#board

Give them a few more months and the rate will be back to 7% like it was 14 years ago. Of course, the stock price will be 50% lower than it was 14 years ago, but Stank will spin the win and the board will do nothing.

Not like management has hands on experience in telecom but this guy is trying to ride the AI hype train so hard it’s embarrassing. Very clear he has no idea what he’s talking about. When is the board going to do something about him?

Don't know if this is the right place as this board mentions layoffs, but lately there have been no layoffs yet people are quietly disappearing from IBM. They are handed out a PIP and then right after the end date they are gone. Does anybody know of a good attorney who can take up the case for wrongful termination?

What were these secret foscussions that caused a clash between a board member and AM? The discussions have been described as a “deal” and “sensitive negotiations” and “essential discussions”. The plot thickens. It could range anywhere from something relatively small to - dare I say it - a merger/buyout. Let the speculation begin.

From the Economist today….

Since 2020 as many people have run bp as have run Britain. Sir Keir Starmer, the
fourth prime minister in as many years, promised to end the pantomime in
Westminster. Last year Albert Manifold was appointed as chairman of bp to do the
same thing in nearby St James’s Square. Sir Keir is still hanging on. Mr Manifold is
finished. On May 26th, after less than eight months in post, Mr Manifold was sacked in
a unanimous vote by the board, which includes Meg O’Neill, the oil company’s new
chief executive.
Mr Manifold inherited a neglected giant. The net-zero strategy of his predecessor
Helge Lund, a Norwegian, had made bp uninvestable. It is fitting, then, that Mr
Manifold’s dismissal should have the air of a Eurocratic initiative. The timing of the
directive announcing his departure could not have been better chosen to agitate
markets. It travelled down the wires just as traders in New York returned to their desks
after a bank-holiday weekend and were busy digesting news about a possible end to
America’s war in Iran. Shares in bp fell by nearly 10%.
But the real sin was the statement’s style. It was written in the worst literary tradition
of arrogant, managerial minimalism. Rather than elaborate on the reasons why bp must
now search for another chairman, the board o!ered just a few lines of cryptic lanyard-
speak. There are “serious concerns” about “important governance standards, oversight
and conduct”, the statement said. Trust us, he’s a wrong’un, pleaded a board which
shareholders have little reason to trust. Like Sir Keir, bp’s board appeals confidently to
an authority that has been spent twice over.
Thus began a guessing game: what did Mr Manifold do that was seemingly awful
enough to jeopardise bp’s turnaround? Plotting a coup in some faraway resource-rich
land? Not likely. Trying to sink Ed Miliband, Britain’s fanatical minister for net zero, in
the North Sea? If only. Predictably, initial speculation turned to sleaze. In its recent
history two bp chief executives have left their posts in bizarre circumstances related to
their private lives.
That wasn’t it, either. Instead, Mr Manifold was apparently exiled from clubland for
being a bad chap. The Financial Times reported allegations that he had been viewed by
some at bp as aggressive and that the board had received complaints from whistle-
blowers. Some reportedly called him a bully. On May 28th Mr Manifold responded. Yes,
he may have pushed people to accelerate cost-cutting and strengthen the balance-
sheet. But “at no point”, he wrote, “has anyone raised with me any issue about my
conduct...I dispute entirely this characterisation of my conduct.”
If Mr Manifold was truly intolerable, the board must explain to shareholders in more
detail. If he was merely disagreeable, that is probably proof of a job well done. As a
supposed City grandee herself, Dame Amanda Blanc, the bp director who led the
process to appoint Mr Manifold, would surely have known his City-wide reputation for
directness. Having (very) successfully run crh, an Irish building-materials firm, for a
decade, Mr Manifold could hardly have been expected to be a passive and detached
chairman.
Accusations of abrasiveness are, in the markets’ eyes at least, a less serious crime than
Accusations of abrasiveness are, in the markets’ eyes at least, a less serious crime than
the value destruction of which other members of the board are plainly guilty. Sure, bp
is in much better shape than it was a year ago. Profits from producing oil rise with the
price of the commodity, after all. The company’s traders are making a fortune. Last
year it made a huge discovery o! the coast of Brazil. Its corporate structure is in the
process of being simplified. But the job is not even half finished. Costs are out of
control, including at its headquarters in St James’s. It is the most indebted of the major
oil companies and still bears the weight of some of its worst misadventures in
renewable energy.
Must bp always be as ungovernable as Britain? Oil majors often reflect the politics of
their home countries. Exxon and Chevron are run by men who care little about the
separation of powers. Both run the board and manage the company. Together the firms
are worth $400bn more than a decade ago. The top job at TotalEnergies, the French oil
major, is held by a former civil servant; at Eni, by a colourful Italian. The two have
outperformed their British rival. bp, once in e!ect a branch of the British state in the
Middle East, now mirrors its decline. Whitehall talks about “delivering at pace”; bp,
about “moving at pace”. Neither goes anywhere.
Manifold destiny
The psychodrama at bp could not have been better designed to embarrass Britain’s
business elite. One view is that an outsider was appointed to shake things up at a
national champion before being pushed out unceremoniously by a club of grandees
who talk about change without really wanting it. An alternative reading of Mr
Manifold’s tenure is about as bad: an amateur with little experience in the industry
thought he knew better than the experts and came unstuck. The big American firms
would hardly hand such power to someone new to drilling.
The main problem with reforming Britain’s business elite is that it doesn’t really have
one. Those in America, Japan, France and Germany are all easily pictured. But Britain?
Its once-mighty merchant banks have disappeared. So have its fund managers. Its
biggest companies, like bp, have mostly become a global clearing house for mediocre
management talent.
The City nowadays is best viewed as a battleground between European collectivist
politics and American finance. Capitalist villains such as oil companies, tobacco giants
and banks make up much of Britain’s stockmarket. But the top investment banks and
funds fly the American flag. The saga at bp is a case in point. It threw itself zealously
into net zero. Now it is being disciplined, mostly by Elliott Management, an American
hedge fund. A very British shambles—and an international joke.

Here's an update from the UK Telegraph. It's behind a paywall, so I've copied it here. Seems AM was also questioning the hospitality spend, with particular reference to highly expensive Wimbledon tickets. I recall seeing photos of BL and his partner at the tournament in July 2023. Nice to know who was really paying for them.

Ousted BP chairman hits back over ‘excessive’ spending
Dismissed chairman suggests his ‘determination to drive change’ is behind misconduct allegations

Albert Manifold said his cost-cutting measures, such as foregoing limousines and private jets, may have ‘ruffled feathers’

Christopher Jasper

The ousted chairman of BP has attacked a culture of “excessive” spending at the oil giant, including purchasing tickets for sports events such as Wimbledon.

Albert Manifold suggested he had been forced out of BP after raising concerns over “unnecessary expenditure”.

Mr Manifold was dismissed without warning on Tuesday, with people close to the BP board suggesting he had been shown the door because of a “volcanic” temper, “bullying” and “verbal abuse”.

However, in a 769-word statement published on Thursday, Mr Manifold said he had been the victim of “lies” from people hiding behind “anonymity”.

He said that during a 40-year career he had “never once had accusations made against me such as those made in recent days”.

During his eight-month tenure at BP, Mr Manifold is understood to have proposed a crackdown on unnecessary spending, such as some corporate events.

Events attended by board members at the expense of the company are said to have included Wimbledon.

A source close to Mr Manifold said: “He feels that that is one of the reasons the board turned on him. Some members didn’t share his commitment to cost-cutting and budgeting.”

Ousted BP chairman hits back over ‘excessive’ spending
Dismissed chairman suggests his ‘determination to drive change’ is behind misconduct allegations

Albert Manifold said his cost-cutting measures, such as foregoing limousines and private jets, may have ‘ruffled feathers’

Christopher Jasper
Transport industry editor
28 May 2026 4:21pm BST

The ousted chairman of BP has attacked a culture of “excessive” spending at the oil giant, including purchasing tickets for sports events such as Wimbledon.

Albert Manifold suggested he had been forced out of BP after raising concerns over “unnecessary expenditure”.

Mr Manifold was dismissed without warning on Tuesday, with people close to the BP board suggesting he had been shown the door because of a “volcanic” temper, “bullying” and “verbal abuse”.

However, in a 769-word statement published on Thursday, Mr Manifold said he had been the victim of “lies” from people hiding behind “anonymity”.

He said that during a 40-year career he had “never once had accusations made against me such as those made in recent days”.

During his eight-month tenure at BP, Mr Manifold is understood to have proposed a crackdown on unnecessary spending, such as some corporate events.

Events attended by board members at the expense of the company are said to have included Wimbledon.

A source close to Mr Manifold said: “He feels that that is one of the reasons the board turned on him. Some members didn’t share his commitment to cost-cutting and budgeting.”

In response, a source close to BP suggested it would not have been unusual for the firm to take up tickets to entertain business clients at events such as Wimbledon.

BP also has a history of hosting politicians – many of whom have backed the oil industry – at the tournament, and was revealed in 2023 to have donated tickets worth more than £4,200 to two MPs and a government minister.

Before his removal, Mr Manifold reportedly clashed with BP’s company secretary and board member Ben Mathews over costs.

Mr Mathews, whose role is to advise the board on corporate governance, was a key architect in the push to oust Mr Manifold, according to the Financial Times. He has since been put on medical leave because of stress after having dealt with the departures of Mr Manifold and his predecessor Helge Lund in quick succession.

BP did not immediately respond to requests for comment regarding spending by directors.

In his statement, Mr Manifold said he was dismissed after he had “sought to streamline and refresh the board and started to advocate for a review of the workings of the board to improve efficiency”.

Called out excessive expenditure
Mr Manifold said he had wanted to “set an example” at BP and detailed how he demonstrated this by making his own coffee, buying his own lunch and resisting the use of private jets.

He added: “Where I saw unnecessary or excessive expenditure, I called it out. I had no interest in having a dedicated chauffeur-driven limousine at my beck and call on the occasions that I was in London.

“I, like most people, walked, took taxis, trains, etc. I had no interest in taking private aviation nor in availing myself of corporate tickets for sports events. I made my own coffee and bought my lunch in the local café. I sat in a small office, eschewing the grand corner-office privilege of previous chairmen.”

However, he said, those priorities “were not always shared by everyone”.

He added: “In business, small signals matter in driving change and contribute to ensuring no company has a culture of entitlement.

“All of this was my attempt to ensure the continuing independence and transparency of the board and the ongoing improvement in oversight and governance.”

Mr Manifold praised BP’s chief executive Meg O’Neill, its chief financial officer Kate Thomson and the wider executive team as being “among the finest people I have worked with”, saying they were “brimming with integrity”.

Getting out since their stock options aren't worth sh-t, I guess? I'm sure they will be replaced by external hires with no industry experience who live nowhere near a Medtronic facility!
You'd think the board would wake up to what a problem Geoff is. The stock is in the 70s!

There are so many rumors about layoffs on this forum. But none of them are based on facts.

Please focus on facts. For example, let‘s talk about the enshittification of the company culture and the effects on staff turnover. That is something that can be grounded on facts and board actions.

Thanks.

"Shareholders rejected a proposal that would ‌have required an independent board chair separate from the CEO role, according to preliminary ​voting results at the annual ​meeting on Wednesday"

Since we are AI all in lets replace the Board & Ceo with AI. Lets lead by example instead of always being a follower.

And hence all the problems. This ain't going to be fixed unless that' fixed.

Fear / uncertainty

• Approximate presence: High before and during notifications

• Examples:

  • Questions about emails
  • “1:1s”
  • Worry about notifications

Anger / betrayal

• Approximate presence: Very high

• Examples:

  • Criticism of leadership
  • Repeated complaints

Info seeking

• Approximate presence: High

• Examples:

  • Severance discussions
  • Notification questions

Speculation

• Approximate presence: Medium

• Examples:

  • Acquisition rumors
  • Nvidia/Cisco discussion

Dark humor

• Approximate presence: Medium

• Examples:

  • Leaderboard jokes
  • “DDAY” framing

Optimism

• Approximate presence: Low

• Examples:

  • Hoping “survivors” can rebuild

I see that the board is divided, some are all doom and gloom, some are more like 'business as usual'. i'd be curious to see what do you all think about our position a few years from now.

Does this mean the bonus will be half this year, so basically some coins after tax. What a scam, I bet the board is still getting a hefty bonus. Employees get to bare the burden.

Do you know that an average German employee has to work around 360 years only to make an equivalent of what Christian Klein gets as a bonus in a year?

Shocking, isn’t it?

But not really.

In most companies, executive bonuses are a fraction of their salary unless they have a very good year. At SAP, executive bonuses are several times their salaries even with drastic drops in the share price and losing shareholder confidence.

Such high bonuses are made possible because of a supervisory board that prefers to give more money to the board and group executives over actually giving more value to shareholders. Since CK joined the board, there has been a tremendous push to increase executive bonuses and reduce employee bonuses.

There was a proposal to pay executive bonuses in RSUs so their remuneration is based on their performance. But it was shot down by them.

Sales have been trying to get more European government contracts but we’re losing them instead because CK is forcing governments to use Palantir and American cloud companies and they don’t want that.

Product and Engineering has been trying to bring all SAP products together to create a seamless end user experience. But they’re asked to stop and instead put customer data in a memory which is accessible to chatbots from American companies in the name of AI.

Engineers have been learning new skills to be better at their work but they are told that being an expert is no good and the only way to grow is by getting on a management track.

Customers are asking for important features in core SAP products and they are told that they should focus on AI slop instead because it’ll be easier for them to lay off their own employees with the help of SAP.

Employees are just asking for fair salary increases and basic human respect. But executives are treating them as dental plaque that needs to be removed with each cleaning. And executives are doubling down to keep them in fear of losing their livelihoods because it’s fun for them.

Shareholders are asking for SAP to have a decent realistic product roadmap and sustainable growth. But instead, they are getting more bull excr-ment called autonomous enterprise which is just frankly bad marketing. And they’re being blamed for not being open to innovation when the share price falls.

We’ve truly reached an interesting age of capitalism where a handful of people who have many times the wealth necessary for a lifetime are exploiting hard working people so they can amass even more wealth.

Their biggest enablers are the supervisory board and group executives and CK fanboys. Stop supporting these freaks.

What can we do to stop this transfer of wealth from shareholders to the pockets of these executives?

Everyone who is an active board member should be immediately fired

Chris Leahy
Virginia Addicott
Lynda M. Clarizio
Anthony R. Foxx
Kelly J. Grier
Marc E. Jones
David W. Nelms
Joseph R. Swedish
Sanjay Mehrotra
Donna F. Zarcone

Thanks CA, thanks board

Boarding NOW
:)

In the last 5 years, MDT stock is down 44% while the SP500 is up 67%. How much longer for CEO and Chairman Martha? Obviously his DEI strategy hasn’t paid off and neither has anything else. How much longer board?

Generally, a CEO with sustained poor performance is -on average- let go after ~3 bad years, if not less. That’s been studied pretty extensively across medium-to-large NYSE-listed companies, and the stats are easy enough to find. Yet Goff Murka is still here.

The decision about a CEO’s employment and performance reviews is handled by a committee of the Board. And Geoff himself is also on the Board. That’s one of the reasons CEOs often sit on boards in the first place: to avoid being completely at the mercy of the Board and to maintain some degree of stability and influence.

Funnily enough, three MDT board members also came out of GE. Funny how that works. At the very least, there’s an element of mutual back-scratching and shared incentives.

Being on a Board is a great gig: incredibly lucrative and relatively low-risk compared to operational executive roles. Great money for comparatively little legwork, with the worst-case consequence usually just being the loss of the seat. Geoff has a pretty nice setup with the GE network: everyone scratches each other’s backs and keeps the machine running.

This is basically a textbook corporate-governance criticism: board interlocks, executive networks, and incentive alignment reducing accountability for underperforming CEOs. We can stop speculating on the mystery of why GM has his job. It's this simple.

There’s simply far more incentive for everyone involved to sit tight and protect the status quo and their own interests than there is to force a change.

And that's where Elliott has come in. That's why they've gotten seats on the Board. What they do with the seats remains to be seen: join in on the grift, or try to save MDT as a company.

There is no mystery. It's rent-seeking in plain sight and will not change until the GE faction leaves or is removed from the Board.

1) Do you feel you understand how we will move forward? 2) Do you think we are just getting started with layoffs? In my view 1=no and 2=yes, also, execs 100% botched communication on this one.

Board and Leadership should be ashamed

Aerospace ISC senior leadership is operating in constant scramble mode, recycling old ideas instead of developing real solutions. They’re not even attempting to rebuild the slide decks or MOS frameworks — they’re simply pulling forward whatever was used years ago. HOS is the clearest example: if it had truly worked, sites would still be using it today.

Rather than listening to the people doing the work, they’re bypassing basic management‑of‑change discipline and issuing knee‑je-k directives with no data behind them. Every week brings a brand‑new ‘top priority’ metric — not because it drives improvement, but because it creates the illusion of action for the board. The pattern is unmistakable: constant metric churn, no sustained focus, and no measurable improvement. If the approach worked, we would see progress; the absence of improvement is the proof.

At some point, the new board of directors will have to acknowledge that the dysfunction originates in the first layers of executive leadership — and that nothing will improve until those tiers are addressed. The board must begin asking the hard questions and digging deeper to separate the leaders who can actually drive change from those clinging to outdated approaches and contributing nothing new.

Who's supposed to handle security at the board level if the CISO role doesn't exist? Does Nike not give a sh-t about security?

For META, Oracle and MSFT it makes sense for LR as they are stuggling to get back to ATHs.

I dont expect Cisco CEO to be under any pressure from the board right now.

https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2026/04/30/3285301/0/en/trian-calls-on-solventum-s-board-to-create-value-publishes-open-letter-and-slide-deck.html

SLF = ~$23M in 2025
The toohster a cool ~$5M.

I hope the board owns up and slashes their salaries equal percentages to stock drop - ~30 percent following the stock drop since Jan 1. Least they can do.

Actually when they sell company off hopefully they don’t get any severance either.

They just want the board to be pleased. No one wants AI, we don’t use it except for occasional copilot. NONE of the products use AI in true fashion. It’s all fake

Boarding begins soon :)

ROE is our focus. You know what that means.

This is just a reminder to everyone that we have the ability to vote for or against the board members that deny us raises and approve the salaries and bonuses for the MC.

Use them. Later this year when the voting comes about USE YOUR VOTE. They won't pay attention to the TTUS but they certainly will pay attention when their shareholders start voting against them..

Artificial insemination at its finest. As Nike board member.

Maybe Allbirds next for him

I've seen it mentioned here, and the same rumor has been going around the office.

https://www.quiverquant.com/news/AT%26T+falls+3.2%25+as+analyst+downgrade+and+telecom+rotation+pressure+shares+ahead+of+earnings

Another slump in the stock price and another downgrade. I’d ask when will the BoD see the light that this dude is clueless and asleep at the wheel. However, we all know they are complacent!

Nonetheless, given we are now market based, the market clearly has no faith in the company and thus the !diot at the top REALLY needs to be the very next person laid off!

Can only imagine the BOD/Vz C-Level circlej--kgoing on before Q1 reporting!

CFO has to be using AI to put lipstick on this Pig!

Good governance says companies need an independent Chairman of the Board to keep the leadership accountable.

Share price still falling, revenues down SLT terrible from the top to bottom, especially corporates. Not even in the top 3 legal AI, CoCounsel not had the right vision, stand alone product the trying to link it with everything, clients just not buying it literally. When wil the board step in and purge the lot of them?

Scott Sheffield of Pioneer wants to get a job as an ExxonMobil board member

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/04/17/2025-06562/petition-of-scott-sheffield-to-reopen-and-set-aside-order

GoPro announced a significant workforce reduction affecting 23% of its global staff. The action camera maker plans to eliminate 145 jobs from its 631 employees. This restructuring plan was approved by the company's Board of Directors on April 7. The cuts aim to reduce operating costs and drive stronger operating leverage. These job reductions are expected to be completed by the end of the year.

San Mateo, California

https://nypost.com/2026/04/08/us-news/bay-area-based-tech-company-announces-shocking-layoff-of-nearly-a-quarter-of-its-workforce/

SB being axed by the board was the final nail in the reinvention coffin. None of its architects or proponents are left in Xerox (JB,MG,SB, DMP). All gone. The street, analysts, investors, rating agencies and financial institutions have all voted with their feet. The board has finally done their job, but it’s 3 years too late. SB in his 4 years in charge missed every outlook or expectation he set. If he was a sales person or sales manager he would have been in a performance improvement plan after 2 quarters. Instead he continued to have the support of the board as the company kept draining its cash, reserves and future to keep returning funds to shareholders even when all the key metrics and results where going horribly wrong and missing plans and expectations every quarter. Now we have an untried, untested CEO who has never led a sales organisation but primary experience is legal and claim to fame is the proxy fight that stopped the Fuji merger that the board are now desperately trying to make. To put that into perspective when Fuji offered to buy Xerox they offered 40 dollars a share compared to the $1.26 a share now, let that sink in, and LP has been part of that from the beginning. The fact a legal guy is in charge should indicate to all the people still in the cult what the next steps are!!!!! We are in the endgame and none of those outcomes reinvent Xerox they consign it to the history books of what was once a trailblazer