3 ms·
To be fair: If he were capable of leading one giant tech company, he is a candidate to run another. HP stock went up something like 130% the first couple year
by turtle4 16y ago
To be fair:
If he were capable of leading one giant tech company, he is a candidate to run another.
HP stock went up something like 130% the first couple years he was there, and tracked better than the nasdaq for the rest of his time there.
If Oracle feels like he has learned his lesson or if someone there (Larry) thinks he can make it clear that certain things can't be brought along to the new job (excessive spending, harassment), then he could be an excellent candidate, completely separate from any trade secrets.
I'm not saying what he might know doesn't play a role in the hire, but your post seems to indicate there is no way it could be considered a merit-based only, and I'm not sure that is the case.
- rbanffy 16y ago> HP stock went up something like 130% the first couple years he was there, and tracked better than the nasdaq for the rest of his time there. This could also be explained by a remarkably incompetent predecessor.
- Hoff 16y agoStock prices, agency ratings, and short-term versus long-term, the efficacy of tranches, credit and collateral paper, and various other metrics have all been found, um, somewhat unreliable in recent years. Most anywhere outside of what you do know about your stock or bond purchases, you're betting as much on who you're listening to for your decision as with what paper you're buying. Historically, more than a few offerings have had stellar and increasing prices right up to the implosion. This in general terms, and without intending any implications toward the recent nor future stock prices or success of either HP or Oracle.