It's not a good day to be a bigwig at Viacom. Both Sumner Redstone and Phillippe Dauman are coming under pressure from The Wall Street Journal and media analyst Rich Greenfield. His Pali Research says, "While we have yet to talk to an owner of VIA/B stock who disagrees with our view Viacom management is an impediment to realizing the full potential of its assets, we walked away from the Q1 2009 conference call even more convinced that the Board of Directors (controlled by Sumner Redstone) has no intention of changing management (a key reason behind our recent downgrade). In fact, they believe he is doing a fantastic job, to quote Mr. Redstone from yesterday’s call: “I will…turn this call over to my great friend and the greatest CEO of all, Philippe Dauman.”
Greenfield notes that when Dauman was appointed President and CEO of Viacom, replacing Tom Freston, he described his compensation package as this: "If the shareholders do well, I will do well. If they don’t do well, I won’t do well. I want to live with that.” Yet in 2008, VIA/B shareholders experienced a 57% decline, while Dauman saw his cash compensation rise 15% to $10.4M (not to mention additional millions in stock/options)," the analyst complains. (And let's not forget that Redstone's other minion, Les Moonves is earning overall compensation, including stock and option awards, valued at about $32 million. That' less than the $36.8 million he took home in 2007. But not by much considering the CBS Inc stock price is on life support.)
And The Wall Street Journal also suggests that Viacom needs management changes. "At the very least, ... CEO Philippe Dauman needs to overhaul management at the cable networks unit. While he cleaned house early on, he left in place the unit's top executive, Judy McGrath, an MTV veteran. Viacom says Ms. McGrath has Mr. Dauman's continued support. If results don't improve, more drastic options include replacing Mr. Dauman himself. Mr. Redstone said when he fired Mr. Freston that he had just 'one goal: to do what is best for Viacom.' It's time for him to show that's still the case."
This is all a bit of history repeating.
Paramount is heading in the direction it was in the 1960s before it was taken over by Gulf+Western and rebuilt from the ground up. All we need is a mega-budget remake of Paint Your Wagon starring Jason Statham, Jackie Chan, and Nicole Kidman to top it all off.
Of course the real question is, who might take over once the current regime enters the dustbin of corporate history? Who could have the will, intelligence, and resources to undo the damage that’s being done to the company?
Hold on. Viacom is about to have an a record breaking summer.
STAR TREK
TRANSFORMERS
GI JOE
Who wouldn’t want THAT line up?
With the mess all the big media executives are in why does everyone still think SAG must roll over instead of flexing its muscle?
I thought I heard word on the street that the mega-budget all new version of “Paint Your Wagon” was going to star Zac Efron. Of course Zac has to sign to star in the remake of Footloose first.
Then Zac has to remake “Flashdance” as the script is being rewritten to center around a male so that Zac can bring his trademark moves to this classic material.
Then “Paint Your Wagon” is the third pic in Zac’s trilogy. It’s all a mega-bucks, mega-budget 3 picture deal and Judy McGrath has sworn to support all 3 pics on both MTV and VH-1. So Judy needs to stick around.
How many remember that the Boopsey Twins Dauman and Dooley walked out with over $100 million each when Karmizan came in. They will walk out with another $100 million when Dedstone makes some changes after the annual meeting. As for LESS Moonves, he’s another piece of Dreck. The CNET acquisition WAS A DISASTER.
When the Wall Street Journal does a story on how Rupert Murdoch famously and disasterously for his stock holders paid $5 billion for the Wall Street Journal then we can take their critisizms of Sumner Redstone more seriously. How much would the WSJ go for today on the open market? Come on WSJ, how much? whatever the number it would be no where near $5 bil. that has been the lament of News Corp and Fox stockholders…Rupert is unchecked on the board level and makes disasterous purchases in print. Remember TV Guide??? I think he paid Annenberg $3 bil for that and what did he have to write that purchase down to?
But I digress…its a cheap shot for the WSJ to go after Viacom when the bigger story is Rupert and I am not an employee or former employee or friend of anyone at Viacom.