Many public companies took advantage of September’s stock market rally to raise more capital.

According to Bloomberg News, there were 11 initial public offerings that raised $4.36 billion and 97 secondary offerings that raked in $19.21 billion. Compare that with only two IPOs and 37 secondary offerings in September 2008.

In the Philadelphia region, four companies completed secondary equity offerings, totaling more than $480 million, last month.

Incyte Corp., a Wilmington drug developer, raised $132 million from an offering of 20.7 million shares at $6.75 per share. (Incyte also raised $387.3 million in a convertible note offering.)

Auxilium Pharmaceuticals Inc., a Malvern biopharmaceutical company, raised $115.7 million from an offering of 3.45 million shares at $34.50 per share.

Penn Virginia Resource GP Corp., a Radnor company involved in coal and other natural resources, raised $102.7 million from an offering of 8.7 million common units at $12.30 per unit.

And National Penn Bancshares Inc., of Boyertown, boosted its capital by $133.1 million by issuing 26.7 million shares at $5.25 per share.

National Penn wasn’t the only bank with local ties to tap the public markets while the money was hot. First Niagara Financial Group Inc., which is acquiring Harleysville National Corp., raised $441.5 million by issuing 38.3 million shares at $12 per share. That was First Niagara third offering in a year.

Harrisburg-based Metro Bancorp Inc., which has agreed to acquire Philadelphia-based Republic First Bancorp Inc., netted $70.7 million by issuing 6.25 million shares at $12 per share.

Finally, US Airways Group Inc., the biggest airline at Philadelphia International Airport, received $137.3 million after issuing 29 million shares at $4.75 per share.

First Address

Rob Wonderling, who was named president and CEO of the Greater Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce in August, will outline his agenda at the group’s annual meeting Wednesday morning.

Expect the former Republican state senator who represented parts of Philadelphia’s northern suburbs to emphasize encouraging entrepreneurship and strengthening the region’s tech communities.

Also speaking at the Convention Center will be Comcast Corp. executive vice president David L. Cohen, who is chairman of the local chamber. He probably won’t be speaking about the odds of Comcast’s landing NBC Universal Inc.

And it might feel like a Sunday morning with ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos slated to give an address on the nation’s priorities.

New Wrinkle

There is no bigger day for a small drug company than when it goes before a Food and Drug Administration advisory panel to make its case for approval of its first product.

For the Exton company once known as Isolagen Inc., Friday is that day.

Plus, it steps into the regulatory spotlight with its experimental wrinkle treatment little more than a month after emerging from bankruptcy.

Now called Fibrocell Science Inc., the company is seeking approval of its Isolagen Therapy as a treatment for those skin folds that run from the sides of the nose to the corners of the mouth.

A number of readers reacted to Tuesday’s column about Exelon Corp. leaving the U.S. Chamber of Commerce over their differing views on climate-change legislation.

Some praised Exelon for its stance, while others saw only corporate self-interest in the move.

Mel Boyd, of Berwyn, said I should have noted that Exelon is the largest U.S. operator of nuclear power plants. Since nuclear power emits virtually no greenhouse gases, it stands to benefit from any legislation that limits carbon emissions.

He’s right. As the Chicago company says in its annual report, Exelon has a relatively small carbon footprint compared with other U.S. electric power companies.

Boyd, who’s not opposed to nuclear power, doesn’t mind that Exelon could benefit from a new clean energy law. Quite frankly, he hopes wind and solar power will also contribute. But he wants full disclosure on why businesses and other groups may support or oppose climate change legislation.

It’s not just power companies that are upset with the U.S. Chamber. On Wednesday, Nike Inc. said it resigned from the chamber’s board of directors, citing its climate change stance. “We believe that on the issue of climate change the Chamber has not represented the diversity of perspective held by the board of directors,” Nike said.

The footwear and apparel maker will remain a member of the U.S. Chamber.

Royal Price

Last Friday, Royal Bancshares of Pennsylvania Inc. said it would sell its Royal Asian Bank to a management-led group, but did not disclose a purchase price.

Always remember: What a company chooses not to disclose in a press release, it tends to reveal to the Securities and Exchange Commission. On Wednesday, the Narberth bank holding company included the sale price of $15.22 million in a Form 8-K.

The transaction is expected to close by the end of the year. Royal Asian has focused on the Korean American community with six branches in Philadelphia; Upper Darby; Flushing, N.Y.; and Fort Lee and Palisades Park, both in New Jersey.

As of June 30, Royal Asian had 26 employees, according to a filing with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

Everyone expected September would be clunker for auto sales, and the numbers coming out today show that everyone was right.

General Motors' sales were down 45 percent in September compared with the same month in 2008. Chrysler was down 42 percent, while Ford Motor was down only 5 percent.

Locally, Cherry Hill-based Subaru of America Inc. eked out a 0.7 percent rise in September sales. The Japanese automaker is tiny next to the Detroit Three. (Subaru sold 14,593 vehicles last month.)

South Korea's Hyundai was another automaker with a rare increase, with September sales up 27 percent compared with last year.

Subaru did experience a big 50 percent decrease in sales between August, when the federal "cash for clunkers" program was humming, and September. (Subaru sold 28,683 units in August.)

Sales for the first nine months of 2009 for Subaru remain 10 percent ahead of where they were in 2008. So far, it has sold 158,421 of its all-wheel drive vehicles this year.

A year ago, I had little inclination to reflect on the stock market’s winners and losers for the third quarter.

With the financial crisis escalating and panic in the markets, it seemed like a worthless exercise when trillions of dollars of net worth were disappearing.

Today, the major equity indexes remain below their levels of a year ago. But they’ve come a long way back during 2009. The Standard & Poor’s 500 index is up 17 percent so far in 2009. It rose 15 percent in the third quarter.

Regionally, the pattern is similiar as reflected by the Inquirer/Bloomberg Philadelphia Index. The index of 193 companies either based in the region or with significant operations here has risen 12 percent in 2009 and 14 percent in the third quarter.

The top three gainers among local stocks that started the quarter with a price of more than $3 per share were: Kulicke & Soffa Industries Inc. (up 79 percent), Resource Capital Corp. (up 76 percent) and Quaker Chemical Corp. (up 68 percent.)

That’s an interesting group because it indicates stirring in the battered sectors of manufacturing and finance. Kulicke & Soffa, of Fort Washington, makes equipment used in the semiconductor industry. Resource Capital focuses on commercial real estate finance. Quaker Chemical, of Conshohocken, manufactures specialty chemicals.

At the other end of the scale, shares of Republic First Bancorp Inc. were down 41 percent - the biggest decline for any local stock in the third quarter. Cold-remedy maker Quigley Corp. sank 37 percent. Private-school operator Nobel Learning Communities Inc. fell 19 percent.

Yesterday was not only the end of the quarter but also the 15th anniversary of the Inquirer/Bloomberg Philadelphia Index. It began with 192 stocks and was set at 100 points based on their prices as of Sept. 30, 1994.

While the index today has about the same number of companies, there is a big difference: Financial stocks are no longer the driving force they once were. Now the giants are in pharmaceuticals (GlaxoSmithKline P.L.C.), technology (SAP AG), and media (Comcast Corp.)

Where financials once represented 34 percent of the weighting in the Inquirer Bloomberg index, they now account for only 8 percent.

The presidents of the 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks give lots of speeches throughout a year.

They are often dry and usually try to explain a president’s view on inflation, interest rates and the economy.

So there was Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia president and CEO Charles I. Plosser at Lafayette College in Easton Tuesday night giving a talk on “Demystifying the Federal Reserve.”

The Fed mystifies a lot of us, so I was curious to see what Plosser would reveal as he peeled back the curtain to show us the inner workings of the central bank.

Unfortunately, the best nugget of information I could glean from his speech was that the Federal Reserve System turned over nearly $35 billion to the U.S. Treasury in 2008. That money represented excess earnings on its portfolio of securities and loans.

Plosser mentioned that statistic while making a point about how crucial it is that the Fed retain its independence from political interests. From its start, the United States has been wary of power being centralized. Instead of kings for life, we have elected presidents.

That suspicion extended to efforts at establishing a central bank to guide monetary policy. That’s why we have 12 reserve banks, which have a voice in the Fed’s decisions, and Fed governors who are political appointees.

But with the Great Recession spurring an overhaul of financial regulation, some fear that the Fed may lose some of that independence.

Count Plosser in that camp. Plosser said Fed policymakers must anticipate what the economy will look like in one to three years. Politicians are much more short-term-oriented.

The current independence enjoyed by the Fed prevents the government “from using the central bank to fund off-budget spending plans or to more directly fund budget deficits,” he said.

Given that the U.S. budget deficit for 2009 is estimated at $1.6 trillion, that is an urge that must be resisted.

Inflation is Plosser’s constant worry. But it’s grounded in experience. The Fed needs to be vigilant on “price stability” even as it tries to be accommodative to economic growth.

Political influence would mess with what is already a tough balancing act.
 

Political commentators keep describing the climate-change legislation passed by the U.S. House of Representatives in June as stalled in the U.S. Senate.

Perhaps, but the latest drama is unfolding outside the political arena, in the offices of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which is fielding some uncomfortable criticism over its opposition to the American Clean Energy and Security Act.

The U.S. Chamber is used to being tarred by labor and environmental groups. But this time, the revolt is from within. Three large utilities say they will leave the chamber over the issue.

Exelon Corp. became the latest and largest to do so yesterday. Chairman and CEO John W. Rowe, in an address to the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy, said his Chicago company is so committed to climate legislation that it will let its chamber membership lapse.

“Because of their stridency against carbon legislation, Exelon has decided not to renew its membership in the U.S. Chamber this year,” Rowe said.

It was only one line in a speech largely about energy efficiency. But in shunning the chamber, the parent of Philadelphia-based Peco joins PG&E Corp., of San Francisco, and PNM Resources Inc., of Albuquerque, N.M., which within the space of a week announced their intentions to leave the chamber. With a market value of $33.1 billion, Exelon is much bigger than PG&E and PNM.

No one from the U.S. Chamber, which has about 3 million members, returned a phone call yesterday seeking comment.

PG&E chairman and CEO Peter Darbee was even more forceful in his criticism of the chamber.

“We find it dismaying that the Chamber neglects the indisputable fact that a decisive majority of experts have said the data on global warming are compelling and point to a threat that cannot be ignored,” Darbee wrote in a letter to the chamber. Excerpts from that letter are posted on PG&E’s corporate blog.

The U.S. Chamber, as an advocate for business, has been challenging the Environmental Protection Agency’s authority to use the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse-gas emissions from cars. Though the organization has said Congress should enact legislation to regulate greenhouse gases, the chamber does not support what the House has passed. (The clean-energy bill is often referred to as Waxman-Markey, after its sponsors.)

Saying the “carbon-based free lunch is over,” Rowe sees that opposition as a mistake. “Inaction on climate is not an option. If Congress does not act, the EPA will, and the result will be more arbitrary, more expensive, and more uncertain for investors and the industry than a reasonable, market-based legislative solution,” Rowe said in a statement.

All that would be Washington as usual had a U.S. Chamber vice president named Bill Kovacs not invoked the phrase “Scopes monkey trial” in an August article in the Los Angeles Times to describe the chamber’s effort to put “the science of climate change on trial.”

Kovacs later said his use of that analogy evoking the 1925 trial over the teaching of evolution in Tennessee public schools was “inappropriate” and detracted from the chamber’s message.

Exelon, PG&E and PNM weren’t buying that. All are card-carrying members of the U.S. Climate Action Partnership, which is also supported by the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Pew Center on Global Climate Change.

The group has been calling for federal legislation to require significant reductions of greenhouse-gas emissions. Does it hope to influence the legislative process? Absolutely.

By turning their backs to the U.S. Chamber, Exelon and the others are showing they’ve given up trying to influence “the voice of business.”

Last week, the McKinsey Global Institute released statistics on the mightly blow struck by the financial crisis.

The value of the world’s financial assets fell by $16 trillion to $178 trillion. That’s still a lot of dough, but the disruption touched more than our 401(k) plans.

Looking at the flow of capital into and out of countries, McKinsey calculated an 82 percent decline to $1.9 trillion in 2008 from $10.5 trillion in 2007.

That means capital that had flowed freely all over the world slippled to a trickle.

At the Carnegie Mellon University conference that preceded the G-20 Summit, David M. Marchick was outspoken about his concern should foreign direct investment not improve. “FDI is responsible for producing higher paying jobs and higher levels of R&D,” he said.

Marchick, managing director for global government and regulatory affairs for the Carlyle Group, cited data that foreign direct investment is responsible for 5 percent of all jobs in the United States, but 20 percent of jobs in manufacturing.

As a result of the financial crisis, such investment has plummetted. In the United States, inbound investment declined by half, while outbound investment dropped by 75 percent, he said.

Plus, the United States often gets squeamish about where its foreign direct investment comes from. Remember the ‘80s when the Japanese were going to own America? Or when Dubai Ports World tried to buy five U.S. container ports in 2006? Not our finest hours.

In Pennsylvania, it’s clear some foreign investment is not only welcomed but embraced. As Gov. Rendell reminds us constantly, Spain’s Gamesa chose the state to build two factories to make wind turbines.

Nuclear weapons will trump economic harmony every time.

News about the existence of a second uranium enrichment plant in Iran certainly made the statement by the leaders of the Group of Twenty sound merely like a global to-do list.

But the G-20 Summit that ended in Pittsburgh Friday was the clearest sign yet that China, India and other developing nations are critical to the stability of the world economy.

President Obama's prepared remarks to the media reiterated many of the themes that had been expected: stronger international financial regulations, phasing out fossil fuel subsidies, maintaining recovery plans until economic growth is restored, and overhauling the International Monetary Fund.

Most important, it will be the G-20, not the G-8, that will guide, shape and seek to protect the world economy.

This is not window-dressing. Back in the 1980s, when many U.S. politicians, labor unions and industry associations complained about ever-growing Japanese imports, Japan at least had a seat at the Group of Eight.

We still buy plenty of cars made by Japanese companies, but it's China that inflames the "Buy American" crowd. It's China whose economy has undergone a massive revolution since the '70s. But it had no seat at the G-8 table.

The G-20, formed in response to the Asian financial crisis, showed that global finance has indeed changed. No longer could the Old Economy G-8 "fix" what ails the globe. And no longer could these fast-growing economies be kept not only from the table of riches, but garage of responsibilities.

So, the Pittsburgh Summit made it official: The G-8 wasn't inclusive enough to promote global growth effectively. The G-20 is now the vehicle by which the nations that account for 85 percent of the world's gross domestic product will cooperate for the benefit of all.

The protesters and some of the activist groups in Pittsburgh advocating on behalf of the poor would beg to differ with that characterization. They view a host of human rights issues that the G-20 will not take on, and point out that there are 174 other countries that aren't inside the bigger tent. (Do we really need a second United Nations?)

In response to a reporter's question, President Obama said he hoped the protesters would read the G-20 communique. The goals set are "strong recognition from the most diverse collection of leaders in history that it is important to make sure that the market is working for ordinary people," he said.

Inclusion is good. Still, describing the G-20 as the world economy's board of directors gives me pause. In this country, big corporate boards aren't always better boards.

Given how intertwined our financial futures are, this shift to the G-20 makes a lot of sense. But it's results, not intentions, that matter to ordinary people.

Bob Eisenbeis, the chief monetary economist for Cumberland Advisors in Vineland, N.J., definitely sees the G-20 imposing limits on bankers pay, but he's convinced that banks will get around them.

How? Through innovation or by redefining pay, he said.

Great, that'll restore faith in banking.

"Clearly, pay wasn't the main cause of the crisis or so many small banks wouldn't have gotten into the trouble they did and failed," said Eisenbeis, who had been director of research at the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta before joining Cumberland.

Still executive pay was the "headline issue" heading into the G-20 Summit in Pittsburgh. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner wasn't inching away from trying to "limit the risk that compensation practices in the world's largest institutions encourage excessive risk-taking."

But who will do it? Eisenbeis does not think it should be the Federal Reserve. Rather, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. and Office of the Comptroller of the Currency "could do it just as well and they are into many more banks than the Fed is."

To Eisenbeis, the focus on compensation is a sideline to the roles leverage, lack of real capital and lack of regulatory enforcement played in escalating the financial crisis to history book status.

And no G-20 communique can substitute for flexing regulatory muscles and wringing out the excess from the system.