×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Nokia's Elop Set To Receive $25 Million Bonus After Acquisition

Unknown Lamer posted about 7 months ago | from the surprise-surprise dept.

Businesses 196

jones_supa writes with an update on the Microsoft purchase of Nokia. From the article: "Stephen Elop, the former Nokia Oyj chief executive officer who is rejoining Microsoft, is set to get more than $25 million if the Finnish company completes the sale of its handset business to the software maker. Microsoft will pay 70 percent of the projected total amount of about 18.8 million euros ($25.5 million), and Nokia the remainder, according to a proxy filing by Nokia today. The value of Elop's reward is estimated using Nokia's Sept. 6 closing share price and may still change. Nokia shares have dropped by more than a third since Elop was hired on Sept. 10, 2010, even with the stock's gain since the sale to Microsoft was announced. Nokia shareholders are set to vote on the transaction Nov. 19. Elop will move back to Microsoft as part of the $7.2 billion takeover. He is also a candidate to succeed Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

196 comments

Ahhh ... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44896433)

Good to see the old boys network is thriving.

They don't choose candidates with successful track records, just the ones who they play golf with.

From the sounds of it, Elop completely fucked Nokia, is selling the farm to Microsoft, and will make out like a bandit and get the chance to be considered to run Microsoft.

All in all, I'd say the shareholders of Nokia are getting the shaft here. This is just corporate pillaging.

Re:Ahhh ... (2)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 7 months ago | (#44896445)

What makes you think that was not a success?

Re: Ahhh ... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44896465)

MS got Nokia cheap, Elop gets millions. I'd say it was a success for both of them. Nokia? They got screwed from the inside out.

Re: Ahhh ... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44896569)

Except their board voted yes to all of this. I think they were in on the conspiracy from day 1. Nokia shareholders and employees got totally screwed.

Re:Ahhh ... (5, Informative)

poetmatt (793785) | about 7 months ago | (#44896623)

You are exactly correct: embrace extend extinguish, same as always. This is no different. The extend was Elop -> Nokia, and back to MS after the damage is done.

Re:Ahhh ... (0, Troll)

MaWeiTao (908546) | about 7 months ago | (#44896669)

You need to read up on the facts before making such statements. First, Stephen Elop wasn't directly involved with much of the negotiation that happened between Microsoft and Nokia. Secondly, and more importantly, Nokia was as good as dead without Microsoft and Windows Phone.

Nokia's decline started over a decade ago when they thought the future of mobile phones was disposable fashion accessories. When they finally got into smartphones late in the game they chose technological dead ends. Praise Symbian or Meego to your heart's content but it's all irrelevant. Nokia didn't have the resources to turn either into a relevant platform. There was far too much effort and expense required to turn them into viable competitors to Android or iOS, let alone then getting third parties to support the platform with apps.

Some have suggested that Nokia should have adopted Android. There's already an overwhelming glut of Android devices on the market. Samsung is the dominant player by a huge margin with LG, HTC, Sony fighting over scraps. So what would be Nokia's strategy? Enter the fray as an also ran and hope that in the next 5+ years they somehow evolve into a relevant player? Don't forget that they were already heavily bleeding cash by this point.

A partnership with Microsoft was the best possible move Nokia could have made. The deal gave them a distinctive OS that thrust them to the forefront of the tech press. I guarantee you we wouldn't be talking about Nokia today if they had gone with Android. The fact that growth has been slower in the US is mostly thanks to a crap retail industry which discourages competition and suffers from ignorance and apathy. Carriers make the situation worse because they have little interest in promoting variety over cash cows. In markets where there is more open competition and where consumers are less likely to get sucked into contracts, Nokia phones have generally done quite well.

Many CEOs are undeserving of the bonuses they receive, but Elop did the best he possibly could do save Nokia. We'll see if Microsoft's acquisition turns out to be positive, but at least for now it's an encouraging sign for competition amongst smartphones.

Re:Ahhh ... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44896743)

Also ran Android? Yeah, like anyone has made a bundle selling anything Windows on the mobile platform in a long time. It was only profitable when it was the only game in town.

As for direct involvement, well, the "tank Nokia and buy them at discount" plan had been hatched long before Elop even left Microsoft. He played his part perfectly.

Shill alert (3, Informative)

CRCulver (715279) | about 7 months ago | (#44896751)

Before anyone bothers to carefully craft a response to the poster above, have a look at his comment history [slashdot.org] : this is one of the clearest examples of a Microsoft shill that I've ever seen on Slashdot.

Re:Ahhh ... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44896777)

A decade ago was 2003. Nokia dominated smart phones sales from 2005 through 2010. Their decline started with the release of the first iPhone, however, they still dominated for a while after that.

As to their speculative alternative corporate turnaround strategies: at this late date it's hard to believe they could have done any worse. They are doing worse than Blackberry at the moment. They are losing money on each smartphone sale because they are selling at below cost. So they are running out of cash pretty quickly. This is not a winning strategy. It would have been better for them to have simply abandoned the smart phone market altogether.

Re: Ahhh ... (5, Insightful)

Eka Renardi (3131071) | about 7 months ago | (#44896785)

Xiaomi does not even exist when Elop became CEO of Nokia. And they are thriving. Android maybe a saturated market, bit it is a market that is growing and thriving. Windows phone on the other hand is a technology looking for a market. Nokia has it all, the value chain, the distribution channel, all they have to do is to sell phone what everyone wants. Instead Elop make a decision to sell a phone, so lame, that nobody wants.

Re:Ahhh ... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44896819)

First, Stephen Elop wasn't directly involved with much of the negotiation that happened between Microsoft and Nokia.

Ah, so he just gets the $25M bonus from stuff that he wasn't so involved with? Much better.

Sergeant Crisp: So now they think we're gutless, the feds? They think we won't actually do it?
Captain Frye: They're going to come at us with everything they got. Air and sea. They're going to bomb our ass back to the Stone Age.
Major Tom Baxter: They don't know we missed on purpose.
Captain Frye: Great. We're not gutless, we're incompetent.

Re:Ahhh ... (3, Insightful)

DMiax (915735) | about 7 months ago | (#44896825)

Some have suggested that Nokia should have adopted Android. There's already an overwhelming glut of Android devices on the market. Samsung is the dominant player by a huge margin with LG, HTC, Sony fighting over scraps. So what would be Nokia's strategy? Enter the fray as an also ran and hope that in the next 5+ years they somehow evolve into a relevant player? Don't forget that they were already heavily bleeding cash by this point.

If there is a meme that needs to die about Nokia is this absurd notion that Windows Phones are somehow not competing with the Android phones.

Re:Ahhh ... (3, Insightful)

gbjbaanb (229885) | about 7 months ago | (#44897017)

I have heard rumours that Nokia was so unhappy with the sales of Windows Phones ( or more likely, their profit margin on the things) that they were considering dumping them for Android - and that the MS takeover is a reaction to that.

I'm not sure if it was the board who were pushing for that, and Elop snitched on the plans to his old buddies, or if Elop figured it all out (on his own!) that he'd end up forcing the takeover.

Re:Ahhh ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44896837)

Lol, I didn't know Elop's nick name on Slashdot! Well, welcome and enjoy your 25 million!

Re:Ahhh ... (1)

Kielistic (1273232) | about 7 months ago | (#44896841)

Nokia's decline started over a decade ago when they thought the future of mobile phones was disposable fashion accessories.

Is that not what they are? Was their problem was being too early in coming to that conclusion?

What? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44896843)

Read the blogs following Nokia and check financial statements. Although declining, Noka was profitable company until Elop took over.
Then sharp decline and mercy killing by Microsoft.
It had very bad smell from beginning.

Re:Ahhh ... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44896867)

First, Stephen Elop wasn't directly involved with much of the negotiation that happened between Microsoft and Nokia.

WTF? The CEO wasn't involved in takeover negotiations? If he wasn't involved then he wasn't CEO.

Re:Ahhh ... (2)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 7 months ago | (#44896961)

Keeping meego and going forward with that might have actually got them somewhere. They had the resources just fine, until they fired them to keep the books looking a little better for a few months.

Re:Ahhh ... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44896963)

What complete BS. Nokia's smartphone unit was making profits, had incrasing smartphone sales, and was far bigger than apple or samsung before they switched to windows phone. Only after this, sales dropped and sales turned into losses. Just look it up, the numbers are out there.

Re:Ahhh ... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44897001)

Stephen Elop wasn't directly involved with much of the negotiation that happened between Microsoft and Nokia.

Yeah, suuuuuure, the former Goon of Steve Balmer and Nokia CEO was not involved in selling his company to his former (and future) employer. WTF are you smoking?

Secondly, and more importantly, Nokia was as good as dead without Microsoft and Windows Phone.

Bullshit. It probably wasn't a bad idea to sell Windows phones, but that allone would not mean tehey had to drop Symbian, Meego and Android - execpt again, when you remember where Elop came from.

Re:Ahhh ... (4, Insightful)

wonkavader (605434) | about 7 months ago | (#44897003)

This is hogwash. Elop killed the company's feature phone business which was doing fine for the time being. Yes, Nokia needed help. Yes, it was on a slope downward and needed to figure out how to compete. But Elop didn't do that. Elop jumped forward without covering the company's behind.

That he made a wrong choice of where to jump to, that it suspicious in hindsight, those are irrelevant. He didn't work to preserve the part of the business which worked and would have kept working for several more years if he hadn't driven a stake into it -- that is his massive sin of incompetance, or perhaps worse.

Re:Ahhh ... (2)

Rinikusu (28164) | about 7 months ago | (#44897081)

Nokia could compete very well on hardware quality on the Android platform. Sure, there's a gigantic glut of android phones, but the vast majority are cheap plastic garbage. If the 1020 was available on my carrier and had Android, it would be a no-brainer for me. And you're wrong: no one is talking about the 1020 because of Windows Phone 8, they're talking about the amazing camera on it.

Re:Ahhh ... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44896799)

The objective was for MS to enter mobile phones on the cheap. They bribed Nokia to kill their own very successful OS and to not join Android. As a result, their phone sales plummeted to the point very few people will consider them. They rolled out Win-Phone devices no one wanted and tanked further. MS then come along and buy the company on the cheap, gain a former major player and an absolute shitload of telco patents.

Mission accomplished.

Re:Ahhh ... (4, Insightful)

Quila (201335) | about 7 months ago | (#44896935)

Notice MS is giving most of the money. It's the payoff for selling Nokia for cheap.

Re:Ahhh ... (1)

Brandybuck (704397) | about 7 months ago | (#44897129)

The shareholders hired Elop. The shareholders kept Elop on. It will be the shareholders who approve the buyout. And it will be the shareholders who vote to reward Elop.

So yes the sharehodlers are getting the shaft, but they're asking for it. I don't understand the motivation behind bondage and dominance, but who am I to judge the shareholders' sexual proclivities?

Re:Ahhh ... (1)

gagol (583737) | about 7 months ago | (#44897155)

I cant believe this is legal. Looks like insider trading to me, but I am not a lawyer. If a lawyer reads this, can you enlighten us about legal recourse by Nokia shareholders?

Re:Ahhh ... (1)

ackthpt (218170) | about 7 months ago | (#44897187)

Good to see the old boys network is thriving.

They don't choose candidates with successful track records, just the ones who they play golf with.

From the sounds of it, Elop completely fucked Nokia, is selling the farm to Microsoft, and will make out like a bandit and get the chance to be considered to run Microsoft.

All in all, I'd say the shareholders of Nokia are getting the shaft here. This is just corporate pillaging.

Aye, squire Anonymous, it be makin' pirates appear nearly civil, by ways of comparison. I be getting downhearted. ox)P-(

Bonny job Master Elop, yer company is headed for Davy Jones locker, here be yer booty!

For some reason... (4, Funny)

Chris Mattern (191822) | about 7 months ago | (#44896457)

...the phrase "thirty pieces of silver" keeps coming to mind...

Re:For some reason... (4, Insightful)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about 7 months ago | (#44896581)

Some people here predicted that Elop was sent in to tank Nokia and get MS to buy it. Others argued that, besides loyalty to MS, why would be do that? Well $25M is another reason. He may not have known the exact amount but generally the CEO of a company getting bought out would be well compensated for it even if the deal is terrible for everyone else.

Conscience? (4, Insightful)

CMYKjunkie (1594319) | about 7 months ago | (#44896475)

I wonder how Elop can sleep at night for getting $25mil to tank a company.

But I suppose it isn't too hard on a pillow made of 250,000 Benjamins

Re:Conscience? (2)

turgid (580780) | about 7 months ago | (#44896701)

Oh, now, cynicism!

It's just the Great Invisible Hand changing the lightbulb.

The Great Invisible Hand has probably already advanced the careers and earnings potentials of all of the staff that were let go as a result.

Stop thinking like a pinko-commie.

Re:Conscience? (1)

couchslug (175151) | about 7 months ago | (#44897165)

Companies are expendable constructs, so they are often expended. They exist to turn a profit for those who control them.

Note I didn't say "invest in them" though those may overlap. :-)

Re:Conscience? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44897291)

I wonder how Elop can sleep at night for getting $25mil to tank a company.

He's a PSYCHOPATH! He has no conscience, of course he'll sleep like a baby.

Nokia was RIPPED OFF! (5, Funny)

CajunArson (465943) | about 7 months ago | (#44896485)

I could have run their business into the ground for half that much!

Re:Nokia was RIPPED OFF! (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44896571)

You might not have dug quite as deep into the ground though. It takes special skills to fail so extensively.

Re:Nokia was RIPPED OFF! (1)

Threni (635302) | about 7 months ago | (#44896627)

Yes, but you might have produced a high end Android phone people actually wanted to buy!

Re:Nokia was RIPPED OFF! (2, Interesting)

interkin3tic (1469267) | about 7 months ago | (#44896661)

Will someone explain to me like I'm five how it is that most large corporations seem to have buckets of cash lying around to waste on executive pay? It seems to me that executives rarely do anything similar to pitching a perfect game in major league baseball, yet they're given money like they are. And how is it that companies that do this aren't out competed by companies who give reasonable pay?

I'm a flamingly liberal academic. I have no understanding of business. I don't worship at the altar of "free market economics solves all problems," so I wouldn't be surprised if there were an obvious reason such wasteful spending isn't going extinct. Still, a simpler explanation would be that these executives actually DO make decisions which justify their absurd paychecks, or at least make it worth it to a company.

So seriously, what's the deal?

Re:Nokia was RIPPED OFF! (2)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 7 months ago | (#44896947)

My similarly pinko commie understanding is that compensation is voted on by the board and these folks are generally board members of other companies where their board members are executives. So they all give each other huge salaries and raises for fear if they vote against they might no get huge salaries and lose out on crazy raises.

Re:Nokia was RIPPED OFF! (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | about 7 months ago | (#44897223)

That doesn't explain why companies that do not play this game aren't driving such companies to extinction.

Re:Nokia was RIPPED OFF! (5, Informative)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about 7 months ago | (#44896995)

You need to work on your pyschopathy. Everyone has some psychopathic tendencies, but if you want to understand a CEO you need to embrace and extend (but certainly not extinguish) those traits.

Stomp on little animals. Steal money from children. Get elected to some office and perform some official malfeasance. Find a trophy wife or two (or husband, lets be 21st century about this). Read up on biographies of famous people.

You seem like an intelligent, hard working person. It's not beyond your grasp.

Re: Nokia was RIPPED OFF! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44897131)

The reason is that CEOs, and companies board of members are tighly linked. It is actually CEOs sitting on boards. Who understands CEO better than other CEO. They give services to each others, and expect to get same treatment. So actually they are pumping shareholders money in their own pockets. Shareholders on the other hand are fine with this, which is strange.

Re:Nokia was RIPPED OFF! (2)

stanjo74 (922718) | about 7 months ago | (#44897273)

very simple. The bigger and older the company, the more proxy voter shareholders it has (traded on the secondary exchanges to millions to people who own only a handful of shares each). These shareholders have no clue what is going on in the company they own. They let the board and executives run the show unabated.

The real game is played at the board level and executives. The company itself is just a stage - nobody cares about the company in the long run - one can always incorporate another. The board and the executives care about the company as a mean to an end - to make money off it. How the money is made - it doesn't matter. Sometimes money is made by making product and selling it; sometimes money is made by selling out; sometimes by liquidating and golden parachutes.

A successful public company is that makes the board and the executives rich. Products, employment, etc. is just secondary effects, to make things look not too sociopathic.

Please (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44896493)

Give me a call if you have a successful company you want to a) run into oblivion and 2) sold for nothing. I can do it for let's say $25 mill.

A comparison (5, Insightful)

Stormwatch (703920) | about 7 months ago | (#44896499)

That'd be like giving captain Schettino a bonus when the Costa Concordia is salvaged, even though he's the dolt who sank it.

Re:A comparison (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44896805)

That'd be like giving captain Schettino a bonus when the Costa Concordia is salvaged, even though he's the dolt who sank it.

Imagine your job is selling traditional beach holidays. Imagine your major competitors are cruise companies. Imagine that Schettino secretly works for you. Wouldn't you give him a bonus?

Re:A comparison (4, Interesting)

akozakie (633875) | about 7 months ago | (#44897179)

No. That's like a salvage company taking over the sunken ship for pennies and rehiring the captain they sent there.

Corporate assasination is relatively easy. Corporate poisoning is difficult. He had to make Nokia cheap as fast as possible but without completely killing it or losing the technological potential or IP assets. Plus, narrowly avoid crossing the line that would cause either legal problems or massive shareholder outrage. That's a hard job. The bonus is well earned.

Very good... and a better suggestion (4, Funny)

jkrise (535370) | about 7 months ago | (#44896515)

when, not if; Elop rejoins Microsoft; Google and the Android phone developers could reward him another $1 bn for achieving the same spectacular success he did at Finland.

Re:Very good... and a better suggestion (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44897089)

Next step: Microsoft sues anyone who makes andriod phones with their new massive mobilphone patent portfolio.

it's worth it (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44896521)

If he had not managed to foist Nokia off to his buddies at Microsoft then Nokia would have eventually gone out of business or sold for a much, much lower price. Therefore, $25 million is a pittance compraed to the billions that Nokia shareholders would have lost had the deal not gone through.

Re:it's worth it (2)

sjames (1099) | about 7 months ago | (#44896607)

Unless the former and future MS exec had some influence on Nokia's fall into the pit of despair. Like, for example, running it poorly.

Re:it's worth it (2)

Qzukk (229616) | about 7 months ago | (#44896647)

Therefore, $25 million is a pittance compraed to the billions that Nokia shareholders would have lost had the deal not gone through.

How much would they have lost if Elop hadn't slit the company's throat in the first place to butcher it for Microsoft?

WTF? (5, Insightful)

Zero__Kelvin (151819) | about 7 months ago | (#44896557)

How is this even legal? It is almost as if nobody sees it as a bribe because they don't think a bribe can happen in the open. The SEC needs to put a stop to this acquisition. It smacks of fraud on a massive level.

Re:WTF? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44896663)

How is this even legal?

Corporations write the laws.

We certainly wouldn't want politicians to hurt the economy, now would we?

Re:WTF? (4, Insightful)

Qzukk (229616) | about 7 months ago | (#44896673)

The problem is that the damage is done. Nokia is dead, the spider venom injected years ago has already liquefied the innards, all that's left is for the spider to suck the guts back out. Stopping it now isn't going to save Nokia.

All we can hope is that future traders will see incoming Microsoft leadership as a strong sell signal.

Re:WTF? (1)

Dagger2 (1177377) | about 7 months ago | (#44896945)

We may not be able to save Nokia, but maybe we can save the next company that would've fallen victim to this.

Re:WTF? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44896711)

How is this even legal? It is almost as if nobody sees it as a bribe because they don't think a bribe can happen in the open. The SEC needs to put a stop to this acquisition. It smacks of fraud on a massive level.

Wouldn't matter. It would be a win-win for the lawyers and a total loss for the consumers. Like always.

Old style payment for services rendered ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44896575)

I wonder if the payment will be in pieces of silver ?

Not bad (1)

PPH (736903) | about 7 months ago | (#44896597)

Assuming 98,000 Nokia employees, that's about $255 per scalp.

Re:Not bad (1)

alexander_686 (957440) | about 7 months ago | (#44896781)

Or maybe 575?

Latest report says they have 87k employees. I don’t know how many are in the D&S division that Microsoft is buying but they do produce about ½ the revenues so I am going to guess that they have ½ the employees.

CEOs and Weather Forecasters (4, Funny)

DontBlameCanada (1325547) | about 7 months ago | (#44896629)

I'll take, "Professions You Get Paid No Matter How Much You Fuck Up" for $25 million Alex.

Excerpt from the new reality gameshow: Shareholder Jeopardy

And people wonder why we hate CEOs (4, Insightful)

dirk (87083) | about 7 months ago | (#44896639)

So let me get this right. He took over Nokia 3 years ago. In that time their stock price has dropped by more than a third. In any way you measure it, he has failed as the head of the company. So they decide to sell to Microsoft, because he has been unable to do his job well and do anything to keep them from sinking further. And he will be REWARDED with $25 million?!?!?! So for helping his company continue to fail, he will get a $25 million dollar bonus over what is I'm sure a fairly ridiculous compensation package.

And to top it off, he is on the short list of people to become the new Microsoft CEO? They really are considering basically giving him a huge promotion for being unable to turn Nokia around and letting them get so bad off that selling to MS was their only option? CEOs are absolutely rewarded for failure, because his performance can't be seen as anything other than a failure.

Re:And people wonder why we hate CEOs (1)

paavo512 (2866903) | about 7 months ago | (#44896697)

CEOs are absolutely rewarded for success, because his performance can't be seen as anything other than a success by Microsoft.

There, fixed that for you!

Re:And people wonder why we hate CEOs (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44896731)

In any way you measure it, he has failed as the head of the company.

Some people will say that the company was in decline when he joined; he was successful in making the decline smaller. E.g. they didn't actually go bankrupt.

(I think those people are deluded, but that's just my opinion).

Re:And people wonder why we hate CEOs (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44896737)

No, Microsoft is rewarding him. His job was to make Nokia cheap for Microsoft to purchase. He did a fantastic job. So they are rewarding him.

Microsoft has seen that Elop is a fantastic candidate - he is willing to ruin other companies for Microsoft's benefit. Can Microsoft ask for a more loyal candidate for a CEO?

Re:And people wonder why we hate CEOs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44896787)

CEOs are absolutely rewarded for failure, because his performance can't be seen as anything other than a failure.
 
If shareholders would rise up CEOs wouldn't get away with this. No one forces a shareholder to invest. If you let your investments rot then who you going to blame for it?

Re:And people wonder why we hate CEOs (2)

thoth (7907) | about 7 months ago | (#44896795)

Sounds like Wall Street Rules, where success is rewarded and so is failure, just a little less so.

Re:And people wonder why we hate CEOs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44896839)

Failing upward. It's the only way to succeed!

Yes, exactly. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44896849)

It's really having the connections.

Those people like to pat themselves on the back and exclaim how "they worked hard" to get where they are but the truth of the matter is that they knew the right people. They were a member of the lucky sperm club. Most CEOs come from wealthy families who then got them into an Ivy League school where they hobnobbed with other wealthy connected people.

We live in an aristocracy in the US; not a meritocracy that the propaganda will have you believe. Sure, if you're smart and work hard, you'll eventually get into upper middle management or have a little pissant small business, but to get into the billionaire or CEO class where you get rich regardless of your abilities or merit? That takes being born to the right family.

And they've closed and locked the door behind them. No new members allowed, boys and girls. That's why we need a 100% inheritance tax for all wealth above a million dollars. So, you die and you have 5 million, well, you either give away 4 million to a REAL charity or the tax man takes it and blows on some shit.

And by real charity - let me ask this, if Bill Gates is soooo charitable, then why is he STILL the richest man in the World?!

To me charity is like Andrew Carnegie - actually giving it away and his case, just about all of it.

Re:And people wonder why we hate CEOs (1)

alexander_686 (957440) | about 7 months ago | (#44896883)

I am going to disagree with you. Sometimes you want to throw cash at the CEO to go away. If you don’t they will hold on to the bitter end and they will make sure it is bitter. You are making the assumption that he ran the company into the ground. Nokia had issues before they hired Elop and I don’t think he made the situation any worse. (Nor did he make the situation better so there is that.)

I will point out that the 25m comes from the change of control clause – he would have been paid that no matter who had bought them out.

I might question the amount but not the principle.

Re:And people wonder why we hate CEOs (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about 7 months ago | (#44897031)

I might question the amount but not the principle.

I believe I speak for most slashdotters in saying that $25 US dollars would have been plenty.

Re:And people wonder why we hate CEOs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44896917)

Unless he acted as an agent for Microsoft whose mission was to ruin Nokia and make it possible for Microsoft to buy it cheaply.

Re:And people wonder why we hate CEOs (1)

king neckbeard (1801738) | about 7 months ago | (#44896937)

CEOs often do get rewarded for their failures, but this was a success, just not for the company he was CEO of. But we pretty much knew this or something like it was coming.

Re: And people wonder why we hate CEOs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44897147)

Share price dropped actually from 8 â to somewhere between 2 and 3 â during Elop. It has raised since Elop left, now about 5 â.

Well, of course. (3, Insightful)

roc97007 (608802) | about 7 months ago | (#44896641)

Money paid for value received. Microsoft got what they wanted, an artificially undervalued cell division, and paid accordingly.

Re:Well, of course. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44897117)

Youthink it's undervalued now, wait for MS to run it for a couple of years.

Why all the complacency? (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44896721)

I knew this was going to happen. EVERYONE knew this was going to happen the moment we heard a Microsoft guy was going to be put in charge. EVERY step this guy has taken has led to this.

I always remember Nokia as being a point of national pride for the finns! They loved to brag about it, being in the forefront of a hot and growing tech industry. Why are they letting an American company walk in and scoop it all up in what is essentially a giant fraudulent business exchange? So many high-tech jobs lost. Where is the outrage?

I know Finland isn't the US, but why haven't executives been hauled in front of whatever the equivalent of congress is there to explain why a key industry has been sabotaged and sold overseas?

Re:Why all the complacency? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44897299)

Nokia was a finnish company, owned by finns. Later it was majority owned by US investment co, US mutuals funds et.c. They control the board, appoint a US CEO.
The nationality of ownership changed. Nokia listed on NYSE since 1994. The owners thought that Elop was the right man to lead the company.

Poor Microsoft (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44896771)

One loser after anther.

Say No to Microsoft! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44896829)

Say No to Microsoft and kick Elop in his ass.

Better title: 25 to life (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44896865)

In finnish prison.
Enough said.

Good news for Jolla (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44896879)

Given that Jolla is having their second round of pre-orders today (in Finland only), I expect Finns, angry at the looting of one of Finland's biggest and most well-known companies by Microsoft, are more likely than ever to throw money at a Finnish phone maker founded by ex-Nokia guys who quit and/or were fired under Elop...

Good morning Mr. Elop... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44896913)

This is your mission, if you choose to accept it:

Infiltrate Nokia. Drop symbian, any non-redmond-based OS and the stock price into a bottomless pit.

In case you get caught, you will be awarded with $25'000'000.

Elop deserves every penny (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44896919)

Mission accomplished: murder Nokia and sell it off at pennies on a dollar. I'd say Elop performed spectacularly, and well deserves his bonus.

So we have the Peter Pinnacle.. (1)

Virtucon (127420) | about 7 months ago | (#44896951)

We have the Peter Pinnacle [slashdot.org] when Ballmer announced he was leaving. I guess this makes this situation the old, tried and tested, Peter Principle. I've already dumped my Microsoft stock a long time ago but when there's speculation that this retard will be Ballmer's replacement, I can't help but think that shareholders and customers will be wanting Ballmer back! That in and of itself is abhorrent but if you're going to get burned in a fire or boiled in oil I guess it pretty much doesn't matter which path you choose, you're dead. Let's hope that the executive search committee looking into Ballmer's replacement at least chooses somebody with vision and conviction in terms of setting a strategy to move Microsoft forward again.

To paraphrase Obi-wan "This is not the executive your looking for."

Quoting directly from VentureBeat (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44897175)

"A high ranking VP of a corporate giant becomes the new CEO of a company in a different business, in a different country. He doesn’t sell his home in Seattle, nor does his family move with him, even though he’s ostensibly going to be there permanently. Over the next three years, he makes counterintuitive decisions that abandon his new company’s core strengths, and their value plummets to a tiny fraction of what it was.

You get the idea. Essentially, the theory here — and this has been floating around for a while — is that Stephen Elop became the CEO of Nokia to soften the company up for the Microsoft takeover left Nokia without its hardware business."

It is so blindingly obvious. If anyone doesn't see this, they are beyond hope. One might quote the Hanlon's Razor: "Never attribute to malice....", but it simply does not account for the amount of maneuvering and the number of counterintuitive senseless decisions that made this acquisition possible. What is more applicable is: "If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck,.....".

I hope people will start paying attention (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44897253)

..to psychopaths in suits, now.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...