Investing guru Warren Buffett shocked the investing world exactly two years ago when he plunked down a cool $4 billion on an Israeli company, Iscar, that specializes in metal cutting tools. It was his largest international purchase by far, and investors were left wondering what he was thinking.

Well, flash forward to May '08 and once again Buffett appears to be a genius. As reported by Marketwatch: "Buffett said that he had very high expectations when Berkshire struck the deal, and that the metal-cutting-tool maker has "exceeded that in every way."

"It's been a dream acquisition," he said.

Since that acquisition, Israel has become a hot destination for foreigners to invest. The local stock market has been one of the best performers in the world and the Israeli currency, the Shekel, has surged to record highs and has been the second strongest currency in the world in '08.

Aaron Katsman is the lead Portfolio Manager and Managing Director of America Israel Investment Associates, LLC. and Senior Editor of IsraelNewsletter.com. DISCLOSURE: Writer's fund has no position in any stock mentioned, as of 5/1/08

Once again investors get left holding the bag.

Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT) shareholders should breathe a sigh of relief for not overpaying for an internet search company, Yahoo (NASDAQ: YHOO) where CEO Jerry Yang let his ego get in the way of handsome profits. Yang rejected the $47.5 billion offer that Microsoft put on the table. Why? Because he thought the company is worth more than $50 billion. As reported by the AP: "Clearly there's frustration," said Darren Chervitz, co-manager of the Jacob Internet Fund, which owns Yahoo stock. "I am not even sure if Yahoo cares about its shareholders because they didn't show much regard for shareholders' best interests in this process."

Yang actually thinks that a more sophisticated advertising platform is the secret sauce needed to produce a spike in revenue growth. Keep in mind that revenue grew by only 12% last year, and there is no indication that that number is going to be much higher in '08. Yang thinks that he will be able to grow revenue's by 25 percent in 2009 and 2010. Uh Huh!

I think that today's selloff in Yahoo stock will be an indication of what the public thinks of Yang's plan.

Could it be that in the long run he will be proved correct? I doubt it but only time will tell.

Aaron Katsman is the lead Portfolio Manager and Managing Director of America Israel Investment Associates, LLC. and Senior Editor of IsraelNewsletter.com. DISCLOSURE: Writer's fund has no position in any stock mentioned, as of 5/5/08.

With the Japanese yen continuing to fall against the US dollar as well as higher yielding currencies such as the South African rand and the British pound, the question is whether the "carry-trade" is back on? If so, stocks may continue to rise.

What's the "carry trade"? It's an investment strategy with currencies, where investors borrow money in a currency with low borrowing costs (such as the yen) and then invest in higher yielding currencies (such as the rand or Australian dollar), earning the spread. If this trade is "back-on," then it shows that investors are more willing to take on some risk, boding well for a continued stock rally as well.

In a report on Bloomberg: "The currency weakened the most against the South African rand and the British pound, two favorites of so-called carry trades, as the cost of protecting bonds from default declined."

The report then spoke with a currency manager: "With stocks rising this much, it doesn't augur well for the yen," said Mitsuru Sahara, senior currency sales manager at Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd., a unit of Japan's second- biggest lender. "Calm is returning to financial markets, and that allows currency traders to focus on rate differentials. The Fed may not have to cut rates much further.''

Keep your eyes on the carry trade to see where the markets may be heading.

Aaron Katsman is the lead Portfolio Manager and Managing Director of America Israel Investment Associates, LLC. and Senior Editor of IsraelNewsletter.com. DISCLOSURE: Writer's fund has no position in any stock mentioned, as of 5/2/08

Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT) may be much better off by not overpaying for Yahoo! (NASDAQ: YHOO). To pay almost $45 billion for a company that's really struggling seems extreme -- especially since I think Time Warner (NYSE: TWX) will spin out AOL in a few months. Microsoft could buy AOL much, much cheaper than Yahoo.

AOL brings to the table both traffic and many properties, including BloggingStocks! The problem is that revenue is declining and so are unique visitors, down from 110 million average unique visitors in the fourth quarter, to 109 million in Q1.

I think that with Microsoft's focused management, it could achieve the same turnaround at AOL that it is anticipating achieving with Yahoo, only it would not have to spend $45 billion.

Some analysts have said that AOL is a consolation prize for the loser in the Yahoo! battle. I think Yahoo! is the booby prize and AOL might just be the better deal.

Aaron Katsman is the lead Portfolio Manager and Managing Director of America Israel Investment Associates, LLC. and Senior Editor of IsraelNewsletter.com. DISCLOSURE: Writer's fund has no position in any stock mentioned, as of 5/1/08

As was reported in AP online, "Members of the Rockefeller family are pressuring Exxon Mobil (NYSE: XOM) to focus more on renewable energy. The family members, who say they are the oil giant's longest continuous shareholders, say Exxon is too focused on short-term gains from sky-high oil prices. They also argue splitting the roles of chairman and CEO will help the company be more flexible in the future."

Last time I checked, companies had a responsibility to provide value for shareholders, and no one has done it better than the oil giant. It has been producing record earnings quarter after quarter, and that is exactly what it is supposed to do. Corporations are not supposed to be politically correct organizations that throw money around at the latest fad. Maybe Exxon doesn't believe that there is a global warming problem? Or maybe it wants to see a lot more scientific evidence of the problem before committing billions and billions of dollars to research. If I were a shareholder, I would want management to take the exact approach that it has been taking. The fact that it is the most profitable company in the world means something. It should be commended for providing shareholder value.

In fact, Bloomberg has an article that says that ocean cooling will stop global warming. Moreover, the article indeed mentions that the authors tried to spin the article because of Exxon. "We thought a lot about the way to present this because we don't want it to be turned around in the wrong way," Keenlyside said. "I hope it doesn't become a message of Exxon Mobil and other skeptics."

Sounds to me that they are right to be skeptical.

Aaron Katsman is the lead Portfolio Manager and Managing Director of America Israel Investment Associates, LLC. and Senior Editor of IsraelNewsletter.com. DISCLOSURE: Writer's fund has no position in any stock mentioned, as of 5/1/08

There is a well known investment strategy that says that investors should by stocks at Halloween and sell them at the end of April. Statistically, most market gains have occurred during that six month period, so the theory says to buy stocks then and when May comes, you should sell.

This time around, the 'buy at Halloween' plan would have been a bad move. With markets reaching their highs at the end of October, investors would have ended up buying the market high only to watch the market collapse. Now that we have finally had a good month, loyalists to the theory would have you sell.

I got a call from a client who asked what I thought about implementing the strategy on his account. I actually think that the market may be setting up for a nice spring and summer rally. It appears that the market has the potential to keep moving higher. While the economy slowed down, it didn't enter a recession, and corporate earnings have generally beaten estimates. Coupled with the economic stimulus checks that are supposed to be arriving in our mailboxes any day, this looks like the year that the 'sell in May and go away' strategy isn't going to be successful.

How about 'buy in May and watch your portfolio go up up and away!'?

Aaron Katsman is the lead Portfolio Manager and Managing Director of America Israel Investment Associates, LLC. and Senior Editor of IsraelNewsletter.com. DISCLOSURE: Writer's fund has no position in any stock mentioned, as of 4/30/08

News that financial services giant Citigroup (NYSE: C) is selling shares of common stock to raise capital is disturbing. According to a report in Bloomberg: "The company announced plans to sell $3 billion of stock to increase capital depleted by writedowns on subprime-related mortgages and bonds."

To dilute investors even more is just plain "Chutzpah." Shareholders over the last year or so have already lost more than 50% on their City shares; there has got to be a better way for the company to increase capital. Instead of diluting investors why not try and unlock some value for shareholders? It's not like the company has no assets. It could spin off the credit cards division, separate domestic and global consumer banking, spin off the capital markets division, and so on. It could generate a lot more than a measly $3 billion, and actually make shareholders happy!

Commenting on the move, as reported by Bloomberg, "Super Analyst" Meredith Whitney, who basically has been correct each step of the way as the banking crisis has worsened, said, "The fact that the company raised such a small amount of capital at this time confounds us. We believe Citi needs to raise an additional $10-$15 billion or sell several hundreds of billions worth of assets in order to truly shore up its capital position.''

It's time for Citi to be broken up, so that investors can finally reap some rewards.

Aaron Katsman is the lead Portfolio Manager and Managing Director of America Israel Investment Associates, LLC. and Senior Editor of IsraelNewsletter.com. DISCLOSURE: Writer's fund has no position in any stock mentioned, as of 4/30/08

With investors awaiting the Fed's interest rate decision, the focus of the decision will be felt in the currency markets. In an AP report: "The Federal Reserve is poised to deliver another interest rate cut to millions of people and businesses this week, although that could be the last break they get for a while."

This scenario may be just what the doctor ordered for the dollar. In anticipation of the announcement, the greenback has staged a minor technical rally, albeit on lackluster volume. If the currency market would get the news that future rate cuts are on hold, the dollar may very well start a recovery.

The reason for the recovery is twofold: Firstly, there is interest rate differential. This has been the major driver in the currency market over the last few years. If the Fed would signal an end to rate cuts, by definition this would mean that the differential would no longer widen. The second reason is economic growth. The US was the first major country in the world to enter this period of lackluster growth and with the steps taken( fiscal stimulus and rate cuts), the right measures were implemented to make sure that the US is the first country to get out of the mess. My hunch is that we will see currency markets move away from the 'interest rate differential trade' to that of one focused more on growth.

As I have mentioned many times, the situation in the Euro-zone is nothing to write home about. Surging inflation, slow growth, the banking sector in turmoil. Sounds familiar. The only difference is that the ECB has done nothing to try and right the ship, while the Fed has. Ultimately, when the US gets back to above-average growth late this year or early '09, the aggressive stance the Fed took will be viewed as the reason for the recovery.

Aaron Katsman is the lead Portfolio Manager and Managing Director of America Israel Investment Associates, LLC. and Senior Editor of IsraelNewsletter.com. DISCLOSURE: Writer's fund has no position in any stock mentioned, as of 4/29/08

I must admit, that even though I am from Seattle and grew up with Starbucks (NASDAQ: SBUX) in my backyard, I am a bigger fan of Folgers coffee than I am of Starbucks. That being said, as an investor, I think it bears to take a long, hard look at Starbucks shares at these levels.

Its earnings report was lousy. As reported in Reuters: " The company, which has been trying to revive business in the United States, said it expects first-quarter earnings per share of 15 cents. Wall Street analysts, on average, had been expecting earnings of 21 cents per share, according to Reuters Estimates. In the same period last year, Starbucks earned 19 cents a share." Yikes. Forget about the fact that Starbucks missed by 6 cents per share. Year -over-year its EPS dropped by 4 cents.

So why be optimistic? With the stock trading down under $16, In think that it bears watching as a contrarian, turnaround story. I think that as part of Starbucks' turnaround strategy, it understands the need to get back to basics and start doing the things that made them successful. This plus the potential windfall that its China business could produce, makes this an interesting story for the future. I doubt that this is a stock that's going to make a major move over the next month or two, but for investors interested in a turnaround story and with a bit of patience, Starbucks may just fill the bill.

Aaron Katsman is the lead Portfolio Manager and Managing Director of America Israel Investment Associates, LLC. and Senior Editor of IsraelNewsletter.com. DISCLOSURE: Writer's fund has no position in any stock mentioned, as of 4/24/08.

With Yahoo! Inc. (NASDAQ: YHOO) reporting earnings after the close tonight, the pressure is definitely on for the company to produce a strong report. As Pia Sarkar wrote at The Street.com: "Sunnyvale, Calif.-based Yahoo! has already reiterated its revenue guidance of $1.28 billion to $1.38 billion for the quarter and $5.35 billion to $5.95 billion for the year, leaving many analysts believing that the company will -- at the very least -- meet those estimates."

With the way the company has been fighting the Microsoft Corp. (NASDAQ: MSFT) bid, it seems clear that the company is going to produce a strong report. Then management will have a leg to stand on when they say there is more value to the company than what Microsoft is offering.

My gut tells me that they will beat estimates by a penny or two and confirm guidance for the rest of the year. Since they had previously brought down guidance and their overall outlook, this isn't so great. It's no secret that the company has not performed to potential and that's why many are calling on Yahoo! chief Jerry Yang to accept the Microsoft deal.

Update: Yahoo's net income showed a rise to $542.2 million, some 37 cents a share, and a profit of $150 million and 11 cents a share. Wall Street was expecting about 9 cents, thus beating the estimates, as noted above, by a couple pennies nicely, giving Yahoo! management a bargaining chip.

It looks like European banks have been hit much harder by the subprime crisis than U.S. banks. Last week, UBS (NYSE: UBS) wrote off about $19 billion, and today we have news that Royal Bank of Scotland (NYSE: RBS) suffered an $11.7 billion loss. We haven't seen numbers like that in the U.S. and this may be a story that needs to get more play. The European banking system is in far worse shape than the banks on our side of the Atlantic, and the impact that will have on global growth should not be underestimated.

Keep in mind that nothing like the FDIC or SIPC exists in Europe, so a major bank failure could be catastrophic for consumers. Banks have started tightening credit, and the once red-hot real estate sector has cooled, especially in places like Poland. I have friends who are in the real estate business in Eastern Europe and they say things have really slowed down.

As so often happens, someone who played an instrumental role in a company for a long time can't seem to let go. The latest example is former General Electric (NYSE: GE) chief Jack Welch. The AP reported: "On Wednesday, Welch, who retired in 2001, said he would be "shocked beyond belief" if Chief Executive Jeff Immelt again missed an earnings target. He said he would "get out a gun and shoot" Immelt if GE missed an earnings target.

Welch, 72, also said Immelt had "credibility issues," but vigorously defended "GE's business model."

Even though he paid lip service to not wanting to bud in, he did. By shooting off his mouth he undermined the current CEO. Could it be possible that Welch should share the blame in GE's struggles? After all, he is the one who built up this huge conglomerate, only to leave before things starting getting tough. We saw the same thing over at Citigroup (NYSE: C), where Sandy Weill created a one-stop shop financial services company that has been crumbling before our very eyes.

Instead of being critical, Welch should keep quiet and continue to promote his book. Leave being the CEO to Immelt.

Aaron Katsman is the lead Portfolio Manager and Managing Director of America Israel Investment Associates, LLC. and Senior Editor of IsraelNewsletter.com. DISCLOSURE: Writer's fund has no position in any stock mentioned, as of 4/17/08.

Reports that Britney Spears was in a minor accident over the weekend with her Mercedes is another in a long line of mishaps for the pop star. Why this qualifies as news is beyond me, and it's my feeling that Britney should just be left alone. The media have succeeded in driving her into a virtual nervous breakdown, for what? To sell a few more papers, or attract a few more viewers. Should the media be in the business of ruining people?

According to the AP report: "Spears was in stop-and-go traffic when her car struck a 2006 Nissan in front of her that had stopped. The Nissan then pushed forward into another vehicle. No damage was noted to any of the vehicles."

The one winner in this latest Spears' episode may be Daimler AG (NYSE:DAI), maker of the famed Mercedes. As with most automakers the company has been struggling, and sales have been sagging. There is no question that they could use the free PR. After all, Britney drives the car, and it escaped the crash without a dent.

Despite recent troubles, investors looking for a contrarian play may want to take a look at Daimler. Their new strategy of trying to gain market share in Russia and in China to help offset US weakness, seems to be a smart move. With a growing upper middle class in both of these countries, the need to own a Mercedes will be strong, as it will be perceived as a status symbol.

Maybe the media can start focusing on global wealth creation, and leave Britney alone.

Aaron Katsman is the lead Portfolio Manager and Managing Director of America Israel Investment Associates, LLC. and Senior Editor of IsraelNewsletter.com. DISCLOSURE: Writer's fund has no position in any stock mentioned, as of 4/14/08.

With CEOs taking home absurd amounts of money, many top companies are hearing calls from shareholders to limit pay to senior executives. The AP reports: "Fund managers and individual investors alike are campaigning for a 'say on pay' rule giving shareholders a vote on executive compensation at major corporations, especially America's biggest banks. This is the latest salvo in the battle against Wall Street's exorbitance, and this time it appears shareholders might stand a chance."

The argument for limitless compensation says that in order to attract the best leaders you need to pay them. I agree wholeheartedly. In fact one need only look at what happened to Ice-Cream maker Ben and Jerry's to see how the principle works in real life. They wanted to limit the CEO pay to a certain percentage of the lowest paid employee. What happened was that they couldn't find anyone worthy enough to take the job. In the end they gave in to the forces of capitalism and paid a normal CEO salary.

My question is simply why can't we compensate senior executives based on their performance? Why should a CEO who managed to lose his company $5 billion, and lose his shareholders 60% of their investment, receive $50 million plus stock? Why not incentavize CEO's so that if they do a good job, they make tons of money, and if not, they don't. On the other hand a CEO that creates shareholder value as well as corporate profits should make lots of money.

There is no doubting that CEO's work extremely hard and 99% of the population couldn't do their jobs. That being said we shouldn't be rewarding them just because they have the title "CEO." We should reward them based on their success.

Aaron Katsman is the lead Portfolio Manager and Managing Director of America Israel Investment Associates, LLC. and Senior Editor of IsraelNewsletter.com. DISCLOSURE: Writer's fund has no position in any stock mentioned, as of 4/13/08.