GE’s Jeffrey Immelt Is on Uber's CEO Shortlist(bloomberg.com)
bloomberg.com
GE’s Jeffrey Immelt Is on Uber's CEO Shortlist
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-27/ge-s-jeffrey-immelt-is-said-to-be-on-uber-ceo-shortlist
51 comments
> Bad decision. Very bad decision.
I agree. Immelt is an HBS educated manager. <- Full stop. That's the only thing about him. He has no Silicon Valley experience and worked for the GE his whole life. The only thing I would hire him for is to stabilize the company to finally go public. I bet the VC's plan exactly for that. I would not expect any innovation in Ubers business from now on. Immelt will bring Uber in shape for Wall Street, VCs cash out and then the whole thing can go to hell. As bad as Kalanick was, he was aggressive and hungry for success. Immelt is nothing of that. Bye bye Uber.
I agree. Immelt is an HBS educated manager. <- Full stop. That's the only thing about him. He has no Silicon Valley experience and worked for the GE his whole life. The only thing I would hire him for is to stabilize the company to finally go public. I bet the VC's plan exactly for that. I would not expect any innovation in Ubers business from now on. Immelt will bring Uber in shape for Wall Street, VCs cash out and then the whole thing can go to hell. As bad as Kalanick was, he was aggressive and hungry for success. Immelt is nothing of that. Bye bye Uber.
How much do we think the CEO position will be genuine, or more of an honorary position to make the company seem stable?
I hadn't seen it that way but like @dna_polymerase pointed out above, it may very well be. I still maintain it's myopic and undeserving of a company I'd like to think of as the next facebook/amazon/google/microsoft
These are outfits that have provided tremendous value to the entire planet. My view was that Uber could have followed the same trajectory. Now, not so much anymore.
These are outfits that have provided tremendous value to the entire planet. My view was that Uber could have followed the same trajectory. Now, not so much anymore.
I always thought Robin Chase (zipcar founder) would be a great pick. She's been a pioneer in transportation for a long time.
WHAT UBER'S NEXT CEO NEEDS TO SAY by Robin Chase
https://www.wired.com/story/what-ubers-next-ceo-needs-to-say...
https://www.wired.com/story/what-ubers-next-ceo-needs-to-say...
It'll be Mayer/Yahoo all over again!
I don't think Uber will last too long. The founder instilled a very bad culture from the very beginning. Travis is everything wrong with the valley right now.
They've also never made a profit and don't seem to have a clear path to profitability.
I don't want to be ageist but I believe there is a correlation between your age and ability to understand a paradigm shift. I think Jeffrey Immelt and I've also heard speculation about Meg Whitman are a bit 'old school' for this role. Not solely based on age but it's a factor. The sharing economy and the idea eventually autonomous cars are the play - is in fact in my opinion a radical shift in the way thing have been, the world Jeff and Meg led.
Unfortunately, that's the definition of ageist.
If you cant see what's wrong, try finishing this sentence in your head "I don't want to be sexist, but women .."
If you cant see what's wrong, try finishing this sentence in your head "I don't want to be sexist, but women .."
To be fair, he said he didn't want to be ageist, not that he wouldn't be.
Age is a factor though in how people think and perceive the world yeah? I do apologize thankfully I'm not in a position where my bias hurts anyone but myself and I'll work on my thinking.
That is an argument that ageism is right, not an argument that your post isn't ageist.
I guess my question is ..
Is it true age has a correlation with perception?
If so - is that truth itself ageist?
Is it true age has a correlation with perception?
If so - is that truth itself ageist?
Let's work from a definition here; I think this is the kind of "ageism" we're talking about (sourced from dictionary.com):
> a tendency to regard older persons as debilitated, unworthy of attention, or unsuitable for employment.
I think this clarifies things, doesn't it? Even if you somehow objectively prove that older workers are unsuitable, or less suitable, for employment, that doesn't make a philosophy against hiring older workers not-ageist. It just means that ageism is correct (to be clear: hypothetically. I am not endorsing that view).
> a tendency to regard older persons as debilitated, unworthy of attention, or unsuitable for employment.
I think this clarifies things, doesn't it? Even if you somehow objectively prove that older workers are unsuitable, or less suitable, for employment, that doesn't make a philosophy against hiring older workers not-ageist. It just means that ageism is correct (to be clear: hypothetically. I am not endorsing that view).
Why not Marissa Mayer?
She'll stop remote work and require all Uber drivers to come to office?
If only so she can read children's stories to them in condescending fashion:
http://www.businessinsider.com/marissa-mayer-childrens-book-...
http://www.businessinsider.com/marissa-mayer-childrens-book-...
-2 for stating facts backed up by a fairly concise source. Bravo.
What I referenced actually happened. Mayer gathered most of Yahoo in a confidential meeting and read them a cryptic excerpt from a children's book that nobody understood. If wasting everyone's time in that manner isn't condescending, then I don't know what is.
Here's an excerpt:
Mayer held the book up to show its last illustration. It was a drawing of a little red-haired boy riding a merry-go-round pony.
Hardly anyone could see the page.
No one understood what Mayer was trying to say.
Later on in the excerpt and in "Marissa Mayer and the Fight to Save Yahoo!" readers learn that Mayer was trying to say that, like Bobbie who finds joy riding a merry-go-round, Mayer values experiences over possessions — and that for her, Yahoo had been a great experience so far.
What I referenced actually happened. Mayer gathered most of Yahoo in a confidential meeting and read them a cryptic excerpt from a children's book that nobody understood. If wasting everyone's time in that manner isn't condescending, then I don't know what is.
Here's an excerpt:
Mayer held the book up to show its last illustration. It was a drawing of a little red-haired boy riding a merry-go-round pony.
Hardly anyone could see the page.
No one understood what Mayer was trying to say.
Later on in the excerpt and in "Marissa Mayer and the Fight to Save Yahoo!" readers learn that Mayer was trying to say that, like Bobbie who finds joy riding a merry-go-round, Mayer values experiences over possessions — and that for her, Yahoo had been a great experience so far.
Marissa's tenure at yahoo was not successful. She was unable to turn around the company, made acquisitions that were too late, or didnt work. What about her tenure at yahoo was convincing of her ability to be a good CEO?
She's not a good CEO.
Why Marissa Mayer?
She did good work at Google, both in software engineering, user experience planning, and handling a large high-revenue department (Adwords).
Which from the sound of it might make her a better CTO than CEO, but I certainly wouldn't judge her just by Yahoo. She likely has the capacity to do well at a growing company, with a clear path to profit (aka no more pivoting), which is exactly what Uber is and Yahoo was not.
Which from the sound of it might make her a better CTO than CEO, but I certainly wouldn't judge her just by Yahoo. She likely has the capacity to do well at a growing company, with a clear path to profit (aka no more pivoting), which is exactly what Uber is and Yahoo was not.
Oh she did a great job at Yahoo! if you use the right measurement: shareholder value.
what has she done that anyone should care about?
[deleted]
I'm not sure this is a good idea. Immelt feels too much like a manufacturing guy. Marissa Mayer sounds like a good choice, but again I don't think she's the right fit. They need someone who understands both software, and transportation. I think they should choose David Abney, CEO of UPS, or Gary Kelly of Southwest.
Mayer is a terrible choice. If nothing else, her tenure at Yahoo! showed how little emotional intelligence she has. That's the last thing you'd want in a replacement for an allegedly out of touch douche bag like Kalanick.
> Immelt feels too much like a manufacturing guy.
Less than half of GE's revenue comes from manufacturing.
Less than half of GE's revenue comes from manufacturing.
It was true before GE Capital had been divested, now I am not so sure it still holds.
Doesn't mean he is a good fit for Uber.
Non sequitur. It means the reasons given by GP for him being a bad fit are flawed.
I personally feel like David Cush (Former Virgin America CEO) should be the guy at the top of their list - he was previously on the shortlist in the COO search and if there is one person who understands building a transportation brand that people love its him.
Customers raved about Virgin America (and still do) even though they were largely a no frills airline - it shares a lot of similarities with Uber
Customers raved about Virgin America (and still do) even though they were largely a no frills airline - it shares a lot of similarities with Uber
Strongly agree.
I once lost a quarter billion in company value by bringing in a big brand name corporate CEO to satisfy VCs instead of continuing to make do with nothing but still-emerging domain experience and a passion for learning and evolving the customer experience.
In this kind of business, if the CEO isn’t relentlessly and ruthlessly proxying the customer needs, it will probably have a bad time.
I once lost a quarter billion in company value by bringing in a big brand name corporate CEO to satisfy VCs instead of continuing to make do with nothing but still-emerging domain experience and a passion for learning and evolving the customer experience.
In this kind of business, if the CEO isn’t relentlessly and ruthlessly proxying the customer needs, it will probably have a bad time.
Only on HN can a mere mortal like me read an offhand comment by a fellow commenter, claiming to have lost a quarter billion dollars (and believe it to be true).
Yeah contrast that with Immelt who oversaw a 50% decline in GE's market cap since taking the helm in 2000. Drastically under-performing the S&P 500 over the same time period.
I can understand the board's desire to put an elder-statesman style CEO in place to reign the "kids" in, but just because he went to Harvard doesn't make him an effective CEO.
I can understand the board's desire to put an elder-statesman style CEO in place to reign the "kids" in, but just because he went to Harvard doesn't make him an effective CEO.
This kills the patient
What are these folks thinking? Bring Travis back.
It's too early to have 1) a non-technical CEO 2) a CEO without domain experience & passion
There's nothing to demonstrate this guy even cares about what Uber is doing in logistics and technology.
It's too early to have 1) a non-technical CEO 2) a CEO without domain experience & passion
There's nothing to demonstrate this guy even cares about what Uber is doing in logistics and technology.
What are these folks thinking? Bring Travis back.
Mistakes are made all the time. I swear to you, there's an exaggerated amount of hate towards Travis. You'd think he's the devil. What has he done that's so bad? He simply founded a company that was super successful within a short time, with an idea that seems so easy that everyone thinks they could've done it and along the way some missteps were made.
Are you sure you would've done better? Would you like it if the plurality of stakeholders in your ecosystem vilified you in a similar way? I'm sure you wouldn't. Cut Travis some slack!
Are you sure you would've done better? Would you like it if the plurality of stakeholders in your ecosystem vilified you in a similar way? I'm sure you wouldn't. Cut Travis some slack!
> He simply founded a company that was super successful within a short time, with an idea that seems so easy that everyone thinks they could've done it and along the way some missteps were made.
Yeah, I suppose if you elide every reason he was removed he doesn't sound so bad.
Yeah, I suppose if you elide every reason he was removed he doesn't sound so bad.
> Would you like it if the plurality of stakeholders in your ecosystem vilified you in a similar way?
If I was having background investigations done on rape victims in order to discredit them for my own benefit, I would deserve it.
If I was having background investigations done on rape victims in order to discredit them for my own benefit, I would deserve it.
Honest question looking for an honest answer.
"Trust, but verify" is well-regarded modus operandi. Why is it acceptable in other circumstances but not this one?
If "trust, but verify" can be a legitimate threat mitigation strategy, how does one conduct the verification in good faith and avoid such verification being labeled as being an "attempt to discredit"?
I honestly don't see how rape differs from any other accusation of wrongdoing with respect to due process. Is it not the right of the accused to question the accounts of their accuser and conduct their own investigation?
"Trust, but verify" is well-regarded modus operandi. Why is it acceptable in other circumstances but not this one?
If "trust, but verify" can be a legitimate threat mitigation strategy, how does one conduct the verification in good faith and avoid such verification being labeled as being an "attempt to discredit"?
I honestly don't see how rape differs from any other accusation of wrongdoing with respect to due process. Is it not the right of the accused to question the accounts of their accuser and conduct their own investigation?
Verifying and discrediting are notably different activities.
I said it before and you can mark my word. This decision to hire Immelt as Travis' replacement only goes further to solidify my claim. Bad decision. Very bad decision.