5 ms·

All official information mentions “shutting doors” and “winding down” and not necessarily a bankruptcy. For instance, in the same space, Shone just returned par

All official information mentions “shutting doors” and “winding down” and not necessarily a bankruptcy. For instance, in the same space, Shone just returned part of the equity to the investors, paid comp to the execs for a full year, and us, employees, got jackshit.

paulddraper 3y ago
> paid comp to the execs for a full year IDK if Shone did things the most intelligent way, but the general story is not uncommon. Shareholders/creditors have a mess if the CEO and CFO walk out the door for their new job; it is financially beneficial for them to liquidate assets and shut the door. Shareholders/creditors don't have a mess when the engineer and a product manager walk out the door to their new job. That's how the logic works.
- Retric 3y ago
  This stuff doesn’t require the CEO or CFO either. Receivership doesn’t even require the active participation of the board, so yes there’s some benefit of keeping existing executives around but that’s often offset by the costs of doing so.
  - paulddraper 3y ago
    > Receivership doesn’t even require Cooperation of board/executives is not required but it is immensely helpful. "The easy way" vs "the hard way."
    - pseg134 3y ago
      How would it possible help in this situation? The game is over and everyone knows exactly where all the money is. It will just be distributed back to the creditors and then remaining to the shareholders. Who needs the CFO for that? Basically anyone could run that process.
      - paulddraper 3y ago
        > everyone knows exactly where all the money is Bank accounts, contacts, loans, real estate, equipment, IP, etc. For a (once) multi-billion 1500-employee logistics business, it's more involved than you give credit for.
        Retric 3y ago
        The CEO/CFO isn’t going to know all the nitty gritty details. Retaining them is about solving different problems than what specific asset is where.
        paulddraper 3y ago
        We went from "everyone knows where the money is" to "the CFO doesn't know the details." HN is wild :/
        Retric 3y ago
        Words have different meaning in different contexts. If your CEO is looking at records of individual office chairs when unwinding a billion dollar company someone has seriously fucked up. They don’t and shouldn’t know the details by memory. However, the details are either available so everyone ‘knows’ them as soon as they become relevant, or the executive officers have been committing serious financial crimes.
- shiroiuma 3y ago
  Maybe they need something in bankruptcy law that requires the executives to stick around, at low pay, to do their jobs and unwind the company. After all, they're the ones who made it fail. Why should they be allowed to walk away? If a regular individual declares bankruptcy and then doesn't bother doing any of the required paperwork and legal stuff, saying the court needs to pay them top dollar for their time, things will not go well for them.
  - paulddraper 3y ago
    > Why should they be allowed to walk away? Because we decided ages ago that compelled labor is a bad idea.
    - PawgerZ 3y ago
      Sorry to be pedantic, but according to the 13th ammendment, compelled labor is allowed as a punishment of crime. To be real, if the executives at a company do commit crimes that lead to the failure of the company, I think they should be on the hook for that.
      - paulddraper 3y ago
        > if the executives at a company do commit crimes that lead to the failure of the company, I think they should be on the hook for that Yes, e.g. Theranos. But the majority of failed businesses fail for reasons that have nothing to do with crime.
    - shiroiuma 3y ago
      Again, try declaring bankruptcy, and then refusing to do any more paperwork or show up for the bankruptcy hearing with the judge, and see how it goes for you. In fact, bankruptcy is a process that, if you follow the rules, is beneficial to you: you get protection from your creditors so that your loss is minimized. If you refuse to do the labor to follow this process, you won't have any protection and things will go badly for you. I don't see why it should be different for the owners and executives of a corporation. These people are not employees.

paulddraper 3y ago

> paid comp to the execs for a full year IDK if Shone did things the most intelligent way, but the general story is not uncommon. Shareholders/creditors have a mess if the CEO and CFO walk out the door for their new job; it is financially beneficial for them to liquidate assets and shut the door. Shareholders/creditors don't have a mess when the engineer and a product manager walk out the door to their new job. That's how the logic works.

Retric 3y ago
This stuff doesn’t require the CEO or CFO either. Receivership doesn’t even require the active participation of the board, so yes there’s some benefit of keeping existing executives around but that’s often offset by the costs of doing so.
- paulddraper 3y ago
  > Receivership doesn’t even require Cooperation of board/executives is not required but it is immensely helpful. "The easy way" vs "the hard way."
  - pseg134 3y ago
    How would it possible help in this situation? The game is over and everyone knows exactly where all the money is. It will just be distributed back to the creditors and then remaining to the shareholders. Who needs the CFO for that? Basically anyone could run that process.
    - paulddraper 3y ago
      > everyone knows exactly where all the money is Bank accounts, contacts, loans, real estate, equipment, IP, etc. For a (once) multi-billion 1500-employee logistics business, it's more involved than you give credit for.
      - Retric 3y ago
        The CEO/CFO isn’t going to know all the nitty gritty details. Retaining them is about solving different problems than what specific asset is where.
        paulddraper 3y ago
        We went from "everyone knows where the money is" to "the CFO doesn't know the details." HN is wild :/
        Retric 3y ago
        Words have different meaning in different contexts. If your CEO is looking at records of individual office chairs when unwinding a billion dollar company someone has seriously fucked up. They don’t and shouldn’t know the details by memory. However, the details are either available so everyone ‘knows’ them as soon as they become relevant, or the executive officers have been committing serious financial crimes.
shiroiuma 3y ago
Maybe they need something in bankruptcy law that requires the executives to stick around, at low pay, to do their jobs and unwind the company. After all, they're the ones who made it fail. Why should they be allowed to walk away? If a regular individual declares bankruptcy and then doesn't bother doing any of the required paperwork and legal stuff, saying the court needs to pay them top dollar for their time, things will not go well for them.
- paulddraper 3y ago
  > Why should they be allowed to walk away? Because we decided ages ago that compelled labor is a bad idea.
  - PawgerZ 3y ago
    Sorry to be pedantic, but according to the 13th ammendment, compelled labor is allowed as a punishment of crime. To be real, if the executives at a company do commit crimes that lead to the failure of the company, I think they should be on the hook for that.
    - paulddraper 3y ago
      > if the executives at a company do commit crimes that lead to the failure of the company, I think they should be on the hook for that Yes, e.g. Theranos. But the majority of failed businesses fail for reasons that have nothing to do with crime.
  - shiroiuma 3y ago
    Again, try declaring bankruptcy, and then refusing to do any more paperwork or show up for the bankruptcy hearing with the judge, and see how it goes for you. In fact, bankruptcy is a process that, if you follow the rules, is beneficial to you: you get protection from your creditors so that your loss is minimized. If you refuse to do the labor to follow this process, you won't have any protection and things will go badly for you. I don't see why it should be different for the owners and executives of a corporation. These people are not employees.