All My Net Biz

Time
(EST) Indicator
(click for definition) Source
(click for press release) Actual Forecast Previous
(revised) Previous
(original)
Monday, February 19
No releases due to Presidents’ Day holiday.
Tuesday, February 20
No releases.
Wednesday, February 21
8:30 a.m. Consumer Price Index for January Labor Department — +0.1% — +0.5%
Ex- food and energy — +0.2% — +0.2%
9 a.m. Mortgage Applications Survey for the week ended February 16 — Market Composite Index Mortgage Bankers Association — n.a. — 639.8
Purchase Index — n.a. — 400.7
9 a.m. Consumer Comfort Index for the week ended February 18 ABC News and Washington Post — n.a. — -3
9 a.m. ICSC-UBS Weekly Chain Store Sales Snapshot for the week ended February 17 International Council of Shopping Centers and UBS — n.a. — -0.8%
9 a.m. Johnson Redbook Retail Sales Index for the week ended Februay 17, vs. January Redbook Research — n.a. — -1.4%*
10 a.m. Leading economic indicators for January Conference Board — +0.2% — +0.3%
1:30 p.m. Treasury auction Bureau of the Public Debt The Treasury announces the results of its monthly two-year note auction, at which $18 billion of securities will be sold, with bids due at 1 p.m.
2 p.m. Federal Open Market Committee minutes Federal Reserve The Fed releases the minutes of its monetary policymaking committee’s Jan. 31 meeting.
Thursday, February 22
8:30 a.m. Initial Jobless Claims for the week ended February 17 Labor Department — n.a. — +357,000
Four-week average — n.a. — +326,000
10 a.m. Help-Wanted Index for January Conference Board — +34 — 33
1:30 p.m. Treasury refunding Bureau of the Public Debt The Treasury announces the results of its five-year note auction, at which $13 billion of securities will be sold, with bids due at 1 p.m..
Friday, February 23
10:30 a.m. for the week ended February 16 Economic Cycle Research Institute — n.a. — +3.5%

P-Preliminary forecast
*Month through previous Saturday, vs. prior month
Expectations as reported by Reuters
Last week’s calendar

This column was originally published on RealMoney on Jan. 18 at 1:48 p.m. ET. It’s being republished as a bonus for TheStreet.com readers. For more information about subscribing to RealMoney, please click here.

During earnings season, it seems like the days just disappear before they even start. There’s so many conference calls to listen to and transcripts to read. Analyses and summaries of analyses fill the inbox all day long. It’s a lot of work, but if you have any fundamental bent at all, you have to tune in and get some data points.

Tonight’s tech lineup includes IBM (IBM) and semiconductor companies Cree (CREE) and Xilinx (XLNX) .

Did you see the semis trading down more than 3% today? I’ve repeatedly suggested avoiding the semis until the Street is fully aware of and baking in the problems associated with the industry’s inventory glut. Isn’t it ironic but typical that such recognition happens just as the glut seems to be working itself out?

Opportunity is coming in the chips, and I’m getting excited about putting some money to work in longer-dated, slightly out-of-the-money calls in that sector. Two names I’m looking at are Seagate (STX) and Micron (MU) .

IBM — like Cisco (CSCO) , Apple (AAPL) and Microsoft (MSFT) — can actually benefit from the inventory glut in its supply chain, as prices for components come down. I’d rather be long IBM than Cree or Xilinx into tonight’s call, but I’m not going to play any of them as the risk/reward isn’t favorable for me.

Since September, when the Nasdaq was much lower and the semis a good bit higher, I’ve been saying buy tech and sell semis.

Though it’s not today’s business, that saying is slowly but surely changing to “buy tech and buy the semis, too.”

The Super Bowl has long been considered the pre-eminent television advertising event of the year, not just because millions of Americans tune in but because many of those viewers stay put specifically to watch the ads.

Now, thanks to sophisticated television-recording technology such as TiVo, some say the allure the Super Bowl holds for advertisers could grow even stronger. Thats because millions of Americans are now using services like TiVo and its ilk to zip through commercials on other shows, leaving the Super Bowl among the few broadcasts that will be watched straight through by almost everyone who tunes in.

The Super Bowl is the least affected by the TiVo effect because its live, said Bob Garfield of Advertising Age magazine. Hardly anyone watches the Super Bowl on Thursday.

Super Bowl Sunday, which falls this year on Feb. 4, has the added benefit of being a showcase for some of the best ads of the year. The curiosity about what companies will do to entertain or annoy viewers offers further protection for advertisers against the scourge of digital video recording, or DVR.

Josh Bernoff, principal analyst with Forrester Research, said Super Bowl ads remain so highly anticipated that people may not even get up to go to the bathroom during the commercial break, let alone hit the fast-forward button.

In fact, some experts say, those who do record the Super Bowl may be doing so specifically so they can watch the ads again later while using the fast-forward button to skip through the game.

In general, the growing prevalence of DVR technology has been seen as bad news for companies that traditionally rely on television advertising. A survey of 133 advertisers done last year by Forrester Research found that 63 percent of advertisers believe such TV-recording technology will reduce the effectiveness of the 30-second television commercial. Another 6 percent thought such technology would destroy the effectiveness of those TV commercials.

Its far from the uniform perspective, but many major advertisers that we work with are starting to question whether theyre getting the value for their money in traditional television, Bernoff said.

As TV recording technology becomes more popular, Bernoff believes it will play a role in pushing Super Bowl ad prices even higher, especially in comparison with other television advertising.

That premium is already plenty high. The cost of a 30-second spot is expected to top out at a reported $2.6 million this year. Last year, the spots cost a record $2.5 million, according to Nielsen Monitor-Plus.

Larry Blasius, executive vice president for MAGNA Global, which negotiates on behalf of advertisers, said he is starting to see advertisers consider the effect of DVR technology when buying ads on other shows. But for now at least, he said advertisers are still using more traditional considerations in deciding whether to invest in a pricey Super Bowl ad.

The issue is whether its the right environment to showcase your platforms, he said.

The high price tag isn’t dissuading traditional Super Bowl advertisers such as PepsiCo and Anheuser-Busch, said Robert Passikoff, president of research firm Brand Keys Inc. He said interest in this year’s game is “as high as it ever was,” although as is also typical some companies are staying quiet about their plans ahead of the game.

Andrew Burke, vice president of marketing for Diamond Foods Inc., said the nut snack company chose this years Super Bowl to launch a new advertising campaign in part because the company knows people will actually pay attention during the commercial breaks.

In contrast, he said the company has scaled back its purchases of normal television advertising time. Thats partly because of TiVo-like technology, and partly because the company thinks many people are being drawn away to other platforms, including the Internet.

We have done a lot less of the kind of traditional TV buys and were using mediums in different ways to accomplish different things, Burke said.

FedEx Corp., another Super Bowl advertiser, has been watching the so-called TiVo effect since the technology was introduced, but advertising director Steve Pacheco said it hasnt responded by reducing its television advertising.

Instead, Pacheco said, the company has sought to create ads that are entertaining enough to get people to stop fast-forwarding and pay attention.

Youll hear a lot about people using TiVo to skip ads, and thats on the one hand, Pacheco said. But if you put compelling content or entertaining content out there, we think it can work the other way as well.

Pacheco said the company also has dabbled in offering advertising promotions directly through TiVo and other companies that provide TV-recording services.

FedEx also has begun designing its ads knowing that they might be watched more closely, more than once and on different platforms. He said the ads now need to stand up to being seen live, played back on a DVR, viewed over the Web or even downloaded to a portable device like a video iPod.

Youve got to give it a lot more thought than you used to, he said. 2007 MSNBC Interactive

A Greens Senator says the Federal Government should make its intentions clear on whether it will try to override Western Australia’s policy against nuclear mining.

There is further pressure on the State Government to drop its ban on uranium mining after the Commonwealth signed a deal to allow Australian yellowcake to be shipped to China.

Acting Premier Eric Ripper is concerned that a recent High Court decision could allow the Federal Government to force nuclear power on the states.

Greens Senator Rachel Siewert says the Commonwealth needs to show its hand.

“I’m certainly concerned about what the Federal Government’s intentions are, and if I was in the State Government I would certainly be trying to find out what the Commonwealth Government’s specific intentions are,” she said.

Senator Siewert says WA should maintain its ban.

“[I am] deeply concerned that there will be pressure put on the WA Government to change its very strong position against uranium mining,” she said.

“I must say that that’s a stand that we very strongly support and we’re calling on the State Government to maintain the stand opposing uranium mining.”

A spokeswoman for federal Resources Minister Ian Macfarlane says uranium bans are costing WA money and the Federal Government continues to encourage the WA Government to repeal its legislative restriction on uranium mining.

WASHINGTONAttorney General says federal judges are unqualified to make rulings affecting national security policy, ramping up his criticism of how they handle terrorism cases.

In remarks prepared for delivery Wednesday, Gonzales says judges generally should defer to the will of the president and Congress when deciding national security cases. He also raps jurists who “apply an activist philosophy that stretches the law to suit policy preferences.”

The text of the speech, scheduled for delivery at the American Enterprise Institute, was obtained Tuesday by The Associated Press. It outlines, in part, what qualities the Bush administration looks for when selecting candidates for the federal bench.

“We want to determine whether he understands the inherent limits that make an unelected judiciary inferior to Congress or the president in making policy judgments,” Gonzales says in the prepared speech. “That, for example, a judge will never be in the best position to know what is in the national security interests of our country.”

Gonzales did not cite any specific activist jurists, or give examples of national security cases, in his prepared text. The Justice Department is appealing an August decision by U.S. District Judge in Detroit, who ruled the government’s warrantless surveillance program unconstitutional and ordered it stopped immediately.

The Justice Department appealed her decision and the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati has ruled that the administration can keep the program in place during the appeal.

Attorneys representing terrorism suspects held at Guantanamo Bay are challenging the legality of a law, signed by President Bush in October, that authorizes military trials. Those challenges raise the possibility that trials will be struck down by a federal appeals court or the Supreme Court.

Gonzales, a former Texas Supreme Court justice, has in the past warned about judges who inject their personal beliefs in cases. But his prepared remarks Wednesday mark his sharpest words over concerns about the federal judiciary Д the third, and equal, branch of government.

Judges who “apply an activist philosophy that stretches the law to suit policy preferences, they actually reduce the credibility and authority of the judiciary,” Gonzales says. “In so doing, they undermine the rule of law that strengthens our democracy.”

Even so, Gonzales characterized efforts to retaliate against unpopular rulings as misguided, noting a failed South Dakota proposal to sue or jail judges for making unpopular court decisions. He also called for Congress to consider increasing the number of federal judges to handle heavy workloads, and to offer them higher salaries to lure and keep the best jurists on the bench.