She is a smart person, means well, but I saw a weakness in her fairly early. She over admires and over compensates some people because she thinks they are bright, entrapreneurial, whatever. This may be a Silicon Valley syndrome....everyone is cool and bright and deserves anything they ask for.
Giving the Tumbler kid $1 billion was the first bad sign, he had to be laughing all the way to the bank. The next was Henrique de Castro who she said "taught her an enormous amount" while at Google. #$%$? She's already a Stanford grad, worked at Google, and Henrique taught her an ENORMOUS amount? From everything I read, this guy was a good looking empty suit with a nice accent, couldn't get along with his own counterparts, much less customers..
Finally, I notice that Marissa has a listening problem. When she speaks like last month on CNBC, it's non--stop, hardly pausing to breathe or take a question.it's like she can't allow a counterthought to enter the conversation. Probably why her underlings walked away.
However, I like the stock action. I think we'll go out at $40 plus in a sale with or without Marissa.
I've owned Yahoo since $11/share and remember Jerry Yang and David Filo going to Microsoft after they offered to buy Yahoo for $30/share and they botched the deal. We stayed in the low teens for years, CEOs came and went, and Filo proceeded to sell a huge amt of his free shares eacn month in the $15 range. It was like a stick in the eye to retail shareholders who were stuck with nothing while he sold the free "candy" awarded to himself.
I know he was a founder, but has he had a good idea in 15 years? Obviously not, as they've hired a boatload of CEOs, and still can't turn it around. This is what Carl Ichan calls self interested boards of directors.
What is amazing is how little a contribution that Filo, a Founder and a techie, has contributed to Yahoo over the last 20 years. But, he has been good getting lots of free stock awarded to himself and selling it in the face of disappointed shareholders.
This reminds me of when Yang and Filo went to Microsoft and told them to stuff their $31 offer. All the Yahoo shareholders that they were looking out for saw their stock go from $30 to $10 and sat there for years.. In the meantime, they award themselves millions of free shares, and get endlessly rich. Yes, they are always looking out for the common retail shareholder who is buying stock at full price. This is the worst of Corporate governance.
This reminds me of when Jerry and Dave went to Microsoft and rejected Ballmer's $31/sh offer. Common shareholders saw the stock fall to the $10/sh level and it stayed in the low teens for years. Of course, as is the case with all of these boards, the directors awarded themselves millions of free shares during the interim, of course, for a job well done! Then, like David Filo, they sold 150,000 shares a month at any price, like a stick in the eye of the retail shareholder who paid full price and were sitting underwater. Yahoo boards have always been the worst, interested in their own self-enririchment. They are always the only shareholders that they have ever been interested in.
Look what Armstrong did for AOL shareholders. He faced up to the limitations of AOL going it alone, and did not view selling the company as a failure on his part, but as an opportunity to benefit all shareholders, and to take advantage of the synergies of merging with a larger company.. That is a shareholders dream. The Yahoo boards have been a shareholders' nightmare.
What is the head of Morgan Stanley or Broadcom going to actually contribute to the core business, advertising, display ads, and many other aps? This is nothing but a Country Club meeting, hor d'ouvres, drinks, and a nice salary for contributing absolutely nothing. Yahoo throws money on the ground i.e. Tumbler, Henrique de Castro, and now these 2 new board members. It's looking like Marissa has turned out to be a rich little spoiled brat. Maynard......hopeless.
help with a strategic plan? Charles Schwab just left the board, obviously did not contribute much over the last several years, so how is the lady from Morgan Stanley going to contribute?. I could see if someone like Mark Zuckerburg or someone of that capability in software/coding might help, or another software hotshot might help, but this is ridiculous!! It just shows that these boards are just lazy country clubs, where they fly in, pick up options, a nice salary, have dinner, and pretend to listen to things they don't remotely understand as the topics/software are so far from their sphere of understanding. They probably vote yes to everything that Marissa and Maynard suggest. Yahoo just throws money on the ground. After Henrique de Castro, Tumbler, they could have paid us a dividend.
Is there any board more hated than this one? Every 5 years, the games begin with them. I remember before 2010 after Yang and Filo gave Microsoft the finger at $31/sh. There was a proxy fight then. I voted for the new guys but some kind of game was played, had to vote again, and the old guard remained. Anyone remember that? Then, they all award themselves tons of free options for what? Whatever, they all remained. And, DavidFilo, after laughing at Microsoft's $31 bid, watched the stock drop to $11, and sold 150,000 shares/month at any price from $12-$14, raking in tons of cash, nearly all free stock awards. It was like he was laughing at the retail shareholders who were underwater. He may own 7.5%, but he's never paid full price for any of it. I guess getting stuff free is ownership.....only in America's stock world.
So, the old board welcomes the 4 new members, pays them $2 million, along with the normal rewards for being directors, makes Starboard feel very "welcome", and keeps some of the old board members who have contributed nothing over the years but have been rewarded very well for failure. I think we're back to Square 1, anything to save Marissa's job. She is just a spoiled brat with no sense of value, throwing $50 million at Henrique de Castro, a billion to Tumbler, on and on. Yahoo is the poster child for the worst board governance.
They are planning the next round of rewards to all the Directors, the new ones, and the useless old ones. That includes salary increases, stock options, etc, all the same things they've been doing for the last 15 years. Why sell the company when you can keep this perpetual gravy machine.
You can find or pay 1 disgruntled employee in ANY company, GE, IBM, etc. who is willing to talk to the media. I was a Dept. head for a very successful Fortune 500 company, and even in the best of times, with the stock at highs, you could find staff or factory employees who were always discontent. That's why they call them malcontents. I got into JCP at $7 last year, made a fortune, and I'm buying again.
There's nothing like a gigantic short squeeze coming your way. JCP has plenty of assets that they could instantaly liquidate to reduced debt. Their Plano commercial properties are one of them. You could wake up to a debt reduction/liquidation and get the squeeze of your life.
There's a movie coming out after May 13 called "Money Monster", and I'm looking forward to seeing it. You can see the trailer on the net. Something is fishy about that New York Post report.
If Lowes earnings dropped, you could bet that Home Depot is taking share from them and its stock would consequently go up. JCP is taking share from Macys, Kohls, etc...just go in any store and compare the lines, so in time, once the debt situation is reduced, JCP is going to take off. Furthermore, some people, 10-15%, may buy their clothes on line (maybe the grunge millennials I see out with their sloppy wear), but the vast majority of people want to see, touch, and buy their clothes physically, same for drapes and other such "soft" items. Most of these analysts never leave their desks.
I am very surprised that the short positions have not covered 24 hours before the earnings report. Especially because of the 20% pop after the last report. I guess they believe their own stories. I'd love a private equity firm to come in and take JCP private. That would be a very interesting squeeze. There is no comparison between the traffic in JCP vs. Macys or Dillards, but I know, data does not matter.
Can't wait to see this movie coming out this weeked starring George Clooney. It probably explains a lot about what we see as the "big boys" take down a stock.
New directors have been been greeted and paid $2MM, golden parachutes are in place, and free stock options are being awarded to all the failed directors and new ones that will contribute absolutely nothing. There can not be a worse history of board governance (47 directors) and failure after failure. Now pretty Marissa has preserved her job and her $55 million parachute. I'm waiting for Mr. Smith to speak.