True except for you mom - but at least I didn't lose any money on this thing.
You WANT to be let go for no cause. It doesn't matter at this point there is no money to fix things and revenue hasn't grown in 7 years. If you get fired without cause (talking the senior people here) you get paid out and you can cash in your stock which is still worth several million dollars.
Bill Clinton couldn't have negotiated the deal better or communicated it better. The company is in a weak position with no money and the only currency they had was to issue stock (which they just spent the last two years and all of their money buying even though the stock price has continued to decline.) The short interest is at a record high after the convertible. The company is weak and wall street took advantage of that. They paid over 30m up front to borrow 143M at 3 percent - its more like 10 to 12 percent loan in and environment where strong companies are paying 3 -5 percent.
Don't disagree with you on the convertible, lots of fault to go around. But if the CFO was a stronger communicator and had better relationships with the banks and investors, i believe it would have played out better.
I agree the time is right to thin the herd. Lot of people to pick from, probably not time for Langrock though. Poulos, gilvar or miller make most sense - all overpaid and unproductive. Lots of redundancy in middle management, marketing and europe.
Might be a good guy but doesn't come across as strong and decisive, even worse on those earning calls. And doesn't help himself by hanging out with buffoons like RH and MM - the 3 stooges of finance. He should think about hitting the road and talking to investors, just don't bring his sidekicks. Maybe then there might be some interest in the stock, one can hope anyway? As bad as they are, the lazy lawyers in legal are even worse. When Sal was there, Miller actually had to show up in the office, now he could rent out his office and no one would even notice he wasn't there.
I don't know where you guys are getting anything positive. The problem at Monster was more than just Sal. In 2006, Monster was one of the top 20 most visited sites on the world wide web. Think about it. The sales people would pick up the phone and say "hello, how many postings do you want to buy". Well, those order takers became managers. Now that they have sooo much competition, they don't know what to do. The leadership does not know how to sell. Now here's the kicker. They decided they wanted to be a "technology" company. Kind of like how IBM went from building computers to being a "technology" company. The only problem, the technology they are selling is cheaper than the job postings they used to sell. So essentially they are replacing their main product with one that will give them lower revenues. If you really want to see what the employees are doing, go to Linkedin and search for PAST Monster reps in your area. People that have had accounts for 10 years or more are leaving faster than they can hire. Last year they were going to hire 100 sales reps. Mainly because there were so many leaving. Sorry guys, this ship is going to sink. Go to Glassdoor and look at the detailed reviews, they are bad. Also, they are known to FIRE. They have a database of 70 million resumes and and "At Will" employment contract. You think they care if they threaten the staff. Think about it.
You might be right but when the CEO and Chairman are both finance people they are likely speaking their own special language. Was the convertible really his fault - not likely given Sal and the timinators background they mostly did or decided how it was going to be done. It is really the CEO's job to deliver the message so I wouldn't fault Langrock on that but I could be wrong.
If we are looking to thin the herd I think Lise makes the most sense. I'm thinking Poulos is most likely next - she never got the COO title and now there is one - not sure why you need both especially when you are paying them $1M+ a year with cash and prizes. They might keep her around because she worked at Symbol but it's a redundancy now that they have an official, real COO who they haven't released a salary for but did give him 200,000 RSU's (about 1M at todays prices.) I'm sure it'll be for no cause or whatever so they pay her out 18 months plus bonus, medical till 65, car service and all that jazz. Maybe they are trying to give her time to look before they pull the trigger.
Thoughts on Langrock? We can debate good or bad but it seems clear he has been an inept CFO. Lacks leadership and integrity and does not ensure credibility on financial trends and forecasts. Does not appear to have strong interpersonal skills or ability to communicate well, especially with staff in remote locations! the recent bank financing should have been his responsibility and I think his communication with investors was a disaster. For someone who is a key member of the executive management team, does not seem to have a strong voice or take a hands-on lead position on anything. When do you think this will be dealt with? Too soon for Yates to make a change, clock is ticking?
Can someone explain the pattern for Monster lately? It tends to be way down in the morning and rally towards the end of the day - not always positive but close. Does that mean someone is buying in or selling out or trying to prop it up? Any trader insight?
As stated I have no money in the game. I'm just trying to save people from losing money and/or their job. I know a lot of people that work at the company and I'm their outside voice. It doesn't really matter though because they can't replace the lost revenue fast enough with new products. Search, government, and the other products are at least $200M a year and yet revenue continues to fall quarter after quarter.
An Internet company has to be run by paranoid and aggressive visionaries.......not finance or business people. They have their place but it's not in the CEO, product, or marketing chair. Sal and the timinator are just that - they could improve the existing process but they lack the vision to see how things are changing until it's too late. If they had the fast follower gene in them they might have a chance but they didn't see Linkedin or Indeed as a threat until after it was years to late. They are playing catchup instead of leapfrog.
There is no money to fix this thing and unless revenue starts to grow it's just OVER. Even Careerbuilder has seen single digit growth the last few years....everybody else has had double digit plus growth.
I understand on paper it looks like a value and a possible large turn around. But that's ignoring the history and the real state of the company. When you see that you know there is some money to be made on the ups and downs (velocity and volatility) but in the end the trend is down and out.
That made me laugh - ok you are in your own special category separate from Stockexpose - have a good weekend - it's a long weekend here in the US for some of us - MLK day Monday - but there are some places that still don't celebrate it.
No $2.xx I've only really been saying since Q4 of last year - it was $4.xx and then $3.xx before that but we crossed those thresholds already. The trend since Sal and Symbol took over has been downward. The stock is small enough in market cap that it does has large swings - the difference between hi and low in a quarter can easily be 50% but overall it's heading down. Last 12 months it has a negative EPS - it's been negative most of the time Sal and Symbol have been in charge. That's why they stopped reporting a real number (GAAP) which everybody uses and went to EBITDA which only high growth capital intensive companies use (Monster is neither) and went to an even more made up adjusted EBITDA so they could pull out the $10M in stock grants they give out in a quarter although Q4 is going to be $15M+.
Keep fighting the good fight - I'm sure you and Stockexpose are right and I'm wrong.
So its a guess. Nothing to read into that then.
"see $2 pretty quick"...suppose it depends on your perception of quick because you have been saying the same for years.
Here's hoping you are wrong...
You could be right - I looked at institutional holdings for Blackrock on Nasdaq for MWW and it was 4.5M as of 9/30/14 but maybe that was just the one fund.
We are dropping fast the last couple of days - have the numbers for the quarter leaked out?