|
Post by azdick on Apr 18, 2013 16:04:13 GMT -8
It's akin to being a stakeholder in a corporation that has just lost an exec. No. It doesn't work that way. None of what you said works that way. No? You do know that corporations are reponsible for full disclosure to shareholders, and even in personnel decisions affecting board of directors and executives, if they don't give an explanation the shareholders lose confidence in their ablity to manage and inverstors stop investing. That IS the way it works.
|
|
|
Post by sportnlyf on Apr 18, 2013 16:31:52 GMT -8
Except when "Corporations are people too."
|
|
|
Post by aztech on Apr 18, 2013 17:07:35 GMT -8
Except when "Corporations are people too." Correct. If I recall from my accounting classes, they are considered individuals. That's why there's so much bitching by the GOP when they hear the buzz about taxing the rich.
|
|
|
Post by MontezumasRevenge on Apr 18, 2013 17:47:54 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by longtimesdsufan on Apr 18, 2013 17:51:50 GMT -8
Anyone making a contribution to this board has a right to know your real name and address. Also your salary and social security number. Post those on this board and we will make sure you know what happened. Dumba$$ response. No, the Dumba$$ is the person who does not understand that some things people do not want to share. You clearly do not respect the privacy of the coach and players. However I note that you want privacy.
|
|
|
Post by 1611Luginbill on Apr 18, 2013 18:17:39 GMT -8
No? You do know that corporations are reponsible for full disclosure to shareholders, and even in personnel decisions affecting board of directors and executives, if they don't give an explanation the shareholders lose confidence in their ablity to manage and inverstors stop investing. That IS the way it works. That's not the way it works. Shareholders are entitled to the compensation and terms of employment of board members. Stock holders, even preferred ones, are NOT entitled to private and personal details regarding personnel matters. You could have had your entire life savings invested in HP back in 2005 and would have not been entitled to any details regarding Carly Fiorina's departure beyond the compensation listed in her severance package that was filed with the SEC. I don't think you know how SEC filings work.
|
|
|
Post by chris92065 on Apr 18, 2013 19:17:05 GMT -8
There needs to be some clarity and closure given to us.
I think its fair that we as donors and fans are given some explanation.
Beth Burns could make a brief statment to the effect:
I am retiring for health reasons and I would like to keep my health issues private.
or
the AD could provide some kind of statment without evading privacy:
Beth Burns choose to retire for personal reasons and we wish her all the best in her future endeavors.
The cloak and dagger crap fuels speculation and does no one any good.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2013 19:18:42 GMT -8
Truth will out.
Patience. Whatever it is, it's a bummer.
|
|
|
Post by 78aztec82 on Apr 18, 2013 19:22:16 GMT -8
Truth will out. Patience. Whatever it is, it's a bummer. No doubt, it will all come out soon. Folks just need to be patient. We'll know soon enough.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2013 19:38:26 GMT -8
I have on confidence it was not health related as well. But no one was willing to give a reason if they knew.
|
|
|
Post by seagull on Apr 18, 2013 21:14:00 GMT -8
Not a health problem. Not a recruiting violation. No players were mistreated. The actual reason is a private matter and not a secret. I ask you to stop inquiring into a private matter. It is not for public disclosure. End of discussion.
|
|
|
Post by azdick on Apr 18, 2013 21:20:29 GMT -8
Dumba$$ response. No, the Dumba$$ is the person who does not understand that some things people do not want to share. You clearly do not respect the privacy of the coach and players. However I note that you want privacy. You don't know what I want, but you're sure willing to think so. The dumba$$ is someone who thinks the University can simply not say a word while those that support the University would like to have, and deserve, an explanation as to why we've just lost a great coach. If you think that the privacy of the University outweighs that concern, then we simply disagree. But please, don't pretend to know what's best, because you have already demonstrated that you have no clue.
|
|
|
Post by azdick on Apr 18, 2013 21:23:15 GMT -8
No? You do know that corporations are reponsible for full disclosure to shareholders, and even in personnel decisions affecting board of directors and executives, if they don't give an explanation the shareholders lose confidence in their ablity to manage and inverstors stop investing. That IS the way it works. That's not the way it works. Shareholders are entitled to the compensation and terms of employment of board members. Stock holders, even preferred ones, are NOT entitled to private and personal details regarding personnel matters. You could have had your entire life savings invested in HP back in 2005 and would have not been entitled to any details regarding Carly Fiorina's departure beyond the compensation listed in her severance package that was filed with the SEC. I don't think you know how SEC filings work. Never said a word about filings. I was talking about the logic and necessity of coming clean on these matters because it affects the confidence of the investor. Ergo, HP SHOULD have come clean, and if the had, perhaps would not have lost have of their share price.
|
|
|
Post by chris92065 on Apr 18, 2013 21:46:08 GMT -8
As long as burn's retiring has nothing to do with any ongoing dispute between her and the ad or has anything to do with possible infractions down the road then yes it's private matter and not my concern.
But I will say calling it a private matter means that it is a secret that Beth has choosing to not to disclose publicly.
|
|
|
Post by 1611Luginbill on Apr 18, 2013 21:50:30 GMT -8
Never said a word about filings. I was talking about the logic and necessity of coming clean on these matters because it affects the confidence of the investor. Ergo, HP SHOULD have come clean, and if the had, perhaps would not have lost have of their share price. What loss of share price? HP's stock did nothing but post new 52 week highs every month for the next 30 months and crush Dell after the severance. I think it's time for you to back away from the whole "shareholders" comparison.
|
|
|
Post by onelittleindian on Apr 18, 2013 21:55:14 GMT -8
With all due respect to her privacy, there's the discrepancy between those who want to know just for the sake of being nosy so they can put their two cents in on this (like every other) subject, despite having never attended a game and only commenting on the sport/team in a negative manner versus the handful of those who have commented here who are season ticket holders and ardent supporters of Burns and the team, that have genuine interest/concern for her, the team and the program.
|
|
|
Post by 12414 on Apr 19, 2013 5:59:23 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Apr 19, 2013 6:34:59 GMT -8
Not a health problem. Not a recruiting violation. No players were mistreated. The actual reason is a private matter and not a secret. I ask you to stop inquiring into a private matter. It is not for public disclosure. End of discussion. Cool, you've taken poetic flight, like Jonathan Livingston.
|
|
|
Post by some_aztec on Apr 19, 2013 7:29:06 GMT -8
Not a health problem. Not a recruiting violation. No players were mistreated. The actual reason is a private matter and not a secret. I ask you to stop inquiring into a private matter. It is not for public disclosure. End of discussion. I take it that you have been informed on what the actual reason was? If it is a personal matter, and she decided to leave, then I agree with you, things should be left private. However, without information pointing to that, there are lots of possible explanations that *should* be made public (or at least to the donors). For example, if Sterk cut her pay (or her staff's pay) to hire back Hutson, and that drove her to leave, then I think that the people who donate to SDSU are entitled to know about that. If we want successful programs, we'd (donors) need to pony up, or help recruit more donors... (Note: The above is pure speculation, and I have no idea why she left)
|
|
|
Post by FULL_MONTY on Apr 19, 2013 8:13:04 GMT -8
Not a health problem. Not a recruiting violation. No players were mistreated. The actual reason is a private matter and not a secret.I ask you to stop inquiring into a private matter. It is not for public disclosure. End of discussion. I am confused, is it a secret or not?
|
|