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

181–190 of 245 posts

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

#181

Post by bradleyjg »

notyourday wrote: post #129
BubRoss wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The shares with no voting power would still be converted in the case of a buyout of a company though, right?

It is also a lot more complicated than that. With a single class of shares every shareholder interest is aligned. It is not possible to create a subclass of shareholders among the existing shareholders without existing shareholders agreeing to it. So in a buyout all shares are equal and will receive and equal percentage of distribution of all assets regardless of how those assets are structured. The moment there are…

Eh. I don’t think the Delaware courts would go for it. Ebay vs Newmark is on point.

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

#182

Post by icelancer »

hbbio wrote: post #100
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.

There is clearly a market for WeWork... and many competitors. WeWork is and will be a great company, no matter what. WeWork main competitor is Regus, founded in 1989. Regus is now present worldwide with revenues of 2.535 billion GBP (2018). Their market cap is a mere 3.68 billion! There are also tons of smaller companies in that sector which are not international (mostly 1/2 countries) with much lower valuations. So,…

>> WeWork main competitor is Regus

Not really. Regus is brutally bad. I am not a fan of WeWork specifically but it's vastly superior to Regus' offices, old-school style of lead capture, and terrible dealing with its customers.

I now lease from an independent co-working space to expand on my small business' offices until we can find a larger space at a reasonable price (good luck with that in Seattle), and it's been great. WeWork helped push co-working along. Regus has done absolutely nothing in this regard for decades.

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

#183

Post by icelancer »

jakelazaroff wrote: post #79
tempsy wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Yeah, but all that would have been fine if he’d acted responsibly. Obviously giving him that much power is a dangerous game to play, but it doesn’t absolve him of responsibility for his behavior. Ultimately he — not the investors — is the one who built this sandcastle on partying, self-dealing and a cult of personality. One of the things about blame is that it’s never zero sum, and in this case there’s more than enou…

>> Yeah, but all that would have been fine if he’d acted responsibly

This is what people say when they give the executive branch of the United States unchecked power to unilaterally do things and sidestep the legislative and judicial branches. Presidents don't always do that sort of thing, and neither do CEOs or.... normal people.

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

#184

Post by icelancer »

michaelt wrote: post #108
purple_ducks wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They rent office space.

If you think office space doesn't vary in quality, you haven't worked in a very wide range of companies :)

Or rented from Regus, which is a company that people are just now finding out about. Their offices are absolutely embarrassing.

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

#185

Post by pgwhalen »

ehsankia wrote: post #131
asdkhadsj wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, it sounds like it is abusive, but it's an abusive relationship investors sought out. At this point it's akin to someone who seeks out abusive partners due to mental health issues. It doesn't make the partners any less abusive, but lets not kid ourselves and think the seeker is a healthy individual. Their greed is killing them.

I think the reality of the situation is that some of these investors actually like the "visionary leader who full control and isn't dragged down by investors" model.

Yeah I don’t understand why people in this thread aren’t entertaining that possibility. It objectively worked for Facebook, at least in terms of financial return.

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

#186

Post by bsder »

rightbyte wrote: post #158
gbear605 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's successful in the sense that it could raise prices to make a profit and there's a possibility that it would still have enough customers left. Unlikely the oft-discussed "selling dollars bills for 90 cents" companies, WeWork is creating real value that its customers will pay for. The question is still open whether that value is more than the operating costs, but it's at least possible. I'd bet against it though.

Uber is also creating real value for its customers.

And Uber could be profitable and create real value for investors. The problem is that, in that case, Uber isn't a unicorn and isn't worth the billions already thrown into it.

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

#187

Post by elliekelly »

DebtDeflation wrote: post #151
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.

>With $700M extracted The $700M figure is a combination of equity sold outright and loans taken out using the equity as collateral. I have not seen any breakdown of how much falls in each category. I would not be surprised to see those loans get called in soon given the current situation and the recent governance change requiring him to pay back any profits he makes on leasing those properties to We.

(Assuming he manages to stay in control) I'm curious to see whether he/the Board follows through with all of the concessions he made in an attempt to get the IPO off the ground.

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

#188

Post by ohashi »

chrisseaton wrote: post #145
hbbio wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is clearly a market for WeWork... and many competitors. WeWork is and will be a great company, no matter what. WeWork main competitor is Regus, founded in 1989. Regus is now present worldwide with revenues of 2.535 billion GBP (2018). Their market cap is a mere 3.68 billion! There are also tons of smaller companies in that sector which are not international (mostly 1/2 countries) with much lower valuations. So,…

Have you ever been in a Regus office? They're horrible spaces. They don't get it . WeWork is a lot nicer. That's why they're worth a lot more.

I've been a few times in different locations around the world. They were blander than WeWork and had about the same level of community. It was just an office. WeWork branded itself as something special... it isn't. It's a slightly nicer looking office (with beer* maybe). Regus is profitable and has a valuation in line with what they do. WeWork... doesn't.

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

#190

Post by jtonz »

manigandham wrote: post #179
solidasparagus wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume they mean using WeWork for Stripe's non-primary offices where flexibility is often more valuable.

Stripe is at a size where they can easily afford all the flexibility they need without a middleman company.

Isn't that We's end goal though? To get billion dollar companies like Microsoft, Stripe, etc. as tenants. People that don't really want to deal with running an entire building when they can just pay someone else to do it.
Post reply on HN