All 11 H-P (HPQ) directors have been re-elected, chairman Ray Lane announces. Also, Ernst &...

This news story has 9 comments:

Register or Login to rate comments »

davidbdc Comments (2990)
 
Of Course. I mean they only wrote off what $8 Billion in failed acquisitions this year. Come on, how could the directors know it would fail so badly?

Oh, you mean directors get paid to oversee management - ask tough challenging questions - and ensure large changes in strategy and/or acquisitions are well thought out????

Hmmm. Well, I hope they only got a 30% pay raise then!!!!!
20 Mar, 06:45 PM Reply Like

AlbionWood Comments (592)
 
Kind of a Catch-22: I won't buy HP stock because their Board is hopeless, so I can't vote against the sitting Board members...
20 Mar, 06:50 PM Reply Like

zoroast100 Comments (31)
 
These wall street clubs of musical chairs continue to bilk $$B out of investors pockets to fill pockets of few incompetent vultures aka board members; it's pity that the share holders are so sheepish and submissive to misrepresentation and abuse of a corrupt circle. where is Carl?
20 Mar, 06:56 PM Reply Like

bgold1955 Comments (948)
 
Could be worse, JPM lost 6.2b on a single trade. Listening to the Senate hearing we were told it was their money they lost. I didn't know that a bank the size of JPM had their own money.... I think it was stockholder money and if you are a shareholder then I would be concerned based on that statement.
20 Mar, 06:58 PM Reply Like

deercreekvols Comments (2921)
 
I don't ever consider HP's stock.
As long as the current Board is running the ship steered by Meg Whitman, you have another MF Global on your hands just waiting to run into the rocks
20 Mar, 07:15 PM Reply Like

Sam Liu Comments (2794)
 
Whitman said why she sits on "Proctor and Gamble [board] and that is good for HP. It’s good to see another big company struggling."

P&G might be having difficulties, but HPQ, how can shareholders write of the Board's incompetence?
20 Mar, 09:55 PM Reply Like

Sam Liu Comments (2794)
 
"Whitman: I came to set this company up for the next 75 years. "

Most shareholder's don't care of a 75 year scope, maybe 5 years is better.
20 Mar, 09:58 PM Reply Like

Moon Kil Woong Comments (8822)
 
The problem is the board doesn't care about even a 100 year scope. All they care about is their personal power and money. They could care less about the shareholders or the company save that it can pay board compensation. Unfortunately a CEO can't solve this issue which is the heart of the rot in HP.

The board sits over the CEO not the other way around.
21 Mar, 01:08 AM Reply Like

The_Varka Comments (2)
 
My cat is more intelligent then the overall board of HP, still a nightmare, how that's possible to be so bad, and they are payed for, unbelievable.
They had a diamond in 2003 (Digital/Compaq/HP) they transform it,.....really i don't find a correct name.
HP employee are for 2/3 52 to 65 years old........in this case you....... wait.....wait............ and don't touch anything.
21 Mar, 06:10 AM Reply Like