A Quote by Alex Berenson

Shareholder meetings are not usually the occasion for utter candor - or for that matter, arch sarcasm - by chief executives. — © Alex Berenson
Shareholder meetings are not usually the occasion for utter candor - or for that matter, arch sarcasm - by chief executives.
Chief executives that are successful make good chief executives.
It has become the custom in our country to expect all Chief Executives, from the President down, to conduct activities analogous to an entertainment bureau. No occasion is too trivial for its promoters to invite them to attend and deliver an address.
In reasoning upon moral subjects, we have great occasion for candor, in order to compare circumstances, and weigh arguments with impartiality.
That's the difference between irony and sarcasm. Irony can be spontaneous, while sarcasm requires volition. You have to create sarcasm.
I'm a really big believer in chief executives not staying forever.
I have to look out for the shareholder’s interests, and I’m the largest shareholder.
When I took over the family business, it had already been a publicly traded company for 20 years. During one of the first annual meetings I attended, one shareholder stood up and advised me and everyone in attendance that I should resign.
Candor is the key to collaborating effectively. Lack of candor leads to dysfunctional environments.
As we all know there have been fabulous women chief executives: Margaret Thatcher, Golda Meir.
My bosses cautioned me about my candor. Now my GE career is over, and I'm telling you that it was my candor that helped make it work.
Outside the arch, always there seemed another arch. And beyond the remotest echo, a silence.
Plutocrats were the chief beneficiaries of so-called neoliberalism and the suite of political changes it brought beginning in the late 1970s - deregulation, weaker protection for unions, the shareholder value movement, and the subsequent inflation of executive compensation.
Can the sarcasm,' he said. 'Please, I always use fresh sarcasm, never canned.
When you give chief executives too much compensation in stock options, they concentrate too much on the stock price, and there is a perverse incentive to raise the stock price, particularly when the chief executive wants to exercise his own options.
Most discussions of decision making assume that only senior executives make decisions or that only senior executives' decisions matter. This is a dangerous mistake.
Chief executives, who themselves own few shares of their companies, have no more feeling for the average stockholder than they do for baboons in Africa.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!