Our company (which shall remain nameless, but starts with a 'Q' and rhymes with 'West') had a CEO led town meeting. Keep in mind that this company traded at about $40 per share this time last year, and now trades at less than $10 per share.
One employee had the guts to raise the question: Why hasn't the Board of Directors replaced Joe? In good humor, Joe responded that he saw it as a "great compliment" that the board considered him the most qualified person to lead nameless company.
"I work very easily with the board. The board knows that any time they want me to leave, I (will go). There isn't going to be a big fight about it. If they think they can get a better CEO to navigate the company through these difficult times, they should!" Joe added that as a nameless company shareowner, it was also in his own best interest that the most qualified person possible lead nameless company, to ensure the best possible performance for the company's stock.
Joe failed to mention that he once owned about 16 million shares in company stock, and now owns less than 500,000 shares. It was also around last May that Joe sold about 2 million shares and the stock has never been the same since.
Our largest investor seems to be the president of the nameless VC firm that started nameless company. The home page for nameless VC firm is so vague as to what they do, it may as well say, "We invest in companies and make money".
I shall now go back to my nameless activity
