Didn't investors, especially SoftBank, enable this behavior? They deserve as much blame for this mess as he does, if not more.
The point of the board is in part to keep the CEO in check. They had many opportunities to do so well before weeks before the now shelved IPO roadshow.
One of the things about blame is that it’s never zero sum, and in this case there’s more than enough to go around.
> if he’d acted responsibly
> if
The "if" is the point. SoftBank had the ability to eliminate the risk of this "if", and didn't.
But what about the perspective of SoftBank's shareholders? If they're unhappy about this, they ought to be unhappy with the dealmakers at SoftBank for creating a situation where SoftBank is exposed to volatility of this kind.
This is what people say when they give the executive branch of the United States unchecked power to unilaterally do things and sidestep the legislative and judicial branches. Presidents don't always do that sort of thing, and neither do CEOs or.... normal people.
[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-09-06/wework-ip...
This is the fundamental conundrum. Softbank has invested a total of $10.65B for a 29% stake in a company that (if valued like the commercial real estate firm it actually is instead of the tech unicorn that it isn't) is probably worth $5-6B if we're being generous. Further complicating matters, We is posting losses and burning cash at an incredible rate and will need additional financing in the very near future. It only makes sense for Softbank to continue to prop We up if they believe they can dump it on a greater fool in the very near future, which is looking less and less likely by the day.
I think SoftBank is probably pushing things further enough until they raise money for their next vision fund.
A CEO trying to run a small little nothing company in a weird way isn't a big deal. It's only a problem because of the scale.
It would be funny if this blew up in SoftBank's face. I think it will make even Theranos sound more sensible.
Sure, the product exists and it's good but the "business plan" and its assumptions and business structure don't make much sense.
Though I don't know how long they will survive without any more cash injections in the short term due to all their rental liabilities.
In reality, it is a very good product with slim margins. The reason it is losing so much money is because it is expanding quickly to show that it is a "high growth" Unicorn company.
It isn't that it's a scam, it just puts it is a non-tech/non-SaaS category. Every founder/CEO wants to tell a huge growth story. If private investors are buying that then it's just that they miscalculated, but not defrauded.
A product with slim margins is one that you divest from so you can focus on the products with good margins.