#ceo

So wonder Dan is realizing how useless Most upper and lower management is in wireline & wireless .Maybe he has realized only the people who are in some sort of hands on position are of any value.The whole reason we lose market share in wireless,wireline,buisness is because of bad management decisions on how to get the largest bonus .Maybe spend the least amount of money by shedding all our customers.Its like committing su----e trying to grab the dollar off the track with a train coming!!!!!

How can anyone respect the CEO when he continues to get huge raises despite crazy bad performance. The best was JB who was the mastermind of the collapse he not only got a bunch of raises and bonuses, he was asked to leave and got a heroes send off and is staying on the board.

Really? You kept him on the board?

I had my best selling year and results in 20 years, got a lousy 3 review, was told that JB didn't want anyone above a 3, my boss said he gave me a 5 and it was downgraded to a 3 because JB didn't think anyone deserved more than a 3.

“This will be a new way of life for us.” CEO
To those who pay the price for this new model, I am truly sorry. Don’t give more to this God forsaken company than it is going to give back to you.

Sometimes you have to stop at ask, is what you are selling your heart and soul for really worth it?

At least he's consistent.
Who thought using an AI-generated voice model would be a good idea? What message does it send?

Also reading the gibberish he read out, not sure what's worse that he did write it but just got AI to say it or that it was clearly spewed out by AI?

Dan Schulman sure put himself out there. Verizon must cut Billions out of the company and streamline the way we do things to fund a complete and total makeover of the company. He states that layoffs will be part of the coming change. He then states that he is only in his 22nd day as CEO and that by his 44th day most of his transformative plans will be unveiled and even executed. If you take him at his word, the next three weeks will peel back the layers of the onion and we are in for one he-l of a ride. Are you as excited to be part of it as Dan says he is?

In a research note, MoffettNathanson analyst Craig Moffett said Schulman "described a shift towards being a customer-centric company, with the 'best value proposition' in the market. There is a clear focus on subscriber metrics. He called it a 'full reboot.' The obvious question is… how? Verizon is no longer perceived to have the best network. And it is perceived to have the highest prices. His promise to reverse subscriber losses without relying on promotions and price strikes us as more of a wish than a strategy."

https://www.morningstar.com/news/marketwatch/20251029375/fiservs-former-ceo-left-the-fintech-company-in-crisis-trump-put-him-in-charge-of-social-security

Xerox's decline has been nothing short of alarming. Over the past year alone, we've witnessed a staggering 59.6% drop, bringing the decline to 80.26% since 2020. Leadership is the cornerstone of any thriving organization, and I'm utterly perplexed by why Steve B remains at the helm amid this losing streak. When I joined the company in 1999, my stock was valued at $70.58; today, it languishes at a mere $3.43.

I've sat through his last dozen or so town halls, and it's clear that Steve has a knack for serving up a buffet of excuses, each one seemingly more inventive than the last. A close friend of John Bruno confided that Steve B's golden parachute is now a financial burden, and no sane executive is eager to captain this sinking ship. Steve's compensation must be recalibrated to reflect the dismal stock performance. John Bruno has yet to add any value, and Louie Pastor seems to be draining the company's vitality, all while we (the workers in the trenches) continue to bail water from this floundering vessel.

The board has been covertly seeking a way to oust Steve, but they're caught in a quandary with this 125-year-old institution—there are no willing successors. And if Steve were to step down voluntarily, the personal cost would be too great for him to bear.

Is Joey available to go tell Frank he is a fraud and low life parasite? I remember Frank on the all hands calls in 2014-15 saying he was a real estate guy and did not know much about payments. That was probably the most honest thing I ever heard him say.

Also remember Franco used First Data money to buy thousands of copies of his side-kick Joey's lame book, and mailed it to employees. I read it, a complete waste of ink and paper, and used it as a door stop for awhile until a flood in the office made it moldy.

I don't think that man is going to turn around Target. "I just watched 5 with Fiddelke: A Target Conversation" And it pi---s me off. I thought Cephas or Ashley Petzold ( She left Target in 2024) would be a good options for CEO. But No. Please keep on boycotting Target. I know Q4 is going to be sh-t

Sona Chowla exiting, Chris Corley as well, more conglomeration at the top with people leading combined departments. Tariff pressure coming down the pike and probably foreseeing a dip in stock price so those pay packages aren’t as appealing. But don’t people want to work with an award winning CEO voted on by her Chicago peers?

Lets make TGT great again and bring back Mark Triton as COO to support CEO Fidelke and Chairman Cornelly

There is a big employee meeting this week. Will the CEO be fully transparent and answer a lot of the tough and fair questions many of you posted on here. The CEO seems to be doubling down on keeping the BOD intact with no changes, keeping field sales leadership who have not lead and are reactionary and don't provide inspiring forward looking leadership and employee support, and head of Boca operations who is focused on the wrong priorities and on their pet side projects instead. The CEO is doubling down on all of this and net outflows are on pace to match last year. Leadership said the bleeding was done last year. Well that hasn't happened. That is why this meeting is so important. For the CFO, it is no laughing matter.

I’ve always been curious. What’s the whole deal with MW saying we don’t create demand, we meet demand?

We’re a fortune 10 company and the ceo is saying we can’t influence market demand? I’m always confused by this talking point.

We could absolutely influence demand if we invested in renewables, batteries, ai power supply, nuclear, etc…

Idk, any thoughts?

If you were to be in Fiddelke's shoes, what would be 3 things you'd do right now?
I'll go first:

• rebuild trust and do it fast (comms, plans, dont let people find stuff from the media)
• fix culture before fixing cost (give power 2 remaining teams & simplify... less layers)
• protect the brand’s core (keep design/merch/stores connected) & dont outsource

Have you ever looked at the wrist of our humble CEO. In one picture outside the Discovery District he is wearing a Rolex Daytona, which costs nearly $30K, has a 6 year waiting list, and requires you to have already bought several pieces from your jeweler.

In another picture in the Dallas HQ he is wearing a gold Rolex DayDate, which costs 44K.

Given this, he easily has 6 - 8 Rolex timepieces. I have no issue with leaders wearing expensive watches, but these Rolexes feel a bit tasteful given the ego our leader has demonstrated and how he treats his employees. I think a Cartier, Jaeger, or just about any watch would have been more humble and appropriate. But, the Rolexes scream “I have money and control, and you don’t” when he wears them.

Guys, if you ever think our leader is relatable or in-sync with the common employee - just know that he goes out of his way to distance himself from the rest of us. Only the best that money can buy for himself. Nothing but the worst for his subordinates.

“Making employees stew over the weekend is an unforced error by incoming CEO Michael Fiddelke. Forcing employees to spend five days in agonizing uncertainty is inexcusably cruel. This first major decision by Fiddelke is a case study in corporate tone-deafness.

Under current CEO Brian ‘Brand Ki-ler’ Cornell, Target's inexplicable pandering to the Trump regime—including the rollback of Target's exemplary diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives last January—has already sent TGT stock plummeting 33%, wiping out over $20 billion in shareholder value by mid-September.

Fiddelke, Cornell's hand-picked successor, has immediately embraced the same cluelessness that further damages the Target brand. The effort to secure $600 million by eliminating 1,800 jobs is cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Executing these cuts in such an unnecessarily cruel manner does absolutely nothing to dig the Target Brand out of the hole Brian Cornell put it in. It also does nothing to revitalize and cultivate the cultural and creative energy that is essential for long-term growth.”

Bob M. via LinkedIn

Will Auchincloss remain as bp CEO beyond 2026 or other candidates better suited to lead the company to prosperity…

Name your candidates and why?

Ryan “poorly tailored suits” Lance, CEO of ConocoPhilllips, stated

"We probably plateau later this decade," Lance said. "It's going to be slow decline beyond that, because there's a lot of resource."

What’s your technical perspective or intuition on production declines and soaring OPEX now that Ryan is viewed with contempt by field personnel particularly Marathon and Concho Honchos

muzza is likely done...who might be next ceo? company value has really not gone up with him running the shoe

Resorting to low attacks bc why not, but did we think we’d be safe when the incoming CEO can’t even tell the abomination that is his horrible balding pattern? Targets doomed if the incoming CEO can’t even see the problems directly in front of him.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/t-mobiles-incoming-ceo-att-is-taking-potshots-because-its-under-pressure-152258495.html

So much for that new campaign those smooth-brains on the Q3 Earnings Call were so excited about.

Wish we had a CEO like TMUS

Will BoD replace Stankey? We all see huge decline in the stock value, stagnant innovations and network rollouts, stagnant cNPS, artificially driven Q results driven by soft layoffs, no obvious acquisition ahead and all time low employee morale after forced 5 days RTO....

https://www.washingtontechnology.com/companies/2025/10/saic-parts-ways-ceo-toni-townes-whitley/409034/

Anyone know what's going on?

Big money is at stake. Seasoned pro is required.

Here’s a summary of total annual compensation for Brian Cornell in his role as CEO of Target Corporation (since his start in August 2014) as available via proxy/SEC filings and media reporting:

Fiscal year Approximate total compensation
2015 ~$16.9 m (reported for 2015) 
2016 ~$11.3 m 
2018 ~$22.6 m 
2020 ~$19.8 m 
2023 ~$19.2 m 
2024 ~$20.4 m 

Richard Greedmore, CEO of MegaCorp Unlimited, had one guiding principle: the dividend must go up. It didn’t matter if the company was selling actual products or just the illusion of productivity—shareholders needed their quarterly dopamine hit.

One crisp morning, as Richard strutted out of his 97th-floor office (which had a view of the poor, for motivational purposes), he spotted a homeless man outside the building fumbling with a cup of change. A nickel rolled away, followed by a rogue dime. Richard’s eyes widened.

“Loose capital!” he gasped.

Without hesitation, he dove from the steps like a linebacker chasing a bonus. He snatched the nickel mid-roll and tackled the dime just before it hit the gutter. Passersby watched in horror and confusion as the CEO of a Fortune 500 company wrestled a penny from a pigeon.

“Every cent counts!” he shouted, holding the coins aloft like trophies. “This is shareholder value!”

He rushed back inside, burst into the finance department, and slammed the coins on the table.

“Add this to the dividend pool. We’re going up 0.0000000003% this quarter!”

The CFO blinked. “Sir, that’s... less than the cost of the paper we’d need to announce it.”

“Then announce it digitally!” Richard barked. “We’ll save on toner!”

From that day forward, MegaCorp instituted the “Street Sweep Initiative,” where interns were deployed to scour sidewalks for spare change. The company’s stock rose 0.0001%, and Richard was hailed as a visionary.

Meanwhile, the homeless man was hired as Chief Revenue Scout, earning minimum wage and stock options—vested over 97 years.

The last semblance of segregation of duties and independent oversight is gone. Not that Citi is the only one to do this. But well....

during the ATG “live only” event this afternoon.

You never know what illegal / immoral/ offensive stuff will come out of the CEOs mouth.

And that stuff needs to be shared.

This guy is the best CEO since McKnight. 3M is humming along under his brilliant leadership. Huge earnings. Morale higher than ever. Lazy people are leaving. What's not to love here. Now get back to work you quiet quitting clowns.

Using only my reasoning capabilities based on the scenario described—a company hiring a CEO with a track record of selling off companies, followed by mass layoffs and a company-wide voluntary layoff—it is a strong indication that the company may be preparing for a significant reduction in size, restructuring, or even an exit strategy through a sale or winding down of operations.

Here is a breakdown of why these actions collectively suggest an exit or major strategic shift:

## 1. CEO with a Track Record of Selling Companies
Hiring a CEO known for divesting or selling companies (often referred to as a "turnaround" or "special situations" CEO) suggests the board or ownership has a specific mandate:

• Preparation for Sale: The CEO's expertise might be used to make the company more attractive and "lean" for potential buyers.
• Divestiture of Assets: They might be brought in to sell off non-core or underperforming parts of the business.
• Maximizing Short-Term Value: Their focus is often on streamlining operations and finances to maximize shareholder return in a shorter timeframe, often leading to an eventual sale.

## 2. Mass Layoffs and Voluntary Layoffs
Layoffs are a key tool for cost reduction and operational streamlining, but the combination described is particularly telling:

• Mass Layoffs (Involuntary): This is a quick way to drastically cut the largest operational expense (salaries and benefits). It signals a severe need for cost savings and often a reduced scope of future operations.
• Voluntary Layoffs (Buyouts/Early Retirement): This is a softer, but still expensive, way to further reduce headcount and often targets long-tenured, higher-salaried employees. It confirms the company needs to shed staff beyond what the initial mass layoffs achieved.

## Conclusion
While the company's stated goal might be "restructuring" or "achieving profitability," the pattern of actions—bringing in a specialized CEO and implementing aggressive, two-phased workforce reductions—is a textbook sign of a company significantly shrinking its footprint or actively moving toward an acquisition or complete exit from the market as an independent entity.

It is less about mere optimization and more about surgical preparation for a change in ownership or a drastic simplification of the business structure.

You're identifying a pattern that often does signal a wind-down or exit strategy. Let me think through what these elements typically indicate:

CEO with M&A/divestiture background - When boards bring in executives known for selling companies or business units, it's usually deliberate. They're hiring for a specific skill set.

Mass layoffs followed by voluntary programs - This sequence is particularly telling. Aggressive cost-cutting followed by voluntary programs suggests they're trying to get as lean as possible, often to make the company more attractive for sale or to preserve whatever cash remains.

The combination - When you see these together, it often means:

• Preparing for sale (buyer wants low cost structure)
• Maximizing short-term profitability before exit
• Managing decline while extracting remaining value
• Positioning for bankruptcy/restructuring

However, there are some scenarios where this isn't an exit:

• Severe turnaround attempts (though success rates are low)
• Private equity "right-sizing" before trying to grow again
• Desperate survival mode with no clear plan

But you're right to be skeptical. The pattern you're describing - especially the CEO's background combined with aggressive workforce reductions - is textbook pre-sale or wind-down behavior. Companies in genuine growth or innovation mode don't typically hire "sell-off specialists" and then hollow out their workforce.

The voluntary layoff following mandatory ones is particularly concerning. That often means either the first cuts weren't enough, or they're trying to reduce severance costs by encouraging people to leave on their own terms.

Is this hitting close to home for you or someone you know?

I wouldn't necessarily agree that such actions definitively mean a company is "exiting" (e.g., being sold off, liquidated, or shutting down entirely), but they do often signal a strategic pivot toward some form of exit or major restructuring. Let me break down my reasoning step by step, based on common business patterns I've observed in corporate turnarounds and private equity plays.

### 1. Hiring a CEO with a Track Record of Selling Companies

• CEOs like this are frequently brought in as "turnaround specialists" or "exit architects." Their expertise lies in optimizing a business for acquisition, merger, or IPO rather than long-term organic growth. For instance, they might focus on short-term value extraction, such as divesting non-core assets, streamlining operations, or improving profitability metrics to appeal to buyers.
• This doesn't always lead to an immediate exit—it could be part of a genuine effort to stabilize a struggling company. However, in mature or distressed firms (e.g., in tech, telecom, or manufacturing sectors), it's a red flag for potential sale. Private equity firms or activist investors often install such leaders precisely because their playbook involves preparing for a flip.

### 2. Mass Layoffs Followed by Voluntary Layoffs

• Mass layoffs are typically cost-cutting measures to reduce burn rate, improve margins, and make the company leaner. In the context of a new CEO with an exit-oriented background, this can be about "rightsizing" the workforce to boost EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization), which is a key metric buyers scrutinize.
• Voluntary layoffs (often called voluntary separation or buyout programs) are a softer approach: offering severance, benefits continuation, or incentives to encourage employees to leave. This minimizes legal risks, preserves morale among remaining staff, and achieves headcount reduction without the optics of forced terminations. It's common in pre-sale cleanups because it sheds "excess" personnel while avoiding wrongful termination lawsuits.
• Together, these steps can indicate distress (e.g., cash flow issues or declining market share) but also deliberate preparation for an exit. By lowering ongoing expenses, the company becomes more attractive to acquirers who want a plug-and-play operation without immediate overhaul costs.

### 3. Does This Always Mean an Exit?

• Not necessarily. Some companies use this playbook for survival and rebirth. For example, a firm might hire such a CEO to execute a "Chapter 11-style" restructuring (even outside bankruptcy) to emerge stronger and independent. Layoffs could be part of adapting to market shifts, like automation or economic downturns, without any sale in mind.
• But often, yes—it leans toward exit. In many cases, especially with private equity-backed companies, this sequence is a precursor to a sale. The CEO's track record acts as a signal to investors and potential buyers that the company is in "harvest mode." Historical examples (without naming specifics) include telecom or software firms where similar patterns preceded acquisitions by larger players or asset stripping.
• Key factors influencing the outcome:
  • Company stage: Mature companies with legacy products are more likely to be exiting via sale than startups.
  • Market conditions: In a buyer's market (e.g., during economic booms), this setup facilitates quick flips. In recessions, it might just be belt-tightening.
  • Board/investor dynamics: If the board includes PE firms or activists pushing for returns, an exit is probable.

In summary, while I don't fully agree it's a guaranteed exit—business is full of exceptions—these moves collectively suggest a high likelihood of positioning for one. It's a pragmatic strategy to maximize value before handing over the keys, rather than a death knell. If this is about a hypothetical scenario, watching for further signs like asset sales or debt refinancing would clarify intent.

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/rogerentner_a-67-year-old-ceo-with-a-two-year-mandate-activity-7385843828764614657-BJmG/

I hope that Shulman does shake things up... but what is the point if Sampath is CEO in 2 years... if this guy's right we are sc--wed regardless.

No more DEI type managers. Got them nowhere. Unfortunately it looks like they are positioning a token.

Did anyone notice a difference in the Q4 pulse survey? It looks like the question are geared toward leadership. The last comment box directly asks what action has been taken since the last survey. Maybe the new CEO is looking to make some changes for all levels of leadership? I’ve been with Verizon 10 years and every rif they only target below ADs. Everyone AD and above are always safe. It’s time to start snipping from the top and not the people who actually do the work.

We are hearing inside whispers that some on the board, executive committee, and rank and file are starting to lose confidence in "T" Brown Duckett. She came in 2021 on a DEI high with lots of fanfare to replace Roger Ferguson who was snake bit at the end by mounting scandals and lawsuits. Now, with outflows at record highs, massive over spend by the Frisco experiment, and mounting legal and PR challenges, some are contending that Duckett step aside so that a turnaround artist can take charge of the helmless sinking ship to right it's course. We are hearing decisions will be made in the next 18 months on a possible sea change of direction.

Attend Board Meetings and a few meaningless town halls
Hire Retreads from JPM but cut jobs held by everyone else
Collect millions in stock and salary
Vacation often

Iger has no creativity!

He buys other IPs and cuts jobs to make up the deficit he causes!

As long as he is in charge, no job is safe-except for his of course!!!