"the rest I used to buy 24 cases of Chateau Lafite-Rothchild in 1982. At this moment, I am having a glass from a $3000 bottle of wine."
If you have some '82 Lafite-Rothschild Pauillac and it has been well stored, it is worth considerably more than $3K. At the latest London auctions it has been around 27K Pounds Sterling, or $43K for 6, or about $7200 a bottle.
I used to have clear access to French wines in the mid 80's, and I had a few bottles of Latour and Margaux, but in general avoided the premier crus. I think they're over priced. I normally bought fourth and fifth growths, better values. I had some GREAT '82 Lynch-Bages (just drank the last of it last year), Beychevelle, and Hayt-Batailley. Had some really good Pavillon Rouge (second growth of Chateau Margaux).
Good stuff, although you really couldn't go wrong with almost any '82 Bordeaux.
Under Kressa, there were 2 appointments to the BOD (Girsky and Marinello). Kressa’s background is aeronautical engineering and was the Chairman/CEO of Northrop-Grumman. Of the 2 appointees, one of them came from private equity and investment banking, the other was the CEO of several financial services companies. Note that both appointees were from different industries than Kressa, and there were no overlapping board memberships as well.
Under Whitacre (formerly the CEO of AT&T), there were 3 BOD appointments (Akerson, Russo, and Stephenson). One was from private equity, one was CEO of Alcatel-Lucent, and one is the Dean of the business school at the University of Western Ontario, note all different industries. Again, there are no overlapping board memberships in any of these cases as well.
Under Akerson, there were 4 appointments. Akerson came from private equity, specifically The Carlyle Group. The appointees from his tenure are a retired Admiral and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Chairman/CEO of ConocoPhillips, Chairman/CEO of Cummins Diesel, and CFO of Walmart. Once again, all from different industries and no overlapping directorships.
Lastly, under Solso whose background is Cummins Diesel, there were 4 appointees. One is a retired VP of the UAW (to represent the shares owned by the UAW VEBA), one an EVP of Lockheed Martin, one the CEO of Novartis, and the last was Mary Barra. Again, from diverse industries and no overlapping directorships.
I believe this is a pretty compelling argument to show that the old wives tale of "bod's are picked from the outside by the cob!" is false. Maybe in sleazy companies decades ago, not today. Your information is false and dated.
"OK genius. Tell us what political process picked the people on GM's board, since this is a GM message board. What connection did they have to the chairman when they were picked? Is the GM Chairman on any of their boards?"
"bod's are picked from the outside by the cob!"
Here’s why you are wrong.
All large corporations have some form of Nominating Committee as a sub set of the BOD. At GM, that committee is called the Directors and Corporate Governance committee (DCGC). It is currently staffed by 4 non-executive outside directors, none of whom are the COB (Directors Russo – Chair, Marinello, Stephenson, and Isdell). According to the by-laws of the corporation, the responsibilities of this committee are (among others):
-Identify and evaluate potential board members
-Recommend candidates to the general board
-Recommend board size and composition
-Compensation for board members
-Annual performance reviews for board members
-Recommend committee composition and Chairs
Board vacancies are examined for the Board’s particular needs in terms of business experience required and functional expertise. In nearly all cases, a third party search firm with a specialized board placement practice (such as Korn Ferry, Heidrick & Struggles, or Spencer Stuart) is engaged to find suitable candidates and present them to the DCGC. The DCGC examines the candidates for experience, potential conflicts, and Clayton Act requirements and makes a recommendation to the board in general. The vetted candidate is then place on the proxy statement and voted on by shareholders.
Specific to the GM board, all members are new since the bankruptcy. During that time frame there have been 4 COB’s. Kent Kresa (March 30, 2009 - July 10, 2009), Edward Whitacre, Jr. (July 10, 2009 – December 31, 2010), Dan Akerson (December 31, 2010 – January 15, 2014), and Theodore M. Solso (January 15, 2014–present).
To be continued
In his mind I'm probably breaking some NDA, but I hear the big boys are lining up between GM (Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley) and FCA (UBS and Lazard).
Marchionne is getting desperate. This may end badly for FCA. They will have to make a heck of a case to get the major shareholders to agree to pressure GM management to negotiate.
Just my opinion (no PM, I have no inside information) but I don't see any advantage for GM any where in this.
"bod's are picked by a political process which is heavily influences by the ceo,"
OK genius. Tell us what political process picked the people on GM's board, since this is a GM message board. What connection did they have to the chairman when they were picked? Is the GM Chairman on any of their boards?
Let's see if you are capable of making a logical, fact based argument for your contention, or if this is just what the boys around the water cooler have told you.
Give it your best shot. We are all waiting anxiously to be enlightened by the corporate governance expert.
"look in the mirror and ask justum to help"
Actually I don't need any help from anyone. You do it to yourself.
"by your own words you violated your nda."
For the last time, which words. You've been spewing this garbage for long enough. Put up or shut up. And if you talking about some vague words I used to make a point about a deal that was closed a year before, forget it. You'll just make a bigger fool of yourself.
"try to divert the discussion back on perfect_market."
But that's the underlying point of this whole discussion isn't it? You and your masquerade. Face it, you've been exposed. You have zero credibility.
"add to that his engaging in certain innuendos about me while blabbing he's on the bod of charities and private companies and you start to get a picture. as a matter of fact, why does someone blab on a message board about being on bod's? what's that all about?"
This is one of your biggest problems. You set yourself up for these things. Here’s what "that’s all about", do you remember the context of that thread? You showed your ignorance again about corporate governance. Let me refresh your memory, your words:
"bod's are picked from the outside by the cob!"
Does that sound familiar?
As I said on Mar 6, 2014 6:43 PM:
“Nope. Depending on the by-laws of a public company, potential board members are NOMINATED by either the entire board or a smaller group of the board in a Nominating Committee. The board members are CHOSEN by the stockholders by proxy statements. If the company is listed on either of the big exchanges, the Nominating Committee is REQUIRED to be all outside directors. In a smaller, closely held private company, directors usually are chosen by the equity owners and distributed based on equity ownership.”
Another example of why you have zero credibility. This information is not secret, if you had any real experience as a consultant….or even an involved stockholder, you would know this.
You’re not getting away with this masquerade. And your position on NDA’s is ridiculous. Again, for your education, here’s the purpose of an NDA, at least as it pertains to deal making:
1. To prevent an unfair advantage to either party in knowing confidential information about the deal.
2. To prevent the disclosure of propriety product or technical IP.
3. To implement a non compete agreement for anyone with confidential information.
The remarks I made are made in business schools around the world as well amongst REAL consultants. You are appearing absolutely laughable with this stuff. Stop embarrassing yourself.
"excuse me, former gm management, failed consultant and failed bod member; please change "charity" to "non profit" as you noted below."
You're excused, but only because you didn't know the difference. I think I'm detecting some jealousy in your posts lately. Not everyone can be what they want PM, it's OK.
"suppose you are in competition for a project. you know your competitor and competitors employees (which is common in consulting). you're competitor takes the client aside and shows the slightest bit of broken confidentiality from the people you are proposing for a project. guess what happens. no, they don't send wngr in to wiggle his way out of the mess he created. "
What client? What Company? What time frame? What EBITDA?
Do you have ANY idea how many PE deals happen in a year's time? Of course you don't look it up. Additionally, that particular deal was done a year before my post. You know nothing.
"add to that his engaging in certain innuendos about me while blabbing he's on the bod of charities and private companies and you start to get a picture. "
I told you once before, I have never been on the board of a charity. Another figment of your imagination.
"actions speak more than words for mr wngr!"
Thank you for finally showing the respect to someone teaching you about business basics.
"quit trying to work your way out of this. you posted ebitda multiples in a bid on a private company."
OK, not much information, but I may know what you're talking about. I think I was explaining to you how to value companies (as I recall you thought it was based on sales....really??). Normally the starting points are 5-7 x EBITDA. I probably said something to the effect that that wasn't ALWAYS the case, that we had just advised our client not to fall in that range but to bid a little lower because of an overly optimistic business plan. Is that what you're talking about??
OMG, you are priceless. You think that's in violation of an NDA? Is that seriously what you're talking about?? What company? What client? How much was there EBITDA? When was the deal closed? Who won the bid? One can probably find similar things in text books. Sorry to burst your bubble but that is so far removed from an NDA violation it's not even in the same universe.
Is that what you were talking about? If it was something different, please tell me. Otherwise, there never has been more proof than this that you are not a consultant. If you want to see someone violate a NDA, take a look at investment banks. They leak information while the deal is developing, THAT'S a violation.
" in the same message stream your mocking me about losing my arm and not being able to use it. you referred to it a "the man's only companion"
Did I say that? That's pretty funny.
You are truly a piece of work (not what you thought I was going to say...right?). I hope that all reading this will have a new appreciation for the child like lack of knowledge exhibited by PM. He is not a consultant, at least one that anyone should hire. He knows nothing and uses terms for which he has no knowledge.
Your masquerade is over PM. You have lost ALL credibility at this point. By the way, what is the date of my EDITDA comments. You do have it right, you have a copy.
"wngr already admitted to posting client info."
Well, I consulted at Delphi once, here's some client information for them too:
2014 Revenue = $17 billion
2014 Net Income = $1.44 billion
That's client information. Is that a client violation??? Of course not, it's public information you dolt. It also would not be a violation of an NDA if it were after the fact and public. Don't believe me? Read "Barbarians at the Gate" by Bryan Burrough and John Heltar. The book is based on quoted interviews with insiders AFTER THE FACT.
Ever heard of a guy named Jay Alix? Probably not, he's in the business of consulting. See if you can ask someone to help you find an article in Forbes titled "How General Motors Was Really Saved: The Untold True Story Of The Most Important Bankruptcy In U.S. History" by Dan Bigman.
Are you beginning to get it? It's no longer CONFIDENTIAL information. The deal is done. It has NO affect on the deal.
" you notice he has not brought specifics in his defense - hmmm."
Hmmm, I've asked you at least three times what the hell you're talking about. And you don't have a clue. You don't even have specifics about your allegation, How am I going to defend them? You claim to have copies, well, I, among others, have invited you to post the copies. And you don't. You don't have copies of anything, or once again, you know you've been had and realized too late (after you shot off your mouth, that you don't have anything). We're supposed to be clairvoyant?
YOU are the one making these mysterious accusations. They are completely without substance, or even a clue what they are. What if I accused you of a felony. You know like not reporting someone falsifying inventory levels. That would require proof wouldn't it? Oh wait, not a good example, you admitted it, and I DO have a copy of that. It is your post dated Jun 4, 2014 12:38 PM. Go ahead and delete it, as usual I'm way ahead of you.
"really tiring wngr. take you lumps and move on!!!"
Really? You truly are delusional. That's not going to happen. You've crossed the line. You impugn my integrity and even my morality and you think I'm just going away?
Oh no, I'm here for the long haul with you pal. Take my lumps?? Seems to me we should start calling you 'Lumpy' with all the times you've been shown to be a light weight on your best day, and completely devoid of any business knowledge on your worst day. I don't have any idea what you do for a living, but I know it has nothing to do with business. That's obvious to everyone here.
So say hello to your new best friend. You and I will be joined at the hip.
" do you want to switch over to your clearly unethical postings about homosexual acts while claiming to be on a charity's bod? i got those messages saved also."
I invite you to post whatever you have. Go ahead, put it up there. I have never been on a charity board. I think you should concentrate on memory exercises, clearly yours is deficient. You can't tell reality from fantasy.
"since you're no longer employable as a consultant"
LOL, if you only knew.
"i can't believe that you would even pull your head out of your void after your last beating!!!"
Which beating would that be? You are truly out of touch with reality. You should really consider seeing someone.
I will invite you one last time to post when I have betrayed a NDA. If not, I, and I suspect everyone reading this, will conclude you are simply a blowhard of the highest degree. You got a copy? Put it up.
"If you are, in fact, a consultant, you're clearly a consultant to dolts, imbeciles and simpletons."
He's not. I assume his reluctance to address my "alleged" violation of an NDA signifies he once again has been shown to be talking out of the wrong part of his body (even though he has a copy of it....whatever "it" is). Apparently his memory is as bad as his business skills.
He is a fraud, nothing more....well, maybe a liar too. I'm forced to ask what many others have asked, "what is it that you really do?". A few months from now, he will claim that he faced me down and we'll have to go through all this again. He's not very smart either.
Speak up PM, we can barely hear you from the bottom of that rabbit hole.
"Sonic is a South Korean built product with very little American content. I won't send my dollars there would you? Start supporting America!"
The Sonic is built in Lake Orion, MI.
"6.2. For the purposes of this Agreement, “Confidential Information” means any information or know-how (in oral, written, digital or other form), including, without limitation, information relating to research, product plans, products, services, clients, markets, software, developments, inventions"
Per your agreement as an example, let's say hypothetically the CEO of a company wants to do an LBO on some outstanding stock in his company. It is a highly public, highly sensitive set of negotiations. The deal is finally made, not to the satisfaction of the CEO. After the deal is done, is it OK to talk about it.
Or another hypothetical...the sale of a company is in progress. Again, another highly public and sensitive negotiations are going on between the parties. After the deal is done, one of the participants begins making public statements about the behind the scenes negotiations. Is that OK by your definition?