“Despite increasing smartphone competition, Palm can maintain differentiation and remains well-positioned to launch its products with multiple new Tier-1 carriers in early 2010 by which time it should have a robust apps catalog,” Arya wrote. “While we expect the stock to remain volatile, the recent sell-off creates an interesting buying opportunity, in our opinion, for a company with an attractive platform, selling into a high-growth market, and at a compelling valuation.”

Interestingly, Arya notes that Palm’s webOS application ecosystem, initially something of a disappointment, is growing a bit more rapidly these days with between 50 and 100 apps being added to Palm’s App Catalog each week. He expects growth to continue with the debut of a new feature enabling customers to download apps simply by clicking on a URL. Arya believes this will dramatically improve discovery of apps and attract more attention from developers. His conclusion: With a more robust App Catalog and two attractive handsets, Palm is well-positioned to launch its webOS line with multiple new Tier-1 carriers like Verizon (VZ) in early 2010.

• A delayed EC review process of the current proposed acquisition, which may end in a rejection left unchallenged by Oracle
• A renegotiated deal with Oracle, which would likely exclude MySQL and therefore involve a renegotiated deal price
• An offer by IBM (IBM) to buy Sun at a discount to the Oracle offer following a rejection by the EC of the current Oracle deal
• A scrapping of the deal by Oracle

Interestingly, Reid feels this last possibility isn’t as disastrous as it might sound. Sun has $1.8 billion in cash, and while its latest results weren’t at all pretty, they did feature improving gross margins.

“Our current thesis on [Sun] assumes the announced [Oracle] acquisition will close, but risks have increased,” Reid wrote. “There remains a risk that the European Commission will provide a ’statement of objections’ to [Oracle’s] planned acquisition of [Sun] based on concerns regarding [Oracle’s] plans for the MySQL database which [Sun] currently owns. The deadline for such a decision is January 19, 2010 but it is possible that the EC will state objections before the end of the year.”

Elaborating, Reid notes that “Although [Oracle] could likely reduce the risk of a statement of objection–and thus of a delayed or perhaps failed bid for [Sun]–by supplying to the EC an argument to explain why the [Oracle-Sun] deal will not adversely impact competition in the database market, our assumptions around [Sun’s] valuation include increased risk regarding the completion of the [Oracle-Sun] transaction at $9.50….While we believe the currently proposed acquisition by [Oracle] is the most likely outcome for [Sun], we believe other scenarios remain possible, although each is made more difficult by the continued uncertainty around Sun’s fate, and the resulting erosion in customer confidence in Sun.”

“Palm is still a turnaround story with its financial success reliant on the newly released webOS operating system and new devices in an increasingly competitive smartphone market,” Fidicaro said in a note to clients Wednesday. “While we anticipate Palm to expand its carrier partners both in the U.S. and internationally, and expect sell-in unit shipment growth to ramp accordingly, we believe the current valuation reflects an optimistic adoption rate of webOS devices.”

Fidicaro went on to say that while he feels webOS is a decent enough platform, its success might be limited–in the near term, at least–because of Palm’s (PALM) exclusive distribution deal with Sprint (S).

“We view the recent price decrease for the Pre to $149 (from $199 at launch) with caution as it may signal that it needed to be repositioned in order to achieve the price elasticity required to reinvigorate unit sales,” he said. “Longer term, we are cautious regarding the webOS platform’s sustainable competitive advantage, especially compared to RIM in enterprise and Apple in retail with more than 75,000 applications in its App Store.”

“The sole driver of the increase in Apple’s price target is a higher valuation of the iPhone,” Wolf wrote. “Courtesy of network effects, the explosive growth of the iTunes App Store…should translate into a higher growth trajectory of iPhone sales going forward….By exploiting a commanding lead in the all-important smartphone applications market, the iPhone is in a position to chalk up share gains in this fast-growing market that could surprise everyone….In many respects, Apple and Amazon are in similar positions. Amazon holds a relatively small but growing share of the e-commerce market, which itself is small, but growing an order of magnitude faster than the physical retail market.”

Wolf admits that his latest forecast is “judgmental” in that it’s based on the premise that software, namely iPhone applications, will drive hardware, namely iPhone sales. But he explains that the premise does have a proven track record in markets characterized by increasing returns and network effects.

“We have upped the number of iPhones that will be sold in 2018, the final year in our model, from 67 million to 107 million,” Wolf added. “Our forecast has the phone capturing 20 percent share of the smartphone market in that year, up from 12.5 percent recently. We should note that the iPhone’s share of the worldwide market is already around 12.5 percent. So our forecast is by no means an aggressive one.”

No doubt about it, it’s a good time to be an Apple investor.

Typically, U.S. companies that do business in Japan without offices in the country aren’t required to pay taxes to the Japanese government. And Amazon (AMZN) has long counted itself among them, claiming purchases made through Amazon Japan are technically transacted in the states. Yet the company does have some retail infrastructure in the country through which it handles merchandise distribution, logistics and whatnot. And, according to the Bureau, that means Amazon has “permanent establishment” in Japan and should be taxed in the country under the U.S.-Japan tax treaty.

Another nasty tax headache for Amazon.com, which also faces calls for tax payments back in the U.S. and in Britain, France, and Germany as well. From the company’s annual report:

We Could be Subject to Additional Income Tax Liabilities
We are subject to income taxes in the United States and numerous foreign jurisdictions. Significant judgment is required in evaluating our worldwide provision for income taxes. During the ordinary course of business, there are many transactions for which the ultimate tax determination is uncertain. For example, our effective tax rates could be adversely affected by earnings being lower than anticipated in countries where we have lower statutory rates and higher than anticipated in countries where we have higher statutory rates, by changes in the valuation of our deferred tax assets and liabilities, or by changes in the relevant tax, accounting and other laws, regulations, principles and interpretations. We are subject to audit in various jurisdictions, and such jurisdictions may assess additional income tax against us. Although we believe our tax estimates are reasonable, the final determination of tax audits and any related litigation could be materially different from our historical income tax provisions and accruals. The results of an audit or litigation could have a material effect on our operating results or cash flows in the period or periods for which that determination is made.

Quite a bit higher, it turns out.

$1.95 billion is the company’s market cap as of March 27, when it had 137.84 million shares outstanding. But this figure doesn’t include preferred shares, etc. So Palm’s true valuation–equity valuation with convertible preferred shares, exercisable and nonexercisable in-the-money options, warrants and whatnot–at its current share price of $13.87 is about $2.9 billion.

$423 million to $2.9 billion in 12 months.

Turnaround story of the year. For now, anyway….

An open-ended timetable for an employee stock sale program.

Perhaps it’s the same “open-ended timetable” Facebook’s using for that mythical liquidity event, hmm? Without a silver bullet business model and no stable revenue stream to speak of, investors were bound to question Facebook’s perceived valuation sooner or later. And, apparently that’s exactly what happened, according to Valleywag’s Owen Thomas. “Facebook’s common shares…have a value that put the whole company’s worth at around $4 billion,” Thomas explains. “Or they did. A source close to potential investors said they wanted to buy shares from employees at a lower valuation, or with guarantees similar to Microsoft’s. To reward a small number of employees who had enough shares to benefit from the program, [Facebook] would have had to give away something for nothing.”

Commenting on rumors that Microsoft (MSFT) may soon acquire the 98.4% of the social-networking phenom that it doesn’t yet own, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg said he’d prefer to keep things as they are now. Said Zuckerberg, “You can tell, from our history and what we’ve done, that we really wanted to keep the company independent, by focusing on building and focusing on the long-term.”

And focusing too on that rumored IPO and the fantastical $15 billion valuation it’s supposed to bring with it.

(Image Credit: The Onion)

The ability to control how much information is available to the public has long been one of Facebook’s core principles. It was this very feature, for example, that Facebook used to distinguish itself from other social networks back when it first launched.

Of course, the ensuing years proved that protecting the privacy of its users was not exactly Facebook’s strong suit–especially when it came to digging up the advertising revenues necessary to justify its fantastical $15 billion valuation. There have been privacy issues with Facebook’s news-feed service, with its controversial Beacon advertising system, and with its terms of service, which granted popular applications access to far more personal user data than is necessary.

And now there’s another. A bug in permission restrictions in Facebook Groups allows members to upload content without first receiving permission from a Group admin. I know this firsthand, because over the past few days videos, photos and blog posts have been appearing on the All Things Digital Facebook Group, and neither Walt, Kara nor I–the only three people with admin privileges to the group–put them there (see screen below). Worse, while I was able to delete the photos and blog posts, I was unable to pull the videos off the page. There was no mechanism to remove them.

Worse still, the bug that makes this possible is not specific to the All Things Digital Facebook Group alone. It affects all Facebook Groups, site-wide.

We alerted Facebook to the issue and the company quickly identified the bug. Said spokesperson Brandee Barker: “Engineering has pushed out a fix that should go site wide shortly.”

UPDATE: Facebook engineers fixed the permissions bug, and we were able to remove the rogue videos from our page.

Anyway … Digg has reportedly hired New York investment bank Allen & Co. to help it find a buyer and has tempered its hopes for a $300-million sale price to a more realistic $200 million to $225 million. Microsoft, it’s worth noting, is said to be mulling a price even lower than that, which makes perfect sense since the software behemonth is already the exclusive provider of display and contextual advertising on the site. Course, Microsoft had a similar deal with Facebook, and that didn’t stop the company from taking a $240 million stake in it that valued Mark Zuckerberg’s little Harvard project at $15 billion.

UPDATE: According to Digg, this rumor is–like others that have gone before it–utter nonsense. In a post on the Digg blog, CEO Jay Adelson writes, “Normally our policy is to not comment about things like this, but this morning’s rumors about a bidding war involving Google and Microsoft have created such a stir we feel compelled to tell you all directly that they are completely inaccurate. Sorry to burst any drama theories, but they aren’t true. We remain focused on improving Digg and rolling out great features.”

So in an interview with the Seattle Post Intelligencer, Liddell spent a fair bit of time defending Microsoft’s investment in Facebook and the company’s metastasizing valuation, though he surely knows as well as anyone that to be worth $15 billion, Facebook would have to generate about $2.5 billion in revenue in three years.

Obviously, I feel comfortable with the transaction we’ve done, and I was involved in it. I think you have to look at the investment not only in the context of the dollar investment but the commercial transaction. I think there’s a great example of finance taking a role in that and thinking about the holistic aspect of what we’re trying to do in the online services, how Facebook fits into it, and how a dual investment-commercial transaction is a very powerful way of creating a partnership.

“So I’m really comfortable with the overall transaction. The $15 billion number is a big number. But can I see realistic scenarios where the company could be worth more than that? Yes, I could. It’s a big call, but it’s a very good one strategically. … It’s a great example of where some of the creative thinking of the business and finance people collectively came to a result which was very good.”

About what you’d expect him to say, right? Except for that one bit about scenarios in which Facebook might be worth more than $15 billion, which is a little, you know, frightening.