Lou Gerstner on CNBC

[txlaw]

Well worth watching, especially for those of us in companies undergoing transformations.

 

http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000095377

http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000096537

http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000096580

[yp]

Heard a lot about him but this is the first interview I've seen with him.

Rational, constantly downplaying himself, intelligent and experienced! Brilliant man!

 

 

No wonder Mr. Buffett loves American Express and IBM!

 

If only we could get him at RIM...  :-\

 

THANKS FOR POSTING THESE!

[Liberty]

Thanks for posting that. His book was very interesting, good to hear the man speak.

 

I just wish they would fire Joe.

[txlaw]

If only we could get him at RIM...  :-\

 

I'm quite confident that HWIC has read Gerstner's book.  That was likely the impetus for FFH's foray into DELL (at higher prices, unfortunately), as they would appear to believe that Dell can pull a Gerstner.

 

Presumably the folks at RIM also will be receiving advice from Mr. Watsa pointing out the wisdom of Gerstner's ideas.

 

THANKS FOR POSTING THESE!

 

No prob.

 

[dcollon]

Great videos...thanks for posting them.

[Liberty]

One thing that bugged me a bit was the part about how analysts and journalists are so critical and always looking for the problems... I wish!

 

Once something is crashing and burning, of course they are, but most of the time they don't dig nearly enough and are way too cozy with management.

[fareastwarriors]

Well worth watching, especially for those of us in companies undergoing transformations.

 

http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000095377

http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000096537

http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000096580

 

Heard about a lot about him but never seen any videos of him before so thank you for sharing!

[sdev]

I just wish they would fire Joe.

[yp]

One thing that bugged me a bit was the part about how analysts and journalists are so critical and always looking for the problems... I wish!

 

Once something is crashing and burning, of course they are, but most of the time they don't dig nearly enough and are way too cozy with management.

 

 

I totally agree but it seems to me that, this may be the case b/c maybe the analysts interested in publishing a contrarian view are discouraged by their editors sometimes... I cite the case from "Confidence Game" where the author; Christine Richard said a financial reporter's performance is judged based on how the stock market reacts to their reporting. Also, she mentioned (if I remember correctly) how her request to cover MBIA's faux shell company; Negris Caulis was out right rejected by her editor.

 

Along with that, I think we don't usually get a chance to hear the analysts who are right on the money about a company going down way before it's cool, because they're usually hushed away or the general news consumer isn't interested in listening to them (though I think the case is different for most of the members here).

 

I too would like to see things change; maybe they would if we aligned the interests of the financial reporters with the buyside investors... but here's my guess; once things start to stabilize again (in w/e # of years) and the next bubble gets in the making and market sentiment goes up... once again the best of analysts shall again be ignored... and rinse, repeat.

What do you think?

[Parsad]

I just wish they would fire Joe.

 

Yeah, why's that frickin' guy even working there?  Him and Sorkin arguing was a pain to listen to, as well as every time they interrupted Gerstner.  Cheers!

[Liberty]

One thing that bugged me a bit was the part about how analysts and journalists are so critical and always looking for the problems... I wish!

 

Once something is crashing and burning, of course they are, but most of the time they don't dig nearly enough and are way too cozy with management.

 

 

I totally agree but it seems to me that, this may be the case b/c maybe the analysts interested in publishing a contrarian view are discouraged by their editors sometimes... I cite the case from "Confidence Game" where the author; Christine Richard said a financial reporter's performance is judged based on how the stock market reacts to their reporting. Also, she mentioned (if I remember correctly) how her request to cover MBIA's faux shell company; Negris Caulis was out right rejected by her editor.

 

Along with that, I think we don't usually get a chance to hear the analysts who are right on the money about a company going down way before it's cool, because they're usually hushed away or the general news consumer isn't interested in listening to them (though I think the case is different for most of the members here).

 

I too would like to see things change; maybe they would if we aligned the interests of the financial reporters with the buyside investors... but here's my guess; once things start to stabilize again (in w/e # of years) and the next bubble gets in the making and market sentiment goes up... once again the best of analysts shall again be ignored... and rinse, repeat.

What do you think?

 

I wasn't saying it's always their fault. The system is definitely structured in such a way that their interests are not aligned with most investors (who signs their paycheck? Who do they spend their day hanging out with?). The result is still the same, though.