#corporatestrategy

What do you all think of Mikes email this morning that he won't won't serve as chairman after his term is up? I got to believe that the rest of the board and Ammit wanted it that way. Maybe paving the way for a sale?

So Verizon laid off 13k and frontier workforce is 13k… strategic… I would say yes

Decline in value 3 consecutive days. Time to let the board activists drive real change - let’s get on with accelerating the next two chapters for gods sake.

Surprised nobody is talking about that here.

For the right price I think we should do exactly that. We need to focus efforts on turning around our core brands: Nike and Jordan. Converse is generating strategic as well as financial drag.

In another distant time it must have been quite a triumph to buy them but that era is long gone. Let’s attach our mask first.

Repost: read this earlier
Word is January 13, at 11:00 am for conductors, when the system re-bid occurs, BNSF is going to take an ax to TY&E, system wide, they’ve cut significantly already all new hires that were not in closed seniority districts hired in 2024 and 2025, and the word is in corporate that they are going to slash those areas next, north town, Cicero, Chicago, Havre, Mandan, Vancouver, and Seattle, Interbay, and phase out or recall all loan outs back to original terminals. California is being spared along with parts of the South Trans Con for for vehicle shipments and for what the carrier deems as high priority Z trains, and vehicle trains to redistribute gas powered vehicles as the electric market has gone belly up and to salvage relationships BNSF is hauling more vehicle freight to areas where the ev market is going to take the biggest hits, but for how long is anyone’s guess, as immediate quarterly profit bumps are slowly taking precedence over moving freight so Belen, Needles, Winslow, and Barstow, Utah are going to eventually take a hit based on what crews are costing BNSF in Winslow alone. The Red River division is being gutted internally, and BNSF is simply reaping tax benefits of having a corporate office in Fort Worth, while moving all other business out, and leasing out terminals 1 by 1.

The layoffs and reorganizations are a distraction and targeted to ki-l the old SAP business streams and make way for the future - Palantir becoming the most important service provider in Europe with the help of SAP.

CK recently sent an email to everyone explaining why AI is the top priority and all 5 OKRs on the SAP leadership level have AI in them. What he failed to mention that SAP is diverting their internal resources away from the core businesses such as ERP to focus on the immediate demand from Plantir and the U.S. Department of Defense.

Palantir is already an SAP partner.
https://www.sap.com/partners/find/palantir.html

However, there was never a time when SAP doubled down its entire engineering effort to satisfy one single partner. I won't share each of the 5 OKRs publicly. But if you look into each OKR and their overlap with the requests from Palantir, you will be surprised. The entirety of Sovreign cloud features are to support the U.S. Department of Defense and its supplier base.

Joule is synonymous with the Palantir Artificial Intelligence Platform where SAP just builds features that Palantir needs. Like AIP, Joule is supposed to focus on a relatively user friendly GUI for AI agents with a focus on low code / no code. It is to be given access to all customer data and also private SAP employee data. Even the interface of Joule mirrors AIP and it has the action-driven logic and automation in the code structure.

In internal emails, CK asked for focus on some critical industries for Joule. It is the same list that Palantir advertises on their AIP website.
https://www.palantir.com/platforms/aip/

In 2026 Q1 several employees in the top management will 'quit' because of the change in direction for the 2026 strategy. Signavio Process Mining is actually developing features that can be sued by Palantir's Foundry Process Mining & Automation platform.

I understand why a company would shift focus on AI features. But I don't understand why SAP is changing their entire strategy to accommodate for everything asked by a single SAP partner - Palantir. Seamless connectivity between Palantir and SAP Business Data Cloud was the first step. And now the executive board's decision is that the development in 2026 and 2027 will effectively ensure interoperability between Joule and AIP and allow for effective bidirectional data access.

Palantir is unable to get adequate access to European government, industry and civilian data and they plan to get this access through SAP. For this, Palantir is working on HyperAuto, which serves as the dedicated integration bridge connecting SAP’s core systems into Palantir Foundry and AIP.

You know which company worked closely with Palantir before SAP? Airbus. Palantir literally powers Airbus's digital twins via Skywise, currently used by more than half of Airbus Commercial employees giving Palantir full access to their design, manufacturing, and predictive maintenance. It came into fruition around the same time Dominic Asam moved from Airbus to SAP.

This Skyview system is what accelerated layoffs across Airbus just as Joule is supposed to accelerate layoffs across SAP. Performance management and HPOM and lower salary and benefits budgets will keep SAP employees too distracted and busy and scared to speak up.

This is a major concern for SAP shareholders because they did not vote for SAP to become a puppet for an American intelligence company. This is a major concern for SAP employees because they are supposed to work on the exact technology that will be used to fire them. This is a major concern for SAP customers because they are getting really bad AI slop in SAP products which is counterproductive for their use cases and they are asked to pay more to fund the development for Palantir. This is also a major concern for European governments because the U.S. Department of Defense found an effective way to infiltrate and cripple Europe's data sovereignty. The SAP executive board has been downplaying the significance of this cooperation

All of this because CK, the former Airbus CFO and other executive board members are making money from SAP executive bonuses and have their future set up when they leave SAP. .

Is anyone working on this project at a corporate level? Accounting was told the timeframe is 12-18 months, can anyone comment that’s in the know?

It’s been a rough year for the Texas job market. Several industries have been hit hard by mass layoffs as corporate headquarters ditched the Lone Star State for greener pastures, sometimes leaving the United States all together.

https://www.mysanantonio.com/business/article/mass-layoffs-texas-21221197.php

Glad to see changes . About time we made an extreme pivot.

1. 56 percent DEI
2. Failed macro strategy of increasing price plans when post covid people has lesser disposable income.
   3.Blanket outsourcing without thinking
3. Open checkbook on failed investments without strategic direction
4. Failure of chief revenue officers to create organic revenue for the last decade . A
   Few were let go after warming seats for a decade.
5. Incapable of lobbying with FCC for negotiating on spectrum auctions resulting in paying premium that put VZ in further debt .
6. Hibernating chief strategy officer. Does anyone remember the name.

Intel has finally realized it’s no longer strong in innovation. Launching a new node by effectively poaching technology through equipment vendors is a step toward eventually selling the company to TSMC.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1288847/000128884725000177/fivn-20250729.htm

Now sale will only need to be approved by a implement majority, not 2/3rds that doomed Zoom’s $15B takeover bid

Removal of Supermajority Vote Threshold
Since its initial public offering, the Company has maintained a voting threshold in its Certificate of Incorporation of at least sixty-six and two-thirds percent (66 2/3%) in voting power of the stock of the Company for (i) amendments, alternations, changes or repeals, or adopting provisions inconsistent with, certain sections of the Company’s Certificate of Incorporation, and (ii) amendments, alterations, changes or repeals of the Company’s Bylaws (the “Supermajority Vote Threshold”). While the Board believes that the Company’s stockholders have benefited from having the Supermajority Vote Threshold, the Board determined on July 29, 2025 that it is advisable and in the best interests of the Company and its stockholders to remove the Supermajority Vote Threshold.
The Board intends to approve and recommend to the Company’s stockholders at the 2026 Annual Meeting an amendment to the Company’s Certificate of Incorporation to replace the Supermajority Vote Threshold with a majority vote threshold, effective at the conclusion of the 2027 Annual Meeting.

Let Private Equity come in and buy out PK. Break up all the Nike assets and sell it.
Nike needs to be divided into 4 or 6 divisions so that they will be more nimble and hungry. And every stock holders will make more money because as is Nike is too bloated, bureaucratic, slow to be effective or meaningful company.
There should be at least
Nike heritage
Nike fashion
Nike sports
Nike apparel
Nike accessories
Nike Team
Nike New Gen for young life style incl skateboarding.
If this little companies compete and be aggressive to one another then it will kick everyone's a-s. In mean time, common stock holders will make a lot more money than seeing this stock stuck 50 to 65 dollars

Otherwise, Nike will have slow death

Has corporate told us which strategies are driving outflows the most? Remembering the blue chip flip during 2020. 8 billion is a lot.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/at-t-revenue-soars-to-1-44b-after-dei-programs-shut-down/ss-AA1SvZGM?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=HCTS&cvid=6942bd8ee25b43e2b58a99b761fae5c7&ei=41

Warner Bros Discovery has urged shareholders to reject a $108.4bn hostile takeover offer from Paramount Skydance, branding it “inadequate” amid an extraordinary corporate battle to control the legacy media conglomerate.

In a blunt letter to shareholders on Wednesday morning, WBD accused Paramount of having “consistently misled” investors by claiming its bid has a “full backstop” – a safety net to ensure it has sufficient funds – from the Ellisons.

Paramount did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

“Following a careful evaluation of Paramount’s recently launched tender offer, the Board concluded that the offer’s value is inadequate, with significant risks and costs imposed on our shareholders,” Samuel A Di Piazza Jr, chairman of WBD’s board, said in a statement. “This offer once again fails to address key concerns that we have consistently communicated to Paramount throughout our extensive engagement and review of their six previous proposals.

“We are confident that our merger with Netflix represents superior, more certain value for our shareholders and we look forward to delivering on the compelling benefits of our combination.”

Source: The Guardian

Here’s what I got out of it:

1) There is a new corporate strategy called Lead to One that is about focusing more on the consumer and personalization. (Every 5 years we claim we’re now going to focus on the consumer, but don’t actually make any of the necessary investments and then abandon it. So excuse me if I’m highly skeptical.)

2) Our expenses are way too high and need to be drastically reduced. (We’ve been hearing that for many years and yet the same leadership that hasn’t fixed it is still in place. Where should the blame be placed?)

3) Layoffs will definitely continue. Evanko said we’ll have fewer employees next year than this year. (No surprise there.)

4) We’re counting on AI to be our savior and are going to push as many things to AI as possible.

5) The only business that is performing well is specialty pharmacy.

6) The VillageMD investment and our attempt at creating a care delivery strategy was a failure. (Even though it’s obvious, I’m glad they actually admitted that. Interesting that the failed MDLIVE acquisition wasn’t mentioned though. I guess we just don’t talk about that.)

7) We’re going to do more lobbying and public relations to try to control the narrative about Cigna.

Did anyone hear something different? What did I miss?

Consolidate all production under the Asia region and aligning reporting into a single Manufacturing hierarchy could improve speed, clarity, and execution.

Several posts have criticized SAS leadership for not embracing Open Source. Successful companies such as Confluent and DataBricks have used Open Source as their foundation, and added their value on top.

But if SAS had taken that approach, its foundation would no longer be SAS data management and analytics — the core of the company’s revenues.

SAS thus faces the Innovator’s Dilemma. It seems to me that SAS leadership is not against the idea of Open Source in principle, but simply sees no way to embrace it without losing revenue.

Is there a way? How would you integrate SAS with Open Source?

Karen's business stylings are just what we need. Who else can move the stock price 35%.

• PepsiCo Signals Imminent Layoffs with Work-From-Home Mandate

PepsiCo appears to be the latest major American corporation preparing to reduce its workforce, with reports indicating that job cuts in the United States and Canada could be imminent. The strongest indication of this move comes from a recent directive reported by Bloomberg, which instructed employees in key North American offices—including the company’s headquarters in Purchase, New York, as well as hubs in Chicago and Plano—to work from home this week. This strategy is increasingly utilized by corporate leadership to mitigate the immediate in-office emotional impact and logistical challenges associated with large-scale termination announcements.

The potential restructuring aligns with a broader strategic push to enhance shareholder value and streamline operations. PepsiCo CEO Ramon Laguarta recently issued a memorandum outlining goals for 2026 that prioritize "record productivity savings" and improved operating margins. These changes, which include increased reliance on automation and digitalization, come amidst pressure from activist investor Elliott Investment Management. Elliott, known for aggressively pursuing operational efficiency and cost reductions, recently acquired a substantial $4 billion stake in the beverage and snack giant.

While PepsiCo has not yet officially confirmed specific numbers, executives have increasingly used the term "right-sizing" to describe workforce adjustments. This development follows a smaller reduction in November, where 500 jobs were eliminated following the closure of two Frito-Lay facilities in Florida. The looming layoffs arrive during a mixed financial period for the company; while PepsiCo reported a slight year-over-year revenue increase in the third quarter of 2025, its stock value has dropped approximately 4.5% since the beginning of the year.

https://www.fastcompany.com/91457193/pepsico-layoffs-job-cuts-heres-the-biggest-clue-theyre-coming-as-pepsi-looks-to-right-size-workforce

Corporate teams just spin papers, PowerPoint and wage a lot of time in meetings
Look at all failed product launches, marketing initiatives, strategic bs, bad acquisitions.
Yet its regions who have to pay the price

What happened Paramount launched a $108.4 billion hostile bid for Warner Bros Discovery, outbidding Netflix's $72 billion offer. Paramount's bid includes $18 billion more in cash and aims to challenge Netflix's dominance.
Why it matters This bid could impact streaming services, movie theaters, and consumers by enhancing competition. It also raises antitrust concerns due to the consolidation of major television operators.


Key details


• When: Paramount's bid was launched on Monday, December 8.
• Who: Paramount Skydance (PSKY.O), Netflix (NFLX.O), Warner Bros Discovery (WBD.O).


• Numbers: Paramount's bid is $108.4 billion, including $18 billion more in cash than Netflix's offer. Paramount's offer is $30 per share, a 139% premium over Warner Bros Discovery's undisturbed stock price. Netflix's offer is $27.75 per share, mixing cash and stock.
• Financing: Paramount's offer includes financing from Affinity Partners (Jared Kushner's firm), Middle Eastern government-run investment funds, and the Ellison family.
• Regulatory concerns: Paramount's offer may face antitrust scrutiny, as it would create a major television operator and increase market share.


• Market reaction: Paramount shares up 7.7%, Warner Bros Discovery up 5%, Netflix shares down 4.5%.


• Next steps: Paramount will appeal to shareholders, regulators, and politicians to challenge Netflix's bid. The battle may become prolonged.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/transactional/paramount-makes-1084-billion-bid-warner-bros-discovery-2025-12-08/

Stankey unloads Time Warner at a massive loss and passes on this loss to employees. The new owners of Time Warner start a bidding was and make a massive profit. Well done Stankey. Can’t even blame it on Stephenson - divestment if Time Warner is on your watch.

https://mronline.org/2025/12/06/30-percent-of-u-s-corporations-planning-holiday-season-layoffs/

Paramount was poised to buy Warner Bros. Discovery. What went wrong
By Meg James and Stacy Perman
Dec. 6, 2025

Paramount’s 30 dollars per share bid for Warner Bros. Discovery, backed by Larry Ellison, collapsed Friday when Netflix swept in with a competing 82.7 billion dollar deal. Analysts and auction insiders told The Times that several issues complicated Paramount’s effort, including low initial offers and overconfidence. Paramount is accusing Warner Bros. Discovery of rigging the auction and is expected to press regulators to block the Netflix deal as anti competitive.

Source: https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2025-12-06/paramount-larry-ellison-hollywood-warner-bros-netflix-skydance-sarandos

Ellison, the Oracle founder, had recently financed his son David’s 8 billion dollar acquisition of Paramount Pictures. The Ellison family then moved to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery for at least 60 billion dollars. With substantial financial backing and support from President Trump, many Wall Street analysts and Hollywood insiders assumed Paramount would win.

But Netflix shocked the industry by announcing its own blockbuster agreement to acquire the Burbank studio, HBO Max and HBO for 82.7 billion dollars. The Warner board judged Netflix’s 27.75 dollars per share offer, which excluded CNN and other basic cable channels, a better deal for shareholders. It was a rare defeat for Ellison and a victory for Netflix’s co CEO Ted Sarandos.

Auction insiders said Paramount’s first major misstep was submitting low ball bids. By mid October, Paramount had made three unsolicited offers, starting at 19 dollars a share. The Warner board unanimously rejected them as too low. Some Warner executives were irritated, feeling the Ellisons had swept into Hollywood and were trying to exploit the studio’s weakened state.

Paramount’s bid relied on Ellison’s pledge of 30 billion dollars in Oracle stock, according to a person familiar with the matter. As bidding escalated, Paramount sought additional capital from Apollo Global Management. When Warner opened the process to other suitors in late October, Netflix and Comcast joined. Paramount underestimated Netflix, in part because a senior Netflix executive had downplayed interest in public.

Analysts speculated that Netflix had been playing possum. One auction insider said Paramount acted as if it were the only serious contender. Meanwhile, David Ellison and RedBird Capital’s Gerry Cardinale were trying to secure funding from Middle Eastern sovereign wealth funds. Their outreach to Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates raised concerns among Warner board members about the stability of the Paramount offer. The fall of Oracle stock during broader market concerns about an AI bubble further complicated Paramount’s position.

Ellison’s ties to Trump also generated concern in Hollywood. Oracle is among the US investors expected to take a majority stake in TikTok’s US business after its separation from ByteDance, a move influenced by Trump. Paramount’s recent 16 million dollar settlement of Trump’s lawsuit against CBS over an edited 60 Minutes interview, its cancellation of Stephen Colbert’s show due to losses, and David Ellison’s hiring of Bari Weiss to run CBS News all contributed to perceptions of political alignment. Trump publicly praised the Ellisons and expressed support for the Paramount bid.

Paramount’s agreement to distribute Brett Ratner’s Rush Hour 4 just after renewed pressure from Trump added fuel to that perception. Some observers said the once advantageous relationship with the administration began to seem less appealing to potential regulators and international partners.

A White House meeting last month addressed Paramount’s bid and concerns about Netflix. During the same week, David Ellison attended a White House dinner for Saudi crown prince Mohammed bin Salman. A Guardian report, citing anonymous sources, claimed White House officials had informally discussed with Larry Ellison a list of CNN anchors Trump disliked and wanted removed if Paramount won the auction. That report raised alarms among foreign regulators.

People close to Paramount argued that CEO David Zaslav and board member emeritus John Malone were biased against the Ellisons and that Zaslav wanted to maintain his status as a Hollywood mogul. Paramount ultimately submitted six offers, including a final 30 dollars per share proposal, but none matched Netflix’s bid.

According to those familiar with the process, Paramount executives realized last Monday that they had been beaten. Two days later, the company accused Warner Bros. Discovery of abandoning any semblance of a fair auction process. Netflix said Friday that its deal will take 12 to 18 months to secure regulatory approval. Approval is far from guaranteed due to antitrust concerns about Netflix’s market strength.

Warner Bros. Discovery now faces a legal fight over its handling of the auction.

Larry Ellison, often remembered in Hollywood for a cameo in Iron Man 2 in which Tony Stark calls him the Oracle of Oracle, has long funded the film careers of his children David and Megan. Despite his age, the 81 year old Ellison remains deeply involved at Oracle as executive chairman and chief technology officer.

Ellison grew up in a modest South Side Chicago apartment, raised by relatives after his teenage mother gave him up. After dropping out of the University of Chicago, he moved to California, worked various programming jobs and helped develop early database systems at Ampex. Those ideas eventually became the core of Oracle, which he co founded in 1977 with 1,200 dollars and concepts inspired by an IBM research paper. Oracle grew rapidly, won its first contract with the CIA, went public in 1986 and propelled Ellison to billionaire status by 1993.

Ellison developed a reputation for flamboyance and intensity. He collected super yachts, fighter jets, mansions and samurai swords, and won the America’s Cup twice. He was unafraid of confrontation, once hiring investigators to comb through Microsoft’s trash during the company’s antitrust trial, calling it his civic duty.

At Oracle, Ellison pushed into cloud computing, healthcare and AI, partnering with Nvidia, Meta and xAI.

Hollywood, however, was shaped by his children. With large trusts of Oracle and NetSuite stock, both entered the film business. Megan founded Annapurna, known for films like Zero Dark Thirty and Her. David tried acting and produced the unsuccessful 2006 film Flyboys before launching Skydance Media, producing major hits including Top G-n Maverick, Star Trek and Grace and Frankie and expanding into animation, sports and gaming.

Larry Ellison stepped in when needed, including restructuring Annapurna in 2018 after heavy losses. He financed David’s 8 billion dollar deal to buy Paramount and holds nearly 78 percent of the new company’s stock. The family announced plans to rejuvenate Paramount through technology investments and franchise building around Top G-n, Star Trek and Yellowstone.

They also made clear they are not walking away from Warner Bros. Discovery. Those who know Ellison say he should not be underestimated. History shows he is always ready for a fight.

Anything other than the ability to blindly cut from one Q to the next?

If you are planning on taking Walgreens private, wouldn't you want to pay as little as possible to do so? And, once you own the company, wouldn't you want to "improve" it easily to make as much money as you can when you sell it or have it go public again?

For instance, is it possible that Pessina/Sycamore/etc. intentionally:

1. Created a bad anti-theft policy so Walgreens would incur losses that could easily be made up after changing this policy later.

2. Created bad losses like the doctor office scheme, etc.

3. Paid massive amounts of money out to 'leaders' who were either friends or affiliated with each other.

The reason I thought of this is because of all the new over-stock all the stores are getting. They obviously held back on stocking the stores immediately before the sale and then after the sale, went back to making sure stores are fully stocked. That is at least somewhat of a manipulation. What else did they do.

Wow, the business world has made AT&T C-suite and BOD look like a bunch of imbeciles. Buying assets above market price only to sell those same assets for pennies on the dollar. Can they really be that inept? T CEO Stankey and Stephenson are notorious for getting "hoodwinked" and beat out of billions. It almost rises to the level of a conspiracy, other companies raiding the AT&T coffers. How these guys can even show their faces in public is beyond me.

YL repeatedly promotes the ‘This is Shell’ moto, yet his messaging focuses almost entirely on LNG, Trading, and short-term shareholder value. If this is truly Shell’s identity now, what does that mean for the rest of the company? What should the logo or tagline really be?

Buy for a dollar, sell for fifty cents, and create a trail of debris with wherever you go. Like sending in Andrew Dice Clay and Maitland Ward to the Baptist church to give sermons and organize the socials. Bernie Madoff will handle the collection plate and funds.

https://www.phonearena.com/news/verizon-layoffs-not-enough-to-turn-things-around_id176364

Like it happen to many direct sellers in amazon before, initially Amazon will deliver significant sales increase to Nike and everyone in Nike will be happy but after few years amazon will demand more and more with higher leverage due to their sales volume until Nike realizes that they made mistake getting into bed with Amazon.

Anyone who has doubt about my claim, check Youtube regarding Amazon abuse.
It is true that Nike is big but that will not insulate Nike from Amazon abuse.
Even if Nike wants to back out from Amazon they will not able to do it since Nike's sale to Amazon has become too big and Nike have grown dependent on it. Like an addict become dependent on dr-g of his choice.
Later on Amazon will bring copy of Nike product with their own private brand and will rank them above Nike. Gradually ki-ling Nike product.
Amazon has done this few hundred thousand times to their seller so it is nothing new, big and small.
For example, 5 billion sale would be a big deal to Nike but to amazon it would mean nothing whose revenue is projected to be $500 billion.

This is open letter to EH and Nike management to think about regarding long term ramification

I was in MW's office and got a glimpse of his game plan going forward to grow the dividend and profits for the company. Its a truly innovative list that we should be proud of! Here is what I saw!

1. Layoffs
2. Make employees miserable
3. Cut benefits

Short but powerful growth strategy!

United’s Lubbock headquarters is planning layoffs tied to corporate restructuring. The reductions focus on office and support roles.

Unemployment rate is already 4.4% and climbing to numbers we've seen during Covid. If AI is about to replace us, who's going to buy services and products from Dell? Mostly corporate customers use Dell, and they are going to be hit hard by bubble bursting... hold your hats, we are going to have a crazy ride in 2026

From an early morning meeting today, looks like the IT Staff Engineers are on borrowed time. GM is looking to eliminate the position and pass their work duties on to other employees in an effort to save more money. Probably some d-mb idea to send more money to the California Innovation Center payroll.

Another great SLT decision.

I can’t wait until the SLT decides to eliminate the bathroom cleaners to save money.

It looks to me like they're almost positioning Verizon to be sold. I have seen these sorts of layoffs (no rhyme or reason and across EVERY GROUP) before and it has always been before a company goes up for sale.

I think there would be anti-trust issues with having an AT&T or T-Mobile buy it, but who knows, maybe Elon might buy it. I have heard that Dan is buddies with Elon.

Pure speculation, but something is quite amiss about how this whole thing has been done and handled from a managerial standpoint.