4 ms·

I want to play devil's advocate here, just a bit. Looking at it solely from a stock price perspective, she's done remarkably well: the share price roughly dou

I want to play devil's advocate here, just a bit. Looking at it solely from a stock price perspective, she's done remarkably well: the share price roughly doubled during her tenure there. Obviously there are a lot of other metrics to look at, but if you're a struggling company as Yahoo was, that's probably enough to consider hiring her. Not to mention, I think a lot of people would argue that Yahoo was a sinking ship regardless of who was running it. She'll probably spend some time with her family, and eventually pop up at some other company that's looking to turn things around.

jonknee 11y ago
> I want to play devil's advocate here, just a bit. Looking at it solely from a stock price perspective, she's done remarkably well: the share price roughly doubled during her tenure there. Obviously there are a lot of other metrics to look at, but if you're a struggling company as Yahoo was, that's probably enough to consider hiring her. She has done terribly. The stock price has little to do with her and almost everything to do with Alibaba. If you remove Alibaba she is now in control of a company worse less than its cash.
- toast0 11y ago
  > She has done terribly. The stock price has little to do with her and almost everything to do with Alibaba. If you remove Alibaba she is now in control of a company worse less than its cash. Wasn't that the case when she started, too?
  - AnimalMuppet 11y ago
    One could argue that she was hired to fix that, though. And failed.
    - toast0 11y ago
      Sure, but when was the last time Y! had a successful CEO? Terry Semel before people he fell out of favor? Lasting 4 years is pretty good.
  - jonknee 11y ago
    Tough to say, Alibaba wasn't public when she started so no one knew how much Yahoo's stake was worth. The stock had a nice period before the IPO when people who wanted to buy BABA shares instead bought YHOO because they were available. It didn't hurt that the market was red hot and there were huge expectations for BABA.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
revelation 11y ago
If you take out Alibaba, she has delivered net negative value. You could have taken out the Alibaba share at the start of her tenure and that would be worth more than Yahoo today.
harryf 11y ago
> She'll probably spend some time with her family, and eventually pop up at some other company that's looking to turn things around. ... e.g. Twitter
- product50 11y ago
  Why you think any other company would hire her to turn things around given her performance at Yahoo really baffles me? And you are even jumping the gun by suggesting the name of companies?!
product50 11y ago
Definitely not true. The only reason why stock has gone up is because Alibaba valuation went up during her tenure. It has nothing to do with Marissa. If you listen to her analyst calls, she keeps on talking about her Maven strategy and that has gone nowhere - wrt the rest of the market.

jonknee 11y ago

> I want to play devil's advocate here, just a bit. Looking at it solely from a stock price perspective, she's done remarkably well: the share price roughly doubled during her tenure there. Obviously there are a lot of other metrics to look at, but if you're a struggling company as Yahoo was, that's probably enough to consider hiring her. She has done terribly. The stock price has little to do with her and almost everything to do with Alibaba. If you remove Alibaba she is now in control of a company worse less than its cash.

toast0 11y ago
> She has done terribly. The stock price has little to do with her and almost everything to do with Alibaba. If you remove Alibaba she is now in control of a company worse less than its cash. Wasn't that the case when she started, too?
- AnimalMuppet 11y ago
  One could argue that she was hired to fix that, though. And failed.
  - toast0 11y ago
    Sure, but when was the last time Y! had a successful CEO? Terry Semel before people he fell out of favor? Lasting 4 years is pretty good.
- jonknee 11y ago
  Tough to say, Alibaba wasn't public when she started so no one knew how much Yahoo's stake was worth. The stock had a nice period before the IPO when people who wanted to buy BABA shares instead bought YHOO because they were available. It didn't hurt that the market was red hot and there were huge expectations for BABA.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

revelation 11y ago

If you take out Alibaba, she has delivered net negative value. You could have taken out the Alibaba share at the start of her tenure and that would be worth more than Yahoo today.

harryf 11y ago

> She'll probably spend some time with her family, and eventually pop up at some other company that's looking to turn things around. ... e.g. Twitter

product50 11y ago
Why you think any other company would hire her to turn things around given her performance at Yahoo really baffles me? And you are even jumping the gun by suggesting the name of companies?!

product50 11y ago

Definitely not true. The only reason why stock has gone up is because Alibaba valuation went up during her tenure. It has nothing to do with Marissa. If you listen to her analyst calls, she keeps on talking about her Maven strategy and that has gone nowhere - wrt the rest of the market.