3 ms·

I don't know any major CEO's myself but I can't imagine having to fire 100's of people to make my share price go up a few cents. Yet CEO's do that sort of thing

by SeanDav 11y ago

I don't know any major CEO's myself but I can't imagine having to fire 100's of people to make my share price go up a few cents. Yet CEO's do that sort of thing all the time. What do you call people that will put others out of work for no better reason than some short term increase in share price, which will benefit themselves, directly or indirectly?

CWuestefeld 11y ago
Yet CEO's do that sort of thing all the time. Citation, please? I mean, specifically, that they don't have qualms about doing it for trivial valuation reasons. There's also an argument to be made for corporations being too reticent to fire deadwood employees. IMHO, that's just as much a problem. Personal anecdote: I talk to our CEO pretty regularly - she's probably the only billionaire I'll ever meet. I know that she personally feels the responsibility for keeping the business viable, because it's the source of income for nearly 3,000 families. Of course, my experience is just a single data point. But I don't see that it's any less valid than a viewpoint that, as far as I can see, is based on TV and movie drama.
- SeanDav 11y ago
  I have a few data points - I worked in the banking industry for many years and saw this sort of behaviour all the time. People, including entire teams were fired, not because the banks were losing money and had to cut jobs to survive, but simply because they wanted to increase profitability. If you want citations - there are vast masses out there - here is just one: http://www.wsj.com/articles/hsbc-unveils-overhaul-of-global-operations-1433824955 http://www.wsj.com/articles/hsbc-unveils-overhaul-of-global-...
  - bweitzman 11y ago
    If you have an opportunity to increase profitability and you don't take it you _are_ losing money, at least so long as the opportunity is sustainable.
bweitzman 11y ago
Rational? It's not a job I'd want to do but it makes sense.

by SeanDav 11y ago

CWuestefeld 11y ago

Yet CEO's do that sort of thing all the time. Citation, please? I mean, specifically, that they don't have qualms about doing it for trivial valuation reasons. There's also an argument to be made for corporations being too reticent to fire deadwood employees. IMHO, that's just as much a problem. Personal anecdote: I talk to our CEO pretty regularly - she's probably the only billionaire I'll ever meet. I know that she personally feels the responsibility for keeping the business viable, because it's the source of income for nearly 3,000 families. Of course, my experience is just a single data point. But I don't see that it's any less valid than a viewpoint that, as far as I can see, is based on TV and movie drama.

SeanDav 11y ago
I have a few data points - I worked in the banking industry for many years and saw this sort of behaviour all the time. People, including entire teams were fired, not because the banks were losing money and had to cut jobs to survive, but simply because they wanted to increase profitability. If you want citations - there are vast masses out there - here is just one: http://www.wsj.com/articles/hsbc-unveils-overhaul-of-global-operations-1433824955 http://www.wsj.com/articles/hsbc-unveils-overhaul-of-global-...
- bweitzman 11y ago
  If you have an opportunity to increase profitability and you don't take it you _are_ losing money, at least so long as the opportunity is sustainable.

bweitzman 11y ago

Rational? It's not a job I'd want to do but it makes sense.