I don't know who made the decision on who to cut, but this is ridiculous. People with over a decade of experience, some of the highest performers, are now gone. Was this really necessary?
3 replies (most recent on top)
If they were there for over a decade then they should be fine. They were overpaid for a decade.
Yes, it was completely necessary to cut costs in order to fatten the pockets of shareholders.
Both CEOs should be fired first for tanking the share price. Post split it has been just disasters. $1000+ to $70 in just 11 months.