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.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (7853)	10/7/1998 9:37:00 PM
From: j_b	Respond to of 67261

<<Well you know, my guess is it would depend on the performance of that CEO.>> This is somewhat like my argument about people supporting Clinton because he supports their pet policies. If the guy does what you want, you will tend to look the other way (up to a point, of course). << Obviously if he owned a sizeable chunk of the company you couldnt get rid of him either.>> It IS kind of hard to get rid of someone that owns a controlling share of the stock, isn't it. However, at the company I was at, that was not an issue. A large share, yes, but not control. And back then, the risk related to a lawsuit and bad publicity made it more practical to get rid of the guy. However, you're right - if he would have been a standout CEO, they probably would have tried paying of the lady involved.