Would stockholders give a CEO

[mdm3045]

a third year if he maintained a status quo $80 share price for his company in year one when that year had positive economic tailwinds that suggested share price should have increased to at least $90 or maybe even $100? He didn’t lose any share price, but he certainly didn’t increase it. Then in year two under his reign the share price goes to $40. Give me a reason the stockholders would give him a third year???

 

[Trojanbulldog19]

a third year if he maintained a status quo $80 share price for his company in year one when that year had positive economic tailwinds that suggested share price should have increased to at least $90 or maybe even $100? He didn’t lose any share price, but he certainly didn’t increase it. Then in year two under his reign the share price goes to $40. Give me a reason the stockholders would give him a third year???

Well put

 

[triton28]

We’ve gone from Keys to the kingdom to complete rebuild in two years. No where near what you’ve presented.

 

[ronpolk]

It’s hard to say he’s maintained status quo. Status quo probably has us 5-1 right now with a decent game coming up against LSU. Instead we are 3-3 destined to be embarrassed at 11 AM next weekend.

 

[Shamoan]

It’s likely those shareholders are state fans. They are happy with a buy at $80 and ride it out with a current price of $20.

 

[mdm3045]

It’s hard to say he’s maintained status quo. Status quo probably has us 5-1 right now with a decent game coming up against LSU. Instead we are 3-3 destined to be embarrassed at 11 AM next weekend.

You obviously missed the analogy that year one wins (8) = $80 share price and so on

 

[ronpolk]

You obviously missed the analogy that year one wins (8) = $80 share price and so on

**** man I kinda thought the stock market updated daily. I don’t give a **** what he did last year. And I’d hardly call that maintaining last year. We won 9 games with practically the same roster the year before.

It don’t matter what analogy you want to use. Fire his *** cause he sucks.

 

[UpTheMiddlex3Punt]

To be technically correct on the analogy, the directors hire the CEO. If the board does not fire the CEO, the shareholders could vote in a new board of directors.

I wonder who the board of directors would be in this analogy?**

 

[mdm3045]

Bingo

 

[tatedog]

He managed to lose by 3 TD's to Kentucky, with arguably the most talented defense we have ever fielded.

I'm still waiting for someone, ANYONE, to explain that.

 

[jdbulldog]

a third year if he maintained a status quo $80 share price for his company in year one when that year had positive economic tailwinds that suggested share price should have increased to at least $90 or maybe even $100? He didn’t lose any share price, but he certainly didn’t increase it. Then in year two under his reign the share price goes to $40. Give me a reason the stockholders would give him a third year???

A company poised to move from $80 through the 100 mark has loyal employees (aka players). The one that drops from 80 to 40 has poison in its system. Then the winning attitude spirals into one of distrust, finger pointing, and self centered greed. Is that us? I do not know.

 

[mdm3045]

Board of directors = Cohen and Keenum

They better act accordingly or will be gone along with CEO