If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Motley Fool)   AOL's Tim Armstrong is one of the worst CEOs of all time. OF ALL TIME. And not just because of the baby thing   (fool.com) divider line 69
    More: Obvious, AOL, CEO, Motley Fool, free cash flow, Lesson Learned  
•       •       •

4137 clicks; posted to Business » on 10 Feb 2014 at 1:04 PM (24 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



69 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-02-10 12:04:18 PM

subscription models:


philly.barstoolsports.com


My Preciouuussssss.

 
2014-02-10 12:09:13 PM
OTOH, he did succeed in making thousands of investors realize that AOL is still in business.
 
2014-02-10 12:23:34 PM
No, the guy who ruined Sears is still the worst CEO of all time. He's so bad I don't even want to contaminate my brain with his name. Honestly, running a company based on the teachings of Ayn Rand? WTF was he thinking? He could only have done a worse job if he'd staged thunderdome style fights to the death of his lowest payed employees.
 
2014-02-10 12:51:58 PM

Ambivalence: No, the guy who ruined Sears is still the worst CEO of all time. He's so bad I don't even want to contaminate my brain with his name. Honestly, running a company based on the teachings of Ayn Rand? WTF was he thinking? He could only have done a worse job if he'd staged thunderdome style fights to the death of his lowest payed employees.


To quote "Casino" "This guy could fark up a cup of coffee." Both of these guys are epic level idiots.
 
2014-02-10 01:09:52 PM
When did Motley Fool stop sucking AOL's cock?
 
2014-02-10 01:11:43 PM

Ambivalence: No, the guy who ruined Sears is still the worst CEO of all time. He's so bad I don't even want to contaminate my brain with his name. Honestly, running a company based on the teachings of Ayn Rand? WTF was he thinking? He could only have done a worse job if he'd staged thunderdome style fights to the death of his lowest payed employees.


I'm pretty sure he's actively trying to kill Sears though.  So he's actually pretty successful in his goals.  I don't think AOL's CEO is trying to kill the company on purpose.
 
2014-02-10 01:13:59 PM
blog.livestrong.org
 
2014-02-10 01:17:36 PM
Maybe he's implementing a stealth head count reduction.... because I sure as hell would be looking for new job if a guy making $12M/year told me they were going to screw me out of the paltry 3% match they were giving while blaming it on my co-workers health care issues.

/nope, he's probably just an ass
 
2014-02-10 01:38:07 PM
That does it. I'm throwing out my modem and dropping AOL once and for all. Oh wait! Explain to me how it makes money in the 21st century. My guess is there are a shiatload of people that just don't pay attention to the fact that AOL has continued withdrawing money out of their accounts after they canceled 15 years ago.
 
2014-02-10 01:39:51 PM
This clown is a classic example of why the publicly traded corporation is a broken concept. Customers are suckers to be taken for a ride and employees are a cheap disposable commodity paid only because slavery was outlawed in the pursuit of turning tricks for the wall street casino.

12 million a year is 11.9 million more than anyone is worth.
 
2014-02-10 01:43:09 PM

bgilmore5: That does it. I'm throwing out my modem and dropping AOL once and for all. Oh wait! Explain to me how it makes money in the 21st century. My guess is there are a shiatload of people that just don't pay attention to the fact that AOL has continued withdrawing money out of their accounts after they canceled 15 years ago.


There's the content side of their business (they merged with HuffPo, IIRC), but yes, apparently that is actually a chunk of their income.  Usually it's people who forgot to cancel (or forgot they had AOL service in the first place) but more or less the same idea.
 
2014-02-10 01:45:15 PM

bgilmore5: That does it. I'm throwing out my modem and dropping AOL once and for all. Oh wait! Explain to me how it makes money in the 21st century. My guess is there are a shiatload of people that just don't pay attention to the fact that AOL has continued withdrawing money out of their accounts after they canceled 15 years ago.


take a map of the US and look at the middle 1/3 of the country, a lot of those folks still can only use dial up. Besides, you could take the ISP portion of AOL and run it with about 5 guys. On top of that, the bandwidth costs to keep AOL ISP up have fallen through the floor I'm sure. The rest of the world speeds up but 56k dial up remains the same.

I bet AOL's ISP is more profitable now than ever.
 
2014-02-10 01:46:25 PM

chasd00: bgilmore5: That does it. I'm throwing out my modem and dropping AOL once and for all. Oh wait! Explain to me how it makes money in the 21st century. My guess is there are a shiatload of people that just don't pay attention to the fact that AOL has continued withdrawing money out of their accounts after they canceled 15 years ago.

take a map of the US and look at the middle 1/3 of the country, a lot of those folks still can only use dial up. Besides, you could take the ISP portion of AOL and run it with about 5 guys. On top of that, the bandwidth costs to keep AOL ISP up have fallen through the floor I'm sure. The rest of the world speeds up but 56k dial up remains the same.

I bet AOL's ISP is more profitable now than ever.


I mean more profitable percentage-wise not in actual total dollars
 
2014-02-10 01:54:41 PM
I'm sure the White House called him and said stop playing Obamacare.
 
2014-02-10 02:10:58 PM
The boy's a time bomb.
 
2014-02-10 02:18:29 PM

Handsome B. Wonderful: The boy's a time bomb.


Thank you. I was looking for that. When I didn't see it I felt like I was in a room without a window.
 
2014-02-10 02:38:53 PM
You know, Abercrombie and Fitch could make a profit off of distressed babies. I don't understand why he can't.
 
2014-02-10 02:40:39 PM

Handsome B. Wonderful: The boy's a time bomb.


Came for this.
 
2014-02-10 02:41:24 PM

chasd00: bgilmore5: That does it. I'm throwing out my modem and dropping AOL once and for all. Oh wait! Explain to me how it makes money in the 21st century. My guess is there are a shiatload of people that just don't pay attention to the fact that AOL has continued withdrawing money out of their accounts after they canceled 15 years ago.

take a map of the US and look at the middle 1/3 of the country, a lot of those folks still can only use dial up. Besides, you could take the ISP portion of AOL and run it with about 5 guys. On top of that, the bandwidth costs to keep AOL ISP up have fallen through the floor I'm sure. The rest of the world speeds up but 56k dial up remains the same.

I bet AOL's ISP is more profitable now than ever.


I live in that middle third and I know of no one that has used the service in the last 10 years. That includes a lot of rural people. That's anecdotal, of course, but most small towns are wired to fiber optic lines now thanks to gubmint welfare handouts. Even without fiber optic lines, you still have cellular technology that beats the hell out of dial-up modems.

I have a feeling the majority of the AOL users are being duped into thinking they need it. 2.5 million subscribers still using AOL is ridiculous.
 
2014-02-10 02:46:36 PM

Handsome B. Wonderful: The boy's a time bomb.


No kidding!  AOL's customers and shareholders should really Take Warning...
 
2014-02-10 02:54:48 PM

bgilmore5: but most small towns are wired to fiber optic lines now thanks to gubmint welfare handouts.


"gubmint welfare" like Rural Electrification, Phone lines, interstates, roads, all that sort of thing?
 
2014-02-10 02:59:45 PM
In my experience many of them are small business owners who have had the accounts for decades.  Their entire client base has that email address and they don't want to lose it.  However, some of them are folk who don't realize they can get to the internet "outside" of AOL.  They are older and don't understand that their broadband internet is always-on.  They think they have to "start the internet" by starting up AOL.  I presume this a throwback to when they had dial-up.
 
2014-02-10 03:01:25 PM

macdaddy357: This clown is a classic example of why the publicly traded corporation is a broken concept. Customers are suckers to be taken for a ride and employees are a cheap disposable commodity paid only because slavery was outlawed in the pursuit of turning tricks for the wall street casino.

12 million a year is 11.9 million more than anyone is worth.


Yeah because $100K a year is just rolling in the dough in the bigger cities
 
2014-02-10 03:03:16 PM
Does it really matter? It's AOL. Slow death vs. quick death?
 
2014-02-10 03:13:21 PM

bgilmore5: chasd00: bgilmore5: That does it. I'm throwing out my modem and dropping AOL once and for all. Oh wait! Explain to me how it makes money in the 21st century. My guess is there are a shiatload of people that just don't pay attention to the fact that AOL has continued withdrawing money out of their accounts after they canceled 15 years ago.

take a map of the US and look at the middle 1/3 of the country, a lot of those folks still can only use dial up. Besides, you could take the ISP portion of AOL and run it with about 5 guys. On top of that, the bandwidth costs to keep AOL ISP up have fallen through the floor I'm sure. The rest of the world speeds up but 56k dial up remains the same.

I bet AOL's ISP is more profitable now than ever.

I live in that middle third and I know of no one that has used the service in the last 10 years. That includes a lot of rural people. That's anecdotal, of course, but most small towns are wired to fiber optic lines now thanks to gubmint welfare handouts. Even without fiber optic lines, you still have cellular technology that beats the hell out of dial-up modems.

I have a feeling the majority of the AOL users are being duped into thinking they need it. 2.5 million subscribers still using AOL is ridiculous.


probably right. ironically i just realized 5 of my friends i talk with daily I do so using AIM
 
2014-02-10 03:20:48 PM

Smeggy Smurf: macdaddy357: This clown is a classic example of why the publicly traded corporation is a broken concept. Customers are suckers to be taken for a ride and employees are a cheap disposable commodity paid only because slavery was outlawed in the pursuit of turning tricks for the wall street casino.

12 million a year is 11.9 million more than anyone is worth.

Yeah because $100K a year is just rolling in the dough in the bigger cities


It might if the income distribution capped out at $100k, but yes, that was a stupid comment.

The idea that $12m might be a little high given what little this guy apparently brings to the company, however...

I mean, is he really $10m a year better than a guy they could get for $2m?
 
2014-02-10 03:31:50 PM

Deneb81: The idea that $12m might be a little high given what little this guy apparently brings to the company, however...

I mean, is he really $10m a year better than a guy they could get for $2m?


You have to pay extra for that level of Douchebaggery.
 
2014-02-10 03:40:32 PM

Ambivalence: No, the guy who ruined Sears is still the worst CEO of all time. He's so bad I don't even want to contaminate my brain with his name. Honestly, running a company based on the teachings of Ayn Rand? WTF was he thinking? He could only have done a worse job if he'd staged thunderdome style fights to the death of his lowest payed employees.


I bought an $80 sweater for $16 today at the liquidating Toronto Sears. Good times in capitalist theory.
 
2014-02-10 03:51:40 PM
..."baby thing"?
 
2014-02-10 03:56:15 PM
I'm glad to see him found success after rancid
 
2014-02-10 04:03:56 PM
Motley Fool is a site people use to aid their pump & dump schemes. Also holy shiat this stock that I bought is farkin awesome you should all buy it too! But this stock that I want to buy sucks ass you should all sell it.
 
2014-02-10 04:07:00 PM

bgilmore5: chasd00: bgilmore5: That does it. I'm throwing out my modem and dropping AOL once and for all. Oh wait! Explain to me how it makes money in the 21st century. My guess is there are a shiatload of people that just don't pay attention to the fact that AOL has continued withdrawing money out of their accounts after they canceled 15 years ago.

take a map of the US and look at the middle 1/3 of the country, a lot of those folks still can only use dial up. Besides, you could take the ISP portion of AOL and run it with about 5 guys. On top of that, the bandwidth costs to keep AOL ISP up have fallen through the floor I'm sure. The rest of the world speeds up but 56k dial up remains the same.

I bet AOL's ISP is more profitable now than ever.

I live in that middle third and I know of no one that has used the service in the last 10 years. That includes a lot of rural people. That's anecdotal, of course, but most small towns are wired to fiber optic lines now thanks to gubmint welfare handouts. Even without fiber optic lines, you still have cellular technology that beats the hell out of dial-up modems.

I have a feeling the majority of the AOL users are being duped into thinking they need it. 2.5 million subscribers still using AOL is ridiculous.


I'll throw some non-anecdotal evidence to combat the notion that the middle of the US "hurr hurr flyover states" are full of AOL users. I work at an Indiana newspaper. According to my browser report in SiteCatalyst, so far this month we've had 958,092 visits. Forty-two (effectively zero percent) of them have been on an AOL browser, behind browser heavy-weights like NetFront, Openwave, Hewlett-Packard, UC Web, and Nokia. AOL did still beat out Dolphin, Teleca, and Tencent Mobile!

/for those who care:
1 Apple 39.80%
2 Google 33.00%
3 Microsoft 19.70%
4 Mozilla 6.60%
5 Amazon 0.40%
6 Netscape 0.30%
7 BlackBerry 0.10%
8 Opera 0.00%
9 NetFront 0.00%
10 Other 0.00%
11 Openwave 0.00%
12 Hewlett-Packard 0.00%
13 Unspecified 0.00%
14 UC Web 0.00%
15 Nokia 0.00%
16 AOL 0.00%
17 Dolphin 0.00%
18 Teleca 0.00%
19 Tencent Mobile 0.00%
 
2014-02-10 04:31:43 PM

TheSelphie: Ambivalence: No, the guy who ruined Sears is still the worst CEO of all time. He's so bad I don't even want to contaminate my brain with his name. Honestly, running a company based on the teachings of Ayn Rand? WTF was he thinking? He could only have done a worse job if he'd staged thunderdome style fights to the death of his lowest payed employees.

I'm pretty sure he's actively trying to kill Sears though.  So he's actually pretty successful in his goals.  I don't think AOL's CEO is trying to kill the company on purpose.


Nope.  The head of Sears actually believes his own bullshiat-he personally owns a significant portion of the company.
 
2014-02-10 04:37:02 PM

skrame: bgilmore5: chasd00: bgilmore5: That does it. I'm throwing out my modem and dropping AOL once and for all. Oh wait! Explain to me how it makes money in the 21st century. My guess is there are a shiatload of people that just don't pay attention to the fact that AOL has continued withdrawing money out of their accounts after they canceled 15 years ago.

take a map of the US and look at the middle 1/3 of the country, a lot of those folks still can only use dial up. Besides, you could take the ISP portion of AOL and run it with about 5 guys. On top of that, the bandwidth costs to keep AOL ISP up have fallen through the floor I'm sure. The rest of the world speeds up but 56k dial up remains the same.

I bet AOL's ISP is more profitable now than ever.

I live in that middle third and I know of no one that has used the service in the last 10 years. That includes a lot of rural people. That's anecdotal, of course, but most small towns are wired to fiber optic lines now thanks to gubmint welfare handouts. Even without fiber optic lines, you still have cellular technology that beats the hell out of dial-up modems.

I have a feeling the majority of the AOL users are being duped into thinking they need it. 2.5 million subscribers still using AOL is ridiculous.

I'll throw some non-anecdotal evidence to combat the notion that the middle of the US "hurr hurr flyover states" are full of AOL users. I work at an Indiana newspaper. According to my browser report in SiteCatalyst, so far this month we've had 958,092 visits. Forty-two (effectively zero percent) of them have been on an AOL browser, behind browser heavy-weights like NetFront, Openwave, Hewlett-Packard, UC Web, and Nokia. AOL did still beat out Dolphin, Teleca, and Tencent Mobile!

/for those who care:
1 Apple 39.80%
2 Google 33.00%
3 Microsoft 19.70%
4 Mozilla 6.60%
5 Amazon 0.40%
6 Netscape 0.30%
7 BlackBerry 0.10%
8 Opera 0.00%
9 NetFront 0.00%
10 Other 0.00%
11 Openwave 0.00%
12 Hewlett-Packard 0.00%
13 Unspecified 0.00 ...


I'm pretty sure the special AOL browser was phased out long ago; IE, dial-up AOL now just acts like any other dial-up ISP, using Internet Explorer or Chrome or whatever to actually surf the web.
 
2014-02-10 04:40:03 PM
Don't they know that stock price is the only thing that matters any more? Investors don't give a damn if the company makes a profit as long as the stock goes up.
 
2014-02-10 04:57:49 PM

Deneb81: Smeggy Smurf: macdaddy357: This clown is a classic example of why the publicly traded corporation is a broken concept. Customers are suckers to be taken for a ride and employees are a cheap disposable commodity paid only because slavery was outlawed in the pursuit of turning tricks for the wall street casino.

12 million a year is 11.9 million more than anyone is worth.

Yeah because $100K a year is just rolling in the dough in the bigger cities

It might if the income distribution capped out at $100k, but yes, that was a stupid comment.

The idea that $12m might be a little high given what little this guy apparently brings to the company, however...

I mean, is he really $10m a year better than a guy they could get for $2m?


You have to pay extra to get that kind of stupid in an exec
 
2014-02-10 05:02:22 PM
that little stunt of his had to have violated HIPAA regulations.

It'll be interesting to see if the govt. steps in to investigate.

/HA!
 
2014-02-10 05:24:20 PM

suburbanguy: Handsome B. Wonderful: The boy's a time bomb.

No kidding!  AOL's customers and shareholders should really Take Warning...


They did, but they then Rejected the idea.
 
2014-02-10 05:26:19 PM

StopLurkListen: ..."baby thing"?


A few years ago, two of AOL's employees had babies with severe birth defections or complications.  The CEO claimed the massive cost of insuring those two kids was the reason he was cutting the employees' pensions, then blamed it on Obamacare.
 
2014-02-10 05:44:32 PM

Geotpf: I'm pretty sure the special AOL browser was phased out long ago; IE, dial-up AOL now just acts like any other dial-up ISP, using Internet Explorer or Chrome or whatever to actually surf the web.


True. Then I'll use the domains report, which shows the ISP (or organization connecting to the site). Comcast.net is #1 with 25.3%, SBCGlobal.net is #2 with 14.7%, and AOL is 73rd with .1%.
 
2014-02-10 06:10:49 PM

Because People in power are Stupid: subscription models:
[philly.barstoolsports.com image 568x349]
My Preciouuussssss.


After learning of his existence recently and seeing an interview with him, I'm convinced he was only hired to make it seem like AOL isn't just used by geriatrics.
 
2014-02-10 06:21:35 PM
Their Shareholder is going to be even more frustrated than their user.
 
2014-02-10 06:35:24 PM

foo monkey: When did Motley Fool stop sucking AOL's cock?


I hope everybody at the Motley Fool gets bubonic plague, and dies with pus-filled sores erupting all over their bodies after they watch their children eaten by hyenas that subsequently die in a fire. But not before they cost this shiathead his job.
 
2014-02-10 06:36:26 PM

StopLurkListen: ..."baby thing"?


Baby thing explained. There is an old Chinese curse that goes "May you find a boatload of money, and may it be juust enough to pay off your doctor bills." That's what I wish on this bastard.
 
2014-02-10 07:44:11 PM

jso2897: foo monkey: When did Motley Fool stop sucking AOL's cock?

I hope everybody at the Motley Fool gets bubonic plague, and dies with pus-filled sores erupting all over their bodies after they watch their children eaten by hyenas that subsequently die in a fire. But not before they cost this shiathead his job.


ryanesaki.com
 
2014-02-10 08:08:10 PM

Arkanaut: bgilmore5: That does it. I'm throwing out my modem and dropping AOL once and for all. Oh wait! Explain to me how it makes money in the 21st century. My guess is there are a shiatload of people that just don't pay attention to the fact that AOL has continued withdrawing money out of their accounts after they canceled 15 years ago.

There's the content side of their business (they merged with HuffPo, IIRC), but yes, apparently that is actually a chunk of their income.  Usually it's people who forgot to cancel (or forgot they had AOL service in the first place) but more or less the same idea.


A "chunk"? According to the article, it's 99.32%.
 
2014-02-10 08:12:59 PM

To The Escape Zeppelin!: Don't they know that stock price is the only thing that matters any more? Investors don't give a damn if the company makes a profit as long as the stock goes up.


Not necessarily on a dividend-paying stock. Of course they want to go up in the long run, but dividends can offer some steady income over the long haul
 
2014-02-10 08:22:55 PM
I am utterly gobsmacked that they make 143M in subscription fees.  I was under the impression you could still get AOL mail and AIM for free, so why the hell would anyone pay for internet access through AOL? The only interaction I have with AOL is noticing spam email from my mother's AOL mail account which she hasn't checked in years.
 
2014-02-10 08:25:36 PM

bgilmore5: That does it. I'm throwing out my modem and dropping AOL once and for all. Oh wait! Explain to me how it makes money in the 21st century. My guess is there are a shiatload of people that just don't pay attention to the fact that AOL has continued withdrawing money out of their accounts after they canceled 15 years ago.


Back in the day (10-12 years ago) I canceled my Prodigy account.  Six months later they started billing me again.  Called up, yelled, charges reversed.  Six months later, same thing.

They kept claiming I agreed to not cancel after they offered free time on and would initially refuse to reverse the charges.
 
2014-02-10 08:34:26 PM

Geotpf: skrame: bgilmore5: chasd00: bgilmore5: That does it. I'm throwing out my modem and dropping AOL once and for all. Oh wait! Explain to me how it makes money in the 21st century. My guess is there are a shiatload of people that just don't pay attention to the fact that AOL has continued withdrawing money out of their accounts after they canceled 15 years ago.

take a map of the US and look at the middle 1/3 of the country, a lot of those folks still can only use dial up. Besides, you could take the ISP portion of AOL and run it with about 5 guys. On top of that, the bandwidth costs to keep AOL ISP up have fallen through the floor I'm sure. The rest of the world speeds up but 56k dial up remains the same.

I bet AOL's ISP is more profitable now than ever.

I live in that middle third and I know of no one that has used the service in the last 10 years. That includes a lot of rural people. That's anecdotal, of course, but most small towns are wired to fiber optic lines now thanks to gubmint welfare handouts. Even without fiber optic lines, you still have cellular technology that beats the hell out of dial-up modems.

I have a feeling the majority of the AOL users are being duped into thinking they need it. 2.5 million subscribers still using AOL is ridiculous.

I'll throw some non-anecdotal evidence to combat the notion that the middle of the US "hurr hurr flyover states" are full of AOL users. I work at an Indiana newspaper. According to my browser report in SiteCatalyst, so far this month we've had 958,092 visits. Forty-two (effectively zero percent) of them have been on an AOL browser, behind browser heavy-weights like NetFront, Openwave, Hewlett-Packard, UC Web, and Nokia. AOL did still beat out Dolphin, Teleca, and Tencent Mobile!

/for those who care:
1 Apple 39.80%
2 Google 33.00%
3 Microsoft 19.70%
4 Mozilla 6.60%
5 Amazon 0.40%
6 Netscape 0.30%
7 BlackBerry 0.10%
8 Opera 0.00%
9 NetFront 0.00%
10 Other 0.00%
11 Openwave 0.00%
12 Hewlett-Packard 0.00%
13 Unspecified 0.00 ...

I'm pretty sure the special AOL browser was phased out long ago; IE, dial-up AOL now just acts like any other dial-up ISP, using Internet Explorer or Chrome or whatever to actually surf the web.


Yesh. Their browser was a version of netscape.
 
Displayed 50 of 69 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report