Originally Posted by BoulderSooner
Participating Member
Re: Chesapeake empire marches on
Re: Chesapeake empire marches on
You buying?
Platinum Member
Re: Chesapeake empire marches on
no .. not for a little while any way ... just disputing the "continues to plummet"
Participating Member
Re: Chesapeake empire marches on
Dead cat bounce.
Participating Member
Re: Chesapeake Business Practices
Say he loses the CEO title next....what kind of power does he retain as majority shareholder?
Platinum Member
Re: Chesapeake Business Practices
any idea what % he actually owns??
Participating Member
Re: Chesapeake Business Practices
3,257,614 shares (a small percentage -- CHK has 662.50 million outstanding shares) as of March 30, 2012 filing.
Owner / Administrator
Re: Chesapeake Business Practices
A very small percentage, particularly after he lost almost all his shares in the now famous margin call.
He is nowhere near a majority shareholder.
Participating Member
Re: Chesapeake empire marches on
I'm not really sure why people think they're going to go under. Worst situation is they hire a new CEO and I'll bet you everything rebounds after that.
Participating Member
Re: Chesapeake empire marches on
Participating Member
Re: Chesapeake empire marches on
Its interesting because you have people saying that there is NO chance of Cheaspeake being taken over because of all their debt, but you also have people saying their A-OK because they have tons of assets and can service their debt.
If the latter is true than someone would be very interested in buying Cheaspeake, take the good assets, clean house, and close "McClendon World".
Re: Chesapeake empire marches on
Yeah, nothing going on here, nothing to see...Aubrey's not like a big deal locally or anything like that.
And that's good if today they're seeing an awkward rebound in the stock.
Participating Member
Re: Chesapeake empire marches on
How does this have anything to do with them going under? So, since Aubrey is a big deal in OKC, the entire company that has shareholders all over the world will go under?
Re: Chesapeake empire marches on
Hold on, you're getting fast and loose with recollection. My suggestion (idk think it was in this thread, but in case it was and in case you read it and are about to quote it, allow me to address it) that I hope this isn't the beginning of the end was based on combining all of this last month's Aubrey scandals into one factor that is equally weighted with the sagging price of natural gas, CHK's debt, and other major issues. Several people have had this nagging suspicion that CHK is a house of cards for a long time. Consider the Lost Ogle's version (written by an insider who works there) or the Rolling Stone, or the other FEW critical looks that have been taken at CHK. Again, I hope I'm wrong on all of those things not looking good for CHK because we really need them to stay afloat (understatement of the year).
Now, to address my concerns about Aubrey stepping down as it relates to this thread. I was talking about the ambitious campus master plan, with more corporate expansion on the east, and initiating some even more impressive mixed-use expansion to the west. This plan is the brain child of Aubrey, arguably, and nobody else. Aubrey steps down, I wonder what happens to that campus master plan. Furthermore, taking a bigger look at that phenomenon, what does that say for CHK's longevity in OKC, not just CHK's longevity as a company? I don't care about CHK's longevity in other cities.
Suffice it to say, while CHK has no plans to move out of OKC obviously and is doing a good job at entrenching themselves in OKC, I don't like the sound of a takeover effort that may be underway. That is not a process that has ever gone well for us. Usually it's a process that goes well for Houston, and to combine these talks of CHK takeover with assertions from CHK that they're looking more at oil at the moment. That doesn't mean that they're moving to Houston, but it does mean that Houston wouldn't be an illogical move as it would be if CHK was truly looking to remain undiversified, focusing on nat gas.
So that's my total opinion on the recent events. I think that there are some major issues, and I wish we could see some critical reporting from the Oklahoman. It's gotten slightly better at addressing the issues (but in a way to deny their possibility), but still smacks of cronyism in the coverage. I hope I'm wrong about all of these concerns, and if you can alleviate those concerns, be my guest.
Platinum Member
Re: Chesapeake Business Practices
there is no evidence that CHK is built on a house of cards
Participating Member
Re: Chesapeake Business Practices
A day with no bad news is a good day for Chesapeake
Owner / Administrator
Re: Chesapeake Business Practices
In Latest Sign of Trouble, Chesapeake Energy Hires Lehman Spin Doctor
Posted: 05/ 2/2012 11:25 am
In the latest sign that massive natural gas fracker Chesapeake Energy is in deep trouble, the company has retained George Sard, the CEO of Sard Verbinnen. Sard was described as a "spinmeister of the apocalypse" by Portfolio magazine in April 2009, because he has worked as a PR consultant for so many high-profile clients in moments of utter, humiliating public collapse.
Chesapeake is in distinguished company. Sard's clients have included the Madoff brothers (Ponzi scheme), Eliot Spitzer (prostitution), Martha Stewart (insider trading), former Lehman Brothers CEO Dick Fuld (Ponzi scheme), and AIG (Ponzi scheme). His firm was also on the scene during the Enron collapse -- JPMorgan hired him to beat back accusations that the bank was complicit in the Enron fraud (it eventually paid $135 million to settle SEC charges).
The first reports of Sard's hiring came today, amid news that Chesapeake's board had decided to replace CEO Aubrey McClendon as chairman (he will continue as CEO). The company made the move following two weeks of controversy first sparked by a Reuters report that the CEO had borrowed $1.1 billion in secret, personal loans in order to finance his investments in the companies' wells.
The reports raised serious conflict of interest questions and attracted new scrutiny from Chesapeake shareholders, the SEC and the IRS. The company's board has taken a series of steps to address the controversy, including ending the "Founders Well Participation Program" that gave McClendon stakes in Chesapeake wells. Its biggest shareholder, reclusive value investor O. Mason Hawkins applauded today's move. But Sard's hiring suggests that the board doesn't think the problems plaguing the company will go away any time soon.
Will Chesapeake emerge from the crisis in one piece, or will it go the way of Lehman or Enron? There appear to be fundamental problems with Chesapeake's business model that go beyond CEO shenanigans; a recent Rolling Stone article suggested that the company is something of a Ponzi scheme. In which case, it might make sense to hire a top-notch PR team...
Owner / Administrator
Re: Chesapeake Business Practices
Aubrey McClendon Needs to Go
By Matt Koppenheffer | More Articles
May 2, 2012 | Comments (16)
Saying I'm frustrated with Aubrey McClendon is putting it mildly.
McClendon, the CEO of natural gas giant Chesapeake Energy (NYSE: CHK ) , was making headlines again today as Reuters revealed that he was running a $200 million commodities hedge fund. This follows on the heels of a Reuters report last month detailing more than $1 billion in loans that McClendon took out against the stakes he owns in Chesapeake wells.
In response to the previous Reuters expose, Chesapeake stripped McClendon of his chairmanship and agreed to end the Founders Well Participation Program -- the cozy deal at the center of McClendon's $1 billion borrowing spree -- early. Originally, the FWPP was scheduled to run through 2015, but it will now end in June 2014.
But these steps aren't enough. There's only one solution to the problem: Aubrey McClendon needs to go. Now.
That's easier said than done. McClendon is not only CEO, but also a founder of the company and, thanks to that FWPP, a part owner of many Chesapeake wells. To many, McClendon is Chesapeake.
On the other hand, thanks to gambling away most his shareholdings with huge amounts of margin borrowing, McClendon is a very small Chesapeake shareholder at this point. According to recent filings, McClendon owns less than 0.3% of Chesapeake's outstanding shares. Meanwhile, his shenanigans have been dragging Chesapeake's name -- and stock -- through the mud. And while he apologized to shareholders for these "distractions," it's hard to consider any of this proper conduct for a public-company CEO.
But perhaps the bigger concern that few are talking about, is what this all means for the way that McClendon has been running Chesapeake. For one, a CEO's attention should be fixed on the company that he's supposedly leading -- not the smaller, personal well-ownership empire he's building or the hedge fund he's apparently running. Furthermore, almost everything coming out about McClendon underscores his sweet-tooth for gambling. A great piece from Jeff Goodell in Rolling Stone back in March speaks to this. Shareholders or potential shareholders should be sure to read that, but, in short, Goodell's conclusion is that McClendon's gambling streak has definitely shown up in Chesapeake's business approach.
Many investors have held onto the hope that the promise of natural gas would trump the poor governance and CEO excesses at Chesapeake. That has looked like a bad gamble to me for years, but today it looks downright scary.
That is, unless McClendon is replaced and a new regime is brought into this company.
Don't stop with McClendon
Public companies aren't structured so that the CEO can run the show. Sure, McClendon wielded a considerable amount of power when he was both CEO and chairman, but in a properly functioning company, the board of directors should be keeping a wild-child CEO in check.
That didn't happen at Chesapeake. In fact, as I see it, almost the exact opposite happened as the board catered to McClendon's needs, co-signed his desires, and bailed him out when he got in tight spots. And maybe it shouldn't be too surprising -- the environment in the boardroom seems like a pretty cozy one when on average board members are being compensated to the tune of $533,000 and getting use of the company's private jet.
So, not only does McClendon need to go, but so does most of the board.
Richard Davidson, Burns Hargis, Don Nickles, Frank Keating, and Pete Miller have all been on the board for more than a couple of years and have obviously done little to rein in McClendon in exchange for their princely directors' compensation. Unfortunately, because of Chesapeake's staggered board -- a shareholder-unfriendly practice that doesn't put all directors up for election at the same time -- only Davidson and Hargis are up for election this year. But replacing them would certainly be a start.
Don't look now, but McClendon has a buddy
Interestingly, in all of this coverage of Aubrey McClendon, very little of the harsh spotlight has fallen on his buddy and Chesapeake co-founder Tom Ward. Ward was president and COO of Chesapeake until early 2006, when he made the jump to take over SandRidge Energy (NYSE: SD ) . Ward is currently the chairman and CEO of SandRidge.
According to Reuters, Ward was a partner and co-founder in the very hedge fund that's causing all of the noise around Chesapeake today. Even a quick leaf through SandRidge's proxy statement reveals much of the same clubby, "praise thy CEO" feel that has brought so many headaches to Chesapeake shareholders. Notably, though, SandRidge got rid of its version of the FWPP back in 2008.
In other words, while Aubrey McClendon may be taking a lot of heat here, SandRidge shareholders may want to gird themselves as well.
What you can do
Chesapeake has released a preliminary proxy statement (touting its great governance no less) that allows shareholders to get up to speed in preparation for voting. The annual meeting is June 8, and votes have to be in by June 6. Current shareholders can have their voice heard by voting and/or showing up at the annual meeting and sharing their thoughts.
In addition, three mutual fund companies -- Southeastern Asset Management, Wellington Management, and BlackRock (NYSE: BLK ) -- currently own more than 25% of Chesapeake combined. Investors in these companies' funds can hit the phones and urge them to push Chesapeake for the wholesale reform that's needed to get the company on the right track.
Participating Member
Re: Chesapeake Business Practices
Ok, that just sounds stupid to me: Hiring someone who worked with companies and people who have been proven guilty. I thought the goal is to avoid the comparisons to Enron or Lehman?
PR fail.
Participating Member
Re: Chesapeake empire marches on
Closed down 2.7% for the day at $17.19, down 23% for the year.
Participating Member
Re: Chesapeake empire marches on
Uhhhhhh ... not quite , there seems to be real support at 17. No matter the news, they havin trouble driving this lower than 17.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=chk&ql=1
Owner / Administrator
Re: Chesapeake Business Practices
Chesapeake confirms SEC probe
Chesapeake Energy Corp. confirmed the company and CEO Aubrey McClendon have been notified of an information inquiry by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
BY JAY F. MARKS Business Writer jmarks@opubco.com | Published: May 3, 2012 4
Chesapeake confirmed the company and CEO Aubrey McClendon have been notified of an informal inquiry by the SEC's regional office in Fort Worth, Texas.
Read more: http://newsok.com/chesapeake-confirm...#ixzz1tqdM1nui
Re: Chesapeake Business Practices
In English?
Guys, my gut feeling on this is only getting worse...
Participating Member
Re: Chesapeake Business Practices
Won't find anything substantial, just the usual nitpiking stuff to justify the trip.
Participating Member
Re: Chesapeake Business Practices
Confirms what we already knew was going to happen: Chesapeake and Aubrey McClendon are under the SEC's magnifying glass.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks