by 
ST. LOUIS — Belden Inc. (NYSE: BDC), a global leader in signal transmission solutions for mission critical applications, today announced that it has entered into a definitive agreement to acquire the Thomas & Betts Communications Products Business, for $78 million in cash.
This acquisition will further strengthen Belden’s position as an end-to-end solution provider within the broadband/CATV, security, and audio/video markets. This business includes Snap-NSeal ® drop connectors, LRC® hardline connectors, Diamond® hardware & grounding products, and telecom enclosures & connectors, including the Kold-N-Klose® enclosure system. By adding these established brands and market-leading Radio Frequency (RF) connectors to its extensive portfolio of audio, video and security cables, Belden will expand its end-to-end solution offering and leverage its existing channels.
“The Thomas & Betts Communications Products Business has an experienced management team, recognized brands, plus a reputation for superior product quality, innovation, and best-inclass manufacturing capabilities,” said John Stroup, President and CEO of Belden Inc. “We intend to invest in the business to leverage these proven strengths and expand our combined presence in core markets within North America, as well as other geographies where we already have commercial infrastructure in place.”
The acquisition is subject to regulatory review under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvement Act and is expected to be completed by calendar year-end 2010. Belden will fund the purchase price with cash on hand. Belden expects the business will contribute $0.05 in income from continuing operations per diluted share in fiscal year 2011.
{complink 9647|Belden Inc.}
You are spot on, Bolaji, protectionism would be a disaster for the supply chain. It's easy to understand why countries are circling the wagons. But a global economy is just that, and one you can't opt out of when things get tough. Supply chain relationships have already endured a number of crises and come out intact–the 2001 inventory “adjustment” was particularly painful for the electronics industry. Let's hope the relationships in the supply chain are strong enought to weather this particular storm.
Protectionism will be the side effect of the inability and impossibility of enforcing “free trade” agreements. Without proper enforcement, fair competition becomes impossible. From this point of view, it seems like the US has been practicing “free trade” while the rest of the world has been practicing protectionism. Something’s got to give when many of the parties aren’t playing fair.
The electronic indusry reached to a level that not only the companies are making their strategis but also the governements are hugely dependent on the industry. Because of the wide spread of the electronics in every application on earth it is even dictating terms to the leaders.
Protectionism will certainly have an impact, Barbara, but I really wonder how much of that is just pure hyperbole. Certainly the companies that have fostered outsourcing and offshoring have a vested interest in being against so-called “Potectionism”.
By the way, isn't that word “Protectionism” a fascinating sound-bite? It's that darn “Protectionism” that is really hurting those profits – not the unemployed workers here – or for that matter, the underpaid and poorly treated workers overseas.
Sorry, Barbara I'm not buying this.
Protectionism has been the game by EEU countries and the emerging economies of China and India in recent times. China's strong economic growth which sucked jobs from the West was partly built on protection of China's interest with the offer cheap labor to any one willing to move jobs to China. The offer was the bait the West bit on and are paying for it now in unemployment. US capitalism has also come home to roost – private ventures made decisions to move out the jobs and hoped competition in a free trade will help determine the prices.
The G20 meeting has just made it apparent to us all, that governments have no control on determining distribution or prices, the private sector does. The governments are beneficiaries of the success of the private sector. Governments of the G20 are protecting these benefits and making sure they are not eroded hence the belt tightning to free trade. Fair or not is another matter. The way to force China to play fair at this time is to curb imports from China while implementing policies that would stop outflow of manufacturing activities from the West.
Ms. Daisy, Your analysis is pinpoint correct. However, the transfer of jobs to Asia has already happened and it's unlikely these manufacturing positions will return anytime soon back to the West. But it's also not only the West that is suffering as a result of China's domination of global manufacturing. I believe the situation is even more acute in developing economies, which are unable to compete as well for investment funds. The problem here is figuring out the optimal way for the global economic regions to interact in such a way that one area does not benefit too much at the expense of the others. How will these economic leaders sort out this mess without resorting to national protectionist practices?
I don't believe individual government's protectionist practices will solve this mess. A collective action to create a balance is what will work. But each leader is also under tough scrutiny at home for the consequences of the melt down, so its going to take a while to resolve.
daisy u have put it in the right way, goverments should take a strong call in solving this problem and to maintain balance in all sectors.