Whole Foods CEO Caught In Embarrassing Message Board Brouhaha
from the mackey dept
The FTC's decision to oppose Whole Foods' acquisition of Wild Oats is the result of a misguided and myopic definition of what constitutes the relevant market. And while many expect Whole Foods to ultimately prevail, the proceedings have been unpleasant for the company's CEO, John Mackey. First it was revealed that Mackey championed the merger, in part because he believed that by taking Wild Oats out of play, it would prevent another supermarket chain from quickly becoming a Whole Foods rival. That may or may not be damning (from an antitrust perspective), but a new revelation will prove to be far more embarrassing. As part of its latest legal filing, the FTC dropped the bombshell that John Mackey had, for several years, been posting on the the Yahoo Finance message boards under a pseudonym, cheerleading his company's success and denigrating its rival, Wild Oats. He even made predictions about the company's stock price, putting out extremely high estimates for its performance. It's not clear that what he did was necessarily illegal, but his posting seems unethical and highly foolish, at the very least. If nothing else, the company's stockholders should wonder about what the boss is doing with his time.
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
by Anonymous Coward on Jul 12th, 2007 @ 7:26am
First
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
What he's doing with his time? by Anonymous Coward on Jul 12th, 2007 @ 7:27am
Wasting it, Mostley...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Anonymous Coward on Jul 12th, 2007 @ 7:33am
OFF WITH HIS HEAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: by Charles Griswold on Jul 12th, 2007 @ 7:37am
Don't you think that's a little extreme? All the idiot did was post "First".Oh, you mean John Mackey. Well, it's still a little extreme.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
everybody does it by Anonymous Coward on Jul 12th, 2007 @ 7:38am
All those fanboy posts you read on various forums and message boards praising Apple products are actually just Steve Jobs using a pseudonym.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Anonymous Coward on Jul 12th, 2007 @ 7:42am
What he's doing with his time?
Who are you the time police!!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Overcast on Jul 12th, 2007 @ 7:58am
How different is it from these "pump ups" you see corporations do on the nightly news?
Just last week I seen something on the news that seemed more like an 'infomercial' than real news.
You get some 'expert' on there who says how great something is... blah blah blah.
Sounds to me like the CEO was just hyping his company.
Why is it now that people act like the damn internet is some kind of holy ground or something? OMG, someone said something on teh inteRnet that's not trUe about me!!!! REAWAWRRRRRRR
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
This is clearly a violation of Insider Trading by Ajax 4Hire on Jul 12th, 2007 @ 8:06am
even if he does not personally gain from the increase in stock price (which he will).
A corporate officer must make all company information public first. No longer can a company give guideance or any other information to a few select. It must be in a public news release.
Posting to a Message board, although a public forum would not be considered by the FTC as a widely distributed public news release.
I smell big problems for Whole Foods CEO in the near future.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: by Edward Blunderbuss on Jul 12th, 2007 @ 8:15am
Yeah, maybe he posted in his free time?!
Which is just sad...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Cheerleading by Dosquatch on Jul 12th, 2007 @ 8:19am
Isn't part of the CEO's job to promote public confidence and opinion for his company? As long as he's just cheerleading, and not disclosing insider information, isn't this what he IS supposed to be doing, at least in part?
Are pseudonyms bad? Should they change the content of what a person says? I promise that this name is not what appears on my birth certificate, but at least I consistently use the same name. There's continuity with this name. Would my words somehow carry more weight if I were to post as Thomas instead?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: free time, work time, anytime by Ajax 4Hire on Jul 12th, 2007 @ 8:32am
he is still the CEO and cannot give material information to a select audience.
In reality, he owns large block of stock, whether he sells at peaks or does a loan on stock colleteral, he still benefits. His job is directly measured against the stock price.
Duhhh! Company Board holds the CEO directly accountable for Stock Price.
I hear deaf ears.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Cheerleading by Ajax 4Hire on Jul 12th, 2007 @ 8:37am
Yes it is a CEOs job to Cheerlead.
But he/she cannot do it in hiding, it must be a public and well-disclosed.
Go look up Pump-n-Dump.
He is the pumper. As CEO he is required BY LAW to disclose this information in clearly defined public channels and with a clear definition of source.
He is doing neither, hiding who he is and limiting the scope of the distribution.
There are different rules for Corporate Officers than for the general employee or outsider. He broke those rules.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
presumption by UniBoy on Jul 12th, 2007 @ 9:26am
Hmmm. A gov't agency made accusatiuons of postings supposedly made to the Internet by this guy under a pseudonym... Did they have a court order allowing them to wiretap his online communications? How exactly do they know it was him? Did his ISP hand over records related to his web posting activity? Were any privacy laws violated?
Do CEO's deserve less legal rights than the typical online music pirate? Or are TechDirt readers just full of hypocrisy?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Cheerleading by Jim on Jul 12th, 2007 @ 9:40am
Is this not what the entire industry of golf is for? Give me a break, how is this any different and how would it be illegal?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Greed by Dave on Jul 12th, 2007 @ 9:57am
I used to date someone that worked for Whole Foods. She said that Whole Foods doesn't care about employees, so they are probably a good company to invest in.
But I was shocked when I found out the Whole Foods accepts food stamps and government aid. I had no idea that poverty-stricken people were so into health food.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Cheerleading by Ajax 4Hire on Jul 12th, 2007 @ 10:30am
Break given.
If a CEO or any other corporate officer is found to give material information outside the normal stream of public media, then they will have to hire a lawyer to defend themselves.
From the way you couch the discussion (us vs. them, rich vs. poor) I can tell you are on the us/poor side of the equation.
Break given.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Greed by Anonymous Coward on Jul 12th, 2007 @ 10:35am
As an institution that sells food,why shouldn't Whole Foods accept food stamps and government aid? They don't force the poor to buy their products, but that doesn't mean they should deny them the opportunity if they so choose.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Greed by Shalkar on Jul 12th, 2007 @ 10:46am
Food stamps are supposed to be used for purchasing food---Everyone points fingers at the "Welfare Mom" who is buying chips and cookies for her kids as being too lazy to even bother cooking a meal. Now criticism for buying healthy food! Cheapest price for most nutients! Poor kids deserve to be healthy too...otherwise America may start to have a problem with obesity, oops...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: by Dr When on Jul 12th, 2007 @ 11:45am
He isn't Time Police, but I am. Get back to work.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Anonymous Coward on Jul 12th, 2007 @ 12:24pm
what a tool. i hope he pays for the unethical aspects of all of this, but i actually find the self-glorifying comments most disturbing.
"i like mackey's haircut. i think he looks cute!"
wow. just wow. glad i'm not a billionaire.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Was the real crime that he was caught? by Shun on Jul 12th, 2007 @ 4:37pm
A CEO's job, by definition is to praise the company and give it a lot of publicity. He kept the shareholders happy by (covertly) pumping up the share price. He probably "earned" himself nice big bonus checks, to boot. Now, given the incentive, is it not in a CEO's best interest to lie, cheat, and steal in order to maintain a high share price for his company?
Just how many CEO's of huge companies can claim that they are perfectly honest, all the time? And the down side to doing naughty things? You get caught, possibly fired, and you have to use 1% of the money you earned to hire a lawyer and pay whatever measly fine the government can come up with to "punish" you.
Maybe the share price goes down, maybe not. Either way, the system continues to exist.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Was the real crime that he was caught? by Charles Griswold on Jul 12th, 2007 @ 6:20pm
Of course not. That's the job of his marketing department. Honestly, the guy needs to learn to delegate a bit more.(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
reduce the cost in the right way by Jenny on Jul 12th, 2007 @ 7:19pm
A CEO should help the company to reduce the cost and increase the profit in the right way, legal and acceptable.I am a member of acb2b.com dealing with trades between America and China. The aim for me to be a member of this site is just to find a cheaper provider for my business. And I do find! Try to explore, it is worthwhile.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: This is clearly a violation of Insider Trading by SailorRipley on Jul 13th, 2007 @ 7:51am
[Disclaimer: I have no stock, but do occasionally shop at a Whole Foods]
I am slightly less quick to judge...
I read the linked article and nowhere does anybody state (or even claim) that he did something illegal...at no point is anybody claiming that he used, or made available, any corporate information that was not already in the public domain.
I totally agree that IF he did, it was illegal to do so and he should be appropriately punished for it, however, based on what I've read, there is no proof, not even a real hint, that he actually did that.
Using a pseudonym etc... might seem shifty, but let's face it, any blog/site he would post on wouldn't, not for even 5 seconds, result in any real discussion (same would go for Jobs, Gates,...). I don't know if he did anything illegal, but judging from what I have been able to read on the subject, it looks like he had no illegal agenda and was just arguing (like he would have (been able to) if he hadn't been the CEO).
I'm not saying with certainty he is innocent, I don't know, not 100% sure, but (sorry to repeat myself) based on what I've been able to read, my statement is much more backed up by facts than yours...either of us can be wrong/right, but based on available information, your confidence is somewhat misplaced in my opinion
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Whatever line he crossed, by Lee D on Jul 13th, 2007 @ 12:34pm
The collective bloggosphere should all chip in and buy him something nice as our way of saying thank you for all the material. John Mackey is a genius at satire, even if he doesn't know it. http://businessopinions.blogspot.com/search/label/whole%20foods
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
CEO blogging by Dan Greenfield on Jul 13th, 2007 @ 6:32pm
A while back, I listed 10 reasons why CEOs shouldn't blog. Http://bernaisesource.blog.com/1504872/ I should add potential stock manipulation to that list. It goes to show that blogging must be transparent whether you are the CEO or work in the mailroom
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
A Web Reputation Follows You by tcurranmortgage on Jul 17th, 2007 @ 9:32am
In its simplest form, this tale describes how a CEO violates one of the most fundamental tenets of a public corporation: transparency.
By creating online "alter egos" and attempting to hide his true IRL "self" this CEO demonstrated a telling quality of his chairmanship. If he can't be transparent on the internet---bearing in mind that your web reputation follows you wherever you go---how can he possibly be transparent in his other CEO activities?
Too, this story proves that many people still don't get it about the internet: the 'net doesn't provide the anonymity they all think it does!
I post a lot on the 'net and I follow a simple rule: whatever I "say" online is a direct reflection on my business. This allows me to keep my ire in check when attacked by a troll or when I want to fire off something silly and negative in response to something that gets me angry.
I've found this basic rule has saved me from embarrassing myself when I wanted to let my emotions speak instead of keeping my cool and thinking "long term" about my business and its online reputation.
Sometimes simple is very, very hard to do, but it's well worth the effort.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
I don't see what this fuss is all about... by John on Jul 17th, 2007 @ 2:59pm
Ok, I am not a relative of Mr. Mackey nor Mackey himeself under a psuedo name.
Now that I have gotten that out of my chest, i feel very relieved so that I can say whatever I have to say... right?
What is the big deal that this man has done? Everyone uses different psuedo names in message boards. There monkeys with keyboard on Message boards. Who the heck cares about what they say, there are always insiders taking sides of their companies and talking good things about their pay-checkin paying companies.
Albeit this guy happen to be the CEO, what rights did he violate? what did he really do? There is nothing wrong in his actions, he could cry out wolf or sweet talk his whole life and no one would have given hoots about that.
Media is having a ball like those star magazines who trive on Paris hilton stories. IMo, He did not violate nothin. Waste of SEC time, and everyone's time...
who care of what he thinks of his competitors, you have to be reading the message boards to have an idea of what goes on there, before you start a issue out there... and whoever invests with the message board info is a fool anyway.
BTW, did I mention monkey with keyboard, I wouldn't have done nothin with his comments.
Peace,
John (of course a pseudo name, what do you think!)
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Childish or Childlike ? by Anonymous Coward on Jul 17th, 2007 @ 5:32pm
What is this guy 13 years old ...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:quailty dropping along with stock/buy when at 1 by mike sved on Jan 8th, 2008 @ 9:31am
i work with wholefoods,and notice a change in there buying opp.by cutting corners,in the seafood dept. as well in other dept.the quailty has drop alot
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Add Your Comment