Slashdot Mirror
The End of Yahoo: Marissa Mayer To Resign; Yahoo To Change Its Name To Altaba (arstechnica.com)
maxcelcat writes: Spotted on The Register's twitter feed: Yahoo! Submission to The SEC. Most of the board is leaving, including CEO Marissa Mayer. The company has been bought by Verizon and is changing its name to Altaba Inc. I'm old enough to remember when Yahoo was a series of directories on a University's computers, where you could browse a hierarchical list of websites by category. And here I am watching the company's demise. According to the regulatory filing, the changes will take place after the sale of its core business is completed with Verizon for roughly $4.8 billion. The Wall Street Journal notes: "Verizon officials have indicated all options remain possible, including renegotiating the terms of the deal or walking away."
According to the regulatory filing, the changes will take place after the sale of its core business is completed with Verizon for roughly $4.8 billion.
I'm genuinely surprised it's worth that much.
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Most of the world will forget, some may even forgive, but we will not.
It is weird they decided to ditch the Yahoo brand, which is one of the last remaining asset (along with customer data).
If they paid branding consultants millions to come up with "Altaba", somebody deserves to be beaten black and blue with a briefcase, including the consultants.
Table-ized A.I.
This version actually crashed a company permanently!
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
"Yahoo" is still an powerful brand name that's decades old.
Who the hell throws away a household brand name and comes up with a brand new one? That's one of the biggest assets they still had. Yahoo as a brand name, Yahoo News (which tons of women still use as their primary source), and Yahoo e-mail (eww.) That, and of course as the older poster mentioned, their existing customer data. (Which everyone has now, hint hint, wink wink.)
Altaba? I mean, what is that? People are going to confuse it with "Alibaba."
Carly Fiorina, it's debatable.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
That other girl from theranos. At least Mayer hasn't been found in violation ot a ton of laws and has not been sentenced by a regulatory organ or court to not exercise further her "profession"
all I could hear was the laughter of a Woody Woodpecker-like Marissa Mayer escaping with bags of cash.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcSujceZDmg
Carly Fiorina?
I think everybody's jumping the gun here. What's left of Yahoo after the sale -- which will basically just be an investment holding company -- will change its name to Altbaba. I see no reason why Verizon wouldn't continue to operate Yahoo's core web businesses under the Yahoo brand. To not do so sounds like a tremendous waste of money.
Breakfast served all day!
Angela Merkel.
She failed at Google, she failed Yahoo
yeah, but her bank balance didn't though so do you think she cares?
...is a perfect illustration of the principle: "A-level people hire other A-level people. B-level people hire C-level people."
Yahoo (including the name), is being sold off to Verizon. Altababa is the parts that are left (ie, a big pile of Alibaba stock). The yahoo name, domain, etc are not going away, they'll just have a new corporate overlord.
Kind of like how slashdot wasn't renamed (or improved!) when bendover.net bought them, or VA Linux, or VA Research, or SourceForge, or Geek.Net or Dice.com, or BizX. Other than (fuck) beta, there have been no updates whatsoever since 1998.
Copyright (c) 1990 - 2014 Dice. All rights reserved. Use of this comment is subject to certain Terms and Conditions.
I've seen some estimates (googling "Marissa Mayer Severance" as high as $110 million.
That's pretty good for running a company further into the ground. I would have done it for half the price.
"Time to spend more time with the family" as they say.
According to one of the linked articles she's only entitled to $55m if she's "removed". According to the SEC fillings, she's "resigning". Not sure if that makes any sort of a difference, but I'm sure it came up once or twice in the discussions. Either way, I sure wish I could get that much money for failing at my job.
She was hired because she had a pussy, she failed because she is a moron.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
A yahoo email address was my first official email. Melissa Mayer ran the company into the ground and she is gonna get a golden parachute.
1) She wanted to run Yahoo like Google but the corporate culture was very different. 2) She thought of herself as a visionary and wanted to be a little like Steve Jobs (and she decided stupid things like the color in Yahoo mail's Android App) but she lacked vision.
I haven't seen any figures but regardless, she did manage to sell a worthless company for 4+ billions. That's worth a bonus.
> Altaba? I mean, what is that? People are going to confuse it with "Alibaba."
With Verizon buying Yahoo mail, Yahoo news, etc., the remains of the company will just be their Alibaba stock, which is already their primary asset. Buying Altaba *is* buying Alibaba, with one step of indirection. It's how you buy Alibaba stock if you want to (on paper) own a US company.
She didn't fail at Google, she was widely respected both internally and externally. Hence why the Yahoo board chose as CEO of the company.
The reality is Yahoo has been a zombie for years, only the investors weren't ready to admit it and put it down.
Well, she killed off a lot of the talent by completely closing the work from home privileges that many of the employees held. That was the beginning of the end for Yahoo as we knew it.
"She failed at Google"
Yeah. She was in charge of search, and we all know how much Google search sucks. Maybe instead of "Altaba," they should call the new company "Alta Vista."
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
without coming right out and saying: We're laying you off (or worse, paying unemployment claims). What's embarrassing is that a company as large as Yahoo stooped to that level...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Was CtrlAltDel.com taken?
tone
Fiorina? How about Elizabeth Holmes? Ellen Pao? No debate there.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
Bullshit. She was known as a shitty project manager but had a relationship with Larry and later a few other higher ups so most people just let it go and she rose through the ranks.
Verizon acquired AOL for 4.4B the year before...
Just because your an SJW and you WANT some woman or minority to be the savior who proves that a female or minority can be just as good as any man, doesn't mean that you should automatically jump on the hype train just because they have dark skin or a vagina.
But you won't learn, will you? The next Carly Fiorina, Ellen Pao, Marissa Myer, or Elizabeth Holmes is just around the corner, and you're going to taut them as the GREATEST CEO EVAR, aren't you?
She was just as good as several men who preceded her. QED.
She didn't fail at Google, she was widely respected both internally and externally. Hence why the Yahoo board chose as CEO of the company.
>
While at Google, she was demoted and left shortly after. Yahoo hired her because "she worked at Google, she must be smart".
This sort of shit happens all the time. Helwett-Packard, world's largest computer hardware maker hired a CEO from a software-only company, who had recently been fired after only 2 years as CEO. And then, after only 11 months at HP, fired him and replaced with him the the former CEO of Ebay.
Read these posts and you'll realize how tough Hillary had it from the get-go. Bigotry, nationalism, racism, sexism, tribalism of all sorts are not confined to truck drivers in the Deep South. Presumably almost all the folks posting here are college-educated with at least middle-class backgrounds.
So no, Hillary didn't do a terrible job. She just didn't a spectacular job like Obama did in 2008 and 2012, and that's what is needed to get past this unbelievable bigoted shit.
elrous0, why don't you mention the guy who was fired when it was discovered he lied on his resume to get the Yahoo CEO job?
Oh, he was a he so the "SJW" taunt doesn't apply. Nice.
The purchase details are still pending an investigation following the accounts leak. Most likely, the figure will go down. But by how much is TBD.
Seems like you could just as easily replace these CEOs with a magic 8 ball and get similar results.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
She failed at Google, she failed Yahoo...
She'll probably be the next head of Telstra.
The stupidest move was when Yahoo refused the Microsoft offer. It was just down hill from then on.
let's hope she doesn't get to lead any company for the rest of her laugh.
Does she now have a fluffy white cat and live under a volcano on a tropical island? She seems a bit young to be doing the evil laugh for the rest of her life.
"She failed at Google"
Yeah. She was in charge of search, and we all know how much Google search sucks. Maybe instead of "Altaba," they should call the new company "Alta Vista."
Wrong. She was not in charge of search at all. She had a role in the design of the search page, then she was in charge of user experience and the shopping stuff. The search stuff was (is) handled by engineers not by a PM/QA person.
lucm, indeed.
Mayer failed, so I'm not making excuses for her, but look at these posts naming all high-profile female CEO failures plus some that haven't failed (Rometty, Whitman, Barra) and try to make it justify their miserable existence as 30 years olds in their mom's basement.
It's stupid. Performance of individuals should not be generalized by race, gender, religion, or other criteria based on tribal criteria. If it is, those posts should be modded down to -1 immediately. But many of the mods we have these days just aren't high character people.
I miss the word more that I'll miss the company.
... since Moby Dick was a minnow.
Yahoo crapped out a long time ago when it lost its compass.
They were, at one time, the "go to" search engine and stepped away from that core competency to do every goddam thing EXCEPT search.
Let's remember this headline as we watch Apple make the same mistake.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Dude not only do you suck at being snippy, you're wrong and that "Israeli Engineering Open House" blog page is not a reference.
She was not in charge of search - she was actually removed from that team because the real search guy (Amit Singhal) complained and they sent her to the shopping division ("Products Search") where they eventually put someone above her because she was a pain in the ass.
lucm, indeed.
It's not the hiring that's the problem so much as the insane over-hype that accompanies the hiring. Elizabeth Homes was getting gushing cover stories in major publications before she had even proven that Theranos's technology even worked.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Except every major media outlet wasn't treating her male predecessor as if he was Jebus-the-savior whose shit didn't stink.
Maybe instead of "Altaba," they should call the new company "Alta Vista."
My first thought was that the name was going to be a concern. One company with major search engine roots changing its name to one that starts with the same five letters and ends on the same as another major search engine? Will HP (or whoever owns the rights to altavista these days) let that happen without unleashing the lawyers?
What's next? Google renaming to altabeta?
How do you pronounce it? "OL-tuh-BAH?" "AL-TAB-uh?"
Could anyone have saved Yahoo!? I'm not sure even any extremely successful tech CEO - Nadella, Bezos, Picheai - could have done the job. It actually may be amazing that it's lasted as long as it has. The one thing Yahoo! has that is top notch is its financial pages which I use and hope it's one of the things either saved in its present form or taken over by someone who can keep it going. The financial features Google has are just awful.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell
And this, ladies and gentlemen is what a parade of mismanagement looks like. Corporate raider CEO after corporate raider CEO trying to pump up short term valuation at the expense of long term viability.
I have said it before, I will say it again. Every executive level and board member should be required by law to receive all compensation above 10x median employee salary as stock options that start to mature in 5 years and mature 20% per year. Thus, if they get $10M per year pay, something like $9.4M is tied up for 5 years and they don't get 100% out of their first years pay until the 10th year. Force these slash and burn CEOs who are only looking to line their pockets to ensure long term corporate viability.
If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
AOL turned themselves into a media business and actually owned a lot of high traffic websites like The Huffington Post, TechCrunch, and Engadget. Can't really see that worth $4B either, but it's not like they bought a dial-up business.
Yahoo probably still has Alibaba shares I assume? That might be worth quite a lot, much more than Yahoo is worth.
She didn't fail at Google, she was widely respected both internally and externally. Hence why the Yahoo board chose as CEO of the company.
The reality is Yahoo has been a zombie for years, only the investors weren't ready to admit it and put it down.
Her reputation was for working at Google. Not for being some kind of super worker. No. Her rep was for being there and having been there early on and long enough to be somebody important without actually contributing a hell of a lot. It's really a lot like having a low /. user number. It gains some respect and whatever but it doesn't really mean much.
The only reason Marissa's adventures at Yahoo lasted this long is that she was fairly smart and it helped obscure that she had no clue what the hell she was doing.
Sig for hire.
"Yahoo" is still an powerful brand name that's decades old.
Yes... and that's part of the reason why Verizon is buying it.
The remaining company (current Yahoo ex-web properties) needs a new name since Verizon is getting "Yahoo".
Sorry ... Could not resist ...
Totof
I'm so glad I changed my 'real' name to Ball Zack many months ago.
But the Alibaba shares are not included in the sale - that's why the remaining entity is (almost) called Alibaba...
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I! Cannot! Help! But! Remember! The! Many! Billions! Microsoft! Was! Willing! To! Shell! Out! For! Yahoo!.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/petercohan/2014/01/21/should-microsoft-acquire-yahoo-for-53-billion/#651371e6a19e
A 'singular oddity' is an event that cannot be explained and only happens when you are alone.
Yahoo had positive revenue before she got there. Hardly worthless.
I believe Yahoo owns Altavista
-- I may be paranoid, but I'm still alive
of course according to many on the interwebs the main reason Ms. Mayer failed is because she has a vagina.
No, that's why she got the job. She failed because she's incompetent.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
This is what you get when you put women in tech.
WRONG.
This is what you get when you hire someone for no other reason than their sex. There are many women I know who do a fine job running companies and groups within companies, and what they have in common is that they spend more time doing their jobs than seeking publicity.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
So CEO Marissa Mayer was wrong about telecommuting. Her ban on working via network did not help Yahoo.
I don't know if its possible, but I find myself missing their old category approach sometimes. Especially if I'm looking for a set of websites with information generally surrounding a common topic, but not necessarily matching any specific search term or results.
Google has a kind of less than useful value searching on generic terms and doesn't seem to do a very good job of producing search results that list web sites associated with a topic.
Maybe Yahoo should have tried to re-invent their old school directory/category approach combining search and some kind of AI designed to organize information by topic in coherent ways.
This is Yahoo we are talking about. I would have done the job for 5 cents and a ball of pocket lint.
...
It should have happened over a decade ago. This company was a case study in stagnation and mismanagement. They had no real vision for ages, and it showed in everything from their product (non-offerings) to their janky back-end systems that could barely cope with basic email functionality.
Honestly, if I were in the market to buy, it would be to take the entire thing apart for scrap value to the highest bidder piecemeal.
@Mindless Drivel: 100% of Twitter posts ever Tweeted.
Stephen Elop is an employee.
Their biggest issue was when they stopped being a search engine and started being a media gossip site. While it kinda feels sad from the whole internet history thing, Yahoo really died at least 15 years ago.
It's really a lot like having a low /. user number. It gains some respect and whatever but it doesn't really mean much.
Of course that's what someone in the 800k range would say. Down here in the 300k range, we're feeling no pain. Except for those stuck-up 100k range-ers, they really boil my potato.
- First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
So, more serious question: what's happening to yahoo finance? It's built-in as a data source in lots of places (e.g. pandas_datareader); what do people typically use for quotes instead today?
Yes.
Will I still be able to ping yahoo?
I can't believe they wouldn't be renegotiating after the breach. Why would they pay that much for the extra liability?
Wat?
My spoon is too big.
No, that wasn't the beginning of the end. I remember very clearly when she was hired that she was hired to "Turn Yahoo around" and other words like "Rescue", "Save", and so on were used. Yahoo was already a sinking ship.
The work-from-home thing may not have helped, but it was far from the beginning of the end. The beginning started many years before she took charge.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Do you mean "who you know" in the Biblical or Platonic sense?
Some time ago the new owners of Slashdot actually posted to KIA, Reddit's infamous Gamergate forum, encouraging readers there to come over here. That's why there's so much misogynist shit here at the moment.
I don't think anyone can reasonably say Mayer killed Yahoo. She just failed to save it. I doubt most Slashdotters know how to save Yahoo, but a very loud subset does like blaming women for everything.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Yahoo Mail, and the name "Yahoo!" are being sold to Verizon. Altaba is the name for everything that isn't being sold to Verizon.
So no, you don't have to worry about your Yahoo mail address changing to someone@altaba.com. It'll actually be changing to someone@verizon.net.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Nothing to do with Ubuntu or Mint. That's a Firefox thing. If you do a fresh install of Firefox under Windows or Mac, you'll also find it defaults to Yahoo.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Should have been AltCtrlDel.
Have gnu, will travel.
The Yahoo Web Directory was a great tool. as Yahoo went commercial the company deviated so far from it's roots that it became just another search engine plauged with fake news and celebrity gossip crap. So.. because of that Google became my web tool.
Google is becoming annoying. I'm hoping the Verizon / Yahoo deal falls through and somehow Yahoo regroups, finds it's roots and becomes the
useful internet directory that it once was. Drop the dumb celebrity crap, drop the sponsored fake news..
If the founders of Yahoo were in charge, and they stayed with a technical focus rather than fake news and celebrity gossip I think Yahoo would still be a viable business today.
300K range? Peasant.
Hwat?
Some (not all) of Yahoo's problems:
Fucking with Yahoo Portfolio, changing its format to something useless (over 90% of the comments hate it)
Interspersing ads with news.
Making Yahoo Finance "news" appear to be stories with content equal to The National Enquirer.
Making their news page the same.
Radically increasing the cost of a paid email service, whose only use is to screen out irritating ads.
The "security stuff" that was ignored for years and kept from users for years.
I consider myself a bit of a latecomer to Slashdot.
I only look human.
My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
Get off my lawn.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
"She failed at Google"
Yeah. She was in charge of search, and we all know how much Google search sucks. Maybe instead of "Altaba," they should call the new company "Alta Vista."
Altaba - [Ahl-tah-bah]
noun
1. a contraction between Alta-vista (Yahoo bought AltaVista in 2003) and Alibaba (aka "RemainCo" part of Yahoo that holds $37billion of Alibaba stock). .
2. a generic term for a used-to-be-search-company-that-still-owns-lots-of-Alibaba stock
Example: "Altaba is a stupid but totally appropriate name for that company."
verb
1. to complete the process of running a business into the ground divesting all operations and turning it into a zombie company that will never die because it owns too much stock in a company that cannot/willnot buy the stock back without suffering a huge tax bill.
Example: "Wow, that CEO totally Altaba-ed that company!"
Ginni Rometty. You know, the useless one who has presided over 18 straight quarters of declining revenue in IBM?
she was a successful Google executive
Does the term "coat tails" ring a bell with you?
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Dreadfully sorry old chap, were you saying something? I can't hear you over the sound of how much respect and whatever my UID gets me. *adjusts monocle*
"Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson
A 'fact' from an anonymous coward...
That's not that debatable, in my opinion. Carly is worse, much worse.
Mayer took over a company that was already a big has-been, and ran it into the ground. It's doubtful anyone else would have succeeded in really turning it around, it's just a question of whether they could have done a better job extracting value from it (at the point that she took over) or turning into something that performed better by excising the stale parts.
Carly took over a great company that made great products (HP) and ran it into the ground, splitting off the parts that made excellent T&M gear and medical equipment, and keeping the part that made crappy computing gear to compete with low-cost Asian companies. She did this largely by forcing an expensive merger with Compaq, which at that point was a lot like Yahoo: a big has-been.
Also, before Carly took over HP, she helped run Lucent (a successful telecom equipment maker) into the ground.
Mayer wasn't a good CEO by any stretch, but let's at least be fair: she took over a company that had serious problems, and then failed at doing much good with this bad hand of cards. This just isn't the case with Carly and HP. There was no good reason for HP to merge with Compaq, but she forced it and it really destroyed what made HP a great company.
No. Carly is the worst.
Holmes managed to build up a company from nothing into something hugely valuable. It of course turned out to be a giant fraud in the end, but she did at least manage to turn nothing into something for a while.
Pao? I'm not sure I see how she was ever bad at all. She ran an internet forum site for a while, and due to the nature of Reddit and all its hugely diverse discussion groups, it's a lot like herding cats and she ran into some big problems and finally left. Maybe she could have done better, I don't know. Either way, Reddit is still just fine today and still hugely popular, so she certainly didn't run it into the ground.
Neither of these rise to the level of destruction that Carly accomplished by pushing for a merger of HP and Compaq, destroying the great company that was HP and turning it into a purveyor of shitty laptops. She took a solid, excellent company and ran it into the ground, leaving it much worse off than it was before. That, to me, makes her the worst female tech CEO of all time. Mayer doesn't deserve this distinction; the company she took over was already a shitty has-been and it's unlikely anyone could have done anything great with it. She certainly didn't do anything good with it, but it's just not comparable to Carly and the way she ruined HP.
Wow, this is a stupid post.
We're discussing female tech CEOs here (with the discussion starter being "who's worst?"), so obviously it's going to be a comparison between various female tech CEOs to argue which one is worst. Male CEOs can't be compared here because we're talking about females.
Maybe you should leave adult discussions like this to us college-educated folks since this seems to be a hard concept for you.
But since you allege sexism, there's no shortage of shitty male tech CEOs (and male CEOs in general). Stephen Elop is a good example here from recent years. Steve Ballmer of MS is another one. Tim Cook I think is a great example; he's really running Apple into the ground it seems. In the last decade and outside of tech, Home Depot's ex-CEO Bob Nardelli was widely reviled as running that company into the ground.
As for Hillary, yes, she absolutely did do a terrible job, as did the entire Democratic Party. That's why they lost to the second most unpopular candidate in history (she's the most). They stuck a knife in the back of Bernie's campaign (as shown by the leaked emails), and pushed a horribly unpopular and flawed candidate at all costs, and didn't even bother campaigning in a bunch of states they thought were "safe" (e.g. Pennsylvania), and as a result, a bunch of people voted 3rd-party and a bunch more just sat at home (see the turnout numbers in comparison to 2008). They completely failed to learn from recent history: Democratic presidential candidates have lost election after election in the past several decades because they were uncharismatic and unpopular: Mondale, Dukakis, Gore, Kerry. They won with Bill Clinton and Obama, and what do those two have in common? They're both highly charismatic. Obama also did a masterful job of campaigning, and he energized the under-30 vote, getting them to turn out in record numbers. It was obvious early on that Hillary just couldn't do that, and had no love from the Millennials, but Bernie did (despite being even older). Even worse, Hillary and her campaign were outright condescending to young people, telling people it was their duty to vote for her because "it's her turn", "I'm with her" (not exactly a message that tells you why the candidate is worth voting for), that you're a sexist if you don't vote for her, etc. It was no surprise that she lost, and ultra-liberal filmmaker Michael Moore even predicted it long before the election. It wasn't bigotry that cost Hillary the election, it was the fact that she was a terrible candidate who reeked of corruption and seemed to be a warmonger, and this just wasn't enough to get people to get up and get out to the polls to vote for her. Meanwhile, a significant part of the country has been left behind by economic changes and they really thought a crappy businessman could actually fix things for them because he spoke their language and told them what they wanted to hear, so he actually had a lot of enthusiasm on his side. No one was enthusiastic about Hillary, except for a few idiotic sycophants like you; the vast majority of people who voted for her did so out of fear of the "worse evil", and historically that strategy has not gone well for Democrats. It works fine for the Republicans because conservative voters will happily go vote for someone just because of a single issue, whether it's gay marriage or guns or abortion or whatever. That doesn't work with liberal voters; they need to be inspired to vote for someone they believe in, because apparently they have higher standards (and of course more idealism). Too bad the DNC is too incompetent and stupid to understand this and back the candidate who actually does inspire people, rather than the corporate whore.
" she did at least manage to turn nothing into something for a while."
So did Charles Ponzi. Your point?
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
My point is that I have more respect for someone who is able to build something, even if it's fraudulent, than someone who takes a perfectly good company and runs it into the ground.
And don't forget her unprecedented level of unpleasantness. For instance, she was allocating meeting time in 5 minutes increments and had people waiting in line next to her office for "their" 5 minutes to make sure her time was not wasted; subordinates, peers, superiors, vendors - everyone was "equal" when it came to waiting for an Audience.
She, on the other hand, frequently showed up late to meetings. Sometimes hours late like in some famous instances where people had to wait for her to show up for a dinner with important clients.
The real guilty people are those who hired her at Yahoo. Any background check would have raised all those issues.
lucm, indeed.
That's fair. But it says a lot about your ethics.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
No, it doesn't, that's just you trying to push an agenda. The debate here is who's a worse CEO. "Worse" isn't defined here, but I'm assuming that "incompetence" is the measure of "worse", and by that measure Carly is the worst of the lot. Fraudsters aren't incompetent (unless they incompetently perpetrate their fraud of course).
And if you're trying to argue ethicality, I fail to see how Fiorina or Mayer are any more ethical than Theranos. They're all morally bankrupt people. People who become CEOs generally are.
"They're all morally bankrupt people. People who become CEOs generally are."
Even limiting that to SP500, you're wrong.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
Alabia?