HP to Keep PC Division

Re:HP to Keep PC Division by mrich on Thursday October 27, 2011 @05:54PM (#3165779)

Wow. What is going on there? At first I thought Apotheker was hired to complete some "unpopular" tasks, and then a new CEO could start over. But it seems like the board was completely asleep while Apotheker made his decisions. I am looking forward to some massive lawsuits brought against these people. Apotheker probably was the most clever guy in this, and knew that he could make a quick 20 million even though he would be fired. Would be interested in insights from HP employees.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:HP to Keep PC Division by sliverstorm on Thursday October 27, 2011 @06:27PM (#3165904)

I suddenly find myself wondering if someone wanted the stock price to crater, to make a takeover or mega-buy-in cheaper.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:HP to Keep PC Division by pedalpete on Friday October 28, 2011 @02:48AM (#3167293)

Interesting theory, and with the history of this HP board, this is actually a very minor possibility.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hewlett-Packard_spying_scandal

You've made me wonder if the quality of the algorithms used for trading make it near impossible for the SEC to track these sort of criminal activities.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:HP to Keep PC Division by thefreehunter on Thursday October 27, 2011 @06:27PM (#3165907)

Lawsuits for what?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:HP to Keep PC Division by bluedanieru on Thursday October 27, 2011 @08:52PM (#3166399)

For not performing due diligence when discussing the company's strategy with the new CEO, leading to about two years of fucking around (after a decade of fucking around) and cratering the company's value to the shareholders.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:HP to Keep PC Division by kb101 on Friday October 28, 2011 @02:33AM (#3167267)

Unfortunately, the board is close to dysfunctional. http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/22/us-hp-board-insigh... http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/22/business/voting-to-hire-a-...

[ Parent | on HN ]