Ad Exec Sues Interpublic Over Facebook Investment

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
If this story ends up being true, you'd think this guy would have something coming to him. Then again, this is a deal with Facebook in it, that automatically excludes it from being "normal." :D

"You have to transport yourself back to 2006," said Neal Brickman, a lawyer for Volpe, in an interview. "Facebook was a fledgling start-up. Interpublic thought it was a stupid investment. But Mr. Volpe was incredibly persistent. Not a whit of credit went to him, and he has never been paid a penny."
Click to expand...
 
I think Ray Volpe could've done better for himself to have amicable relationships with Interpublic and use his role in the 2006 acquisition of Facebook share. (this preferred share that Interpublic held at only $2.5 million then is very significant today).

Burning those bridges with Interpublic and try to sue for that kind of money is really lacking in executive judgment. O well...
 
You work for a business. Your job duties for that business are to generate revenue for that business. Unless you're a major shareholder or a member of the board, you may never ever see proportionate monetary compensation for your efforts for the business. But if you got paid for your work there (aka, your agreed-upon salary for your contributions), that's what you get. Unless you had a separate contract covering the specific account, you got what you were supposed to get, and the company made their profit. That's the way a job works. Want to profit from the company's growth? Buy shares of stock. What about the efforts you make where they didn't make profit? Or lost? Are you going to pay them for their losses?
 
teh_chem said:
You work for a business. Your job duties for that business are to generate revenue for that business. Unless you're a major shareholder or a member of the board, you may never ever see proportionate monetary compensation for your efforts for the business. But if you got paid for your work there (aka, your agreed-upon salary for your contributions), that's what you get. Unless you had a separate contract covering the specific account, you got what you were supposed to get, and the company made their profit. That's the way a job works. Want to profit from the company's growth? Buy shares of stock. What about the efforts you make where they didn't make profit? Or lost? Are you going to pay them for their losses?
Click to expand...

i dunno about how it works there, but i know a lot of AEs where i used to work got some form of commission from doing good work...
 
teh_chem said:
... Want to profit from the company's growth? Buy shares of stock. What about the efforts you make where they didn't make profit? Or lost? Are you going to pay them for their losses?
Click to expand...

Of course they are going to pay for their losses. You know, the same exact problem people had with the bailouts. Banks make money, they keep it. Banks lose money, the government pays their losses. That's super unfair right? Unless its me whose getting paid!
 
OniFactor said:
i dunno about how it works there, but i know a lot of AEs where i used to work got some form of commission from doing good work...
Click to expand...
Right, but there's no mention of a commission agreement in this story. Which I infer to mean that there isn't one, and this guy just wants a piece of the cash that he's not actually entitled to. He did his job, he got his compensation (salary). The fact that he made a decision that others thought, at the time, might not be a good decision but he push for it regardless doesn't mean jack or entitle him to any money
Monkey God said:
Of course they are going to pay for their losses. You know, the same exact problem people had with the bailouts. Banks make money, they keep it. Banks lose money, the government pays their losses. That's super unfair right? Unless its me whose getting paid!
Click to expand...
LOL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top