Slashdot Mirror


CEO Questionably Used Pseudonym to Post Online

jpallas writes "The Wall Street Journal reports that court filings by the FTC about Whole Foods' plan to acquire Wild Oats reveal an unusual detail: The CEO of Whole Foods regularly posted to a Yahoo! stock bulletin board under a pseudonym. His alter ego was feisty, to say the least, and regularly disparaged the company that he later decided to acquire. A former SEC chairman called the behavior 'bizarre and ill-advised, even if it isn't illegal.' This certainly raises questions about online rights to free speech and anonymity, especially when the line between free speech and regulated speech depends on who is speaking as much as what they are saying."

12 of 187 comments (clear)

  1. So what? by seanadams.com · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why would you expect that anyone posting to a stock message board did NOT have some stake in the game? I don't see how or why you would differentiate the CEO from any other stakeholder who chooses to post for his own self interest. Does the public in general use their real names?

    It certainly reflects poorly on the him, but only insofar as he's just another lame schmuck posting propaganda on the message boards. Maybe I'm missing something but I wouldn't expect to find unbiased opinions there.

    1. Re:So what? by Notquitecajun · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A CEO would be differentiated because...well..he's a CEO, and has a HIGHER stake in case his agenda is out to acquire the company. However, I doubt that anonymous posters on a little-viewed yahoo board about a poorly-performing whole foods company which have a huge amount of influence on what its stock does.

      I can imagine that several large corporations have attempted to somehow change the stock price either for themselves or a competitor in such a manner, and I would be extremely surprised if it was worth the effort, unless those postings contained some sort of insider information.

      By the way, Mackey is an entertaining sort. He's a vegan who eats eggs, is a libertarian, and ticks off unions. I could almost like this guy. He also cut his own salary for his employees' benefit (the way it ought to be done, not by some idiot act of Congress).

      On reflection, this should have little to nothing to do with the acquisition of another company.

    2. Re:So what? by Cedric+Tsui · · Score: 5, Funny

      I don't think you understand the big deal here.

      This is a CEO who is paid by his company to acquire other businesses. Instead, he is wasting time on Yahoo message boards.
      I think all slashdotters will agree that browsing online forums while at work is unethical.

    3. Re:So what? by DerekLyons · · Score: 4, Interesting

      A CEO would be differentiated because...well..he's a CEO, and has a HIGHER stake in case his agenda is out to acquire the company.

      A CEO (actually any C_O) is differentiated because they have insider information - I.E. information not available (legally) to the general public and the average investor.
       
       

      He also cut his own salary for his employees' benefit

      That sure sounds impressive. How much did he cut it, and how prescisely did the employess benefit thereby?
  2. This just goes to show by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    They should ban pseudonyms and anonymous posting to forums

  3. Fine By Me by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It think that such behaviour is smarmy but not worth much attention.

    The guy is essentially just another anonymous poster. Even if his intended goal was to somehow affect the price of the company he was buying, as an anonymous poster the impact of his statements should be close to nil. If they were not nil, then the problem is with society taking the word of anonymous posters seriously, and the cure is not some sort of extended regulation, but for society to learn to think more critically.

    They say freedom isn't free. Well, this is a perfect example of a trivial cost that society should bear in order to assure freedom of speech for all of us.

    --
    When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  4. Bad headline. by peacefinder · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Actually, the CEO Unquestionably Used Pseudonym to Post Online.

    The questionable part was the propriety of him doing so.

    Carry on.

    --
    With reasonable men I will reason; with humane men I will plead; but to tyrants I will give no quarter. -- William Lloyd
  5. Yahoo stock message boards? by Pedrito · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The last place I'd ever take advice is from the Yahoo Stock message boards. Everyone is a zealot for one stock or another there. Who cares if people are dumb enough to take investment advice there. I suspect anyone who actually knows anything about the market and Yahoo stock message boards knows this. I suspect anything he wrote had little if any effect on the performance of the stock.

  6. I'm Shocked !!! by asphaltjesus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Unbelievable!

    A. The guy couldn't come up with another way to kill Wild Oats? He should hire some of the scumbags running HP. They've got plenty of dirty tricks and know how to give their CEO plausible deniability.

    B. The SEC in general would frown on this kind of activity from a CEO. In theory, they are held to a higher standard. Since it's a public company the likes of Albertson's would love to see disappear, no doubt more non-stories like this will appear.

    C. The job should be left to underlings. Contracted underlings like they do in *every* other industry.

    D. Most /.'ers fail to understand how much money he stood to make if the price of Wild Oats shares were lower by a dollar or two. Easily worth the effort. Easily.

    E. The simple fact he couldn't pay off enough people in D.C. to force this one through is also quite enlightening. The telcos have enough budget for bribes. I guess Whole Foods doesn't.

    --
    Got Trader Joe's? friendwich.com RSS feeds work now!
  7. No anonymity, no free speech, no truth. by twitter · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Someone going the the pen name eht asks:

    If you're not willing to take a stand for what you say, why are you even bothering to say it?

    Because the truth is more important than taking credit for it. Often, the credit is punishment and the anonymous accuser always runs this risk.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  8. Am I the only one who approves? by jesdynf · · Score: 4, Funny

    I mean... that's pretty cool. He didn't hire PIs to stalk his foes, "pretext" their private records, bribe our elected leaders, or even bully his interns into doing it and cutting them and their "independent actions" loose when the investigation came. No. That man sat himself down, got on the internet, and told some lies.

    Hands-on kind of approach. I like it. I don't think even the SEC can really complain about people believing anonymous internet posts.

    (I also propose Slashdot rename "Anonymous Coward" to "John Mackey, CEO of Whole Foods Market, Inc." for the week, but that's because I don't believe in letting him off scot-free either.)

    --
    Yahoo! Pipes are awesome. How awesome? http://pipes.yahoo.com/jesdynf/slashdot
  9. Re:Salary cut by CoderDude · · Score: 5, Interesting
    The details of his new salary are on his blog at: http://www.wholefoods.com/blogs/jm/archives/2006/1 1/compensation_at_1.html The applicable section:

    Beginning on January 1, 2007, my salary will be reduced to $1 per year and I will no longer take any other cash compensation at all. I will continue to receive the same benefits that all other Team Members receive, including the food discount card and health insurance. The intention of the Board of Directors is for Whole Foods Market to donate all the future stock options I would be eligible to receive to our two company foundations - The Whole Planet Foundation and The Animal Compassion Foundation. In case there is some technical, tax, or legal reason why these stock options cannot be given to our two foundations, then I will retain future option grants and will pledge to donate 100% of the gain from those options to the foundations. This donation of future options received doesn't apply to the stock options already issued to me prior to January 1, 2007.

    One other important item to communicate to you is, in light of my decision to forego any future additional cash compensation, our Board of Directors has decided that Whole Foods Market will contribute $100,000 annually to a new Global Team Member Emergency Fund. This money will be distributed to Team Members throughout the company based on need when disasters occur (such as Hurricane Katrina last year). The money will be placed in a special account and any money not distributed in any particular year will roll over and be added to the following year's contribution. We are still working on the exact way Team Members will be able to access this money. The first $100,000 will be deposited on January 1, 2007. (I added the highlighting)

    Not many CEO's behaving that way these days.

    Disclaimer:
    I work at WFM in the IT group, so now I make more than the CEO does. :-)

    CoderDude