backtop


Print 11 comment(s) - last by wallijonn.. on Nov 1 at 1:02 PM


  (Source: funwidmasti.com)
The pretax costs are $27 million in severance and $4 million for closing facilities

Back in August of this year, Google announced that it had acquired Motorola Mobility, an American company that makes devices such as Droid smartphones and the 10.1" Xoom tablet, for $12.5 billion. Now, Motorola Mobility expects to pay $31 million in costs due to job cuts as it prepares for the Google acquisition.

The acquisition looks great for Google. This move allows the tech giant to get its hands on over 17,000 patents to protect Android, and also provides a path into the hardware business.

Just last week, all was looking well for Motorola Mobility as well as it announced favorable financial results that beat analysts' predictions. Motorola Mobility reported an 11 percent increase in sales to $3.26 billion, and managed to narrow its loss to $32 million from $34 million one year before.

Now, Motorola Mobility has announced expects to pay $31 million to cut 800 jobs. The pretax costs are $27 million in severance and $4 million for closing facilities.

These costs were reported in a regulatory filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. According to Motorola Mobility, the moves were approved October 24, and the costs will be recorded this quarter.

Source: Business Week



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Pretty generous severance...
By MeesterNid on 10/31/2011 11:04:30 AM , Rating: -1
Agreed. Though because this is going to cut jobs I have a feeling the SEC is going to tell them what for. I wouldn't discount the possibility that Motorola execs get pulled in in front of a congressional committee on populist appeal and get grilled on how they are not doing what's best for the American people...because we all know businesses exist only to do what's best for the people instead of make money.


RE: Pretty generous severance...
By bupkus on 10/31/2011 11:11:42 AM , Rating: 2
So you imagine an SEC hypothetical just so you can spew your political theory?


RE: Pretty generous severance...
By MeesterNid on 10/31/2011 1:03:39 PM , Rating: 3
There is a marked difference between extrapolating probable outcome based on past events and "imagining hypothetical(s)". And the same can be said for the contrast between a response that could perhaps have some merit vs one that is simply defecated out of one's void cranium.


RE: Pretty generous severance...
By FITCamaro on 10/31/2011 11:13:41 AM , Rating: 1
Businesses are in business to make money and stay profitable for their shareholders. Who are people.

With any large merger like this there's always going to be job losses due to redundant jobs. You don't need two people doing the same thing.

Don't act like this is corporations sticking it to the man.


RE: Pretty generous severance...
By FlyBri on 10/31/2011 5:10:05 PM , Rating: 3
@FITCamaro Look, I'm not going to get into whether or not this specific layoff is ultimately a good decision or not, but while you're right that businesses are in business to make money and stay profitable for their shareholders (people), you have a simplified view of everything.

First off, who are the majority shareholders in many corporations? Many times it's executives and other higher-ups who are directly related to the business. Also, businesses aren't just worried about their shareholders, but also their stakeholders (any person with interest or concern in the business, i.e. strategic partners, etc. who don't necessarily have to own any stock).

And while "trimming the fat" during mergers is typical of companies, it isn't always the best long-term plan. In the short term, sure, it may add to their bottom line, but in a lot of cases it's not the best long-term plan, and just a quick and easy fix for the short term.

Sometimes companies are too worried about shareholders due to stock price, making sure they can give a dividend, etc., rather than the operations of their business. As a result, their stock price may stabilize in the short-term, but long-term it will eventually suffer because their core business degrades. Hate to use the example, but Apple doesn't give out dividends because it rather use the money for building the business, which makes them worry less about appeasing shareholders and more focused on growing the business.

So, in some instances people have the right to feel that corporations are screwing over their employees. Finally, I know what you were getting at obviously, but just wanted to let you know that you used the phrase "sticking it to The Man" incorrectly. It's used when people who don't have power resist against people who hold power. So actually the corporations would be "The Man" in your example, not the employees.


"So if you want to save the planet, feel free to drive your Hummer. Just avoid the drive thru line at McDonalds." -- Michael Asher














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki