you are viewing a single comment's thread.view the rest of the posts
I have reviewed Jacobson's employment letter, and he was to be due a bonus of $100,000 on March 31 and to be vested in an additional 131,000 options in May. The strike price on the options was under $2/share. He's a heavy hitter in his industry, his performance was exemplary, he was more than well deserving of his compensation, and we shareholders were being rewarded by his efforts. Now that he was let go, the stock and the company's reputation is taking a beating.
I think the board decided to "cheap-out" and renege on their deal to avoid the cost of the bonus and options (they'll only owe Jacobson one year of salary for dismissal without cause), and due to their actions (anyone with any sense will figure out what transpired), they'll never get another CEO of Jacobson's quality. I think Jacobson got screwed, the shareholders got screwed (Robertson and Rosenthal own very few shares so they haven't been harmed), and the board doesn't have the integrity to honor their deals or to site a reason for their actions.
There is nothing positive that I can see coming from the board's action. I suppose board member Mike Davis is the biggest loser, and if he supported this action, he deserves the loss in his stock value. Cysewski probably didn't like resigning his position as CEO in the first place, so I'm guessing sour grapes on his part, and Rosenthal lost his CFO position when Hain took over Celestial Seasonings (Jacobson was president of Hain's natural products group). It all sounds quite childish doesn't it?
I read through the company's "code of ethics" on their website. It seems like integrity and fair dealing doesn't apply to Cyanotech's BOD. Just keep an eye on where the money goes. Watch who starts getting the stock options going forward (although considering the company's history, stock options haven't been of much value). Cyanotech's BOD did something incredible when they hired someone of Jacobson's caliber, it showed up in the company's performance, and now they've pissed it all away.
Very well written and explained.They will not get anyone of Jacobson's experience and desire to move the company ahead instead of remaining in the head. Unless distribution channels are opened and name and product recognition comes about this company ain't going nowhere .
I do not or have not owned this stock. I do track and invest in natural companies, so I have watched this for some time. SO I do not have any dog in any fight.
- The board obviously found a reason to let him go. Was it for "cause"? I doubt it. If so he would not have received terms of his contract.
- The company has done well under his tenure. BUT was there a bubble of some sort? Did they "find" something? I doubt it since it has been a steady uptrend for far too many quarters. This is very difficult for such a small comany where a director can walk throught the warehouse and review all the books in a couple of hours.
It appears to me that Jacobson was a street guy bent on doing what it took to grow the business and may have stepped on toes to do it. Now that the company is growing again, those who were in control, and who do NOT show confidence in the company by owning shares, want it back.
So I believe it was a classic personality conflict. The blueblood, inhouse board could not stand that he had the potential to make some real coin if he kept the company growing the next few years. AND they would not since they did not even own shares!!!
Therefore, I would not own at this time. The only way the current team will get ownership is by giving themselves free options, which will dilute the stock. Also you will have the same clueless crew that was in place for years, and the company did what???
Where was it indicated that "he recieved the terms of his contract"?
I have seen many cases where a CEO left a company for one reason or another, typically though when a company was doing poorly.
In most cases, the company NEVER discloses the reason for the departure. In those cases where it is disclosed, it typically is disclosed in the initial press release or SEC filing. As for the reasons, the most common are: health reasons, pursue other interests, by mutual agreement, retirement, etc. There are any number of reasons. Oh, I forgot "spend more time with their family" -- that was Skilling's excuse at Enron when he bailed a few months before the collapse.
The ones where no reason is given are certainly the most interesting, and generally the most problematic. This seems to be one of those cases.
I don't know why you say he (Jacobsen) was a "street guy." I am not aware of ANY information about him other than his professional resume and what has been in company disclosures.
So what other "natural companies" do you follow? I don;t follow natural companies other than recently WNI and NTY when I noticed the charts of all three companies were moving completely together last Fall...
Thanks for your input