Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by RetpolineDrama 831 days ago
>He pretty clearly won. There's not much to it. A huge chunk of the company went into open revolt and he got a competing offer that threatened to recruit all of them.

Yep, talk about an absolute power flex. You don't have to like it, but this is what peak performance looks like.
1 comments
baking 831 days ago
He went from controlling three seats on a six-member board to having one seat "as CEO" of a seven-member board looking to add even more independent members. Also, he can't pull the "the board can fire me at any time" card with a straight face anymore. He kept his job, but he didn't win by any stretch. There is a good chance he will move on to another role.
link
notahacker 831 days ago
He went from being fired after failing to convince the board to remove one of his opponents to being on a board that unanimously backs his return with his opponents all removed, because the majority of staff demonstrated unquestioning loyalty to him. Hard to spin that as anything other than a win.

The only slight downside is his position is evidently dependent on Microsoft's patronage, but I'd rather have one seat in seven and an alternative offer and the ability to threaten to take most of the company with me for the alternative offer than one seat in six with a board that believed they could oust me if they didn't like my decisions.

link
baking 830 days ago
Having employees leave for Microsoft is the least of the board's worries.
link
Jensson 831 days ago
The current members are almost all from for-profit backgrounds, they are on Sams side here.
link
baking 831 days ago
I don't think you understand the concept of governance. This is not Tesla's board.
link
code51 831 days ago
Any case similar to this? What kind of boards you find to be more fitting for the case of OpenAI? It may not be Tesla but you’re probably drawing another reference from history, right?
link
baking 831 days ago
It is hard to think of a case of a public charity that owns a controlling interest in a for-profit subsidiary and that is all they do. The Morman church owns a lot of businesses, but it is still the Morman Church.

Note that in the US, private foundations are not permitted to own a controlling interest in a for-profit company, so the example has to be a public charity. IKEA is controlled by a Dutch nonprofit foundation, but it has no obligation to the public except to give away a small portion of the profits.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stichting_INGKA_Foundation

https://www.economist.com/business/2006/05/11/flat-pack-acco...

link