Shares of Adobe Systems Inc. (NASDAQ: ADBE) are trading slightly higher in today's premarket action, following yesterday evening's fourth-quarter earnings release. The company posted a pretty strong quarter, but investors have displayed some concerns over the company's 2008 outlook, which was left unchanged.

The company reported a growth of 21% for its quarterly profit, which rose up to $222.2 million, or 38 cents a share, following strong sales of its design software. Back a year ago, Adobe had posted a profit of $183.2 million, or 30 cents a share, in the same period.

Included in the company's figures were certain costs related to stock-based compensation and restructuring charges. Excluding that, the company''s profit was 49 cents per share. Analysts had been expecting to see the Adobe show earnings of 37 cents per share.

If you take a look at revenues, you see a very respectable jump of 34% in the quarter, helped by increased sales of software for photo editing, building Web sites and creating graphics. The maker of Photoshop, Flash and Illustrator software posted record sales of $911.2 million, easily beating analysts' expectations for sales of $887.33 million.

Shares of Sears Holding Corp. (NYSE: SHLD) have been taking a beating in today's action after a dismal third quarter earnings report this morning. At one point shares had dipped as much as 16%, but with an hour left to go in the session shares have moved slightly higher, only showing a 12% drop as shares are trading down $14 to $101.56.

If you ask me, the stock is doing better than it probably should, considering just how poor this morning's report was. Analysts had been expecting to see the retailer show net income of 53 cents per share for its third quarter. The actual net income? ONE PENNY! It is not often that you see such a miss.

During 2007 the company showed earnings of 80 cents for its third quarter, and today's report represents the largest year over year drop in income since Sears and K-Mart merged back in 2005, and the first consecutive quarter earnings decline.

This post is part of our Hottest Products of 2007 feature. Check out our other Hottest Products of 2007 posts and let us know which product you think is the greatest thing since sliced bread.

If you find life a little boring, stifling and basically bland, then you may be a prime candidate to check out one of this year's hottest properties. Second Life is for people who wish to expand the boundaries of their life experience. Second Life opens up opportunities (albeit virtual ones) that most people would never encounter in their own personal daily grind. Much of the "news" that surfaces in mainstream media regarding Second Life is just dicey, sensationalist spin. What we want to know about are the things that make Linden Lab's Second Life worthy for consideration as a product of the year.

A good place to start investigating is Second Life Insider, a blog dedicated to tracking that constantly changing virtual environment. For instance, did you know that Second Life has an economy of its own, which actually maintains an exchange rate against real American dollars? It's true, and according to Second Life Insider, on November 1, Second Life membership invested U.S. $1,372,000 into Linden dollars (the site's virtual currency) at an exchange rate of L$268.7 to one U.S. dollar. In fact, there was quite a moan put out by the IRS at the beginning of this year when they again realized that people do generate significant income in virtual spaces.

I'm placing this blog post squarely at the feet of George Soros. The first reason I'm doing that is because I can. The second reason I'm doing it is because Mr. Soros will never read it. The third reason is because I have the ability to understand insurance actuary tables and I can read the writing on the wall.

Is anyone out there willing to take a guess at exactly why George Soros, Progressive Insurance (NYSE: PGR), and most of the rest of the auto insurance industry is so highly motivated to promote the green movement? Do you think it's because they want more trees available for the little birdies to sing in? Is it because someone said we're running a couple quarts low on oil? Could it be that they fear "green house gases" will soon choke us all? Nope, it's about none of those things. It all comes down to percentages, money, and control.

Verizon Communications (NYSE: VZ), reported Q3 earnings that dropped by 33% compared to the year-ago quarter, mainly based on tax-related charges. The telecom stalwart did see earnings reach $1.27 billion ($0.44 per share) in the July-to-September quarter, however. That figure compares to $1.92 billion ($0.66 per share) from 2006's Q3 period. Outside of Q3 charges, earnings would have been $0.63 per share, one-upping the consensus estimates of $0.62 per share.

Q3 revenue for the telecom carrier crept up almost 6% from the year-ago quarter, finishing at $23.8 billion, and as usual, Verizon's cellphone business saved the day (an all-too-common occurrence). Wireless operations are becoming the consistent engines of both Verizon and larger competitor AT&T (NYSE: T), as the two companies control the two largest cellular carriers in the U.S. for all the right profit reasons.

Verizon's wireless operations added 1.6 million new customers in the quarter, giving the company a total of 63.7 million customers. Verizon is catching up to AT&T's 65.7 million customers, although AT&T is not sitting still, and continues to add over a million new subscribers every quarter as well -- propelled nicely by being the only carrier to offer Apple (NASDAQ: AAPL)'s iPhone.

Outside of the cellphone arena, Verizon's FiOS business, which is the program to replace aging copper telephone lines with fiber optic lines directly to homes and businesses, did very well in the quarter. The company added 229,000 FiOS customers in the quarter, up quite a bit from the 203,000 it added in the Q2 period. It also began providing television service over those new fiber lines to 202,000 new customers in the quarter.

Visit AOL Money & Finance for more earnings coverage

Toshiba Corp. (OTC: TOSBF) saw quarterly operating profit increase of 38% for its latest quarter, due to increases in the sale of flash memory chips and nuclear power plants, according to the Japanese electronics conglomerate. Toshiba is the world's second-largest maker of flash memory chips (the NAND design) behind South Korean competitor Samsung Electronics, and such a large quarterly increase be a telltale sign for the consumer electronics industry.

For example, the storage needs of the world continue to explode every year, but more and more of that insatiable need is being requested by consumers instead of corporate data centers. The form of storage, though, is required to be portable, energy-efficient and super-tiny (think Apple iPod Nano). The solution? NAND flash storage, where Toshiba is a huge player. Apple Inc.'s (NASDAQ: AAPL) iPod line (not the larger, hard drive-based units) and almost every cellphone sold worldwide use some kind of NAND flash storage. As cellphones continue displacing landline phones and grow in capability with portable video and audio players, my guess is that NAND manufacturers will see even brighter days than they have already seen.

Now, here's the sticky part: Toshiba expects NAND prices to fall about 20% in the October-December quarter as the annual price decline continues in that market. Add an annual 50% price decline into the picture and it could strike some as odd. It's not -- this is standard operating procedure considering the supply-demand dynamic taking place. In addition to the red-hot NAND market, Toshiba's division responsible for nuclear reactor building (that's a change, no?) expects an operating profit for the year to come in at over $2.54 billion. Toshiba's largest competitor in that commercial space is General Electric (NYSE: GE).

Citigroup, Inc. (NYSE: C) saw a 57% drop in its Q3 profit as reported yesterday, which unfortunately should not come as any surprise to long-term watchers of the financial services company. I continue to be amazed that current CEO Chuck Prince, who took over from the legendary Sandy Weil four years ago, has lasted this long with the up-and-down performance levels he led the company to in his tenure.

Peter wrote on this a few weeks back, and it's something I completely agree with. As a shareholder in this company, I'm calling for change. Wait, I did that already (years ago). Perhaps my luck will change after this summer's credit crunch sacked Citi in the gut.

Let's pour some more salt in the wound: after yesterday's quarterly meltdown, the financial services behemoth acknowledged that the risk management models it has in place to prevent the kind of nuttiness bestowed upon it by the subprime lending situation that's still underway failed the company.

Samsung Electronics (LSE: SMSN) is a big name in the consumer electronics field these days. Personally, I use a Samsung cellphone, color laser printer, LCD computer monitor and more. In many cases, Samsung products have entered my home due to good pricing, stylish quality and excellent craftsmanship. Those amenities are apparently not enough to keep large profits flowing into South Korea's largest company (by revenue).

Samsung continues to be the world's largest seller of flat-panel screens (computer monitors and flat-panel televisions) and is a staple in the cellphone world, serving virtually every global market that exists along with almost every wireless carrier in established wireless markets. But, even with that, the company's share price is down 10% this year, and the company is expected to report its fourth straight quarter of declining profit. What's happened?

Margins have plummeted in many areas where it leads, such as flat-panel technology and computer components (Samsung makes more computer RAM memory than any other company). The company has been slow to create market-leading awareness in higher-margin businesses (like color laser printers), and its recent quarterly results show this. Are customers increasingly being more satisfied with Samsung's products, thereby waiting on upgrading and considering price as the main factor when they do? Perhaps.

Consumers in emerging markets have these same concerns as well (especially price), so where are all these new high-margin product segments at, then? That's the magic 8-ball question. I'll say this: I've owned a high-end Samsung cellphone since January of this year and don't plan on upgrading it for a long time. Why? Well, it works great and has every conceivable feature I could ever need in a cellphone. Samsung doesn't want to hear that, though. In other words, it may be making many products so good that customers have a stagnating need to buy the latest and greatest.

Profits of the 500 largest companies in the U.S. are up 80% from 2000 to 2006 with revenue up just 39%. Why? U.S. productivity is growing 3.9% per annum, one of the highest productivity growth rates in the world.

Another interesting data point from Shlomo Maital in this weekend's Barron's editorial is that total capital formation is only 17% of GDP, with two-thirds of it reinvested in obsolete plant and equipment. With unemployment and investment in new capital formation so low, this could mean employees are in a strong position to demand higher wages.

Although Maital did not conclude this in the editorial, what the economic data suggest are that economists and other pundits calling for the collapse of the consumer -- and, ergo, the U.S. economy -- are simply way off. As the housing market collapses, this has more to do with the mortgage market and new home sales. Do not expect this to spill over completely into consumer spending. The growth in wages in this economic cycle to date has been muted, but do not expect that to last forever. High productivity and the supply-and-demand balance favoring the laborer will more than offset the impact of the mortgage market.

I'm not writing this piece for my associate bloggers here on BloggingStocks. The fact of the matter is that most, if not all of them are far better, more well versed and more professional than myself. I don't even consider myself a professional writer. Basically I'm a hack commentator with some creative potential. But be that as it may, I do know a thing or two about presentation, and if there's one thing I've learned about blogging is that the presentation is what garners the healthy numbers. So, for the aspiring and struggling bloggers out there who want to expand their potential, this one's for you.

I get quite a lot of my material from three major news services. United Press International, Associated Press International, and The Financial News Wire. The angle is that I tend to quickly skip past the stories that I know everyone else is reporting. I know what's being reported because I research that fairly well. So when I get down to sifting through the news to determine what I'll present to you, I already have a pretty well formed picture of what stories are not requiring another go around. Sometimes I do present a piece regarding a story that has been hashed over pretty well, but in those cases you'll notice that I don't just put out a carbon copy of the press release. In the cases when I grab onto a hot headline to present content to the readers, it is my purpose to give them more of a scoop of my opinionated brain matter than just another carbon copied dateline.

An article in Sunday's London Times reveals first hand how some unscrupulous sellers on eBay (NASDAQ:EBAY) are defrauding honest customers out of their hard-earned cash. A reporter, posing as a well-to-do individual looking to sell high value antiquities, easily talked one of eBay UK's largest sellers into admitting that, oftentimes, the practice of shill bidding was used to assure adequate value for items sold on eBay.

In explaining how the process of shill bidding to inflate prices is accomplished, the subject of the interview stated:

"I've got some of my big clients who buy big items off me, I look after them. So I can get on the phone to America and say: Mr XXXX . . . you're a multi-millionaire. You buy a hundred grand's worth off me a year. Do me a favour would you. Just put - yeah. Exactly."

In response to the investigation, eBay claims that its new practice of hiding user ID's from view during the course of bidding has helped to address the shill bidding problem. I and many of my fellow sellers fail to see the connection. In times past it was fairly simple to formulate and chart patterns regarding systematic bid manipulation by specific seller groups, and we had success in shutting some of them down. Now however, there has been a iron wall placed between the identities of bidders and the balance of the eBay populace. This means that eBay itself is solely responsible for scouting its site for bidding violations, and I feel eBay's actions have made it abundantly clear that while the company will try to help, it's really not eBay's responsibility to protect you or your money.

I want to know: how does reducing transparency within the eBay auction venue result in greater safety for eBay buyers? It's problematic that eBay is only set to gain from high prices; if fraudulent sales practices do drive up final value fees, eBay's bottom line is given a boost. Obviously shill bidding is not an accepted practice; but why would eBay create the appearance of trying to hide it?

When I had first heard about eBay Inc.'s (NASDAQ: EBAY) attempt to build an eBay branded auction platform in China I was just about screaming at my monitor, "No no no, they'll never accept you like that!!!" I knew better than to think that trying to establish an eBay branded platform would work there in any manner or fashion. The girth of my protests was documented both on eBay's discussion boards and (I believe) here on BloggingStocks comments also. Too bad Meg and crew didn't hear my pitiful whining. I could have saved them some lost time and some major bucks. Now, in a bold and somewhat clever move, eBay has purchased into a joint venture with the Chinese mobile Internet portal Tom Online Inc. (NASDAQ:TOMO). Well, better late than never!

Tom Online is a Chinese owned multimedia company that holds a leadership position in wireless Internet services. Some of the company's involvements include: wireless Internet, interactive voice response systems, online advertising, search, advanced email, gaming and entertainment. TOM Online is a subsidiary of TOM Group Limited, a leading Chinese language media group in the Greater China region. The company has a demographic focus towards the young and mobile trend seekers.

This is a move by eBay that I like.

I've noticed that there hasn't been a whole lot of ballyhoo about the communist party setting up its tent in the Chinese branch of Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (NYSE:WMT). I'm thinking that possibly most of you are seeing this turn of events in the same way that I am. Personally I think this is more of a dilution of the classic "red" communism than the rise of collectivism into an American corporation. Even the communist party dialog in this scenario gives hints that capitalism is once again prevailing. Did you doubt that it would?

Jonathan Dong, a Wal-Mart China spokesperson is quoted as saying, "Quite a few of our associates (employees) are party members already, so they have a right to establish branch organizations."

Did you catch that? Here it is in American line item style: "associates ... have a right." Since when did a communist have a right to anything in their party line thinking? Communists have privileges and responsibilities to serve the party's declared objectives. Historically they have no rights... at least not until Wal-Mart and Best Buy (NYSE:BBY) got there.

My apologies to the socialists out there but I'm declaring this one a victory for our side. China is in the hands of supply side, trickle down economics now. The government is instructing the workers to be good, work hard and build their companies. Hmmm, that sounds kind of American to me. Can the time be far off when the Chinese government realizes that they can create greater wealth and power by opening their business structure to increased investment by their public? Does the Chinese government realize that they have finally and completely opened their doors to free enterprise?

This is a situation that we're going to be watching very closely. It was capitalism that finally crushed the USSR and freed the Soviet population. It was capitalism that brought down the Berlin Wall and reunited Germany. It is capitalism that has kept Cuba and the Korean communists at bay. It is capitalism that has kept the Chinese fed.

Let's face it folks, socialist collectivism is gasping for its last breath ... and it's about time.

I've taken some heat lately in regard to my stance on labor unions and their place in the American employment landscape. I've made some strong statements, as is my habit, and I've gotten some strong reactions. I thrive on controversy and debate. Please keep your comments coming. Now, to quote a controversial past president, "Let me make one thing perfectly clear."

I am not anti-union. I am anti-bad union. You are kidding yourself if you believe that we don't have some of those. I have been a laborer all of my working career. I've worked manufacturing, assembly, retail, food service, sales, warehousing, and logistical support. I have worked union shops and non-union shops.

I do believe in unions and what they stand for. I have seen unions perform to the highest standards as they pursue honest wages, adequate health care, worker involvement and social responsibility. By the same token, I have seen unions operate in borderline criminal fashion as they extort votes, extract dues only to disappear, thwart negotiations, stifle business and strangle companies. I have earned the right to express my opinions about labor unions and I live in a country where I can freely do that.

Why does all the protesting, screaming, crying, ranting, raving, begging, petitioning, pleading, and threatening appear to fall on deaf ears at eBay? That is very simple, they do not care. Oh they do care very much overall, but they may not care about you in particular.

Every time eBay increases its fees, modifies its procedures, changes its format, the noise starts up in earnest by those directly affected and they all wonder why eBay does not care about them anymore, or more importantly, why they are pushing them so hard, perhaps to their financial limits.

Consider the math, eBay has; if they raise rates for sellers by any percentage you choose, say 25% then they will make more money as long as something less than 25% of the sellers don't run off to do something else. What are the chances of that? Where would they go? Who would leave first? The ones generating the least revenue with the weakest business models would be the first ones by their own admission. Even then some of the business of those that left would be picked up by the sellers that remained making eBay and the established sellers stronger. That is how the macro-economy is supposed to work and generally does. When and if eBay fails to meet their projected goal by misjudging the marketplace then they will make more changes and adjust again. They have always done that and they will continue to do that. Why can't sellers do that too?

I have a disenchanted young friend that left a $45,000-a-year junior architect position to try her luck selling things on eBay. She had been unhappy with the pressures of her chosen profession and eBay offered her an option. Last year I was told she made $100,000 profit on about $300,000 in gross receipts selling clothes. She is working about 20% more hours (for herself) and still more during the holiday season, however she more than doubled her income and it's growing at a much faster rate than any employee could hope for. She grumbled at the recent rate increases and figures they may eat into profits by 10% to 15%, still leaving a healthy profit, more than she was making working for someone else. She figures this will be absorbed in her business growth. She is expanding. She does not have time for whining. She is in business and must keep moving, adapting, and growing ! That seems to be the message -- grow or die.