i read in one businessweek that GE's Chairman&CEO Jeff Immelt workedfor P&G for a brief time. but, very weired
114270
Reading his bio on GE's website, it states that he joined GE in 1982. You are correct, it does not mention P&G.\n\nI found an article on cnn.com (see below) that has a little more background on Mr. Immelt, and it mentions that he was born in Cincinnati on February 19, 1956, and that he worked for Procter & Gamble in his hometown after graduating from Dartmouth in 1978.\n\nThis would indicate that he spent at most about four years at P&G, and joined GE at about the age of 26. I suspect that GE felt that the time spent at P&G was immaterial to the bio on their website (which was pretty limited).
932283
I don't know the full scope of Sarbanes-Oxley and what it is accomplishing in the grand sceme of things.  I will tell you that it is creating TONS of extra work for organizations and implementing it is really bogging down companies...making them drown in implementing process and controls.  What this is attempting to do isn't a bad thing...it's just really impacting the productivity of American companies in a negative way.
759277
It can be observed to a high extent.............\n\nYou know the whole Stakeholder V Shareholder concept right? Long term vs Short term.\n\nThink of a well known PLC and note down all the things that these two groups think differently about.........for example - using retained profit to update the computer system Vs paying shareholders more money.
1029181
That thought has crossed my mind before too.\n\nI don't know but I think anything like that is possible when it comes to a company that makes such huge profits based on ppl dieing or being sick.
1045169
My boss told me that he prematurely shot his wad on something that was supposed to be a dry-run, and that he now had a mess on his hands.  He was referring to a situation with an accountant, but it was still wierd.
33567
I hate to break it to you, but Ford and GM have been operating in a vacuum for too long.  The layoffs are tragic (I'm from Lansing, Michigan, so I'm speaking as someone whose seen the effects first hand).  But you can't run a company that loses billions of dollars every year forever.  As for China, President Bush doesn't have the legal authority to really do anything about trade with China.  Most of our trade agreements have been set through international treaties and other arangements, ratifed by the Senate, and most of them predate his term in office. He would have a hard time altering them.  Besides, the American government's attempts as 'helping' the economy are someone notorious.  I think you should invest in reading up on the issue before posting questions out of sheer emotional responce.
253971
I totally agree with you it does not make sense to me either. I can only assume he was more of a figure-head than a real treasurer. Although there were some reports that he was sick and in hospital for a time. Even then there should have been a deputy to brief him, so this should not be an excuse for not being fully informed when he got back into his job. Unless of course he was sidelined by other executives who knew he did not do the job properly!
411310
put ur money in GM.. VERY risky
609216
From my personal experience of working there ,for 2 1/2 years from Jan. 1996- July 1998 and for 9 months from Sept 2004 to June 2005, I can tell you that they are very inconsiderate of their employees, they have horrible benefits, and the pay is terrible. To be honest, I have found from working there for so long ,and "being on the inside" and knowing how the compnay really is, I have learned that they don't care about anything other than their precious money. I worked there while Sam Walton was still alive and the company didn't quite seem like they just cared about the money. It seemed more like they cared about the people working there, but now that Sam Walton is no longer here the company has gotten big headed and greedy. It seems like they'll do everything they possibly can to make a $1. All I can say is that if Sam Walton knew what his company has become he'd roll over in his grave and that's the honest truth.
780988
Contact google and ask for an explanation.  There may have just been a glitch, not a huge conspiracy run by Google.\n\nGoogle didn't offer stock in the 1990's, they went public and sky high in value after that.   \n\nGood luck.
1143458
That pretty much depends upon what the company he works for is like. Most companies are relatively lenient about employess who have personal problems, but he may be in a position which is critical for the company. I would estimate no more than a month or two at the latest.
558134
He would run it into the ground like the other companies that he has been in charge of.  \n\nFor those of you that don't like what I have said.... Do a little research!
931011
No, but, ADM (Archer Daniels Midland) is. I think GM use their products and I have made good money on their stocks. ADM's motto is; "When you walk into a store, you will not see our name, but, ...................... We are there"! Another statement they make is; "If it was not for world Politics, ................ We could feed the world" I believe they can!!!!!
217636
No.  The company employer just did what was agreed.  The problem lies on the malaysian manager who turn out to be not really qualified to handle the job.  That's why, there's a great imbalance between amount paid against his contribution to the company.
172409
General Electric, I think.
1159749
No.  It's a solid company and he has laid the groundwork to help it remain successful.  As long as he's still alive it will continue to be a strong company.  Though increased competition could weaken them over time, I would chalk that up to more of a natural progression than anything.
1115939
they both are a proccesor but they are of different companies