Thread regarding IBM layoffs

CEO Turmoil Is Rising. Here’s Who Could Be Next on the Hot Seat.

There are others with less stellar records that might start to feel the heat. IBM (IBM) has earned
investors almost nothing over the past five years, while the Dow Jones Industrial Average is up
about 12% a year on average over the same span. CEO Ginni Rometty made a big bet on the cloud,
buying Red Hat in 2018 for more than $30 billion. If deal synergies don’t emerge soon, the
temperature in the board room could rise.

Ginni's ouster should've happened years ago. A bonfire under her keister at this point can't happen soon enough.

https://www.barrons.com/articles/heres-who-could-be-next-on-the-ceo-hot-seat-51574449447

Like a baseball team with a tired pitcher on the mound, corporate boards have been going to the bullpen for new CEOs in record numbers. Such a move could change a stock’s trajectory, for better or for worse.

C-suite turnover is on the rise. Just this past week, T-Mobile US (ticker: TMUS) CEO John Legere announced that he would step down, joining a slew of other departing leaders, including Adam Neumann and Kevin Plank. If it feels like there’s a lot of turnover atop publicly traded companies, you’re not wrong. The CEO exodus is at its highest on record, according to outplacement firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas.

Barron’s also identified 108 S&P 500 chief executives who have been replaced over the past two years. Fifty-six S&P 500 CEOs have less than one year on the job. And overall CEO tenure is down compared with a few years ago.

Why are CEOs leaving? Some have no choice. They are “forced” by poor performance, due in part to the high level of disruption in the market today. Retailers face e-commerce threats. Media companies face streaming threats. And alternative meat’s rise has investors asking questions about the strategic playbook of food companies such as Kraft Heinz (KHC). And yes, Kraft has a new CEO.

Poor performance isn’t the only reason for CEO exits. After more than 10 years of a bull market, many chiefs are riding off into the sunset while the going is good. Consider soon-to-be-former Nike (NKE) chief Mark Parker, who announced his departure in late October. He’s led the sports apparel giant for about 14 years. During his tenure, the stock has returned about 19% a year on average, better than the 13% return of the benchmark over the same span.

Of course, there is a third reason CEOs are asked to leave: ignominy. McDonald’s (MCD) former CEO was forced to resign because of a relationship with a subordinate.

CEO changes can be a catalyst for stock appreciation—or depreciation—depending on how the new leader performs. In fact, value-type investors often look at management change as potential opportunity. Some significant investors, for instance, bought General Electric (GE) stock because of CEO Larry Culp. Of course, a new CEO can have the opposite effect—don’t forget that Culp is GE’s third CEO since October 2017.

Even if a troubled CEO gets replaced, it doesn’t guarantee stock-price outperformance. The academic data is mixed on whether the “forced” kind of CEO change helps or hurts stock prices. For the most part, it seems troubled companies remain troubled companies, even after the board takes action. Value investors, however, don’t care what the papers say. They argue that every situation is unique.

Who’s next? We have some ideas. Two hot—yet volatile—stocks will almost certainly move if their dynamic founders decided it’s time to leave. Reed Hastings has led Netflix (NFLX) successfully for 22 years. With content spending and streaming competition up, investors should ask who’s warming up in the bullpen. Netflix didn’t return a request for comment about succession, but has said in filings that “the board knows how to pick a CEO.”

Tesla (TSLA) founder and CEO Elon Musk has led the electric-vehicle pioneer for 11 years, and the company is now planning the launch of Model Y in 2020 and the release of the Cybertruck at some date in the future. But as competition from the proliferation of EVs rises, investors should also ask if a traditional car executive could help smooth product rollouts while Musk moves on to a more chairman-oriented role, focused on Tesla’s mobility, charging, and storage initiatives. (In a February 2019 earnings call, Musk said that there wasn’t even a “passive search” on for a new CEO.)

That pair, while controversial, have generated long-term gains for shareholders. There are others with less stellar records that might start to feel the heat. IBM (IBM) has earned investors almost nothing over the past five years, while the Dow Jones Industrial Average is up about 12% a year on average over the same span. CEO Ginni Rometty made a big bet on the cloud, buying Red Hat in 2018 for more than $30 billion. If deal synergies don’t emerge soon, the temperature in the board room could rise.

And maybe its stock will too.

by
| 1533 views | | 4 replies (last December 3, 2019) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+12fbuFo3

4 replies (most recent on top)

Sam Palmisano left a ticking time bomb for Ginni Rometty. Amazon and Microsoft were pouring money into Cloud from 2006 on. Once again, much like with the PC and OS/2 dilemma in the 1990's, IBM's heavily seeded Z-Systems hot shots were unwilling to allow something to harsh their vibe and potentially end 50 years of dominance in computing. IBM's Z team was always very careful to oppose a possible Z replacement. Well, it happened then (90's with PCs), and it's happening now with Cloud. I think Red Hat was the inevitable purchase price of 30 years of "whoops".

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @5req+12fbuFo3

I give Ginni a pass for the first couple years - Sam P had IBM on a bad course. But she full owns the past 4-5 years. How many of the numerous acquisitions have panned out? I don't see Red Hat paying off either. Every quarter it seems like they're doing something to try to mitigate the bad news so they can hang on for a few more quarters. Not sure how many quarters they'll try to get out of Red Hat. Not sure what the next "strategic imperatives" will be after Red Hat doesn't pay off as expected.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @5ure+12fbuFo3

How the f— has Ginny not been removed? IBM is a sh– company and under her watch, ibm stock has been flat in a bull market. MSFT, GOOGLE, and AMAZON have eatten IBMs lunch under her watch. She should have been removed years ago.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @5pwk+12fbuFo3

IBM is a very metrics driven Company. They already know how the 4th Q is going to go. If revenue comes up short, the board will be forced to act, especially considering the 34 billion spent on Redhat and the excessive planning IBM said they did to assure success. (please see the August public announcement and the extensive mapping IBM laid out for the 1100 largest customers around the world). It’s all about synergies and driving additional revenue. Come end of Dec, we will be at the 6 month / 14 month check mark (6 months from the official closing date, and 14 from announce). If we are not seeing additional revenue Or announced deals by then, the plan was a poor one. Enough is enough. Grow the revenue or change the management team. Oh by the way, no parting gifts for the non-performers

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @fwq+12fbuFo3

Post a reply

: