I am not sure about risk. Mayer had worked at one place before, Google and not as CEO so there was no CEO level reputation to risk. On the contrary this was an

I am not sure about risk. Mayer had worked at one place before, Google and not as CEO so there was no CEO level reputation to risk. On the contrary this was an opportunity her to build her reputation as a CEO. If it was such a risk as some commentators say she could have chosen something else. There is an agency problem with management. CEO pay is not connected to performance and there is no way to effect accountability especially for mid and long term interests. When hundreds of jobs are removed to save 10-20 million a cacophony of commentators chime in with sincerity about 'shareholder interests' yet these 'interests' don't seem to care when hundreds of millions are lost to non performing CEOs who take the brand, value and long term prospects of the company down with them. Billions lost to fines for fraud, brand tarnished, management continues sticking on and yet not a peep from shareholders. It seems we make the rules and arguments up as we go along, as long as it benefits entrenched interests.