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 573387
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[9]: Criminal?
by Morgan on Thu 26th Sep 2013 19:10 UTC in reply to "RE[8]: Criminal?"
Morgan
Member since:
2005-06-29

As I recall, previously I've said that I work in law enforcement. I'm not here to present my résumé, I'm here to discuss technology, like everyone else. It's only when some asshole questions my right to present an informed viewpoint do I feel the need to elaborate. I don't owe you an explanation but I gave you one so you would understand where I'm coming from, and you attack even that gesture.

You're about as loony as they come, mate.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[10]: Criminal?
by lucas_maximus on Thu 26th Sep 2013 19:30 in reply to "RE[9]: Criminal?"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

As I recall, previously I've said that I work in law enforcement. I'm not here to present my résumé, I'm here to discuss technology, like everyone else. It's only when some asshole questions my right to present an informed viewpoint do I feel the need to elaborate. I don't owe you an explanation but I gave you one so you would understand where I'm coming from, and you attack even that gesture.


You made it sound before much like it was very much like IT. Don't have a go at me because you mis-represented yourself.

It pretty obvious to know what I do, because I say it plainly.

You're about as loony as they come, mate.


Fuck you then Morgan, because quite frankly you are having a go at me about how you represented yourself previously very differently. I was speaking to you as if I knew you and you were "okay".

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[11]: Criminal?
by Morgan on Thu 26th Sep 2013 19:37 in reply to "RE[10]: Criminal?"
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

You made it sound before much like it was very much like IT.


Now I think I know where the confusion is coming from. For the past three years I've worked part time in a test bench/IT role at a private company, along with working full time in law enforcement. I have mentioned both jobs on here. I've recently left the law enforcement job to go full time as the IT manager at the other job, and I've mentioned that recently as well.

Now I do feel like an ass; I can see where anyone would get confused about that. It doesn't change the fact that your initial approach was just plain wrong (you don't live in the US, I do, and I was speaking specifically of US law enforcement approaches to corporate shenanigans), but I understand now why you thought I just worked in IT. I really am sorry this got dragged out like it did over something so simple.

Reply Parent Score: 2