Comments on: The HP board fiasco continues

By: y2kurtus

y2kurtus — Sat, 24 Sep 2011 18:08:20 +0000

“the shareholders’ own representatives on the board.”

I hope one of the outcomes from this ficasco is that shareholders actually get more imput into the makeup of their boards.

Yes boards are elected… but the elections are uncontested. I’m pretty sure I could get elected president if I was the only one on the ballet. Hopefully in few years we’ll have a system where the nominating committee will put forth a slate of 12 – 15 canidates for 8 – 10 annually elected board spots.

By: thinkbeforetalk

thinkbeforetalk — Sat, 24 Sep 2011 12:44:44 +0000

Mr. Hurd: Please tell the world what it wants to here, the stupidity of “Nobody is indispensable.”

By: thinkbeforetalk

thinkbeforetalk — Sat, 24 Sep 2011 12:44:37 +0000

Mr. Hurd: Please tell the world what it wants to here, the stupidity of “Nobody is indispensable.”

By: right

right — Sat, 24 Sep 2011 00:33:57 +0000

Felix, while I agree the HP board as an institution has done little to inspire confidence over the last decade, it is worth noting that neither Whitman nor Lane joined the HP board until after Apotheker was hired. Given they are only 12 months removed from an extensive CEO search, it is pretty reasonable to believe that they had a good understanding of what options were out there, and it’s not obviously ridiculous that Whitman was a good choice. She has been a successful CEO in the past. Finally, “we support Apotheker’s strategy but he was executing it and communicating about it poorly” is a perfectly sound reason to replace the CEO.

All that said in the way of semi-defense, the worst thing the HP board did this time around was leak Apotheker’s potential firing 24 hours before they actually decided to do it. That more than anything makes me believe that these guys are still a bunch of clowns.

By: hilli

hilli — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 20:27:18 +0000

@bedhead From the FT:

Both Ms Whitman and Mr Lane said Mr Apotheker, who became chief in November 2010, was replaced for what they saw as failings of leadership, communication and operation, rather than problems with his strategic decisions.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/be2fa12e-e5f7- 11e0-b196-00144feabdc0.html#ixzz1YoEUO79 d

By: MyLord

MyLord — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 17:28:18 +0000

Was Meg Whitman given a lateral transfer (promotion to get her off the board)?

By: klhoughton

klhoughton — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 17:05:33 +0000

The strange idea that there is any value left in HP surely died this morning when Whitman declared (slight paraphrase), “My predecessor was incompetent, and I plan to continue his actions.”

At this point, anyone who is stupid enough to invest in any company that has a member of the HP board on its Board–and, yes, I am including Marc Andressen, who is rapidly becoming the Bernie Madoff of high-tech, on that list–gets what they deserve: massive losses with very limited upside.

Rather like the way Whitman ran eBay after the VC monies were replaced with their own capital.

You’re too nice to them, Felix. That HP’s Board wasn’t fired by the shareholders after The Hurd Debacle is a result of regulatory capture and inept pension funds in the =best= case scenario.

By: KenG_CA

KenG_CA — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 15:25:43 +0000

@FifthDecade, very funny. I don’t often smile when reading about HP.

@Curmudgeon, HP already has a lot of debt, so an LBO wouldn’t be a great idea. Of course, that never stopped those kinds of deals. The market cap has dropped like a rock this year, I think they were over $100B in February. I would bet shareholders might finally revolt against the board if they tried to sell off the company at a valuation of $50-60B, even if the sale was in pieces, so maybe that would be the best thing for HP’s employees and customers.

By: bedhead

bedhead — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 15:16:49 +0000

So Leo gives his best effort to wreck the company by changing the strategy, the stock tanks and the board decides to dump Leo and hire Meg, whose first words are “the strategy is right.” So why in the hell did Leo get fired again???

By: Curmudgeon

Curmudgeon — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 13:32:16 +0000

@TFF, point taken, I didn’t realize it was that low. It does (or did) through off a good amount of cash, so an LBO may be the only viable strategy, although you might sell off pieces for a more manageable debt. I still don’t know anyone who would want it whole, though.

By: FifthDecade

FifthDecade — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 13:09:20 +0000

Rumour has it they’re considering a new name for the company: “Headless Parrot” based on the fact that HP is now like a headless chicken but the board wants the CEO to copy what they say parrot fashion.

The board must have known they needed medical help when they got Apotheker as CEO – Apotheker in German means ‘Pharmacist’ – but I guess the medicine didn’t taste good so they decided to sell the company using eBay methodology…

By: TFF

TFF — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 10:50:43 +0000

Curmudgeon, the market cap is just $45B.

With that kind of ratio between revenues and market cap, you could potentially swing a LBO.

By: NewNegotiator

NewNegotiator — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 10:17:05 +0000

There is a website that sells mugs & t-shirts with pity sayings on them. One saying I saw there sums up the HP board situation: “Because None of Us Are As Stupid As all of US”

Nice article, Felix. Stay fearless.

By: Curmudgeon

Curmudgeon — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 09:57:29 +0000

No one is going to buy HP, at least not whole. I don’t know what its market cap is offhand, but it does around $120 billion a year in sales. There may be three tech companies able to put together a credible bid, and I don’t see why they would do so. There may be a Chinese manufacturer willing to take on the PC division, like Lenovo did with IBM years ago, but for various reasons I think that window is closing. Likewise, you may be able to spin off printers, a la IBM with Lexmark, but in printers the brand name counts, and a new branding today would be deadly. No, the company is pretty much going to have to stumble along.

But you’re right about the board, and I’ve been saying that since the Patricia Dunn days.

By: TFF

TFF — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 00:43:55 +0000

“HP is, I think, beyond redemption at this point.”

That is a bit of hyperbole. They still have some valuable brands.

They need new management, however. Simplest solution would be to sell out to a successfully managed company. Wouldn’t it be ironic if Oracle ended up with that plum? (Though perhaps not realistic.)