What Do Yahoo!s Think? What's Right and What's Wrong at Yahoo!?

Throughout these past weeks of the Yahoo! proxy fight, we've heard a lot of opinions about Yahoo! from lots of stakeholders except one group: current Yahoo!s.

We've heard Roy Bostock and the board defend themselves for the handling of the Microsoft deal. We've also heard Microsoft's side of the story.

We've heard from Carl Icahn, through his colorful letters, and other shareholders including me. We've also heard from Jerry and Sue Decker.

We've even heard from the stock analysts and industry analysts -- even though they have no skin in the game (although neither do some members of Yahoo!'s board -- but Mr. Bostock and Mike Callahan assured us on Friday that those board members now follow a rule that they have 3 years in which to get some skin in the game).

But, we have never really heard from the Yahoo! employees through these haggard last few weeks. Some might argue, they have the most skin in the game of any Yahoo! stakeholder.

For investors, we have diversified portfolios. Yahoo! is but one position in many we hold. For employees, Yahoo! is their livelihood. They have the most to gain if the company turns itself around; and the most to lose if it doesn't.

The press always wants to hear from this group to round out the varied points of view they display in their stories. But employees decline, for fear of their jobs.

Occasionally, you see a comment from a Yahoo! employee leaked to Kara Swisher, TechCrunch, or Valleywag. However, there is no place where a community of Yahoo! employee voices can converge to speak (anonymously) in a way which allows thoughtful exchanges of points of view.

For example, Jerry says that Yahoo! has a plan and is executing against it. I have heard from several Yahoo! employees that execution is (and has historically been) a major problem. Who's right? Maybe I spoke to a few people with axes to grind. Maybe the vast majority of the 14,000 Yahoo!s agree with Jerry - or maybe they don't.

As a shareholder, I sure would value reading their opinions in their full text, unedited. Because, here's the thing: pointing out a problem doesn't make it worse, it helps fix it. If there's a problem, shine a light on it. Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

Therefore, I would like to offer this blog "Breakout Performance" for such a purpose -- pointing out what's right and what's wrong with Yahoo! To do so, feel free to comment anonymously to this post. Or, if you prefer, send me an email and I will post several comments (without email addresses) in future posts to this site.

If you like this idea but prefer to share your thoughts on a different site or in a different way, let us know below the means you think would be most effective. I don't really care where the comments go.

Let me strongly state that I think it's important that they be in one spot. When different voices of employees get scattered across Valleywag, Swisher, TechCrunch, Silicon Alley, and other outlets, they lose their power, because most will read only one here or there, not all of them together.

Let's hear from the employees who are the heart and soul of Yahoo! What's right and what's wrong with your company? Feel free to complain if you think it's deserved, but let's also be constructive. What needs to change and how could it change? What specifically should happen to make this company great again?

You tell us. Don't let us tell you.

Sphere: Related Content

Yahoo! Withhold Vote Count from 2008 Annual Meeting

Here is the final vote count released by Yahoo! yesterday afternoon of the votes for the directors. Kudos to Yahoo! for releasing these numbers the day of the meeting. Last year, Yahoo! waited 7 weeks before releasing the numbers in the very back of their 10-Q.

As expected, the members of the Compensation Committee (Roy Bostock, Ron Burkle, and Art Kern) received a high number of "against" or "withhold" votes. Unexpected: the large number of votes cast against Gary Wilson.

It's also worth noting that only 75% of eligible votes were cast. This is an unusually low number. I would guess that several shareholders who voted for Icahn's gold proxy did not re-vote and that those votes were thrown out (as per Mike Callahan's comments at the meeting). Therefore, the "against" votes below are actually higher in terms of the percentage of votes cast.

I will comment more on the meeting in the coming days. For now, here are the numbers....

Director Shares For % For Shares Withheld % Withheld
Roy J. Bostock 832,023,657 79.5% 214,071,927 20.5%
Ronald W. Burkle 849,373,291 81.2% 196,722,293 18.8%
Eric Hippeau 948,862,579 90.7% 97,233,005 9.3%
Vyomesh Joshi 971,594,650 92.9% 74,500,934 7.1%
Arthur H. Kern 814,871,925 77.9% 231,223,659 22.1%
Robert A. Kotick 967,044,818 92.4% 79,050,766 7.6%
Mary Agnes Wilderotter 964,939,727 92.2% 81,155,857 7.8%
Gary L. Wilson 856,006,576 81.8% 190,089,008 18.2%
Jerry Yang 893,055,602 85.4% 153,039,982 14.6%

At the meeting, stockholders also ratified the appointment of the Company's independent registered public accounting firm, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, with 1,021,286,375 shares voting for, 9,952,603 shares voting against and 14,856,606 shares abstaining. Stockholders also voted to reject a pay-for-superior-performance proposal, with 339,808,082 shares voting for, 681,650,539 shares voting against and 24,636,963 shares abstaining. Stockholders also voted against a proposal relating to Internet censorship, with 54,531,125 shares voting for, 889,546,203 shares voting against and 102,018,256 shares abstaining. A proposal offered to amend Yahoo!'s Bylaws to establish a Board committee on human rights failed, with 41,874,370 shares voting for, 932,055,232 shares voting against and 72,165,982 shares abstaining.

Total shares represented at the meeting were 1,046,095,584, representing 75.8% of the 1,381,008,701 shares outstanding as of the record date, June 3, 2008.

Sphere: Related Content