• mse-big-banner-new-03-17-2016-416716a-tonernews-web-banner-mse-212
  • ces_web_banner_toner_news_902x1776
  • banner-01-26-17b
  • clover-depot-intl-us-ca-email-signature-05-10-2017-902x1772
  • ncc-banner-902-x-177-june-2017
  • Print
  • 4toner4
  • 2toner1-2
  • 05 02 2016 429716a-cig-clearchoice-banner-902x177
  • cartridgewebsite-com-big-banner-02-09-07-2016


 user 2005-02-12 at 10:38:00 am Views: 71
  • #10216

    Despite the general downturn in financial markets across the
    world, office products companies have fared well in the latest FT Global 500,
    the annual list of the world’s most valuable public corporations

    Global company performance lists always make for
    interesting reading and the latest, published in the UK by the Financial Times,
    is no exception.

    The FT list gives an instant snapshot of not only the companies’ relative
    performance, but also the performance of the global economy itself. And it makes
    for sobering reading. Falling stock markets mean that this year the entire FT
    Global 500 is valued at $12,580 billion, down 22.6% on the previous year.

    Office products companies however, fare quite well. At the risk of
    sounding like a disc jockey reading the latest chart countdown, there are five
    new OP-related entries on the Global 500 this year (Staples, Eastman Kodak,
    Lexmark International, Henkel and Newell Rubbermaid), with only one
    company dropping out – Guilbert’s former owner, Pinault Printemps Redoute.

    Staples appears in 420th position with a market cap of $8.8 billion. It
    is interesting to note that its fierce rival, Office Depot, does not make the
    Top 500 at all, coming in as only the 417th most valuable company in the USA. On
    that particular ranking, Staples is streets ahead at 202nd.

    Indeed Depot
    is not the only notable absentee from the list. Ingram Micro for example, is the
    world’s 179th largest company in sales terms, but its market value does not even
    register in the top 500 US companies. The same goes for IT wholesaler rival Tech

    And no place either for manufacturing giant Xerox. Sales of $16.5
    billion may be good enough for 300th place on the Fortune list, but not the FT
    500, although it does rank as 273rd most valuable in the USA.

    In terms
    of geographical regions, the FT list vividly illustrates where the balance of
    power lies – emphatically in the USA with 240 entries, almost five times more
    than closest competitor Japan. But again illustrating the economic malaise, the
    combined value of these US companies has fallen 23% over the last 12 months.

    As for the emerging markets, however, it is clear they have much
    emerging still to do. Hong Kong, South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore all slip down
    the market cap table, suffering from the global depression among technology

    Unlike the perhaps more-vaunted Fortune Global 500, which ranks
    companies in terms of sales, the FT listing measures market capitalisation and
    contains a forward-looking element inasmuch as a share price reflects an
    investor’s confidence in the firm.

    The FT feels its list gives the most
    accurate overall presentation of a company’s standing, pointing out that going
    on sales does not adequately allow for banks and financial services companies,
    while lists that rank on profits are distorted, for example, by write-offs.

    Consequently, the FT list can differ greatly from the Fortune table.
    While Microsoft tops the FT ranking, with a market value of $264 billion, in
    terms of revenue it rates as only the 175th largest company in the world on the
    Fortune list, with sales of $28.4 billion.

    Some things never change,
    however. Whichever way you look at it, mass retailer Wal-Mart is huge, appearing
    in fourth place on the FT Global 500, and first place in the Fortune Global 500.
    Wal-Mart’s market value is calculated to be a whopping $234.4 billion. Compare
    that to its nearest retail rival, Home Depot, in 46th place with a $58 billion
    market cap.