Motorola boss gets $66M golden parachute in Google purchase

2»

Comments

  • Reply 20 of 37
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bikertwin View Post


    Exactly. Google is desperate and would pay anything.



    And this is all part of his job description. That's why he gets paid 10x or 100x more than you and me.



    I mean if an engineer improves a process and saves a company $1 million/year, does he get anything other than a certificate of appreciation in his cubicle? It's part of his job description is the excuse they always give.



    Agreed. This is why there really isn't any point in anything anymore. Nothing of value a person does matters.
  • Reply 22 of 37
    The rich get richer...
  • Reply 23 of 37
    Unemployment is probably going to hit at least 15% next year as the Republican Congress cuts funding and jobs.



    These golden parachutes make me sick. Creepy rich people get richer while we struggle to pay our mortgage. And of course the parachute will probably be exempt from any income taxes.
  • Reply 24 of 37
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bikertwin View Post


    Exactly. Google is desperate and would pay anything.



    And this is all part of his job description. That's why he gets paid 10x or 100x more than you and me.



    I mean if an engineer improves a process and saves a company $1 million/year, does he get anything other than a certificate of appreciation in his cubicle? It's part of his job description is the excuse they always give.



    The engineer probably gets laid off so the company can replace him with a foreign national with an H-1B visa. Half the salary and twice the workload. Time for another round of executive bonuses!
  • Reply 25 of 37
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bsimpsen View Post


    The parachute applies if Jha is ousted. If they keep him as head of MMI, the parachute does not deploy. It would be a conflict of interest for Jha to negotiate a sale that results in a personal windfall.



    It is already a conflict of interest, whether the parachute deploys or not. "Sell us the company and we guarantee you, if you lose your job it won't hurt one bit." That sounds like a bribe to me.
  • Reply 26 of 37
    Things that are in violation of management's fiduciary duty to stockholders and should be banned:



    1. Golden parachutes. Nothing more than a bribe to get management to agree to a takeover.



    2. Management buyouts. If there is value in the company that can be unlocked, management's duty is to unlock it for the stockholders, not to purchase the company them unlock it for themselves.



    3. Chairman of the Board is the CEO. Fox guarding the henhouse.
  • Reply 27 of 37
    dluxdlux Posts: 666member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Conrail View Post


    The engineer probably gets laid off so the company can replace him with a foreign national with an H-1B visa. Half the salary and twice the workload. Time for another round of executive bonuses!



    See, now you're thinking like a true executive!



    Now you just have to work on the "It's not a reduction of workforce - it's an enlargement of the community talent pool" doublespeak. That's where an MBA helps.
  • Reply 28 of 37
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post


    he got google to pay $12.5 billion for a company with no profits and a huge pension obligation



    Do you know that for a fact? If Google is buying the assets, then they would not be getting the pension obligations.
  • Reply 29 of 37
    dluxdlux Posts: 666member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tundraboy View Post


    Things that are in violation of management's fiduciary duty to stockholders and should be banned:



    1. Golden parachutes. Nothing more than a bribe to get management to agree to a takeover.



    2. Management buyouts. If there is value in the company that can be unlocked, management's duty is to unlock it for the stockholders, not to purchase the company them unlock it for themselves.



    3. Chairman of the Board is the CEO. Fox guarding the henhouse.



    In theory, a business entity should be allowed to compensate it's people in any manner that doesn't break the law. The problem is twofold: those who hold the power are often sociopathic Type-A personalities who lack ethics (and that's part of the reason they got to those positions in the first place), and the laws (at least in the US) have far too many loopholes to ensure fairness. Then add to that another layer of injustice where well-funded corporations further bastardize those laws, and you have a vicious cycle that ultimately leads to financial calamity and political wars over regulation.



    There are certainly decent corporations contributing to the economy, but you rarely hear about those. It's the high-profile ones like the big tech firms that get the most press. Sometimes they overreach and public outcry leads to their downfall, but that doesn't happen often enough.
  • Reply 30 of 37
    kibitzerkibitzer Posts: 1,113member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    Do you know that for a fact? If Google is buying the assets, then they would not be getting the pension obligations.



    And who else do you think takes on MMI's liabilities ... the tooth fairy?
  • Reply 31 of 37
    kibitzerkibitzer Posts: 1,113member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    Apple has filed motions to stay for two Motorola lawsuits, arguing that the company lacks the right to enforce its patents until the Google acquisition is finalized.



    This part of the article really isn't relevant except to mention Apple and thus qualify the article for inclusion in Apple Insider. As long as the authors dropped this turd in the toilet, let's get out the plunger and clean it up.



    What Apple wants is the court to put a hold on the patent lawsuits filed against them by Motorola, at least until Google's acquisition is finalized. Why? What if the court issued a temporary injunction against the sale of Apple products within its jurisdiction that allegedly violated Motorola's patents? (Note the German court's injunction against Samsung products in the patent suit brought by Apple.) Then what if the acquisition process drags out or ultimately fails for some reason? The patent dispute then becomes entangled in the acquisition, and Apple suffers for no reason connected to the patent cases themselves.
  • Reply 32 of 37
    nhtnht Posts: 4,429member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Kibitzer View Post


    And who else do you think takes on MMI's liabilities ... the tooth fairy?



    Tooth Fairy, LLC.
  • Reply 33 of 37
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    Do you know that for a fact? If Google is buying the assets, then they would not be getting the pension obligations.



    As mentioned before... this is a stock sale, not an asset sale... that's what $40 a share means... everything, lock, stock and barrel.
  • Reply 34 of 37
    Where can I get one of those Cheshire Cat grins?
  • Reply 35 of 37
    dluxdlux Posts: 666member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by frankinden View Post


    Where can I get one of those Cheshire Cat grins?



    Is that a polite way of saying "shit-eating"?
  • Reply 36 of 37
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bikertwin View Post


    What on earth did that man do to deserve $66 million?



    Please, tell me.



    He tricked Google into buying a turd sandwich for $12.5 billion.
  • Reply 37 of 37
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dlux View Post


    Pfft. 66 Mil is nowhere near the Big Leagues these days. Trophy wives won't even look at you for under a hundred.



    Jha, right!
Sign In or Register to comment.