Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Some WeWork Board Members Seek to Remove Adam Neumann as CEO

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 245 posts

Re: Some WeWork Board Members Seek to Remove Adam Neumann as CEO

#61

Post by krisoft »

gwern wrote: post #49
exogeny wrote: post #19

Considering he has the votes to fire the entire board, I'd be shocked if this happens. Softbank is completely fucked.

Adam has the votes, but not the cash. Softbank has the cash, but not the votes. Arrangements can be made. Ironically, that's a problem for Adam precisely because We is not Theranos. Holmes had the votes and the cash, which hadn't been spent yet since Theranos wasn't a real business, and she could (and did) just coast for years on what was already in the bank without any need to go to any investors or banks or third p…

> But since We is a real business with real users and a successful one, We can't just coast on its cash.

We have a very different definition of what does it mean to be a successful business.

Re: Some WeWork Board Members Seek to Remove Adam Neumann as CEO

#62

Post by greglindahl »

shartshooter wrote: post #58
cm2012 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is if the global economy downturns fewer people want to rent short term, WeWork is still committed to paying the long term lease costs.

Short term rentals are an inferior good. An economic downturn could lead to more business for them

Past experience says WeWork will end up bankrupt.

"This time it's different"

Re: Some WeWork Board Members Seek to Remove Adam Neumann as CEO

#63

Post by tempsy »

tptacek wrote: post #51
tempsy wrote: post #26

Didn't investors, especially SoftBank, enable this behavior? They deserve as much blame for this mess as he does, if not more.

Help me understand how this is a coherent argument. I could see making the argument that investors share some of the blame for what the CEO did. How could they have more of the blame?

Because they decided to invest and never demanded oversight or questioned his voting power with each new term sheet they handed to him?

The point of the board is in part to keep the CEO in check. They had many opportunities to do so well before weeks before the now shelved IPO roadshow.

Re: Some WeWork Board Members Seek to Remove Adam Neumann as CEO

#64

Post by hef19898 »

MobileVet wrote: post #23

With $700M extracted and long term leases to the company for properties that he owns... One could easily ride off into the sunset. It will be interesting, and insightful, to see if that is the tact he takes. If he does... It will add credibility to the already strong case for this being deliberate deceit versus unchecked ignorant hubris.

I'm not sure if any other employee in any other company could get away with something like that. Sounds like a clear conflict of interest to me. Same goes for some of Elon's and Tesla's business transactions, so. Sounds like an overall bad idea to me, just how SoftBank accepted any of it is beyond my imagination.

I'm all for letting founders cash out to a certain degree before an IPO, but 700M and the lease agreements? Bot sure if that was a good deal for investors.

Re: Some WeWork Board Members Seek to Remove Adam Neumann as CEO

#65

Post by chrisseaton »

tyri_kai_psomi wrote: post #24
ink_13 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is true of many large companies today, though. Facebook comes to mind.

What I don't understand is what is so mind boggling to GP? This is the norm for the vast majority of private companies.

> This is the norm for the vast majority of private companies.

But they're trying to become a public company - that's the point.

Re: Some WeWork Board Members Seek to Remove Adam Neumann as CEO

#66

Post by wpietri »

tyri_kai_psomi wrote: post #24
ink_13 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is true of many large companies today, though. Facebook comes to mind.

What I don't understand is what is so mind boggling to GP? This is the norm for the vast majority of private companies.

That's not the case. For private companies where the founder has the majority share, sure. But what's unusual with WeWork is how the founder has control despite not having a majority share.

As others mention, there are historical reasons why WeWork got this. But things like WeWork and Uber are going to be the new historical reasons why founders don't get that as much.

Re: Some WeWork Board Members Seek to Remove Adam Neumann as CEO

#67

Post by hef19898 »

blantonl wrote: post #29
MobileVet wrote: post #23

With $700M extracted and long term leases to the company for properties that he owns... One could easily ride off into the sunset. It will be interesting, and insightful, to see if that is the tact he takes. If he does... It will add credibility to the already strong case for this being deliberate deceit versus unchecked ignorant hubris.

He’s quoted as saying he wants to be “President of the World” and live forever. This guy isn’t riding off into the sunset.

So the bank robber type who gets caught after the perfect crime for picking up a penny from the floor or for having one last job too many?

Re: Some WeWork Board Members Seek to Remove Adam Neumann as CEO

#68

Post by [deleted] »

blantonl wrote: post #29
MobileVet wrote: post #23

With $700M extracted and long term leases to the company for properties that he owns... One could easily ride off into the sunset. It will be interesting, and insightful, to see if that is the tact he takes. If he does... It will add credibility to the already strong case for this being deliberate deceit versus unchecked ignorant hubris.

He’s quoted as saying he wants to be “President of the World” and live forever. This guy isn’t riding off into the sunset.

[deleted]

Re: Some WeWork Board Members Seek to Remove Adam Neumann as CEO

#69

Post by AlexandrB »

tempsy wrote: post #47
bhouston wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Slim margins means it isn't a great product, at least by standard business definitions. A product with slim margins is one that you divest from so you can focus on the products with good margins.

I was referring to the quality of the product from the customer POV.

MoviePass was an amazing product from the customer POV. Not a viable business though.

Re: Some WeWork Board Members Seek to Remove Adam Neumann as CEO

#70

Post by mychael »

thedogeye wrote: post #53

WeWork is a useful product. Office real estate is broken for startups. Landlords make us take 5-10 year leases when startup planning horizons are almost never longer than 18 months. WeWork earning 30-40% margins by allowing us to take shorter terms that better fit our needs. Should be a good business.

> "product"

They're a glorified landlord, not a product.

Post reply on HN