneeded dishes, linens, personal items and furniture. Try to empty closets. Your house will appear bigger and more valuable.
Good Improvement: Paint Exterior and Interior
Cost: $100 to $1,000
If the paint on the front of your house is peeling, scrape it and repaint. Indoors, cover up any blemishes and repaint any rooms in loud colors that may be off-putting to others.
Good Improvement: Tidy the Yard
Cost: $100 to $300
No need to break the bank here. Mow the lawn, weed the flowerbeds and pull any dying bushes. Plant flowers in bare spots.
Good Improvement: Replace Hardware
Cost: $300
It's a mistake to replace the kitchen cabinets or closet doors. But you can convince buyers to pay a little more by installing new handles, knobs and drawer pulls where needed.
Good Improvement: Replace Ugly Appliance
Cost: $500 to $1000
A new stainless steel range will not prompt buyers to pay much more for your home. But a seriously bedraggled stove or refrigerator could scare them off. If you've got a junky-looking appliance, swap it out for a budget-minded replacement.
Good Improvement: Steel Entry Door
Cost: Around $1,170
A heavy entry door comes with an impressive return: You're likely to get back your investment plus a 29% gain, according to the National Association of Realtors remodeling 2009 report.
Good Improvement: Roofing Credit
Cost: $19,700
If your roof leaks, offer the buyer a discount. It's likely to cost you less than the difference between what it'll cost you to replace the roof before selling and the lesser amount you'll recoup afterward. Source: National Association of Realtors/Remodeling.
Bad Improvement: Family Room Addition
Cost: $82,800
If you're itching to add a family room, do it for your family. Do not do it to profit from selling your home; you're likely to be disappointed. Source: National Association of Realtors/Remodeling.
