damn name wrote:Unfortunately, everyone lost on the bottom line from this, and that's all that stockholders care about. They don't care if Woodford did the right thing or did the wrong thing, they only care about their money.
A quick look at the portfolios of Japanese institutional investors would suggest that money is not their chief concern. Cross shareholdings, in particular, are not directly motivated by financial considerations.
"When it doubt, do nothing" is a major driver of decisions in Japan. Woodford required Japanese investors to take an actively supportive stance towards him and they were not prepared to do this. The absurdity is best highlighted by the fact that Sumitomo Mitsui effectively gave support to Takayama just as the investigation was recommending that Olympus sue him.
I don't know whether Woodford is a busted flush or not. It may be that Japanese investors later rationalize their refusal to support him by depicting him as a loose cannon. To suggest they have an opinion at all at the moment beyond, preferring not to think about the matter, is to give them far too much credit.
Yokohammer wrote:Woodford did the right thing.
1) He was appointed president of the company and brought a potentially serious problem to the attention of the management and demanded an explanation.
It's worth reiterating that the problem Woodford brought to the board looked very much like a criminal matter. This wasn't about an overrun in the R&D budget.