Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Non-Tech : MAT - Mattel - toysRthem -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Zakrosian who wrote (429)	2/3/2000 5:22:00 PM
From: sjemmeri	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 706

Since sales in the core brands seem to be OK if not excellent, its hard to see it that way. The big question is are these results awful enough to outweigh any potential bounce from her resignation?

To: Zakrosian who wrote (429)	2/3/2000 5:35:00 PM
From: Mark Marcellus	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 706

"Jill Barad was dealt a decaying deck, but someone has to pay for Mattel's mistakes," said Richard Rubinstein, a fund manager at Oppenheimer Funds, who oversees several hundred thousand shares of Mattel." Anyone agree with this statement? That's a rhetorical question, right? I hope no one on the board believes that, or the new CEO they pick will be as bad as the old one. This statement certainly contradicts the official press release, which says that everything's going great except for the nasty old Learning Company. Since TLC was acquired during Jill's tenure, it's hard to make the case that she inherited the problem. Even putting that aside, the statement is ridiculous. Mattel may not have been running on all cylinders when she took over, but it was profitable and it was (and still is) a great franchise. Jill's situation was similar to Michael Eisner's situation when he took over Disney. He did a little better than she did. My vote for CEO goes to Pleasant Rowland, but I doubt that this board has that much imagination.