Intel CEO Brian Krzanich Out Over Relationship With Former Employee

rtangwai

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 26, 2007
Messages
1,369
Any chance this is a cover story to avoid the insider trading accusations leveled at Krzanich? That he's being moved out now and they want to keep people from speculating that it is really insider trading and that fraud charges could be coming down the road?
 

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
33,857
THese policies do nothing to stop that. That still happens but its just kept quite. You would be surprised how many affairs/hookups etc happen in the modern office...

The same thing was said when drunk driving laws started to be enforced. Over the last few decades though, it has gone from an "everyone does it" thing, to one in which there is much shame involved and is considered culturally inappropriate.

Anti-fraternization policies over time can have the same effect, to change the culture.

I don't understand why people do this though. I've always kept my life in three strictly separate boxes. At work I am strictly professional. I may have some limited social chit-chat, but I don't even make friends at work, let alone pursue romantic relationships. Work is about being cold, sterile and professional, nothing messy ever. I don't want to compromise my career or work history.

The other boxes are family and friends. Or at least were when I was younger. I did not mix work with either family or friends, and did not mix family with friends or vice versa either. Romantic relationships were strictly in the "friends" box, in that friends got to meet romantic interests, but none of the other boxes did.

As I have grown older, the borders between the friends and family boxes has softened somewhat, in part because the "romantic interest" has slowly morphed more into "family", and in part because there is less youthful debauchery involved in my friend relationships I feel I need to shield away from both work and family.

The work box is still completely intact, as it should be. My colleagues are fellow productivity robots. I only make awkward small-talk with them, and would never socialize with them in any other setting than the work setting. And even if I were single, I wouldn't care how hot a chick is, even if she appears really in to me, if she works for the same company as I do, or any of its customers, clients or vendors she is completely off limits. She is a fellow productivity robot, just like everyone else, and I would never even be flirtatious. In situations like these I try my hardest not to even look at the woman. I really wish everyone had the same sense of detached professionalism.

Work is not the place for any kind of indulgence. You go, you work, you get paid. Get your play, romance, fun or friendship elsewhere.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
33,857
Wonder what the wife thinks of this? :)


I'm going to guess "probably not thrilled".

That being said, the article is light on details. It says it was a past relationship with a former employee. It doesn't say how long ago it was. Maybe he wasn't even married at the time?
 

ChoGGi

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 7, 2005
Messages
1,733
Never bothered reading it, I see he was married in 98, made COO in 2012, and all I can see about the relationship is that it was with a subordinate, so seems likely it was during the marriage...
 

PigLover

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 11, 2009
Messages
1,183
My guess: the board couldn't "get him" over the poorly timed trades last year but would rather have him gone when they settle with the SEC. If they can him over his trading activity they tacitly admit to the SEC that it was "wrong" and the fines are much higher. This was "convenient" and much cleaner. He's gone and they can still claim no issues with the trading stuff, they get to settle without admitting guilt, and they possibly get to throw him under the bus with the SEC later. If they wanted him to stay they would have informed the board of his fraternization issue, chastised him quietly and privately and moved on...
 

kju1

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 27, 2002
Messages
3,460
The same thing was said when drunk driving laws started to be enforced. Over the last few decades though, it has gone from an "everyone does it" thing, to one in which there is much shame involved and is considered culturally inappropriate.

Anti-fraternization policies over time can have the same effect, to change the culture.

I don't understand why people do this though. I've always kept my life in three strictly separate boxes. At work I am strictly professional. I may have some limited social chit-chat, but I don't even make friends at work, let alone pursue romantic relationships. Work is about being cold, sterile and professional, nothing messy ever. I don't want to compromise my career or work history.

The other boxes are family and friends. Or at least were when I was younger. I did not mix work with either family or friends, and did not mix family with friends or vice versa either. Romantic relationships were strictly in the "friends" box, in that friends got to meet romantic interests, but none of the other boxes did.

As I have grown older, the borders between the friends and family boxes has softened somewhat, in part because the "romantic interest" has slowly morphed more into "family", and in part because there is less youthful debauchery involved in my friend relationships I feel I need to shield away from both work and family.

The work box is still completely intact, as it should be. My colleagues are fellow productivity robots. I only make awkward small-talk with them, and would never socialize with them in any other setting than the work setting. And even if I were single, I wouldn't care how hot a chick is, even if she appears really in to me, if she works for the same company as I do, or any of its customers, clients or vendors she is completely off limits. She is a fellow productivity robot, just like everyone else, and I would never even be flirtatious. In situations like these I try my hardest not to even look at the woman. I really wish everyone had the same sense of detached professionalism.

Work is not the place for any kind of indulgence. You go, you work, you get paid. Get your play, romance, fun or friendship elsewhere.


I think the big difference is that sex is a biological imperative and drinking is not. We are driven to procreate and that comes out in behaviors that we suppress in modern society.

I typically keep work life separate from non work life. But I will say I have banged a few girls at work. Two who were temps on a different team and are now full time employees on mine. We dont do it anymore now that they are on my team....well that and they both have bfs now. Plus none of us want to talk about the debauchery the three of us used to get into when they were temps ;).

I do think its fine to have friends that you work with. But you do have to be sure not to mix work and pleasure. We had strict no contact while working rules that all three of us obeyed (my work doesn't have a no fraternization policy except for supervisor/employee relationships) because we wanted to ensure we stayed professional at work. So from a work perspective we did nothing untoward.
 

vegeta535

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 19, 2013
Messages
8,520
Right
Intel's stock has risen about 120 percent during Krzanich's tenure as CEO.
terrible
People don't understand because a CEO doesnt run a company like they want them too makes them aa terribl ceo. While the people he works for are wiping their asses with $1000 bills and laughing it up. a buissness #1 goal is to make money. Everything else is a distant 3rd.
 

Dayaks

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 22, 2012
Messages
8,872
THese policies do nothing to stop that. That still happens but its just kept quite. You would be surprised how many affairs/hookups etc happen in the modern office...



How do you know his wife wasnt ok with it? Maybe she even participated?

It’s something like 32% of affairs happen at work IIRC. And I think those numbers are low..
 

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
33,857
I think the big difference is that sex is a biological imperative and drinking is not. We are driven to procreate and that comes out in behaviors that we suppress in modern society.

I guess we differ here somewhat.

To me, what separates us humans from every other form of life we are aware of to date is that we have an intellect that is able to allow us to override our more basal instincts and instead make more rational decisions.

When you think of it, getting laid is a very irrational thing to do. It doesn't even come close to passing the risk/benefit test.

Risks of casual sex include:
  • Disease/infection, many of which are incurable, some of which can be fatal
  • Unwanted pregnancy/becoming a baby daddy
  • Spending money on some girl you could use for other more important things
  • Hurt feelings / awkward social interactions
  • If at work: loss of employment or tainted reputation
  • If in a relationship: hurting someone you (supposedly) care about
  • probably others I'm not thinking about now

And what's the upside? A short period of fun followed by a few seconds of intense pleasure. If you think about it rationally, that tradeoff seems to be very much not worth it.

Our intellect has the ability to override our monkey brains in many other ways too, like eating less of the foods we know are bad for us, getting more exercise even though we really don't want to, delaying gratification so we can work or study or save money for an important large purchase, etc. etc.

It's just a shame that more people don't prioritize and use what makes them uniquely human. We'd live in a much better society if that were the case.
 

spintroniX

Gawd
Joined
Apr 7, 2009
Messages
974
People don't understand because a CEO doesnt run a company like they want them too makes them aa terribl ceo. While the people he works for are wiping their asses with $1000 bills and laughing it up. a buissness #1 goal is to make money. Everything else is a distant 3rd.

In a market where stock prices are driven by easy money fed policy, it's not a merit badge for a CEO to claim an increased stock price.

The issue is that the decisions he has made put the company in peril down the line, while pumping up their stock price in the short term.

The purchase of Mobile Eye for $15bn, for instance, is a highly questionable move at best. The company is banking on using theory, not actual test miles on the road, to validate their self driving car tech. This has the potential, and indeed likelihood, to turn catastrophic, as the majority of Intel's acquisitions tend to go tits up.

Worse yet, 10nm has been completely broken the entire time he has been CEO. Yet he has not replaced the upper level management that is responsible for leading that shit show. The consequence of this is that the company is now bracing for AMD to gain double digit market share in servers, which is the company's bread and butter.

These are just a few high profile fuck ups. Remember the contra revenue program to get people to buy their dog shit tablets? How long did it take them to abandon what was obviously a terrible idea from the beginning? How about the supposed move into the custom foundry space, only to retreat later?

It's an objective fact, he's a shit CEO with no vision and no real leadership capacity. Stock prices are fine and dandy, but the company cannot survive on stock price increases. They need revenue, and growth in new markets, and under his leadership Intel has only fallen further behind in their core competencies while investing big sums of money in questionable areas, only to abandon them later.
 

Joust

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 30, 2017
Messages
5,510
I guess we differ here somewhat.

To me, what separates us humans from every other form of life we are aware of to date is that we have an intellect that is able to allow us to override our more basal instincts and instead make more rational decisions.

When you think of it, getting laid is a very irrational thing to do. It doesn't even come close to passing the risk/benefit test.

Risks of casual sex include:
  • Disease/infection, many of which are incurable, some of which can be fatal
  • Unwanted pregnancy/becoming a baby daddy
  • Spending money on some girl you could use for other more important things
  • Hurt feelings / awkward social interactions
  • If at work: loss of employment or tainted reputation
  • If in a relationship: hurting someone you (supposedly) care about
  • probably others I'm not thinking about now
And what's the upside? A short period of fun followed by a few seconds of intense pleasure. If you think about it rationally, that tradeoff seems to be very much not worth it.

Our intellect has the ability to override our monkey brains in many other ways too, like eating less of the foods we know are bad for us, getting more exercise even though we really don't want to, delaying gratification so we can work or study or save money for an important large purchase, etc. etc.

It's just a shame that more people don't prioritize and use what makes them uniquely human. We'd live in a much better society if that were the case.

I am a rational, very educated human being. What you're promoting is less than human, rather than greater. Social interaction is key. Oh, sure, you have people that boast, "I'm a loner...and I like it that way!" And a very, very small percentage of the population would be speaking the truth.

Stripping the humanity from the human is degenerative, not progressive. In my opinion.
 

Aireoth

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
5,928
I guess we differ here somewhat.

To me, what separates us humans from every other form of life we are aware of to date is that we have an intellect that is able to allow us to override our more basal instincts and instead make more rational decisions.

When you think of it, getting laid is a very irrational thing to do. It doesn't even come close to passing the risk/benefit test.

Risks of casual sex include:
  • Disease/infection, many of which are incurable, some of which can be fatal
  • Unwanted pregnancy/becoming a baby daddy
  • Spending money on some girl you could use for other more important things
  • Hurt feelings / awkward social interactions
  • If at work: loss of employment or tainted reputation
  • If in a relationship: hurting someone you (supposedly) care about
  • probably others I'm not thinking about now
And what's the upside? A short period of fun followed by a few seconds of intense pleasure. If you think about it rationally, that tradeoff seems to be very much not worth it.

Our intellect has the ability to override our monkey brains in many other ways too, like eating less of the foods we know are bad for us, getting more exercise even though we really don't want to, delaying gratification so we can work or study or save money for an important large purchase, etc. etc.

It's just a shame that more people don't prioritize and use what makes them uniquely human. We'd live in a much better society if that were the case.

I'll go a step further, its not just a differ, kju1 either doesn't comprehend the dangers of what they did, or just doesn't care. Both are not healthy, though the latter is decidedly worse. They got lucky, and so do others that engage in this behavior with colleagues. Don't mistake lucky for anything else though. Just because others do it, does not make it a wise decision. All that says is you lack the judgement to avoid massive pitfalls.

There is a reason sex is censored heavily and violence isn't, violence is both easy and simple, sex on the other hard is not. This should be painfully bloody obvious today (#metoo as an example).

I am a rational, very educated human being. What you're promoting is less than human, rather than greater. Social interaction is key. Oh, sure, you have people that boast, "I'm a loner...and I like it that way!" And a very, very small percentage of the population would be speaking the truth.

Stripping the humanity from the human is degenerative, not progressive. In my opinion.

You're equating sex with social interaction...
 

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
33,857
I am a rational, very educated human being. What you're promoting is less than human, rather than greater. Social interaction is key. Oh, sure, you have people that boast, "I'm a loner...and I like it that way!" And a very, very small percentage of the population would be speaking the truth.

Stripping the humanity from the human is degenerative, not progressive. In my opinion.

I don't recall suggesting that people deny themselves social interaction. In the post you quoted I suggested that casual sex, especially at work, and even more especially while in a relationship with someone else is irrational and doesn't pass the risk benefit test.

In a previous post I suggested maybe it was better to get ones social interaction outside of work.

I never suggested that anyone forgo social interaction all together. That wouldn't be healthy.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
33,857
In a market where stock prices are driven by easy money fed policy, it's not a merit badge for a CEO to claim an increased stock price.

The issue is that the decisions he has made put the company in peril down the line, while pumping up their stock price in the short term.

The purchase of Mobile Eye for $15bn, for instance, is a highly questionable move at best. The company is banking on using theory, not actual test miles on the road, to validate their self driving car tech. This has the potential, and indeed likelihood, to turn catastrophic, as the majority of Intel's acquisitions tend to go tits up.

Worse yet, 10nm has been completely broken the entire time he has been CEO. Yet he has not replaced the upper level management that is responsible for leading that shit show. The consequence of this is that the company is now bracing for AMD to gain double digit market share in servers, which is the company's bread and butter.

These are just a few high profile fuck ups. Remember the contra revenue program to get people to buy their dog shit tablets? How long did it take them to abandon what was obviously a terrible idea from the beginning? How about the supposed move into the custom foundry space, only to retreat later?

It's an objective fact, he's a shit CEO with no vision and no real leadership capacity. Stock prices are fine and dandy, but the company cannot survive on stock price increases. They need revenue, and growth in new markets, and under his leadership Intel has only fallen further behind in their core competencies while investing big sums of money in questionable areas, only to abandon them later.


So, you are suggesting that this is a way for the board to get rid of him without publicly admitting his failures, and thus trying to avoid stock price pain as much as possible?
 

IcePickFreak

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 1, 2010
Messages
1,673
Didn't he just sell 20 something million dollars worth of Intel stock this past fall with the whole meltdown/spectre debacle? I'm sure he's really upset he gets to retire now, when Intel is having all their current issues, and got to bang the office 10 to boot.
giphy.gif
 

Joust

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 30, 2017
Messages
5,510
I may have some limited social chit-chat, but I don't even make friends at work, let alone pursue romantic relationships. Work is about being cold, sterile and professional, nothing messy ever.

The work box is still completely intact, as it should be. My colleagues are fellow productivity robots. I only make awkward small-talk with them, and would never socialize with them in any other setting than the work setting. And even if I were single, I wouldn't care how hot a chick is, even if she appears really in to me, if she works for the same company as I do, or any of its customers, clients or vendors she is completely off limits. She is a fellow productivity robot, just like everyone else, and I would never even be flirtatious. In situations like these I try my hardest not to even look at the woman. I really wish everyone had the same sense of detached professionalism.

Work is not the place for any kind of indulgence. You go, you work, you get paid. Get your play, romance, fun or friendship elsewhere.


I guess we differ here somewhat.

To me, what separates us humans from every other form of life we are aware of to date is that we have an intellect that is able to allow us to override our more basal instincts and instead make more rational decisions.

When you think of it, getting laid is a very irrational thing to do. It doesn't even come close to passing the risk/benefit test.

And what's the upside? A short period of fun followed by a few seconds of intense pleasure. If you think about it rationally, that tradeoff seems to be very much not worth it.

Our intellect has the ability to override our monkey brains in many other ways too, like eating less of the foods we know are bad for us, getting more exercise even though we really don't want to, delaying gratification so we can work or study or save money for an important large purchase, etc. etc.

It's just a shame that more people don't prioritize and use what makes them uniquely human. We'd live in a much better society if that were the case.



You're equating sex with social interaction...

I am not equating sex with social interaction. I read both of this gentleman's comments as one continuous thought. It reads, paraphrasing, "I do not socialize at work, nor should anyone. It is objectively detrimental to the purpose of work. Moreover, the costs of getting laid are greater than the benefits - and there are other excellent decisions we should make for ourselves, while we are at it."

Let me be clear: I commend Zara's work ethic and professionalism. I am also a professional. His are exactly the kind of qualities I would like to have in certain roles, and not what I would like to have in others. However, I am clearly far more social, at least in my work environment, and feel there is a benefit to being this way - than the other fellow.

I do not desire productivity bots. I prefer thinking, humane, human inputs that have all associated benefits (empathy, creativity) even with the less desirable qualities. I suppose it depends on what business you are in as to how valuable these traits are, but I would like to think they carry a premium in most environments. I approve of an office culture that identifies as a familial unit, or at least a cohesive community.

I would also like to clarify: I do not condone drama in the work place. However, I have seen romance - not between supervisor-subordinate (or however you want to say it), which is properly prohibited - between two consenting adults...multiple examples, actually...which began, existed, and terminated without issue. I suppose my expectation is that the human intellect can handle business while accommodating the monkey brained desires of friendship.
 

spintroniX

Gawd
Joined
Apr 7, 2009
Messages
974
So, you are suggesting that this is a way for the board to get rid of him without publicly admitting his failures, and thus trying to avoid stock price pain as much as possible?

I'm not suggesting that at all. He could have had an improper relationship with a subordinate, or he could be ousted due to being a failure. I don't know what the actual cause of his ouster was. I just think he was a shitty CEO, and the company is ultimately better off with someone more competent at the helm.
 

whatevs

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 23, 2017
Messages
199
I'm not suggesting that at all. He could have had an improper relationship with a subordinate, or he could be ousted due to being a failure. I don't know what the actual cause of his ouster was. I just think he was a shitty CEO, and the company is ultimately better off with someone more competent at the helm.
He sold every bit of stock he legally could. If that's not announcing to the world that he as absolutely no faith in his companies future, i don't know what is.

He should have been fired immediately for that. He's not a regular employee, he's a senior executive. Shares are supposed to keep all interests aligned. Obviously he was all about himself.

Likely the board members were too afraid of losing other gigs if they didn't distance themselves properly. Seriously, he has all the insider information on how fucked up 10nm is being handled(future) and how they've been playing real loose with quality/security to meet targes(past) under his watch.

When you sell every bit of stock you can, you don't have a viable plan for the future and see no way to put in place a viable plan.
 

Derfnofred

Gawd
Joined
Dec 11, 2009
Messages
606
FTFA

so.. it comes out there is a bug that can compromise their CPU's, and the stock goes up..

CEO has an affair... and the stock goes down...

????

1.) Depressed stock rebounds after speculation of problems, then becomes a "workable solution"
2.) Knee jerk reaction in confidence. Ask again in 6 months whether this is a blip or a read deal adjustment
 

KazeoHin

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
8,471
Any chance this is a cover story to avoid the insider trading accusations leveled at Krzanich? That he's being moved out now and they want to keep people from speculating that it is really insider trading and that fraud charges could be coming down the road?

This was my reaction.

"No, no, sweet sweet investors, we're doing fine and are definitely not making mistakes and doubting our leadership, see? He resigned because of an office affair, not because of a lacklustre leadership strategy!"
 

SickBeast

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 29, 2012
Messages
499
People who know what they are doing would have sold their Intel stocks some time ago. The writing has been on the wall for some time. AMD and Apple are going to erode their market share badly in the coming years, and they might never recover. I'm not convinced about their entry into the graphics market, either.
 

Chimpee

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 6, 2015
Messages
1,687
People who know what they are doing would have sold their Intel stocks some time ago. The writing has been on the wall for some time. AMD and Apple are going to erode their market share badly in the coming years, and they might never recover. I'm not convinced about their entry into the graphics market, either.

Maybe, but if there is one thing we know, when someone gets complacent, that is when others will catch up to you or overtake you, both Intel and AMD have done it to each other and may happen in the future if AMD gets complacent again.
 
Joined
May 13, 2002
Messages
526
He'll be replaced by a chick who'll do even worse but will be impossible to fire due to gender politics. I for one think Ottelini was the last decent boss Intel had .
 

kju1

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 27, 2002
Messages
3,460
I guess we differ here somewhat.

To me, what separates us humans from every other form of life we are aware of to date is that we have an intellect that is able to allow us to override our more basal instincts and instead make more rational decisions.

When you think of it, getting laid is a very irrational thing to do. It doesn't even come close to passing the risk/benefit test.

Risks of casual sex include:
  • Disease/infection, many of which are incurable, some of which can be fatal
  • Unwanted pregnancy/becoming a baby daddy
  • Spending money on some girl you could use for other more important things
  • Hurt feelings / awkward social interactions
  • If at work: loss of employment or tainted reputation
  • If in a relationship: hurting someone you (supposedly) care about
  • probably others I'm not thinking about now
And what's the upside? A short period of fun followed by a few seconds of intense pleasure. If you think about it rationally, that tradeoff seems to be very much not worth it.

Our intellect has the ability to override our monkey brains in many other ways too, like eating less of the foods we know are bad for us, getting more exercise even though we really don't want to, delaying gratification so we can work or study or save money for an important large purchase, etc. etc.

It's just a shame that more people don't prioritize and use what makes them uniquely human. We'd live in a much better society if that were the case.

To each their own. To be clear we arent exactly "casual" about it. I may have spoken a bit cavalier about it but the three of us were definitely a thing...outside of work. We only happened to work for the same company but on different teams at the time. Nothing ever happened at work. Period. It was all on our own time. And as long as there is no impact to work and theres no supervisor/employee relationship at work I see no reason why my workplace should have any say in who I have sex with.

Perhaps what we did is casual to you but it wasnt for us.

I'll go a step further, its not just a differ, kju1 either doesn't comprehend the dangers of what they did, or just doesn't care. Both are not healthy, though the latter is decidedly worse. They got lucky, and so do others that engage in this behavior with colleagues. Don't mistake lucky for anything else though. Just because others do it, does not make it a wise decision. All that says is you lack the judgement to avoid massive pitfalls.

There is a reason sex is censored heavily and violence isn't, violence is both easy and simple, sex on the other hard is not. This should be painfully bloody obvious today (#metoo as an example).



You're equating sex with social interaction...

And you have quite frankly misunderstood the situation or are making it into something it was not. I did point out we did not work on the same team and had rules of no contact at work. To be clear WE NEVER did anything at work. It was all on our own time at home NEVER in the office.. As I said before we didnt even work on the same team, just for the same company (and it was a big one).

So you think in a company of oh say 25k people that individuals who work in ENTIRELY different offices should never date or be invovled with each other? Thats just dumb. We are all adults...as long as you act like it I don't see an issue (absent any employee/supervisor status of course - that IS inappropriate).

My current workplace actually encourages employees (again absent any supervisor relationship) to be social with each other and form relationships. There are affairs...and if youre having an affair and caught youre terminated but if your two consenting adults on different teams and it doesnt interfere with your jobs there is no concern. Obviously none of that can happen at work.
 

Imhotep

Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
816
Us is so backwards. In France this sort of thing is normal.. Everyone knows about it and no one talks about it. Yes, that includes politicians as well. It is not anybody's business , but the parties involved. Here its borderline crime. :D
 

ChoGGi

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 7, 2005
Messages
1,733
Not so much a crime as a:
An ongoing investigation by internal and external counsel has confirmed a violation of Intel’s non-fraternization policy, which applies to all managers. Given the expectation that all employees will respect Intel’s values and adhere to the company’s code of conduct, the board has accepted Mr. Krzanich’s resignation.
https://newsroom.intel.com/news-rel...-resigns-board-appoints-bob-swan-interim-ceo/
 

pyr02k1

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
423
A golden parachute won't make up for divorce court.

My guess: the board couldn't "get him" over the poorly timed trades last year but would rather have him gone when they settle with the SEC. If they can him over his trading activity they tacitly admit to the SEC that it was "wrong" and the fines are much higher. This was "convenient" and much cleaner. He's gone and they can still claim no issues with the trading stuff, they get to settle without admitting guilt, and they possibly get to throw him under the bus with the SEC later. If they wanted him to stay they would have informed the board of his fraternization issue, chastised him quietly and privately and moved on...

Probably wasn't even something that happened. Get rid of the guy drawing the attention in a clean way that doesn't draw more attention to the bigger issue. He probably even had a sit down with his wife to tell her what's going on and that they'll publicly announce that they're "going to work it out." He'll get his golden parachute, on top of his insider trading profits. Heck, probably a bigger parachute if he takes the SEC fall if needed. Not normally a conspiracy person, but this one just reeks of bull.
 
Top