![www.theregister.com](/proxy.php?image=https%3A%2F%2Fregmedia.co.uk%2F2024%2F07%2F17%2Fshutterstock_layoffs.jpg&hash=c357fff5e07f20ce972d6870b99b1b88&return_error=1)
Merged Exabeam and LogRhythm cut jobs, face lawsuit
Unconfirmed reports suggest 30 percent reduction in headcount
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Stock as you likely well know, is regarded as a gamble and nothing is guaranteed.These two poorly performing companies merge. Somebody directing the merger decides exabeam's employee stock just doesn't matter anymore -- according to this article.![]()
Merged Exabeam and LogRhythm cut jobs, face lawsuit
Unconfirmed reports suggest 30 percent reduction in headcountwww.theregister.com
There are still limits of what a company can do. It sounds as if they are doing some illegal stock manipulation. The stockholders are actual owners of the company. I sincerely doubt if two companies can merge and then declare the stocks of one company worthless.Stock as you likely well know, is regarded as a gamble and nothing is guaranteed.
They had "common stock".These two poorly performing companies merge. Somebody directing the merger decides exabeam's employee stock just doesn't matter anymore -- according to this article.![]()
Merged Exabeam and LogRhythm cut jobs, face lawsuit
Unconfirmed reports suggest 30 percent reduction in headcountwww.theregister.com
Oh, well, then, it's ok to screw the employees out of part of their compensation. Because you were just "gambling" with it, anyway.Stock as you likely well know, is regarded as a gamble and nothing is guaranteed.
Best except the fact that stocks for a long time have been well known to be a pure gamble and never guaranteed to investors then trying to reason it away with unrelated examples.Oh, well, then, it's ok to screw the employees out of part of their compensation. Because you were just "gambling" with it, anyway.
Especially when the dealer is cheating.Best except the fact that stocks for a long time have been well known to be a pure gamble and never guaranteed to investors then trying to reason it away with unrelated examples.
Well that's why some people can sue. It's just a wait and see affair I would think right now.Especially when the dealer is cheating.