After a sweeping rebuke representing "total collapse of investor confidence" in Chesapeake's...

This news story has 14 comments:

Register or Login to rate comments »

Leftfield Comments (3482)
 
This active intervention by shareholders can be used as a model to improve more than a few corporations run by self-aggrandizing and amazingly over-compensated upper managers and BOD's. Enron comes to mind as somewhat directly comparable to CHK, but there are many many in all areas of business pursuits whose governance is clueless enough despite their extraordinary golden parachutes and golden showers of compensation who are serially rehired elsewhere even as proven failures or mediocrities mainly because they are members of the elite insiders club.

Of course a downside is that "shareholders" may mean other self-interested mega funds who have their own dodgy agendas.
8 Jun 2012, 03:29 PM Reply Like

rsgensburg Comments (11)
 
Very well put. It is interesting to read the Rolling Stone article and the recent Reuter's article about McClendon. When you refer to Golden showers, it is the shareholders like myself who have been getting the Golden shower from the company particularly McClendon and his cronies who seem to feel the sole purpose of our company is to provide a lavish lifestyle equivalent to modern royalty.
8 Jun 2012, 04:03 PM Reply Like

bdoeden Comments (51)
 
Aubrey is the reason that CHK has the assets that it has. Put in a button down manager and this company will have a much more bleak future. Finding oil and gas is a high risk business and it takes a special type of person to handle these risks. If you want a more stable business invest in a bank.

Most of the complainers here have never done a proper due diligence on the company. I saw a fund manager on CNBC today that was surprised that Aubrey had a contract that gave him a share in every well. Obviously he had not read the company 10K's over the years. I voted for that plan a few years back since it aligned Aubrey's interests with mine.

I hold a substantial number of shares and have added a lot more recently.
8 Jun 2012, 04:12 PM Reply Like

choosh Comments (200)
 
To the extent that is true it in no way excuses the cavalierly self-serving activities of Aubrey. Try explaining what he has done to your kids and risk becoming a hypocrite in their eyes.

His past successes were in large part due to his high risk tolerance coinciding with market cycles. A risk taker with luck looks like a genius, visit Vegas for future study. Given what Aubrey is, he is good at it that is the only reason I have a substantial number of shares too.
8 Jun 2012, 05:03 PM Reply Like

paulbip Comments (104)
 
According to your logic, you should have sold with Aubrey getting beat up now.
8 Jun 2012, 06:05 PM Reply Like

petewd Comments (3)
 
I imagine that Aubrey McClendon feels suitably chastened and shackled by today's events but to get rid of him would be ridiculous. His recent unwise personal business activity aside he is one of the most knowledgeable in the industry and as such a valuable asset. I would wager almost anything that Carl Icahan would be amongst, if not the, first to ask him to stay on. I have suffered the same reversal as most other shareholders but feel that recent events have stabilized a very shaky situation and that long term the company is a very worthwhile investment.
8 Jun 2012, 04:46 PM Reply Like

PabloTC Comments (22)
 
I have followed McClendon's various antics here in Michigan and they are really quite disgraceful. The man appears to be an eight-cylinder jackass. His ways, however distasteful, might have worked when he was building the company. But they don't work now. He needs to go.
8 Jun 2012, 05:37 PM Reply Like

Harry Johnson Comments (463)
 
Face facts folks. CHK got where it is by borrowing whatever it needed to buy whatever it wanted. Punch bowl is gone; party is over.
8 Jun 2012, 06:28 PM Reply Like

TruffelPig Comments (3325)
 
I think I agree. There are certainly better US O&G companies growing. I am happy with KOG and cohort. This is a rapidly growing company. Or CLR, WLL, EOG, SM, ............ pick any of those and you will likely do better than picking CHK.
8 Jun 2012, 08:19 PM Reply Like

deercreekvols Comments (3050)
 
I agree. One of the better moves I made over the last few years was dumping CHK from my portfolio. The postitives of the company were/are far outweighed by the negatives of management, in my opinion.

Plenty of other Natural Gas fish in the sea, that is for sure.

I am long KOG and like the direction that it is heading. No "edge of universe" contract language for the CEO is a bonus too.
8 Jun 2012, 09:07 PM Reply Like

bdoeden Comments (51)
 
What other nat gas fish in the sea has CHK's prime leases and reserves? Why are large energy companies willing to partner with CHK?

If you all want to be moralists preach in the church. I'm here to make money. Were there mistakes made? Obviously there were. But who know we were going to have a warm winter?

That is in the past! In my mind this is a great opportunity. I like to invest in stocks no one likes and have made a lot of money doing so. I've also had my disappointments and bankruptcies. I always assume in these situations I'm going to lose and once in awhile they do. But my gains far exceed my losses over the years.

But to do this you have to have the personality to handle the risks. If you start sweating when your stocks go down you don't belong investing in E & P's.
9 Jun 2012, 10:29 AM Reply Like

TruffelPig Comments (3325)
 
Great opportunity perhaps. But also the debt load of the century. And the CEo is NOT to my liking - maybe he has a good nose for opportunity but he seems to have a gambling problem.
9 Jun 2012, 10:55 AM Reply Like

bdoeden Comments (51)
 
It is obvious that your investments should not be in oil & gas exploration. Try the banks!
10 Jun 2012, 08:16 PM Reply Like

fmpmailinc@aol.com Comments (49)
 
I have asked the question on several occasions--What illegal, immoral or unethical thing has AM done?? I have found a lot of disgruntled people, not necessarily share holders, spewing what their personal opinions are of Aubrey... but nobody has sited to me any statement of facts. There has been a number of comparisons between CHK and Enron, but I find none in my research. Sure the compensation packages for the CEO and BOD seem to be out of line in comparison to other such organizations. The actions on the part of Enron's CEO & BOD were Illegal, unethical, and immoral, which is why people were tried and put in jail. Maybe you boys should take a look at what the Banking Boys are knocking down, before as well as after, the Wall Street bail out.--- Remember the majority of share holders including Southeastern Investment approved all of these proxy's prior to their implementations at CHK. If NG goes back to $5 and Oil back to $100, CHK's debt will turn out to be quite manageable and shareholder value should certainly be on the up side.. I'm a believer in CHK as well as AM. If you don't like the Co.--sell it---that will leave more of it for the rest of us.
11 Jun 2012, 09:43 AM Reply Like