Why No Regulation of Offshoring: Untangling the Gap Between Rhetoric and Action

Professor Bob Kennedy, who heads up the William Davidson Institute, a non-profit research and educational institute that focuses on business and policy issues in emerging market economies, has been keeping very close tabs on regulatory issues with offshoring.  I asked Bob to contribute his recent experiences and views with us.  Bob also has a new blog up and running entitled "Services Shift", and has recently released his new book, adorning the same name.  Over to you Bob...

Picking up on Phil’s April Fool’s day post, I wanted to share a few thoughts on why we see lots of anti-offshoring rhetoric from politicians, but (thankfully) very little actual policy.

There is certainly a heavy demand from the man on the street to “do something.” It’s easy to understand why. We have become accustomed to trade in manufactured goods and natural resources. But manufacturing accounts for only about 15% of US employment, and developing countries generally enjoy a fully-delivered cost advantage of 10-30%. This is disconcerting for developed country workers, and we frequently observe moves against trade in manufactured goods, such as spurious anti-dumping actions and “buy America” provisions in various pieces of legislation.

Services, by contrast, account for about 78% of U.S. employment, and developing countries enjoy delivered cost savings of 40-70%.

Deloitte and PwC Pick Up BearingPoint Pieces, Plan Return to Pre-Sarbox Business Models

BearingPoint’s obituary has been half-written for some time now, lacking only dates and potential buyers to fill in the blanks. Today, just a month after the company filed for bankruptcy, two global accounting firms, Deloitte and PricewaterhouseCoopers, stepped up to acquire some of what is left. The result redraws industry lines into something that looks oddly like turn-of-the-century consulting, pre-Enron and Sarbanes Oxley. Dana Stiffler comments.

Remember that pesky Sarbanes-Oxley Act? Today’s announcements – in the world of consulting and IT services – almost make it seem like it never happened. Deloitte announced its intent to acquire BearingPoint’s relatively healthy North American public sector business for $350M in cash. Pricewaterhouse Coopers’ U.S. firm will acquire select pieces of BearingPoint’s North American commercial portfolio, while PwC Japan will acquire all of BearingPoint’s Japanese consulting practice.

A quick SarbOx refresher: the Act prohibits accounting firms from doing consulting work for independent audit clients. Even prior to SarbOx, this ethical conundrum and different firms’ takes on what it meant for future revenue opportunities saw four of the big five accounting firms divest themselves of their consulting businesses. Only Deloitte remained integrated, calling off its consulting spin-off at the last minute. This decision turned out to be a hugely profitable one, which hasn’t escaped the notice of the three non-integrated accounting firms, Ernst & Young, KPMG, and PwC. Since 2003, only Deloitte has been able to provide high-end financial and tax advisory services as well as operational consulting and systems implementation. This has compelled KPMG and PwC to gradually rebuild the consulting practices they had jettisoned years ago, which brings us to announcements like the PwC-BearingPoint one today.

Detailed terms of the PwC-BearingPoint acquisitions weren’t available, though the industry focus is fairly tight: energy and utilities, insurance, and life sciences. PwC is essentially cherry picking contracts -- the offer on the table is just $25M for the selected contracts, while BearingPoint’s North American commercial services business generates approximately $400M annually. PwC leadership couldn’t say how many people would be part of the proposed acquisition but said the number is in the hundreds, not thousands, and includes BearingPoint’s offshore delivery capability in India.

The small size of the potential PwC-BearingPoint acquisition notwithstanding, it’s becoming clear that the accounting firms, Deloitte and PwC in particular, are gearing up to compete head to head with their offspring at IBM, Accenture, and Capgemini, and with India, Inc. as well. The accountants have not yet crossed the Rubicon into re-embracing IT and business process outsourcing wholesale, but it looks as though things are headed in that direction.

BearingPoint’s obituary has been half-written for some time now, lacking only dates and potential buyers to fill in the blanks. Today, just a month after the company filed for bankruptcy, two global accounting firms, Deloitte and PricewaterhouseCoopers, stepped up to acquire some of what is left. The result redraws industry lines into something that looks oddly like turn-of-the-century consulting, pre-Enron and Sarbanes Oxley. Dana Stiffler comments.

Remember that pesky Sarbanes-Oxley Act? Today’s announcements – in the world of consulting and IT services – almost make it seem like it never happened. Deloitte announced its intent to acquire BearingPoint’s relatively healthy North American public sector business for $350M in cash. Pricewaterhouse Coopers’ U.S. firm will acquire select pieces of BearingPoint’s North American commercial portfolio, while PwC Japan will acquire all of BearingPoint’s Japanese consulting practice.

A quick SarbOx refresher: the Act prohibits accounting firms from doing consulting work for independent audit clients. Even prior to SarbOx, this ethical conundrum and different firms’ takes on what it meant for future revenue opportunities saw four of the big five accounting firms divest themselves of their consulting businesses. Only Deloitte remained integrated, calling off its consulting spin-off at the last minute. This decision turned out to be a hugely profitable one, which hasn’t escaped the notice of the three non-integrated accounting firms, Ernst & Young, KPMG, and PwC. Since 2003, only Deloitte has been able to provide high-end financial and tax advisory services as well as operational consulting and systems implementation. This has compelled KPMG and PwC to gradually rebuild the consulting practices they had jettisoned years ago, which brings us to announcements like the PwC-BearingPoint one today.

Detailed terms of the PwC-BearingPoint acquisitions weren’t available, though the industry focus is fairly tight: energy and utilities, insurance, and life sciences. PwC is essentially cherry picking contracts -- the offer on the table is just $25M for the selected contracts, while BearingPoint’s North American commercial services business generates approximately $400M annually. PwC leadership couldn’t say how many people would be part of the proposed acquisition but said the number is in the hundreds, not thousands, and includes BearingPoint’s offshore delivery capability in India.

The small size of the potential PwC-BearingPoint acquisition notwithstanding, it’s becoming clear that the accounting firms, Deloitte and PwC in particular, are gearing up to compete head to head with their offspring at IBM, Accenture, and Capgemini, and with India, Inc. as well. The accountants have not yet crossed the Rubicon into re-embracing IT and business process outsourcing wholesale, but it looks as though things are headed in that direction.

Think before you fire: The cost of replacing IT talent

By Phil Fersht

There’s currently a certain sense of déjà-vu within the IT community, as companies look at shaving even more cost out of a function that has been battered since the 2001 dot-com bust. However, when we look at the lessons of the past, you do have to question companies which decide to sharpen their knives once more when they address their IT costs. Companies need to offset the cost of every layoff with the cost of replacing that talent when the economy improves. It is not so much who is left standing, but rather who is in position to grasp the brass ring of prosperity when it returns.

If economic conditions improve in 2010, then the amount of costs saved by releasing an employee may only be $50-100K by the time all the lay-off costs are incurred. How can you put a price on replacing the inherent business knowledge of that staff member when you re-hire a replacement? It may take another year or two to get the replacement up-to-speed, and will not only end up costing you more, but may also impede your executives from accessing critical data in a timely fashion. The overall cost of replacing that staff member could easily be three times the costs saved by laying her off. And these easily-identified direct costs are only the beginning; the costs incurred to your culture and morale can prove even more damaging.

There are lessons to be learned from those who did it right and those who failed to do so during the recession of 2001. The frequently cited observation by George Santayana warrants consideration, “Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” Furloughed IT employees in the RIF of 2001 were often reluctant to return to their previous employer. Having been viewed as expendable, the trust and bond between the two may have become a casualty. Often the company belatedly discovered the employee was not at all expendable.

HR outsourcing in this recession... why this makes sense for many global firms

By Phil Fersht

While many firms are hunkering down tryng to ride out this turbulent year, we're also seeing an increasing number of multi-national companies use this time to develop business support infrastructures that can scale quickly with the needs of the business.  It's not all about cost-reduction - it's about being nimble, and having a firmer handle on accessing critical data on your staff at a global level. 

As we discussed at the beginning of the market crash, more than 50% of employees in major multinationals now reside outside of the corporate home country (source Mercer / Harvard Business School study, 2008).  The pressure to standardize policies and processes, manage increased workforce mobility and compliance issues is greater than ever, and the current market volatility and uncertaintly is exacerbating the need for corporate leadership to get a tighter grip on managing their global workforce.  For example, many large retailers and consumer goods firms have increasing numbers of employees working in low-cost locations, such as China, Vietnam, Thailand and the Malaysia.  How can corporate management keep a handle on where staff are, how much are they getting paid, and how are they adhering to local regulations in a market where they may need to staff up or down at a moment's notice?

Consequently, many senior HR executives are stepping up into global roles, but are failing to divest of their localized issues.  According to the Mercer / HBS study 45% of HR executives have moved into global roles over the last two-to-three years.  However, while roles are being structured globally, most of the HR executives have been struggling to get away from dealing with local and regional issues.  For those working in global roles today, 9 out of 10 have less than 3 years experience and a failing to move away from their previous localized job roles.  Hence to need for HR administrative support at a global level to help companies develop effective global payroll, benefits administration, workforce data analytics, compliance and recruiting operations has never been as intense with today's market conditions.  So what can we expect to see happening in the coming months with HRO adoption?

As Figure 1 illustrates, the multi-process HRO market grew by 24% in 2007 and is ontrack to maintain  single-digit growth-rate throughout 2008 and into 2009:

Figure 1: Multi-process HR Outsourcing Contracts, 2002 - Present

 

The core question now is centered on whether the deepening global recession is going to impact this market growth. While some engagements will inevitably be put on hold as a result of conflicting corporate priorities, the upward growth trajectory of this market will continue throughout 2009 and into next year as a direct result of the following factors:

NASSCOM: Pushing the Reset Button on an Industry, But Hush-Hush on Satyam

We are priveleged this year to have AMR's own Dana Stiffler at the NASSCOM show in Mumbai.  What a time to be at the heart of the Indian services industry with the recent Mumbai terror events, the Satyam saga and the current economic crisis...  How is India Inc. responding? Over you to Dana:

NASSCOM President Som Mittal opened the group’s 17th annual leadership conference with praise for the resilient city of Mumbai, as the packed house observed a moment of silence for the victims of the city’s terrorist attacks last November. It’s a watershed moment for NASSCOM and the industry in general and Mr. Mittal struck just the right tone in his opening comments: cheerful, welcoming, resolute. Addressing the attacks and Satyam’s challenges up front, he told us it was time to reset expectations.

As for specifics, Mr. Mittal announced that NASSCOM will reconvene its ethics and governance committee. He also highlighted green technology as a new opportunity and responsibility for NASSCOM members, and reminded the group that NASSCOM’s work is now truly a global affair. Members from 22 countries are participating this year. 

Cisco CEO John Chambers delivered the event’s keynote. Mr. Chambers proved the ideal man for the task, given the ups and downs he’s experienced in his tenure at Cisco. His umbrella topics were global competitiveness and collaboration, accompanied, naturally, by a big plug for Cisco’s TelePresence technology. But it was his anecdote about Jack Welch telling him that “you’ll never have a great company until you have a near-death experience” that probably resonated best with the audience, most of whom have never been through a major downturn.

Indian Minister for Commerce and Industry Kamal Nath came next, charging NASSCOM to use the global economic crisis as a time to look inward to the Indian market opportunity. India’s IT sector has been heavily export focused, the largest players even more so. This has left much of the Indian IT opportunity, especially at the enterprise level, open to rivals IBM and HP. I agree with Minister Nath that Indian IT needs to be stronger domestically for another reason as well: the multinationals we work with all have emerging market IT strategies. Today, Accenture, HP, and IBM are better-positioned to advise on and support these operations than Indian service providers.

Then, finally, the session I had been anticipating the most: a panel discussion featuring Vineet Nayar, Nandan Nilekani, and S. Ramadorai, top executives of HCL Technologies, Infosys, and Tata Consultancy Services, respectively. TPI’s Dennis McGuire was there for buyer insight and color commentary as well. I was less interested in what the panel had to say than in how they would said it. Indeed, it was fairly predictable, if reassuring stuff – there is no question these companies will be around for the long haul. All agreed that there is a lot of efficiency to be wrung out of current operations and that uncertainty and volatility are the new normal. Mssrs. Ramadorai and Nilekani talked about deepening client relationships and helping them leverage existing scenarios while Mr. Nayar made no bones about aggressively seeking market share, i.e. “eating someone else’s lunch.”

Presumably it is Satyam’s lunch that we are talking about. But we didn’t talk about Satyam -- none of the panelists even mentioned the company’s name, though the moderator did in a few joking asides. Of the ten or so questions from the floor, none were about increased client concerns with vendor financial transparency and viability.  The panel missed a major opportunity, perhaps the event’s only main stage opportunity, to address the biggest elephant in the room.

And so, while NASSCOM’s first day was reassuring, even inspiring, on many levels, there’s a lot more that needs to be said. I look forward to your comments and questions as the event unfolds -- tomorrow brings the likely emergence of said elephant as I’m having breakfast with NASSCOM leadership and participating on two panels. Stay tuned.

We are priveleged this year to have AMR's own Dana Stiffler at the NASSCOM show in Mumbai.  What a time to be at the heart of the Indian services industry with the recent Mumbai terror events, the Satyam saga and the current economic crisis...  How is India Inc. responding? Over you to Dana:

NASSCOM President Som Mittal opened the group’s 17th annual leadership conference with praise for the resilient city of Mumbai, as the packed house observed a moment of silence for the victims of the city’s terrorist attacks last November. It’s a watershed moment for NASSCOM and the industry in general and Mr. Mittal struck just the right tone in his opening comments: cheerful, welcoming, resolute. Addressing the attacks and Satyam’s challenges up front, he told us it was time to reset expectations.

As for specifics, Mr. Mittal announced that NASSCOM will reconvene its ethics and governance committee. He also highlighted green technology as a new opportunity and responsibility for NASSCOM members, and reminded the group that NASSCOM’s work is now truly a global affair. Members from 22 countries are participating this year. 

Cisco CEO John Chambers delivered the event’s keynote. Mr. Chambers proved the ideal man for the task, given the ups and downs he’s experienced in his tenure at Cisco. His umbrella topics were global competitiveness and collaboration, accompanied, naturally, by a big plug for Cisco’s TelePresence technology. But it was his anecdote about Jack Welch telling him that “you’ll never have a great company until you have a near-death experience” that probably resonated best with the audience, most of whom have never been through a major downturn.

Indian Minister for Commerce and Industry Kamal Nath came next, charging NASSCOM to use the global economic crisis as a time to look inward to the Indian market opportunity. India’s IT sector has been heavily export focused, the largest players even more so. This has left much of the Indian IT opportunity, especially at the enterprise level, open to rivals IBM and HP. I agree with Minister Nath that Indian IT needs to be stronger domestically for another reason as well: the multinationals we work with all have emerging market IT strategies. Today, Accenture, HP, and IBM are better-positioned to advise on and support these operations than Indian service providers.

Then, finally, the session I had been anticipating the most: a panel discussion featuring Vineet Nayar, Nandan Nilekani, and S. Ramadorai, top executives of HCL Technologies, Infosys, and Tata Consultancy Services, respectively. TPI’s Dennis McGuire was there for buyer insight and color commentary as well. I was less interested in what the panel had to say than in how they would said it. Indeed, it was fairly predictable, if reassuring stuff – there is no question these companies will be around for the long haul. All agreed that there is a lot of efficiency to be wrung out of current operations and that uncertainty and volatility are the new normal. Mssrs. Ramadorai and Nilekani talked about deepening client relationships and helping them leverage existing scenarios while Mr. Nayar made no bones about aggressively seeking market share, i.e. “eating someone else’s lunch.”

Presumably it is Satyam’s lunch that we are talking about. But we didn’t talk about Satyam -- none of the panelists even mentioned the company’s name, though the moderator did in a few joking asides. Of the ten or so questions from the floor, none were about increased client concerns with vendor financial transparency and viability.  The panel missed a major opportunity, perhaps the event’s only main stage opportunity, to address the biggest elephant in the room.

And so, while NASSCOM’s first day was reassuring, even inspiring, on many levels, there’s a lot more that needs to be said. I look forward to your comments and questions as the event unfolds -- tomorrow brings the likely emergence of said elephant as I’m having breakfast with NASSCOM leadership and participating on two panels. Stay tuned.

Everything will change

I've been avidly following Robert Peston's coverage of the economic crisis.  Peston is the BBC's business editor and has built a stellar reputation for reporting the key facts on what went so massively wrong and what we can do to emerge from this crisis. His recent BBC radio discussion with Robert Wolf, Financial Times's chief economic commentator, Richard Lambert, director general of the CBI and Roger Carr, the chairman of Centrica and Cadbury, is well worth hearing.  Key points discussed:

• * The UK is the most vulnerable economy, due to its unprecedented housing bubble and over-reliance on the financial services sector.

• * The strong sense of denial is fading - there aren't going to be any winners out of all this, just relative advantage. 

• * Not everyone yet grasps this is a massive structural change - we're not going back to 2006.  The massive consumer-led debt boom cannot be repeated.  We might go back to fast growth, but the whole pattern of global demand will have to be different for that to happen.  The world economy will have to be re-balanced in different ways.

• * We've done a very good job of driving short-term stimulus and saved the banking system, but the long-term solution has to be the restoration of healthy private sector demand across the world: that is the next stage of getting back to a healthy economy...but does the private sector understand this?  There is an increasing awareness that we are interdependent.  Unless the strong support the frail we will have continuing difficulty.

• * We must protects the emerging economies now and change the way we finance them.  The IMF resources need to be bigger to protect developing economies.

• * We need to have serious intelligent dialog with the Chinese on how to make their growth more compatible with global stability.

All-in-all, you can really start to guage how crucial the role global sourcing has to play as we emerge in a new economic structure.  The inter-dependencies across economies and businesses can be managed more effectively by firms adopting multi-cultural, multi-lingual and multi-regional delivery models. Both governments and businesses need to embrace both local and global talent to restore private sector demand over the long-term.  What is abundantly clear is that we don't fully realize how this structure will ultimately develop, but we are quickly understanding the basics of what needs to change.  The next stage is for both governments and business to work together on stimulating long-term demand and making these inter-dependencies really function effectively.

Want to offshore yourself?

IBM is now offering employees, who would otherwise face layoffs from their North American jobs, the chance to work abroad through 'Project Match'. Destinations include Argentina, Brazil, China, Czech Republic, Hungary, Mexico, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Turkey, and United Arab Emirates. IBM will also help with moving costs and provide visa assistance. While some cynics will sneer at this scheme, at least Big Blue is doing something proactive to support at-risk staff, and also promote moving much-needed onshore talent into their emerging country delivery centers. Furthermore, maybe they'll pick up some good work habits and bring them home to the States when the economy improves?

Poland delivers against quality, not low-cost

By Phil Fersht

Amidst the current economic gloom, it's encouraging to see developing nations continuing to grow their economies, develop their people resources and their industries. A recent article by the Guardian's Ashley Seager discusses the Polish situation, with the government forecasting 3% growth in 2009. 

The fact that thousands of migrant Polish workers are now returning home form the UK is testament to the rapidly-changing global economy.  Over a million Polish migrant workers have moved to the UK over the last 5 years, but that trend is now dramatically reversing as job opportunities in Poland are now more attractive than economies such as the UK, not to mention the falling currency valuation of the pound. 

From my own personal experience, Poland has proved to be a first-class location for high-quality, multi-lingual support, particularly for BPO functions, namely finance, procurement/sourcing and human resouces.  No wonder providers such as Accenture, ADP, Capgemini, Genpact, HCL, HP and IBM have all made significant investments there, in addition to many captive centers that have been established there in recent years. 

Poland is simply not an "alternative nearshore location", as its value-proposition is not driven by scale and low-cost, but by highly-motivated and educated staff, and is a proven first-class hub for multi-lingual European language support. Poland has the potential to be challenging the unique expertise of a country such as Israel, as the country possesses far more potential that simply services as an administrative back office to Western corporations. In many instances, clients have not found significant cost savings using Polish delivery resources - they have used them because of the value and quality tthese bring to a global delivery model.

The impact of Satyam on the Indian IT industry

I wanted to share with you a recent press interview on the Satyam situation an it's impact on the Indian and global services industry.

What is the impact for the Indian IT sector because of the Satyam scam? Will Indian IT companies find it more difficult to bag international deals?

PF: The impact is short-term and will pass quickly, unless there is another scandal involving another IT services firm. We believe the negative publicity is largely media hype, amidst a political backlash against offshoring of US jobs in the current economic slump, and international corporations will continue to make the right decisions for their business models to remain competitive. As all the leading IT services vendors have significant Indian staff-bases, there will be minimal impact on the Indian IT sector as a result of this deal. Clients which sign with the Western headquartered firms (Accenture, IBM, HP etc) would have done so whether or not the Satyam scandal had happened. We do not believe customers can easily sever their existing services relationships with Satyam without significant issues re-badging personnel, losing critical operational staff, and the expense and complications of transferring H1B-Visas. It often takes clients two-to-three years to establish an effective working relationship with their service provider and we are concerned with the advice several service providers are giving Satyam’s clients that switching will be quick, easy, uneventful and at minimal incremental cost.

Who will benefit from this entire episode, other Indian IT firms or international counterparts like IBMs and Accentures OR newer geographies and emerging IT service players like Eastern European companies, China, Philippines etc...or will cost considerations out-weigh other concerns?

PF:  We am more concerned regarding the governance of firms from countries such as China and Russia,

The challenge of staying relevant in today's corporate climate

Have been musing over some stats on the plummeting average tenures of C-suite executives:

CEO: A 2007 Harvard Law School study shows that a “manager CEO” of a S&P 500 firm averages 5.5 years of tenure.  Crist Associates’ 2007 Volatility Report also shows the majority of CEOs with less than 5 years of service.

CFO: Spencer Stuart has CFO tenure at 4.3 years - and falling (Crist at 5 for all CFOs).

COO: Chief Operating Officer tenure is shrinking to just under 3 years, with the total number of Fortune and S&P 500 COOs diminishing at a perilous rate.  

CIO: According to the 2008 State of the CIO poll results, a Chief Information Officer’s average time in seat is about 4.4 years, down from 5.1 years in the prior period.

CMO: Spencer Stuart’s annual study shows Chief Marketing Officers at a mere 26.8 months, which is actually up from 23.2 months in the prior year.

CHRO:  Workforce Magazine’s analysis putting an average CHRO in their seat for approximately 3.1 years.  

These stats got me thinking more about how organizations today are rethinking their organizational strategy in a challenging economy where talent management is ever-critical to the business, and non-core functions are becoming increasingly subjected to lower-cost outsourcing solutions.  So why are C-suite tenures all getting shorter? 

Beware of Satyam ambulance-chasers

We’ve been inundated with questions from Satyam’s competitors who have all been eagerly circling the beleaguered service provider’s clients over the past week. As we discussed in our recent piece “Satyam’s Woes Put India’s Services Industry In The Hot-Seat”, we do not believe customers can easily sever their existing services relationships with Satyam without significant issues re-badging personnel, losing critical operational staff, and the expense of transferring H1B-Visas. It often takes clients two-to-three years to establish an effective working relationship with their service provider and we are concerned with the advice several service providers are giving Satyam’s clients that switching will be quick, easy, uneventful and at minimal incremental cost.

While the future of Satyam hangs in the balance, our advice to clients is to remain patient in the short-term before evaluating their future options. Yes, clients should be concerned and seek reassurances from Satyam regarding any imminent service delivery issues. However, they should disregard the propaganda coming from several of Satyam’s competitors, and some of the articles from business publications questioning the viability of offshore outsourcing as a consequence of the Satyam scandal.

Should Satyam be acquired (which we believe likely), then there may be few compelling reasons to move to alternative service providers in the short-term. However, should Satyam start to lose critical staff and their execution suffers significantly, then clients may have little choice but to jump ship and go through the switching pain. Our view is that customers can afford to wait for at least a few weeks to evaluate the situation. It does appear that the Indian government is likely to lend some short-term support to the ailing service provider as it struggles with short-term financial liquidity, so there should not be major cause for panic at this time. Stay tuned for more on this developing saga.

January 5th: time to shake off the gloom

It's time for people to stop panicking about next year.  

On January 5th it's business as usual, companies will be selling and delivering their services, looking for new avenues that will provide them with competitive bite, operational excellence and new ways of surviving in a tough business environment.  We are part of that.  

Yes, some of us will get laid off - several people I know already have, but we'll find new jobs, or new career opportunities - we always do.  We may get a little poorer, but so will everyone else and the cost of living will get cheaper.

End of the day, we function in a world where we have much better technology and communications than we had 6 years' ago, much more mature global delivery models, and a truly global marketplace in which we operate.  The future opportunity for our careers and our businesses has never had so much potential in the long-term, once we get over these short-term hurdles and adjust to a more challenging business environment. Challenges and change breed new opportunities - and the world won't stop while we try to embrace them.  

We have exciting new technologies being developed and a fledgling new industry for developing alternative energy sources.  And we have a new President arriving with fresh ideas and a fresh energy... in just 3 weeks.

It's time to shake off the gloom.  2009 here we come.