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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Just 2 weeks ago, on his Mad Money show, someone called in about JCP. His exact words were, I don't shop or Sears or JC Penney. Don't buy. This morning, he's a hypocrite, JCP offers value, taking share from Macy's, etc. Karen Fineman on Fast Money is a big New York girl Macy's lover, having told her clients to buy M when they were in the 60s. She wouldn't' walk into a Penney's. These people do no research, stuck with their personal opinions of how things are.
Well, the shorts will go to work now. Over the weekend, they'll start writing their articles. Each will begin with the same 2 paragraphs about the Ron Johnson era. It's almost like consensual plagiarism, where they spout nearly exactly the same words about how he ruined the company 3 years ago, the insurmountable debt, etc. It's all put there to make you believe that they'll never overcome. They, they'll reluctantly state the good news today, but, but, but, etc. These guys are pigs.
Years ago, I bought Taser at $6 cost avg and sold 80% at $30. How much did you make?
I sold long (leap) covered calls at $25 strike price.
I can sleep at night.
When companies are extremely successful, like Google, Apple, others, there is a notion that appointing their employees as CEOs elsewhere will work miracles. History does not necessarily prove this out.
* Henrique De Castro, hired by Yahoo, fired, paid a fortune within 18 months
* Marissa Mayer, very smart, talks non-stop, so not sure that she listens well
* Ron Johnson, Apple Store creator, drove JC Penney to $10/share (clothes are not computers!!)
* Steve Ballmer, ex-P&G exec, really did little for Microsoft shareholders during his tenure
on, and on, and on
I was absolutely amused at the latest statement in the earnings report regarding the buybacks. "Our stock repurchase plan has now delivered $6.5 billion into the HANDS of SHAREHOLDERS in just 3 years". Can you, as a retail shareholder, feel that money in your hands as the stock has gone from $4.15 to $3.30???
If you love FB, and it's a great company, sell covered calls on exuberance. when it pops, go out of the money with long calls. Premiums are high, bank the cash, and you can withstand the computerized algo drop days like this. Your money is in the bank. When the stock gets cheap, you can buy the call back, or just wait things out. Think of the premiums like paying yourselves a fat dividend which growth stocks usually don't do.
When FB hit 110, I sold August 125 calls, took in a lot of cash. I can stand the $6 drop today caused by the fast trading jerks on Wall St.