Previous news story    Next news story

'It nearly killed me' - Ex-Olympus CEO Woodford looks back on crisis

By dpreview staff on Nov 28, 2012 at 22:30 GMT

Amateur Photographer Magazine in the UK has posted an interview with Michael Woodford, the former Olympus CEO-turned-whistleblower whose 2011 revelations about corporate mismanagement lead to mass resignations and major restructuring at the Japanese company.

In the interview, Woodford describes the strain on his personal life, from coping with his wife's anxiety following the exposure of the scandal to advice from British police to fit a reinforced front door and seal up the letterbox of his property in case his whereabouts became known to Japanese organized crime syndicates. 

Speaking of the strain on his marriage, Woodford told Amateur Photographer's Chris Cheesman 'we could have broken up [...] but I don't think that's unique to us. I think any marriage or couple who suffer extreme emotional [stress]... it doesn't make you together. It accentuates your differences. That is what happens in those situations. ‘There was enough love and shared experiences that we've managed to hold it together.'

Woodford's book about his experiences at Japanese camera
manufacturer Olympus is about to go on sale, and has been given
positive reviews ahead of its release. 

Woodford also describes the process of writing a book about the experience, and how after deciding to ditch his initial plan to use a ghost writer, he was forced to pass every word through three sets of lawyers, to avoid legal issues following its publication.  

Even after the very public breaking of the scandal last year, the former CEO told Cheesman that 'there are still areas where we just don't know the actual losses, their extent and specific nature. We don't know a lot about who received monies in the facilitation payments. We will never understand...

'As I say in my book, we've got more than you would ever dream of getting in a Japanese scandal... It's incomplete but we know, in general terms, the nature of the scheme, the motivations behind it. But we don't have the pounds, shillings and pence detail in some areas.'

After his dramatic exit from Olympus after just ten days as CEO, Woodford sued for unfair dismissal and was eventually awarded £10 million (~$16 million). In the interview he rejects suggestions that he is 'cashing in' on the crisis, explaining that most of the money will be donated to charities, including Reprieve, which promotes the cause of human rights across the globe.

Comments

Total comments: 151
kadardr
By kadardr (Dec 10, 2012)

"CEO-turned-whistleblower" is an oxymoron. Serious doubts of sincerity and shadows of his misconduct.

Hope he will be a novel writer excellent at fiction, because in the reality he will not be able to get a high position in the corporate world again.

He was no innocent child appointed to CEO, and unaware of corporate business conduct in Olympus. His appointment was a mistake from both parties.

You are kidding if you think of Olympus as an exception or a bad example, or even as a "Japanese or Asean model" of "misconduct".

0 upvotes
Bilgy_no1
By Bilgy_no1 (Dec 14, 2012)

His appointment was a mistake from both parties? I'm sure that the top clan in Olympus see the outcome as unwanted: their dirty laundry was exposed. But for the investors in the company it was a better thing for the scam to have been uncovered. Yes they lost money, but otherwise the company would have gone bust altogether.

I think it takes courage to operate from your ethical standards at that level. You're right that his chances at another job as CEO of an international company are pretty slim. That's why GBP10m should not be seen as greed. It's commendable that Woodford even gives away most of that.

0 upvotes
max metz
By max metz (Dec 6, 2012)

Mr Woodford recognized trouble at Olympus in a remarkably short time, responding properly with admirable immediacy, that is to be lauded. The blinkered sense of justice confronting him then and since in Japan does little to reassure the overseas investors, those many 'outsiders' still not privy to the what appears to be the privileged financial detail.

No matter what final figure one puts on Woodford's wealth, nor how that figure may tug and jar at the cords of social injustice for some, the fact remains that a grand scale wrong doing was exposed in Japan by this man at a cost - pecuniary or otherwise.

The real question and concern now is how such a mischief went unfettered for so long, particularly how it survived audit.

1 upvote
skysi
By skysi (Dec 6, 2012)

So what did he exactly expose. Did Olympus helped Al-Qaeda to photographed British troops?

0 upvotes
Ubilam
By Ubilam (Dec 5, 2012)

Somebody find me a tissue so I can dry my tears for this guy.

0 upvotes
rallyfan
By rallyfan (Dec 2, 2012)

I bet he goes home each night and cries into a suitcase full of money.

4 upvotes
c_henry
By c_henry (Dec 3, 2012)

Even if he did, and the last sentence of the DPR article says he's donating most of it to charity, so what?

If I was in the same position I'd expect to be compensated. You wouldn't I take it?

1 upvote
Stephan Def
By Stephan Def (Dec 3, 2012)

Last time I checked "money" was paper with some odd designs printed on it, and some bogus text about trust added on ...

2 upvotes
rallyfan
By rallyfan (Dec 3, 2012)

>>By c_henry
If I was in the same position I'd expect to be compensated. You wouldn't I take it?>>

Are you certain he's being compensated though? This is crucial. Just in case he's not, you could consider making a donation.

1 upvote
MikeS2012
By MikeS2012 (Dec 1, 2012)

What is the most galling? Are you saying the pity is for not having the opportunity yourself to choose? This is not a county club question: Oh! I am not one of them! There is a "we" and our dialogue is important.

http://www.ratical.org/corporations/SCvSPR1886.html

There is a crisis in corporate, (and civil) governance in many countries today perpetrated by the attitudes of BOTH the "haves" and "have nots". I for one, am unwilling to have it explained this is the way of the world and one should simply get on with it.

Now, if Mr. Woodford belongs to a an unassailable uber-class of world corporate wranglers, that is one thing. However, it is quite another to belittle his dilemma and righteous indignation at how a corporation, by the action of its board, have just shrugged their shoulders and pushed him aside. And, not that he was paid off, but the board of directors were so willing to pay him.

Only three board members have left. Any who voted his departure ought be gone.

2 upvotes
rrr_hhh
By rrr_hhh (Dec 1, 2012)

I read Woodford's interview and what he says sounds wrong. He has sour grapes and plays the victim's role, but he just sounds like an angry looser, trying to harm Olympus as much as he cans. He sounds like a manipulator and insinuating things for which he has no proof (like the involvement of the Japanese mafia).
He making a meditation retreat with Buddhists ? And giving his money to charity ? Let me laugh, it is not because you stay three days with Buddhists that what you did before was right and how much did he give to charity ? Many people are giving to charity ! And even if he gave half of what he received he still got way more money from Olympus than what most people earn in 20 years ! I will believe it when I see the list of beneficiaries and how much each actually received and testimonies of what they could achieve with his gifts.
Poor soul ! He may have uncovered real problems, but he used the wrong way to solve them : he just tried to use them to his own advantage.

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
Tape5
By Tape5 (Dec 2, 2012)

Right. Juicing the mob mentality and laughing all the way to the bank.

0 upvotes
Stephan Def
By Stephan Def (Dec 2, 2012)

Olympus is a company Woodford helped to create. Just google it: the complete real history is there.

Why should he have helped to cover-up the corrupt elements?

1 upvote
MichaelKJ
By MichaelKJ (Dec 2, 2012)

I'm not a fan of Woodford and agree that he could have handled things better. But one only has to look at the huge severance packages received by CEOs to know that he could have quietly walked away with more than enough money to retire in comfort. I think it is also fair to assume Oly would have paid him nicely if he had left the company with a non-disclosure agreement.
Examples: Lee Raymond Exxon $321 million; Tom Freston Viacom $100 million after only 9 months on the job.

0 upvotes
Raist3d
By Raist3d (Dec 3, 2012)

I still find really ironic when people like you try to justify certain things. Didn't you know that it was FACTA who first insinuated the mafia link? Do you think it's an unreasonable suggestion? In what world do you think you live in?

1 upvote
JohnRinJapan
By JohnRinJapan (Dec 5, 2012)

Comments from Olympus fan-boys who know nothing about the situation and nothing about Japan, really crack me up. This guy did the right thing under terrible circumstances. As for the Yakuza involvement: very, very credible. They simply permeate this society and the risk was real. I've live in Japan for 20 years, have faced similar, ugly situations and fraud is destroying this country. He did the right thing and deserves ten times what he got in compensation.

0 upvotes
ThomasSwitzerland
By ThomasSwitzerland (Dec 1, 2012)

He was a hero standing in front of the whole, more than photos with a tank.

0 upvotes
kstechb
By kstechb (Dec 2, 2012)

So Maloy, what does ThomasSwitzerland's comparison have to do with being an American? It's merely his opinion. Just in case you didn't notice, the whiney CEO is a Brit.

Regarding the whole fiasco, many people can speculate whether he did it out of honour, revenge or for the money. One can also speculate whether the effects of his "whistleblowing" were as tough as he claims or are exaggerated. Unfortunately, without being there or wearing the same shoes, one can only speculate.

Whether this man is a hero or not depends on perspective. Also, there are many acts of heroism that don't require standing in front of a tank, gun or even organised criminals. I should also add that many people hailed as heroes turn out to be anything but to the people who really know them.

Therefore, why belittle yourself by generalising?! After all, every country has their equal share of wackjobs.

1 upvote
JohnRinJapan
By JohnRinJapan (Dec 5, 2012)

Maloy is a jealous little troll. Ignore him. His ignorance is so thick you could cut it with a knife.

1 upvote
JohnRinJapan
By JohnRinJapan (Dec 5, 2012)

There is no question that he did NOT do it for any reason other than honor and integrity. His pay-off and his reputation would have been much higher if he had remained silent. All who honor integrity do, in fact, honor this man.

1 upvote
Chuck Lantz
By Chuck Lantz (Dec 1, 2012)

No one should be criticizing this guy. He could have easily kept his mouth shut and cashed his paychecks, and lived happily ever after.

Instead, he risked everything, including his life, to do the right thing. It almost cost him his marriage, and despite what some have said, there are many companies who would never hire him now.

To put it on a more personal level, his whistle-blowing may have saved all of us a few bucks. The best way to help perpetuate white-collar crime is to do nothing.

2 upvotes
rrr_hhh
By rrr_hhh (Dec 1, 2012)

Some are more driven by power ! And anyway, he didn't loose money, on the contrary !

3 upvotes
erichK
By erichK (Dec 1, 2012)

Some people will believe anything. Even that this thirty-year bean -counting corporate shark who rose through the managerial ranks through ruthless cutting of R&D and support and staff and salaries acted for the public good when, after finally managing to wrest the CEO job in what he himself described as a virtually day-long pitched shouting match and using the position to produce his own bombshell with which to oust and replace K (Chair of the Board), and being instead fired.

0 upvotes
Raist3d
By Raist3d (Dec 3, 2012)

@rrr_hhh - but you ignore the other points! He could have shut up and cashed his checks instead of risking his life.

0 upvotes
Raist3d
By Raist3d (Dec 3, 2012)

@erichK- some people will believe anything indeed. Wasn't it you one of the ones who suggested at first this was nothing to examine or worry about? You know that Olympus didn't do anything wrong? Or do you still do?

0 upvotes
sproketholes
By sproketholes (Nov 30, 2012)

God this guy... Jeez talk about Milking it.. Im so over this story dude get a bloody life..

7 upvotes
marco1974
By marco1974 (Nov 30, 2012)

"pansy whining"? Is this what you think of not being willing to stand for blatant corruption?

4 upvotes
Delacosta
By Delacosta (Dec 1, 2012)

I think instead of "stand for" you meant "stand against". Hopefully.

0 upvotes
marco1974
By marco1974 (Dec 1, 2012)

No. I wrote "NOT being willing to stand for", i.e. that he would NOT stand for it.

Anyhow: I'm glad to see that the post I was referring to in indignation has now been deleted.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Jonathan F/2
By Jonathan F/2 (Dec 2, 2012)

Woodford ain't no whistle blower looking out for the well-being of his fellow co-workers. He's just another corporate opportunist looking to gratify his self-indulgent ego.

0 upvotes
kstechb
By kstechb (Dec 2, 2012)

Did you ever stop to think that as a CEO and longtime employee that he may have owned shares in the company and may have been thinking as a shareholder? Besides, what's wrong with thinking about the money?

Imagine if you worked for a company for 30 years and then got fired because you stumbled upon something that was not only illegal but an affront to shareholders, including yourself (maybe).

Now imagine you know you'll never recover what you lost in terms of investment and then imagine you're at that age and stage in your career and either don't want to start over or have to explain to the next prospective employer why you only lasted 10 days as CEO of a large enterprise.

Now, then tell me what options you'd take. Would you roll over and play dead? Would you walk away, licking your wounds? Would you be happy knowing that you could still be at risk for "what you know" even if you don't seek compensation?

If you are, then good for you but don't judge others for doing what you won't

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Jonathan F/2
By Jonathan F/2 (Dec 3, 2012)

My take is he used the information to manipulate the situation for his benefit. This was nothing but a power play on Woodford's part.

0 upvotes
MichaelKJ
By MichaelKJ (Nov 30, 2012)

CameraLabTester said:
>His severance paycheck is intack.

We live in an age where the average CEO of a major company makes over $5 million/year and US football coaches are the highest paid public employee in many states. There was an article in the NY Times today about the fact that major universities pay $5-$10 million in severance pay when they fire a football coach. The fact that Woodford walked away with $10 million (give or take) is nothing exceptional.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
Delacosta
By Delacosta (Dec 1, 2012)

Luckily the current economic crisis isn't hurting everyone then.

1 upvote
erichK
By erichK (Dec 2, 2012)

Please do yourself the favour of checking on CEO remuneration in Japan, which, unlike the US and UK (and Canada) has a very strong ethic of social fairness and of outrage at conspicuous consumption and extreme income inequality.

0 upvotes
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (Nov 30, 2012)

"In the interview he rejects suggestions that he is 'cashing in' on the crisis, explaining that most of the money will be donated to charities..."
---excerpt form DR article above

Lets make it clear: The money to charities comes from the "cashing in" aspect. (Le Book!)

His severance paycheck is intack.

.

3 upvotes
Stephan Def
By Stephan Def (Nov 30, 2012)

I think he had a 5 year contract, its legally and morally sound that he should have sued on the fullfillment of the obligations out of that contract. Thats normal and anybody would do that.

Furthermore the amount he received is actually minimal compared to what he could have earned as CEO in those 5 years;
Just look at how much Olympus lost on those "creative" accounting practices in the previous years to get a clue.

I also have no doubts that he will find another position as he is a very able and astute salesman, with quite a track record. With that kind of a track record you will always find a job.

5 upvotes
erichK
By erichK (Dec 2, 2012)

Please refer to my comment, above. I doubt that as the CEO of a major *Japanese* corporation he would have made more than that.
As far as the idiotic dishonest shell-game to hide losses is concerned, it likely did bleed some money to sleazy bankers, and perhaps even the Yakuza, but mainly in the form of fees to create the illusion of much larger losses so that they could finally hide the real operational losses they had been hiding for over a decade "off the books".

0 upvotes
bobbarber
By bobbarber (Nov 29, 2012)

Interesting, the comments that reference _Japan's_ culture of corporation.

I grep up in the U.S., home of Enron, Halliburton, billions of dollars unaccounted for during the Iraq War, and on and on and on and on and on...

What's different about Japan?

I live in a country now, not the U.S., that is supposed to be corrupt. When I compare the businesses and government here to the U.S., in terms of corruption, the corruption here comes off as amateurish. Millions of dollars are robbed at a time, not billions and billions, and the corruption of government agencies, like the national police, is not entirely endemic, but reflects the influence of U.S. government agencies abroad.

Maybe we should stop talking about a culture of corruption in Japan, or at least somebody should demonstrate how corruption is worse in Japan than elsewhere if they want to use that terminology.

Comment edited 47 seconds after posting
11 upvotes
rhlpetrus
By rhlpetrus (Nov 30, 2012)

Agreed, corruption has many forms, some of them institutionalized in the form of lobbies and government subsidies, when not in the form of whole national armies used to help private business/individual interest. In a better world the likes of Cheney would be in jail. Still, Woodford, whatever the reason behind his actions, deserves credit for bringing this up from the shadows. Lowering corruption is always a positive thing.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
kstechb
By kstechb (Dec 2, 2012)

Agreed. And again I say, why are people even criticising other countries? Corruption exists wherever humans exist. Corruption can be small or large. If a person steals $5 or £5 from a person who only has that much left, is he/she any less corrupt than someone who steals hundreds of millions from someone who has billions?

I really wish people would stop generalising and remove the planks from their own eyes before talking about the specks in others'.

0 upvotes
akula57
By akula57 (Nov 29, 2012)

So, Sony & Panasonic have non-investment grade debt ratings. And, I assume,
Olympus does. I used to work for a rating agency and that is certainly a problem. So is Japan's demographic problem (too many retired people and too few kids).

Buy bonds (and maybe even products at your own risk). Check the S&P and Moody's ratings first (Warranty work, returns.)

Have you heard Apple may soon be making DSLRs in China? :-)

2 upvotes
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Nov 29, 2012)

Olympus' ratings were withdrawn entirely around 2005.

Why would Apple want to make something that appeals mainly to retired people and not kids?

3 upvotes
MichaelKJ
By MichaelKJ (Nov 29, 2012)

Since you are lumping Olympus in with the other Japanese electronics companies, it would appear that your comment has nothing to do with Woodford and the scandal.

Many people have made a lot of money by investing in junk bonds as did those who invested in Olympus last year when their stock was selling for 35% (484 Yen) of what it is worth today (1,370 Yen).

1 upvote
Delacosta
By Delacosta (Nov 30, 2012)

I take these agencies and their ratings for what they are worth. Not much. Remember how they rated Lehman Brothers the day before the collapse?

1 upvote
rhlpetrus
By rhlpetrus (Nov 29, 2012)

Well, many companies have disappeared in the last 40 years, like PanAm, Kodak, etc. One more, one less, why should we really care? Cameras or endoscopes will be still made by some other companies. Now, the guy deserves a lot of credit, did something most in his position would not have done.

4 upvotes
SeeRoy
By SeeRoy (Nov 29, 2012)

"... I was known to be a micro manager.'"
So, noticing frauds on the scale of hundreds of millions of dollars now amounts to "micro-management".

2 upvotes
Michael_13
By Michael_13 (Nov 29, 2012)

Yes it does, or do you think they simply booked some cheques with the text "bribes to yacuza"?

2 upvotes
57even
By 57even (Nov 30, 2012)

That's not "micro management" that's diligence. Any worthwhile CEO would go through a companies accounts and make sure he or she understood the major items, especially if they had just accepted the position. Or perhaps you'd prefer them to fly blind and hope for the best?

1 upvote
Tape5
By Tape5 (Nov 29, 2012)

''An estimated 250 000 to 500 000 vitamin A-deficient children become blind every year, half of them dying within 12 months of losing their sight.'' WHO.

No cameras for those kids.

Each tablet of vitamin A costs about 0.1 of a cent.

What was that ''sensational'' corporate scandal again?

6 upvotes
Cane
By Cane (Nov 29, 2012)

You must be fun at dinner parties. "Who brought Debbie Downer to dinner?"

5 upvotes
Marty4650
By Marty4650 (Nov 29, 2012)

The problem here was the corrupt BOD who were hiding their own incompetence. In a perfect world, Woodford should have gotten praise for uncovering this, and not been terminated and subject to slander.

There are only two possibilities here. Either Woodford was the only honest man in the room, or he simply chose to NOT go to prison for someone else's crimes. Either way, I find his actions commendable.

28 upvotes
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Nov 29, 2012)

Well said.

6 upvotes
feraudy
By feraudy (Dec 1, 2012)

I'll second that.
There are very few CEO's who have the guts to do what Woodford did.

0 upvotes
rusticus
By rusticus (Nov 29, 2012)

we complain about corrupt regimes - it is corruption every day among us

0 upvotes
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Nov 29, 2012)

Right ! Corruption is the first and the mother of all crimes. Besides, look at how the European Parliament in Bruxelles is as to say under siege of all these tens (or hundreds ?) of lobby cabinets that bought almost every places all around the parliament building. The rat race for a bit of cheese !

0 upvotes
Deleted pending purge
By Deleted pending purge (Nov 29, 2012)

Nice world we've made for ourselves.
You tell the truth, and you've got "to pass every word through three sets of lawyers, to avoid legal issues"?
So why do our kids have to go to school at all?

3 upvotes
Edwaste
By Edwaste (Nov 29, 2012)

To become lawyers?

3 upvotes
cgarrard
By cgarrard (Nov 29, 2012)

@OldArrow- Yep. Nice choice of words I might add, the world is what we all make of it (the culmination of good and bad), only we, as a species, are accountable for it. Toleration and a blind eye are only one step away from being just as bad as crime itself I say.

C

2 upvotes
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Nov 29, 2012)

Anyway it's always the same in Japan. The ones who alert the rest of us are almost always fired without being protected by the law. Once I watched on a TV program that an engineer who alerted because the company he worked for constructed tunnels in the mountain that didn't respect the security standards was fired just like that. When he looked for some help to get back his job he had been said that it was sad for him but no court in Japan could compel his former company to re-hire him according to the laws. He did well but lost everything.

By the way, I would like to point out the M. Woodford VS Olympus is not the only case here, some other employees have complained too (in fact before the burst of the Woodford issue) to be subjects to bad treatments following their being too honests about some way of doing things in the company.

Frankly speaking, my heart bleeds thinking to the poor engineers working for Olympus, as they seem to be the real treasure buried on the pirates island.

3 upvotes
57even
By 57even (Nov 30, 2012)

If the engineers are any good, they will find jobs with someone else. Unless of course they helped Mr Woodford...

0 upvotes
YouDidntDidYou
By YouDidntDidYou (Nov 29, 2012)

The extracts (usually the best bits) I read in last week's Sunday Times magazine suggest that it's going to be as dull as dish water and that he remains clueless.

‘You don't have bad companies being taken over by good companies." in the United Kingdom we have have bad companies taking over good companies instead!

2 upvotes
Paul Callahan
By Paul Callahan (Nov 29, 2012)

he worked as CEO for 10 days. But he had worked for Olympus for 30 years, in part as MD of Olympus Europe and part as president before being appointed CEO

5 upvotes
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Nov 29, 2012)

It's clear the Olympus board was looking for somebody to wear the hat for when things would turn bad, because let's see things as they are, the dust under the carpet was on the verge to be too bulky to be hidden anylonger. M. Woodford did well to extract himself as soon as possible of this slurry pit before it's too late.

4 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Nov 29, 2012)

there is no doubt majority, not all, of Japan Inc (the larger ones; financial/banks, power groups, conglomerates, old companies, and GOVERNMENT) are Yakuzakian in nature from the old era, it affects both big and small players all around (vendors/suppliers/distributors, etc). one cannot separate the two, unless it is an independent younger company that survived amongst the 'big boys' club. thus, no such thing as 'independent auditor' nor 'manager/employee' that would dare question/challenge the Yakuzakian entrenched status quo. (US Wall Street 'old plutocratic-corporatocratic' corruption isn't that far off; just different.)

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
ThomasSwitzerland
By ThomasSwitzerland (Nov 29, 2012)

That's why Japan is in a stalemate since 20 years now. Old boys loosing in global competition.

US and Europe will follow. The world is in a substantial change now towards the New Asia. Japan will not belong to.

1 upvote
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Nov 29, 2012)

To sdyue: 100% approved.

To Thomas: not sure that's true as Asia is not the very source of new ideas/trends/styles/discoveries/etc. For now, asian countries just make things just as they are designed by western/japanese companies, or are little perfectionnements of what has been previously designed outside Asia. I don't say Asians are not able to make original items - it would be mad to tell such a thing ! - but it's way too early to tell whether they will be able to rise further. For the moment, one element for sure is that big finance is silently moving from Europe to Hong Kong (the gold stock exchange has been transfered recently to this place) but is Hong Kong under China's control ? Really ?

0 upvotes
ThomasSwitzerland
By ThomasSwitzerland (Nov 30, 2012)

Siemens company from Germany is not being capable to deliver high speed trains to German Federal railways. Quality problems (AC/embedded systems) all unresolved. A nightmare. China got one "sample train", being dismantled and reconstructed. Runs better with innovations. One may question this, but this is business practice.

I live in the middle of vibrant New Asia and can allow me the judgment: Your opinion is typical of the arrogant "Old" Western world.

Here in Malaysia we got excellent young people, top education, eager to strive - they will take the butter from your bread.

Europe with the Euro, as the US with Dollar, will become the ailing "Japan" - no hope, increasing their problems without solutions.

3 upvotes
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Nov 30, 2012)

I'm not more arrogant than you are a sweet dreamer. You mix up what you think you know and what you believe/hope is the future. For now, nothing significant comes from Malaysia (except palm oil ?) and its economy is largely based on making things that are at least based on foreign designed products/inventions, and on big money that is essentially a bubble at that stage of developement. And by the way, don't ever forget the "young dragons" of Asia have several times been given as the new boss of the world just days before it collapsed for years.

Yet, I don't say, once again, that everything is fixed, civilisations go up and down, and up and so on.

0 upvotes
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Dec 3, 2012)

To Thomas who feels Malaysia as the epitome of "vibrant New Asia" is the future of mankind while western/Japan are obsoletes: http://ajw.asahi.com/article/asia/south_east_asia/AJ201212030111

Wow, what a nice model for the future of the world, indeed !

0 upvotes
Barry Fitzgerald
By Barry Fitzgerald (Nov 29, 2012)

Woodford is a shining light in the culture of Japanese corporate corruption.
His removal as the "honest CEO" Is a stain that Olympus will never be able to move forward from.

I would not spend my money with a corrupt company.

4 upvotes
Infared
By Infared (Nov 29, 2012)

Clearly ...you have not used an OM-D...and some hot Oly glass.
As far as Michael goes...yawn....how many million did you cash in on boy scout?

4 upvotes
cgarrard
By cgarrard (Nov 29, 2012)

Even clearer is that you completely missed his point.

CEO's make millions all the time like it's nothing. Oly offered him a severance package, those, are also very common. Read up a bit bud.

0 upvotes
Infared
By Infared (Nov 29, 2012)

I am a photographer...not a corporate suit...read up on your cameras a bit there bud. Clearly you missed my point.

3 upvotes
Delacosta
By Delacosta (Nov 29, 2012)

"I would not spend my money with a corrupt company."

I suppose you mean a company you 'know' to be corrupt. Otherwise, I suspect there wouldn't be many opportunities for you to spend money at all...

8 upvotes
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Nov 29, 2012)

The fraud at Olympus was committed by high level executives to hide losses by means of phony investments. The company did not sell fake cameras. Many companies are losing money on sales of P&S cameras and certain other goods right now. Odds are, those products will never be profitaable again. Might it be "corrupt" to continue to make them, based on dreams of a turnaround, while continue to lose money? What exec will dare to say: "Dear Members of the Board, it's time for us to quit the camera (or HDTV display) business."?

2 upvotes
Marty4650
By Marty4650 (Nov 29, 2012)

Barry, you almost made sense that time.

Yes, Woodford was right, and the old BOD was wrong and corrupt, and this was a "stain" on the corporation.

But that still doesn't seem like a good reason to punish all the honest employees, talented engineers and designers, and all of Olympus' suppliers by boycotting a company that has gone through a financial scandal.

I'd say that Olympus has paid a dear price for their allowing this to happen, and it makes very little sense to further punish the company going forward.

2 upvotes
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Nov 29, 2012)

Barry, I'm with you on this case, while admitting Delacosta is totally right too. As for the debts they're not the result of bad sells as supposed by Cy but the awful product of foolish investments during the economic bubble that almost killed the whole Japan Inc. and not only financial or industrial companies ! The gambler lost "his" money, it's almost as simple as that: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15834854

As for what says Marty, I agree it's way too sad that the excellent Olympus engineers are in dire situation but it's maybe time for them to look for another employer. And I'm certain many good firms would be more than pleased to hire these engineers who, anyway, will maybe have to deal with unemployement next year as Olympus has just been saved by Sony... which is not a healthy company itself: http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-11-22/business/sns-rt-us-sony-panasonic-fitchbre8am02t-20121122_1_panasonic-sony-downgrades

0 upvotes
John M Roberts
By John M Roberts (Nov 29, 2012)

I doubt it. I'm sure they will continue and this will be just a bump unfortunately. Now if they could get some pressure from the buying public that would cause them to change, great but like I said.

I was considering the OM-D E-M5 but maybe I'll hold out for Fuji.

0 upvotes
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Nov 29, 2012)

Olympus first losses originated in speculative investments made in the late 1980s. When stocks imploded, Kikukawa's inner circle used a series of ersatz investments and accounting ploys to hide the losses. Meanwhile, the camera business has become unprofitable on its own account, and the company has a load of debt it can barely service. This is more than just a wee "bump," and it vastly transcends whether one likes the companies (mostly good!) cameras or not.

0 upvotes
Barry Fitzgerald
By Barry Fitzgerald (Nov 29, 2012)

I think Sony had their eye on the medical division rather than the camera one. But it's their cheque book so fire away!
Olympus as a company has had innovation over the years and I won't take that away from them.

But this whole "kill the good CEO" episode simply draws an unfortunate line under the old saying "arrogant Japanese company", some clearly more than others. But it has caused huge damage to both Olympus and Japan corporations as a whole.

0 upvotes
Stephan Def
By Stephan Def (Nov 29, 2012)

The original Article on amateurphotographer.co.uk is a very interesting and insightful read; its very revealing of a cultural phenomenon and it seriously connects the dots.

Comment edited 26 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Nov 29, 2012)

Right, but it's not "cultural", it's so to speak "genetic" or at least "traditional". How one dares to believe things can be changed while having been the same during centuries ?

Comment edited 16 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
gustabod
By gustabod (Nov 29, 2012)

so it takes 10 days as the new CEO to uncover irregularities and deals that go back many years? The independent auditors didn't pick it up? No one else, or was every manager and employee on this? Should be an interesting read...

5 upvotes
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Nov 29, 2012)

The fraud involved over-stated investments in some phony entities purportedly involved in cosmetics, food, or waste removal, thus hiding operating losses as assets that would amortize against future earnings. Only a few people close to Kikukawa would know the details, but not dare challenge their lord and mentor. The Board was passive. The external auditors, focusing on major operations, relied passively on internal audit reports covering the bogus undertakings. A web of complex offshore payments complicated the trail. Woodford had to decide fast whether to blow the whistle, or keep the Ponzi going, only to have it blow up on his watch and on pain of criminal charges. It would be so much easier for Kikukawa to make a timely exit, and let the blame fall on a foreigner.

3 upvotes
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Nov 29, 2012)

I predict this book will be a huge best seller all over the world as it just doesn't deal with a particular case even of a world famous company, but with the way the infamous Japan Inc. works on a regular basis, with japanese-only companies working hand in hand with other Japanese-only partners "against the world" and too often being related to the Yakuza... don't ever forget almost one japanese company on five has relations with these gangsters (cf: http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/national/T121116004872.htm ) for what is known.

1 upvote
Paradigm Changer
By Paradigm Changer (Nov 29, 2012)

18.4% of 11.7% is a lot less than "almost one fifth". Only 62 of 2885 companies surveyed gave in to demands, and only an estimated 34 in the year preceding the survey.That makes 1.2% in the past year and 2.1% in time remembered.

0 upvotes
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Nov 29, 2012)

You're right, this article is not clear about how this figure has been found but who can tell the japanese National Police Agency tells lies that trash the Japan's pride ?

To those who are too busy to read the article, here are the first lines:
"Among companies subjected to demands from organized crime syndicates such as extortion of money, 18.4 percent acquiesced, according to a recent survey, the National Police Agency has announced.
The figure was almost the same level as a similar survey conducted in 2010 in which 21.8 percent of companies that received unreasonable demands complied with them."

To know better the yakuza world: http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=5486399n

1 upvote
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (Nov 29, 2012)

Crime does not pay.

Hmmmm... it just did, here...

16 Million Pezookas.

.

2 upvotes
fad
By fad (Nov 29, 2012)

This was a career-ending move.

CEO jobs are few and far between and very lucrative. It's pretty much inconceivable that he would ever have such a position again.

He was being compensated for the loss of future income.

Just because most of us may not be used to having so large an income does not mean it is not normal for those who are used to it. People who were comfortable 50 years ago would be flabbergasted by the wealth of an ordinary lifestyle today.

I don't know what his motivation was, and do not care. He did a good and difficult thing. Can you think of another person who has done something like this?

4 upvotes
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Nov 29, 2012)

Self-interest is always a powerful motivator. It also helps to have enough personal wealth to survive an attempt to go against the grain. Had Woodford failed to uncover the fraud at the outset of his appointment, he would have become complicit and culpable--likely becoming the scapegoat. On the other hand, abstract honesty or love-of-neighbor count for nothing if a person can remain blameless (and maybe retire on a pension) by doing nothing.

1 upvote
Ropo16
By Ropo16 (Nov 29, 2012)

AP's vendetta against Olympus continues. They? have been dragging this morsel out for most of the year.

2 upvotes
thewhitehawk
By thewhitehawk (Nov 29, 2012)

I don't think there's anything wrong with reporting actual news, as long as it's actual news and not just speculation.

7 upvotes
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Nov 29, 2012)

To report on a mega fraud is not a "vendetta." Formal legal actions have finally been undertaken. This is not rumor or unfounded malice. The "morsel" involves billions of dollars, not mere opinon or personality.

4 upvotes
57even
By 57even (Nov 30, 2012)

Wow fanboyism at a new level. My little camera is more important...

0 upvotes
tommy leong
By tommy leong (Nov 29, 2012)

why should he give to charity ?
The man acted with courage and integrity, and deserves every cent ! !

how many today, would just stay on the job and turn a blind eye
to all that greed and deceit ........

13 upvotes
cgarrard
By cgarrard (Nov 29, 2012)

Probably a majority, and then we have the world as it is today. Make your own, guard your own- with integrity. I say. That's all we can do.

C

1 upvote
King Penguin
By King Penguin (Nov 29, 2012)

My understanding of the above is that he will give some of the profit of the book to charity not his £10m compensation!

0 upvotes
MichaelKJ
By MichaelKJ (Nov 29, 2012)

The Oly scandal was of some interest while things were unfolding, but now it is yesterday's news. Woodford has his money and will soon be forgotten. I can't imagine why anyone would want to read his book and the comment in the article about a possible movie is nothing more than PR.

2 upvotes
Raist3d
By Raist3d (Nov 29, 2012)

Because maybe they want to learn more in depth what happened? As for his money, he's donating a lot of it to charity.

5 upvotes
Andrew53
By Andrew53 (Nov 29, 2012)

Those who don't study history are doomed to repeat it.

Corporate governance is obsure or completely unknown to the majority of people. A review of how these monumental mistakes or possibly massive fraud occured will be very valuable for anyone who with a stake in the corporate world - which is just about everyone since at a minium corporations have a significant impact on our commuities.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
5 upvotes
stuntmonkey
By stuntmonkey (Nov 29, 2012)

>why anyone would want to read his book

Because it was a years-long, if not decades long behind the scenes agenda to hide losses from public disclosure. The scope of it is still unknown, and it's common knowledge that many Japanese companies engage in this kind of behavior. When you overpay multiples for little companies, with mysterious consultancy fees going to undisclosed intermediaries, you know it's not a small thing.

3 upvotes
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Nov 29, 2012)

"Yesterday's news" perhaps for people who care nothing about honesty or integrity. Forgettable, from the vantage of people who will blithely let the same things happen again. It's possible that Woodford's book is light on things that might matter most (full details of the fraud), but the story is important. Fraud, by its very nature, is furtive and leaves messy, destroyed, or indeterminant details.

3 upvotes
LJohnK2
By LJohnK2 (Nov 29, 2012)

It amazes me how a rightful act can be twisted in some way to vilify this guy.

....he could have done it quieter, he was a mean manager before he got to Japan, he disliked baby seals....blah, blah, blah.

Think of your own career, have you been perfect ?....if you haven't does that nullify the good things you have done?

Woodford did a very good thing.

13 upvotes
Richard Murdey
By Richard Murdey (Nov 29, 2012)

I hadn't realized he was only 10 days in the job.

One the one hand I admire his sticking to principles.

On the other hand. 10 million. 10 days. .....

3 upvotes
Raist3d
By Raist3d (Nov 29, 2012)

10 million, which he says most of it will go to charity?

1 upvote
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Nov 29, 2012)

He didn't want to leave after 10 days. He sued because he got fired for doing his job properly.

7 upvotes
MuMinded
By MuMinded (Nov 29, 2012)

A more careful reading of the text and it appears that only thing he will be donating to charity are the proceeds of the book, not the settlement money. I'm not discrediting or belittling it, but just setting the record straight.

4 upvotes
stuntmonkey
By stuntmonkey (Nov 29, 2012)

> I hadn't realized he was only 10 days in the job.

But he worked years within the company, so it wasn't like he was an unknown. The board miscalculated on his willingness to play ball.

4 upvotes
Brian Mosley
By Brian Mosley (Nov 29, 2012)

What about the proceeds of the film?

I imagine he balanced the risks, and took the best course for himself and his family. I don't think for one moment the whistle blowing was based on principle, other than self interest.

I don't think Mr Woodford is a bad person, any more than the rest of the corporate bods trying to survive in those treacherous waters.

2 upvotes
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Nov 29, 2012)

"I imagine he balanced the risks, and took the best course for himself and his family. I don't think for one moment the whistle blowing was based on principle, other than self interest."

You're maybe right, maybe wrong, who knows ? Anyway, that's the result that matters: Olympus scam has been exposed to the world, shareholders have been informed their shares value is next to nothing, and more important than anything in my opinion, that's an invaluable inside view of the way of doing things of Japan Inc.

0 upvotes
Richard Murdey
By Richard Murdey (Nov 29, 2012)

- I do realize he was paid the money for wrongful dismissal, not as salary. However, the net result is still 10 days work and 10 million dollars.

- He may be giving the bulk of that money to a (tax deductable) charity, he may not. That's his choice; he may indeed be more interested in the paying of it than the receiving of it. Either way though, it is still 10 million for being fired after 10 days on the job. The 1% have it sweet, that you can't deny.

1 upvote
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Nov 29, 2012)

You stubborn still hold on tight to this false argument ! He was not fired for 10 days of work, as he worked for Olympus for maybe 20 years or more ! But the worse was that he had been given to leave his job, his car, his house and even Japan in a raw just 24 housr while being threatened to be a yakuza next contract.

That said, It delights me so much that M. Woodford received this compensation ! At the climax of this case, I went to the Olympus HQ in Shinjuku, where I heard with my own hears Olympus employees going out of the company laughing loudly and making bad jokes on M. Woodford, never forgetting to ad (all in Japanese) "Of course, he is an alien" (foreigner). Now, I doubt they have the heart to laugh again of Woodford as they have it deep in their... <name it>.

0 upvotes
Raist3d
By Raist3d (Dec 3, 2012)

MuMinded - what part of "He won £10 million - much of which he plans to donate to a human rights charity, Reprieve, and the kind of road safety campaigns that earned him an MBE 11 years ago.

Any suggestion that he is cashing in on the Olympus crisis, he says he would regard as offensive."

Refers to giving to charity money for the book sales? That sure sounds to me referring to his court settlement. Please, let me know where the discrepancy in claim is because I re-read carefully and I could not find any.

Comment edited 4 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Raist3d
By Raist3d (Dec 3, 2012)

@Richard- your suggestion that it was "10 days of work =10 million dollars" is shortsighted and quite frankly ridiculous. You don't get 10 million dollars unless you had his background of working at the company for so many years then being fired with a wrong dismissal. That's hardly anywhere equivalent to "just 10 days of work."

0 upvotes
Raist3d
By Raist3d (Dec 3, 2012)

@Brian - I don 't think he's necessarily a saint but consider there were other courses of action that could have gotten him more money while keeping his mouth shut and vanishing from the work place.

A good way to know would be to have a background check of what he did in general, and if he does donate a lot of the cash as he promises, but don't rule out that maybe he did try to do partially the right thing after all. He could just have cashed in and gone away quietly without the public stress.

And don't get me wrong, I am sure he considered some degree of self interest, but I think given the circumstances it's also possible he was additionally partially motivated to do what's right.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
ThomasSwitzerland
By ThomasSwitzerland (Nov 29, 2012)

The room at the top is always dangerous, because one falls deeper because of the height.

I find Mr Woodford has shown tremendous courage to keep his character intact; not tolerating this kind of business. One brave exemption in a complex network of mutual hi-level dependencies.

7 upvotes
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Nov 29, 2012)

"The room at the top is always dangerous, because one falls deeper because of the height."

That's not right. The ones who are fired the first when things go wrong in a company are the ones who work at the bottom of the corporate pyramid, while at the top of it, if ever one has to leave, it's often with a golden parachute, that's well known.

For the rest of your post, I agree with you totally.

8 upvotes
ThomasSwitzerland
By ThomasSwitzerland (Nov 29, 2012)

As this is a very serious matter I want to specify.

The room at the top is dangerous to your mental health and your character.

Golden parachutes and money do not compensate for broken relationships, autism, and further flight into desperation, and prestige empty compensation items like Bentleys, jets, women, and others.

Woodward has the right to take 10 million, because this is a small amount compared to the effort of inside powers to ruin his life totally. Just like a ransom pay. He spoke loudly. This earns deep respect.

4 upvotes
Dave Oddie
By Dave Oddie (Nov 29, 2012)

I am sorry but what has autism got to do with it? You don't catch autism. It is not a mental illness that you drop into due to stress or whatever.

I do see what you are driving at. I have seen some pretty flawed characters at the top of companies I have worked for over the years. All very wealthy but flawed. Some are not.

I am sure Woodward was horrified at what he found out given his long association with the company but had he not exposed it then I am sure he knew sooner or later it would come out and he'd be in the dock as well. I am not belittling what he did and I don't begrudge him the money but he had little option. It is still a credit to him he didn't cave in and stick his head in the sand.

4 upvotes
Delacosta
By Delacosta (Nov 29, 2012)

"...prestige empty compensation items like Bentleys, jets, women..."

Don't think women would appreciate being considered as empty compensation items. Prestige or otherwise.

2 upvotes
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Nov 29, 2012)

Delacosta: "Don't think women would appreciate being considered as empty compensation items."

Indeed. They will insist on a major share of the Bentlys, jets, mansions, stables, wardrobes, stipends, and other lavish accoutrements of grandeur.

3 upvotes
Delacosta
By Delacosta (Nov 30, 2012)

Cy Cheze: "Indeed. They will insist on a major share of the Bentlys, jets, mansions, stables, wardrobes, stipends, and other lavish accoutrements of grandeur."

If you mean that women generally want a major share of the wealth available in the world, then that may be true. I don't think greed has a gender.

If you are referring to the particular case of divorce settlements, then obviously it's every man for himself - literally. ;-)

0 upvotes
Gary Dean Mercer Clark
By Gary Dean Mercer Clark (Nov 29, 2012)

How about donating some of the 10 million severance package to the Gary Mercer charity----me. :)

2 upvotes
onlooker
By onlooker (Nov 29, 2012)

I like the idea, but I can't "Like" it because you've got my name spelled wrong.

1 upvote
Delacosta
By Delacosta (Nov 29, 2012)

I do like it. He spelled "me" perfectly.

0 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Nov 28, 2012)

I doubt it was more stressful than dealing with Nikon USA. But seriously, this sort of corporate taradiddle is not that uncommon and probably looms larger because they make nice cameras. Cameras weren't the bulk of Olympus' business and as far as I know there wasn't much fuss about the possible dissapearance of Olympus endoscopes, etc.

1 upvote
TLD
By TLD (Nov 29, 2012)

'The dissapearance of Olympus endoscopes'

Now there's a statement that conjours up a mind picture...

13 upvotes
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Nov 29, 2012)

The endoscopes are likely to survive, if they continue to make money. The cameras unit, on the other hand, has suffered multiple quarters of losses and declining volumes. A rise in OMD EM-5 or TG1 sales can hardly plug the hole.

0 upvotes
SayCheesePlease
By SayCheesePlease (Nov 30, 2012)

Endoscopes! For where the sun don't shine. Now I know why Olympus cameras are so great for low light photography.

Comment edited 37 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
stuntmonkey
By stuntmonkey (Nov 28, 2012)

In retrospect, the signs were in plain view when Olympus starting buying nothingburger companies like Gyrus for obscene amounts of money. Woodford is a bit of a load mouth, but that shouldn't be an excuse for what happened. Carlos Ghosn is an even bigger loudmouth non-Japanese, but is loved at Nissan.

1 upvote
rhlpetrus
By rhlpetrus (Nov 29, 2012)

Is there anything wrong with Nissan?

0 upvotes
Horshack
By Horshack (Nov 28, 2012)

Now that he's safe can he trying calling someone at Olympus Japan and ask if they can add focus peaking to the OM-D?

4 upvotes
RezaTravilla
By RezaTravilla (Nov 29, 2012)

they already does =D

there is tutorial on youtube on how to make focus peaking...well someone finds and told it.

0 upvotes
Horshack
By Horshack (Nov 29, 2012)

I've seen it and tried it (art filter). Didn't really care for it.

2 upvotes
Ken Rocket
By Ken Rocket (Nov 28, 2012)

It nearly killed Olympus. Nearly?

0 upvotes
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Nov 29, 2012)

And it's not finished as the book will soon be sold in Japan (that's the second blade of the razor) and next year, the movie will be done (the third blade). I guess things are far from over for the Olympus shareholders, the main victims of this scandal.

1 upvote
unknown member
By (unknown member) (Nov 28, 2012)

I am glad that Olympus had to cough up huge money to this crime exposing CEO.

10 upvotes
cgarrard
By cgarrard (Nov 29, 2012)

Yep. I often wondered how much crime exists that doesn't get exposed, this case just makes me question that even more. I guess the answer is that there is as much crime as honest people will allow or ignore.

;)

3 upvotes
JacquesBalthazar
By JacquesBalthazar (Nov 29, 2012)

Most financial crime is borderline stuff. Someone takes a risk that turns into an error causing financial loss and potential loss of personal and brand equity. What happens then is that those guys, who are by definition excessively self-assured egomaniacs, think they can "fix" it before it gets visible, and design complex delay and cover-up schemes. Since they are good at doing that,and nobody sees the manipulation or speaks up against it, they convince themselves that the schemes are the fix, and lose sight oft the illegality or immorality of what they are doing. Then comes another error, a fluke control or a whistleblower, and, suddenly the "king is naked". I agree with you that most of these white collar crimes go un identified and unpunished. Many top flying execs out there have ugly corpses rotting in their cupboard somewhere, without necessarily realising themselves that something smells and they did wrong.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Nov 30, 2012)

"Many top flying execs out there have ugly corpses rotting in their cupboard somewhere"

Music, please ! Cf: http://youtu.be/YO2Viv8dQJ4

2 upvotes
pkincy
By pkincy (Nov 28, 2012)

This is the major reason I don't invest in foreign securities. You don't have any idea who is really running the company and whether the books really reflect what is happening.

4 upvotes
unknown member
By (unknown member) (Nov 28, 2012)

Like American books are any cleaner. Hello Enron, World Com, Wall Street Banks etc.

Comment edited 15 seconds after posting
32 upvotes
jim stirling
By jim stirling (Nov 28, 2012)

I think that while there are no doubt corrupt companies the world over the bigger issue is the insular nature of Japanese business

5 upvotes
cgarrard
By cgarrard (Nov 29, 2012)

Exactly Ratty, exactly. Like its ok that the US gov spends 180 billion a day more than we take in through taxes too.

C

2 upvotes
Tape5
By Tape5 (Nov 28, 2012)

Boredom extraordinaire.

2 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Nov 28, 2012)

Do you mean boring? Because there's nothing boring about financial scandals and whistleblowers.

Boring is arguing endlessly about camera specs and who has the bigger, better lens.

18 upvotes
RStyga
By RStyga (Nov 28, 2012)

I have to agree with marike6 albeit talking about camera technology is not always boring :-)

The problem with such publications is that it's not possible to tell who's honest and what to believe...

I remember an 80s book about IBM with the title "Big Blue: IBM's Use and Abuse of Power", by R. DeLamarter. Very interesting reading too.

0 upvotes
Airless
By Airless (Nov 29, 2012)

Wait a second. I have the bigger, better lens, it's ME, NOT YOU!

0 upvotes
Tape5
By Tape5 (Nov 29, 2012)

I need no middle aged man who has destroyed a few lives to become what he is, to expect us to kiss his moral butt because when waters got cloudy he made the best business decision he could.

1 upvote
Stephan Def
By Stephan Def (Nov 29, 2012)

The only way I could see it boring is if I was extraordinarily cynical, living and breathing that.

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Total comments: 151