Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 24th Sep 2013 11:44 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless

Finland is boiling with rage this weekend over the $25 M bonus payment the CEO Stephen Elop is set to receive as he leaves Nokia after his two-year tenure. Questions are now being raised by the oddest aspect of the bonus: the board of Nokia seems to have given Elop a $25 M incentive to sell the handset unit cheaply to Microsoft way back in in 2010. This effectively means that the board hired a man who was given a giant carrot to drive down Nokia's overall valuation and phone volumes while preparing a sale to Microsoft. What could possibly be a reason to structure Elop's original contract in this manner? Did the board in fact end up promising Elop more compensation in case he sells the phone division than if he runs it with modest success?

Vindication. We were right all along.

Thread beginning with comment 573083
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Comment by Nelson
by lucas_maximus on Tue 24th Sep 2013 19:16 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Nelson"
lucas_maximus
Member since:
2009-08-18

It was on a downward trend long before to be fair. You can see it for yourself on Google Finance.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Tue 24th Sep 2013 19:24 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by Nelson"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

People conveniently forget Nokia was once worth $40 a share.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by Nelson
by lucas_maximus on Tue 24th Sep 2013 19:30 in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by Nelson"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

I dunno enough about this stuff, but a quick look at the stock price shows an obvious trend downwards well before late 2010 which according to Wikipedia is when he started as position of CEO.

I also tend to believe that "Rome wasn't built in a day" and I seen a rather agile business like the one I work in take 2 years to recover from bad management, we have less than 1000 employees.

So I am inclined to agree with your point of view.

Edited 2013-09-24 19:31 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by Nelson
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Tue 24th Sep 2013 22:00 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by Nelson"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Yeah, it was a downward trend. But objectively the company was worth a lot less than when he took over. You can argue many different things to say that he did a good job which are mostly a matter of opinion. He wasn't able to turn things around. Maybe no one could have, maybe he prolonged the life of the company. Who knows.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by Nelson
by lucas_maximus on Thu 26th Sep 2013 18:42 in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by Nelson"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

That is my point, we don't know because we are looking from the outside in to a company and culture we haven't worked in.

Reply Parent Score: 2