% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Monster Worldwide, Inc. Message Board

salpleasego 9 posts  |  Last Activity: Nov 24, 2015 3:59 PM Member since: Jan 27, 2012
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • salpleasego by salpleasego Nov 24, 2015 3:59 PM Flag

    So before the reign of Sal, his henchman, and Mark E Mark - Monster was a once profitable company.

    Q4 2007 - Revenue $354M EBITDA $84M or 24%.

    Q4 2015 - Revenue $167M EBITDA $25M or 15%.

    They want to pat themselves on the back and claim that they are 'managing' the business effectively but they aren't even close to what the company used to do. Plus they are using Adjusted EBITDA (you know without the stock compensation expense that the team hasn't earned) and still they are only at 18.1% - with Korea!!! Without they are 16.8%.

    Tick Tock - time to end the Symbol mafia and Mark E Mark.

    They wasted $600M in the bank when they took over and over $200M a year in cash - you know net income - generated by the business. Now they might generate $30M in net income for 2015. Bravo - Bravo - time to start figuring out what stock bonuses you need to keep the professional management team in place.

    Sal took $11M for some yet to work long term strategic plan - What the crapola people?

  • salpleasego by salpleasego Nov 23, 2015 9:43 AM Flag

    Europe is likely not to be the bright spot that Monster was hoping for. The US also seems down so I would expect closer to $160M in revenue - real revenue not unicorn constant currency and other stuff.

    I think the team is starting to realize that when you have only 5% or less of market share you are really at the mercy of the market and job postings are a commodity.

    The only real hail mary that they have left is to duplicate or clone Linkedin. Start on that now - capture the passive seeker and you might have a chance at survival. You can do what they do but cheaper and maybe you stay alive. Otherwise I think the symbol people are finally out of the picture come the end of 2016.

    Happy turkey week people.

  • salpleasego by salpleasego Nov 19, 2015 9:00 PM Flag


    At least Tim is keeping the illusion the rest are selling. The management team reminds me of Ben Carson how did someone so dumb and out of touch with reality end up rich, a brain surgeon, and in charge (or at least running for president.)

    6 month low and still dropping. Management team not telling the truth and selling stock as fast as they can without 'retiring.' Why not pay a dividend that would have returned at least $400M+ AFTER taxes to the shareholders - instead you have bought stock above the current price. How can a group of managers make the wrong decision for nearly a decade now and still get paid big bucks.

    Mark how do you live with yourself you have been an key player in the demise of two companies now? America is great isn't you've made a ton of money and ruined to industry leaders - bravo - bravo.

    Oh I know we are lowering the stock price so when we decide on next years bonus plan we know we'll make it just like last year.

  • Reply to

    Leaders vs Managers

    by tandcgots2go Nov 13, 2015 9:00 AM
    salpleasego salpleasego Nov 16, 2015 9:21 AM Flag

    I would agree here - I think you are right on. The management team had a revenue and bookings goal for many years that they missed but still got rewarded for. I still think that is a better goal than what the current team has which is stock price and EBITDA margin. The stock was very low and the EBITDA margins are easy to get even if it hollows out the company. We know there are 1500 - 2000 more people than needed in the company so you just cut some of those and you got your number. The stock price is based on 30 days and we know this stock can be pushed up and down for periods of time especially when the management team lies about how future quarters are looking.

    I would agree on the 5% number as well although I'm not sure they ever had 50% of the market but it's possible. The strategy is the same since the days of Sal, we hope that things will improve in the future and we have so much extra overhead that 50% or more of the increase in revenue will drop to the bottom line.

    You have the horrible incidents in Paris and the US planning on increasing interest rates. In the best of times Monster has continued to shrink so if the economy and world slip a bit I would expect Monster to do even worse. As their % of the market is so small now they are really at the mercy of the market pricing which is trending down. With 250K jobs you need $200+ average revenue to keep going but the market is closer to $25 so expected continued declining revenue.

    This is why internet companies find that getting rid of the founders is a bad idea and why the bring them back to save the company. As long as the company lets Jeff DJ a couple of times a week I'm sure he would come back and lead the company. He wasn't a great manager but he surrounded himself with people that could manage. Of course Sal got rid of all of them because he thought his bar code reader friends could professionally manage this thing.

    It's OVER.

  • salpleasego by salpleasego Nov 13, 2015 4:22 PM Flag

    Hello does anybody hear me?

  • salpleasego by salpleasego Nov 12, 2015 2:39 PM Flag

    AW feels like old times. Short interest at all time high since May of this year. Sure sounds like the street is starting to see that Sal was the real brains of the operation and with him gone it's all down hill. Seriously the only thing we can possible think of to do with money is buy more stock?

    That has worked so well but when you are the largest shareholders it really is the only way to keep the price up until you retire. You can't grow when all you do is cut but you can't stop cutting because you can't grow the business. If you have no idea how to run the company, if you have no idea how to grow the company, then step aside and give someone with vision a chance. Waiting for things to grow and talking about the margin expansion with growth is so freaking old.

    I hate to say this but Tim and Mark you are worse than Sal and you should be ashamed of yourselves. You had an opportunity to distance yourself from Sal and instead you embraced his idiotic visions of grandeur. But we are the largest shareholders - yes that's true but the shares were given to you - you did not and have not earned them - just like Sal and Lise. You are the reason America is falling behind - you are the 1% that didn't earn it or deserve it. I hope you retire soon.

  • Reading posts while I was gone and this guy/girl seemed interesting. Junkie if you are still lurking what would you value Monster at?

  • Reply to

    Guess who's back!

    by salpleasego Nov 9, 2015 2:26 PM
    salpleasego salpleasego Nov 10, 2015 10:23 AM Flag

    Great question - I wish the pumpers would brainstorm on that.

    I think they had two choices - go low and compete with Indeed - or go high and compete with Linkedin. I don't know why they went low - that really baffles me. Why dilute the brand they spent years building, why compete with a company offering jobs at $25 when you are charging several hundred. Why increase the job count by 16x especially when others have already done it? Maybe it was easier both from a technology side and from an EGO side. Sal spent years saying Linkedin wasn't a competitor and bashing them. It may have started out that way but they went down the food chain and stack and quickly eroded Monster's core.

    They have talked about pricing holding steady - some decline this quarter. The reality is it's been eroding - if you keep your prices the same and you shed massive market share then pricing isn't holding. Think about all the revenue from all the job sites and Monster has to be 5% globally now? Linkedin is 4x, Careerbuilder is 1.25x, Indeed is 1.5x plus dice, ziprecruiter and the like - plus overseas!

    The other way was to create a network site like Linkedin. I think they dabbled in this even way back in the tickle days with structured data. One of the biggest knocks against Monster was the resumes (profiles) weren't the same so searching was a problem. That's why they went the sick sense route but obviously that wasn't a game changer either. They also tried the BeKnown thing so maybe after those laughable failures they just chose the simple route versus doing nothing. The problem is the simple route was worse than doing nothing and continues to erode the core business.

    People made fun of me when I said they would barely do $800M in revenue a few years ago. This year they will barely do $700M and next year it will be $600M. Yes some of that is due to Korea but it still counts as someone else said.

    I'm not sure they have the money or resources to pivot at this point.

  • salpleasego by salpleasego Nov 9, 2015 2:26 PM Flag

    It comes back to the same question - why believe that current management that they have any clue or understanding in the believe that the business will GROW next year 5% YoY?

    Whatever they focus on causing things to break. Remember many quarters ago when they said they would focus on the US because it was starting to pick up - 6 quarters of down revenue since. $5M in growth for new products in 7 quarters - amazing to bad the rest of the business declined $37M in that time frame (counting the sale of Korea.)

    We were supposed to be growing now with 10% growth on our way to $205 - $210M in revenue by Q2 of 16. We are now at 167M and declining.

    Organic search is down the last 2 quarters but up 40% over the last 2 years. On one hand that's good on the other were they just paying for key words they didn't really need to buy for years - I think that's likely but hey take credit wherever you can and tie a bonus to it. Take credit twice - we reduced our marketing spend because we got more efficient. No you were paying for things that you were going to get anyways genius.

    Remember when we said we would cut 300 positions - we cut 150 - that should be good for another bonus.

    Don't look at our churn rate which is 30% YoY just look at it as 15K new customers (with less revenue.)

    Deferred revenue was up 4 quarters in a row in the US yet revenue fell each and every quarter including this one.

    We increased jobs by 16x but UV's haven't changed - we made you think it did by talking about organic search UV's though didn't we.....come on you got to give us that one. Revenue still down quarter after quarter because this is game changing stuff.

    But we tied executive comp to % of adjusted EBITDA and stock price (after it was at an all time low) and we've made those numbers so - bonus again baby!

    12+ months into the new plan and revenue continues to go down. Why would we believe that you can turn it around when you don't even know why you have failed so far!

6.29+0.05(+0.80%)Nov 25 4:02 PMEST