[Info-vax] HPE going after Mike Lynch's estate

[Dave Froble]

On 9/17/2024 9:58 PM, Chris Townley wrote:
> On 18/09/2024 02:12, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 9/16/2024 2:18 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>> On 2024-09-16, Arne Vajhøj <arne at vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>>>> On 9/16/2024 8:31 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>>>> Can I assume that, in order to protect the shareholders, they intend to
>>>>> go after the HP management who made the purchase decision in the first place
>>>>> without carrying out the due diligence checks before buying Autonomy ?
>>>>>
>>>>> No, I didn't think so. :-(
>>>>
>>>> The acquisition was done in the very short reign of Leo Apotheker.
>>>>
>>>> According to Wikpedia he got 7.2 M$ in severance pay, 3.56 M$
>>>> in shares and a performance bonus of 2.4 M$ when he was kicked out
>>>> after 10 months.
>>>>
>>>> And he has done rather well as member/chairman of various
>>>> companies boards since then.
>>>>
>>>> But he does not have 4 B$.
>>>
>>> The point is to make an example of him for not following established
>>> procedures and hence costing them a _lot_ of money.
>>>
>>> That way, future executives will be less tempted to do the same thing
>>> and hence the shareholders benefit.
>>>
>>> These people get a _lot_ of money. They should have a level of
>>> responsibility that matches earning that amount of money.
>>
>> I totally agree with that.
>>
>> But unless there is a claw back clause in his contract,
>> then there is no way to move forward with that.
>>
>> And I am a little bit puzzled that you believe that
>> the company should try and claw back severance/bonus
>> of a an ex-CEO for negligence in an
>> acquisition, because it may deter other CEO's from
>> doing the same, but you don't believe that the
>> company should try and claw back the gain of
>> company sale based on fraudulent accounting practices
>> from the company's CEO? The CEO avoided jail because
>> the court did not find it proven that he knew about the
>> fraudulent accounting practices, but while not knowing
>> is not an criminal offense, then it is still
>> negligence and clawing back the gain may deter other
>> CEO's from doing the same.
>>
>> Arne
>
> Over here in the UK, we have a legal principle of Caveat Emptor
>

There is two sides, at least, to that.

The buyer should know what he is buying, and that is his responsibility, 
including making sure the seller is being honest.

Then again, a seller being fraudulent, should not be tolerated.

Not that I know much, but I thought HP was at fault.  Then again, there is the 
old "reach for a lawyer" that is sort of despise.

-- 
David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      E-Mail: davef at tsoft-inc.com
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA  15486