Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Urgent: Dubow says $40K went to his private fund
Under my questioning during this morning's annual meeting, CEO Craig Dubow finally conceded that $40,000 in Gannett Foundation money he directed to Western Carolina University in North Carolina was deposited in the Craig A. and Denise W. Dubow Scholarship Fund. The fund is off limits to virtually all Gannett employees. He and Executive Director Tara Connell have been dodging the question for more than four months.
25 comments:
Jim says: "Proceed with caution; this is a free-for-all comment zone. I try to correct or clarify incorrect information. But I can't catch everything. Please keep your posts focused on Gannett and media-related subjects. Note that I occasionally review comments in advance, to reject inappropriate ones. And I ignore hostile posters, and recommend you do, too."
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Jim, you travel across the country to attend the shareholder's meeting implicitly representing thousands of employees who view themselves as disenfranchised and without a voice, and THIS IS THE F'ING QUESTION THAT YOU ASK?!!!
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteToday's sound: pfffffffffff
ReplyDeleteI sure hope he got to ask others.
ReplyDelete1:32 -- If you were a shareholder, you could have been there to ask whatever question you wanted. Jim's question about the scholarship is fair and illustrates Gannett leadership's disregard for their own policies and, I think, an utter distaste for the people who work in this company. While Gannett Foundation support of scholarships for the children of employees and the news carriers of its community newspapers has dried up, Dubow seems comfortable elevating his stature by donating to a scholarship fund established in his own name, one that virtually no Gannett employee or their children can obtain. That, 1:32, speaks volumes.
ReplyDeleteI don't get it. With all of the layoffs and everything else that has been going on, with shrinking circulation and the installation of new editors and publishers and the obvious need for a game changer in the newspaper industry, and Jim wants to know about $40K in scholarship money that the CEO gave away, as he is CONTRACTUALLY ENTITLED TO DO! to a deserving university in NC, where previous posters back in January indicated was in a very needy area.
ReplyDeleteSo if that weren't enough, Gannett hires independent council so make sure no rules or laws were broken, wasting more shareholder money, all so that they could conclude that there were no violations.
The dude's allowed to give his specified amount away to whatever flippin charity he chooses, CONTRACTUALLY!, as a Perk of the job, and Jim wastes his questions on that.
Such small-minded thinking around here...
I'm still puzzled about this line of inquiry on charitable contribution by the CEO. Prior to working for Gannett (I am no longer with GCI), I worked for two other publicly traded companies and both had nearly identical programs that allowed a specific dollar amount in contribution to the executives' named charity. This was in addition to matched contributions that executives or non-executive employees could make.
ReplyDeleteOf all of the things that could have been asked, this persistent line of questioning about the CEO's decision to create a scholarship fund is at the very least odd and does make the questioner appear to be a "gadfly" rather than a crusader or journalist.
I think most Gannett stakeholders are more concerned with how the company will make it through the current recession and what kind of business models are being looked at to effectively transition the company and industry to a multi-platform future.
It would have certainly been appropriate for the self-appointed leader of the "Gannett dispossesed" to have focused on how the company plans to get out of the ditch.
Instead, the snarky (what is my name?) and odd line of questions made it easy for Dubow and the board to basically ignore the questioner.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteIn think Gannettblog has done a world of good for Gannett employees. But it pains me to say that Jim's obsession with this relatively minor issue is very disappointing.
ReplyDeleteI know there are principles involved. Jim is right about that.
But there are more pressing issues to be dealt with. And this was a potentially great forum in which to raise them. Sadly, that opportunity seems to have been largely wasted.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete1:48:
ReplyDeleteIt seems you're the one being being small minded. Why all this obsession with which question Jim asks? What question did you ask?
Jim has his own blog and can ask whatever fucking question he chooses. it's not his responsibility to bear the entire weight of Gannett questioning on his shoulders.
Some of you may think he's obsessed with the "perks" of the Foundation's board. It may be a small piece of the puzzle, sure, but it's a piece to be certain. And so, 1:48, ask yourself why the board of a company that is furloughing people left and right, laying off people, and otherwise acting like the H.M.S. Titanic is giving its board members perks like slush money to fund private philanthropy.
When you start your own blog, let us know so we can critique your questions too.
Wil
I love how the same person from corporate has come here to post multiple times about Jim's questions.
ReplyDeleteJim, it's pretty clear that you have no background in business reporting.
ReplyDeleteFrequently corporations use their charitable arms as a tax-advantaged way to do good. If you're looking to wind down or sell assets that have a low carrying cost and would be subject to a high, essentially capital gain, tax rate, then you'll have a high tax bill.
Transfer those same assets to a nonprofit, and you eliminate some of the tax liability and get to use that money to do good in a community.
Before all of you morons sit here and whine about the CEOs personal slush fund for charity why don't you do your homework and realize that if the tax bill was high enough they could actually be saving money and using the proceeds to do good at the same time.
But Jim's not really that bright, or if he's capable of figuring these things out, he intentionally obfuscates them for his own ulterior motives.
Whether this sort of donation is common or not is beside the point.
ReplyDeleteIt is common for CEOs to take big bonuses while laying off employees. Common, but wrong, and that deserves to be reported ... just like this.
Should Jim have asked about the layoffs. Dumbo and company have already adressed this and that's an easy line of questioning. "We did it to be financially prudent, yada, yada, yada." It's more difficult to explain a donation like this that has no value to the company yet speaks loads about Dumbo's commitment to employees.
4:40 pm totally gets it.
ReplyDeleteI'm done with this blog. It's all childish and Jim was the perfect teacher today.
ReplyDeleteYou know, Jim, if everyone who anonymously posts that they've sent in money before but will no longer do so, I'll bet you'd be much better off now than you really are.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteWe know that Jim does not get it. That's all that counts.
ReplyDeleteLOL! Judging from this thread, the Gannett corporate blog dogs have been unleashed with instructions to attack Jim.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteJim, you let us down.
ReplyDeleteShould Jim have asked about the layoffs. Dumbo and company have already adressed this and that's an easy line of questioning. "We did it to be financially prudent, yada, yada, yada." It's more difficult to explain a donation like this that has no value to the company yet speaks loads about Dumbo's commitment to employees.
ReplyDelete4/28/2009 4:40 PM
Yep, completely agree with you. Does anybody ever want to hear another lie about how Gannett rises like the "Phoenix out of the ashes" (re. business plan, innovation etc.)? Maybe that is why most of the Directors, VPs and other management didn't even attend this meeting. Stunning - since they are the ones that tell us worker bees how everything will get better. But it does tell you a lot about their support and dedication to the company.
FYI: I'm reading all your comments about my participation in yesterday's annual meeting. Lots of interesting stuff. I don't agree with it all. But I want to hear a lot more, too.
ReplyDelete