/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>16043570
What were their techniques? What did they do differently?

>correlation=/=causation

>>16043570
All women are whores

>>16043594
they wore a skirt

>>16043570

Female CFOs most likely were promoted to that role at companies that were already succesfull, rather than women making these companies succesfull in the first place. Now perform the same study on start up succes, male vs female CEO.

>>16043594
exploited their holes either mentally or physically or both

I don't give a flying fuck what they are. Could be a genderfluid transvestite nonbinary mtf dog raping furry pansexual crippled jew for all I'm concerned. As long as they shit out massive golden fucking dividends and get the stock price to high heavens I'm fine with it.

>>16043570
Really? Because some of the biggest corporations that had female ceos take over turned to shit. Yahoo comes to mind first.

>>16043683
Yikes and sexistpilled

>>16043700
What others?

>>16043594
they hired big braphogs so the guys worked harder to have a chance at sniffing it, 500iq plays desu

>>16043570
If you want to find something, you are eventually gonna find it.
Ask yourself, why is it not CEO? or CTO? why is the time-frame limited to 2 years after, why not compare business' that have a female CFO and compare them with business that have a male CFO?
The answer to these questions and more, reside in the conclusion that "he bar is a little bit higher for females". This study does not prove that, and you can't conclude that from the study..

>>16043570
>over the last 17 years
hmmmmmmmmmmmm

>>16043710
Google. Bitch openly admits her "team" basically overruled her bad policies on everything that was successful. Like, she wanted to axe gmail because "who would use free email?" and other dumb shit.

>>16043710
name 5 female Ceo's.

>>16043570
I audit a company with a female asian CFO.
Its a multi national multi billion dollar asset and revenue company.
However, he biggest number on their balance sheet is debt, amounting to 5b.
Typical female

some women do this very well and consistently.

micromanaging a companies finances, taxes etc. is not the CEO's job anyway.

You have many cases of couples who run small business like this where the man is the professional offering some service or what not and the woman manages the books and finances and what not. all the boring shit the man is not really interested in letting him focus on the core of the business.

A rising market will do this. The study is comparing them against their predecessors, not comparing them against companies that hired male CFOs during the same time period. There is no telling whether the companies that hired female CFOs wouldn't have seen them same increase or better if they hired another male CFO.

>>16043756
Theranos chick for example :)

>>16043717
makes sense. That would motivate me to perform well too

>>16043710
Carly Fiorina
Marissa Mayer (absolutely fucking destroyed Yahoo)
Meg Whitman
Andrea Jung
Elizabeth Holmes (possibly the biggest scammer of my lifetime)
Darleen Druyun
here's the real question, out of the women running fortune 500 companies, how many of those companies did THEY build, as opposed to acquire via husband/dad or other vagina affirmative action? Isn't it convenient to be given such a position, instead of building it from the bottom up?
I've never had a good female manager. The owner of the company I worked for left and now it's owned by an effective and competent male.
Men build with blood, sweat and tears; women acquire with vagina. Call me an incel, that doesn't change the truth.

>>16043865
Also, for all the muh empowerment that's spewed in our feminist media, the irony is that no one hates female bosses more than other women lmao

>>16043594
They did things that male counterparts would consider unethical and harmful in the long run.

>>16043814
came to post this. it is so fucking obvious

>>16043710
OP says CFOs, not CEOs as
>>16043700 and I'll add YouTube's ceo, Susan's wojckidjdjdoxijki or whatever the fuck her name is
Ellen pao
I'm still conflicted about Christine langarde (she's a smart gilf, but she works in THAT field)

>>16043814
/Thread

>>16043709

Women consistently fail in higher up positions, best example being Merkel who has been an absolute traitor to her people.

They usually get into power via a male: Inheritance or marriage. That’s 99.9999% or even more of the cases.

My opinion of a female ”boss”: bad, very bad,
They never have what it takes and fuck up ALWAYS at the critical parts.

Women in higher up positions should be banned and thats a honest opinion. I’m of course not talking about the one unicorn female who magically still fits and handles shit well but the overwhelming majority who should be not allowed in higher positions.

The secretely high IQ response to this is that jews own all the money and can enrich whoever the fuck they want for whatever reason they want.

>>16043570
probably by dimwittingly cutting costs in areas that will eventually lead to the complete demise of the company

A better indicator would be positive or negative growth during their tenure. Profitability alone wouldn’t describe their performance

>>16044898
OK but literally OP's post indicates that woman CTOs, broadly speaking, haul in more cash than men. Meanwhile you're just spouting off a bunch of unsubstantiated reckons.

>>16044099
This

>>16043570
Post tits

>>16043700
Marissa Mayer is the reason a lot of companies pulled back their remote worker perks. Fuck her. The funny thing is that when Yahoo got rid of their remote worker positions, the US Patent Office INCREASED their remote worker force to 90%.
Of all places, the fucking government is ahead of the curve when it comes to remote working.

https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Telework_Annual_Report_2018%20508%20Compliant.pdf

>>16043814
>A rising market will do this.
Just like how everyone is a genius trader/investor during a bull market.

>>16043594
I can tell you first hand that they simply stop buying essential items and keep trying to source cheap shit to look good on the monthly review

Men will generally plan ahead and not change reliable suppliers for knock off chink shit.

I want to live under a female executive's desk and snif there pusy all day bros

>>16043695
Based

>>16044898
>inheritance or marriage
Reminds me of some big article the past year or two that showcased the top millionaire (or maybe it was billionaire) females. What they failed to mention was that 90% of those females were rich not from a business they built, but from an inheritance of a business, a big divorce, or a rich daddy. That's female empowerment for ya, welcome to this feminist hell.

>>16043570
Wasn't it proven than CEOs influence in company profit is under 10%?

>>16047322
This is about CFOs, not CEOs

>>16043695
But we all know it ain't happening

>>16047322
Only for shitty companies with shitty CEOs. For truly excellent CEOs, the ROI is mind-boggling. Examples? Steve Jobs, Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Michael Dell, Howard Schultz, Fred Smith, Larry Ellison, Mark Zuckerberg, Thomas Watson Jr., etc. Note that with the exception of Watson, these are all founders. Watson was the highly capable son of the founder so he wasn't going to plunder the company like almost every other "great" CEO such as Jack Welch.