| Topic Name: |
Adjoined Consulting |
| Message Name: |
A Great Place To Work... If You Are Good |
| Date Posted: |
03/21/2005 |
| In Reply To: |
We agree on one thing
Much too much wasted energy
Organic growth versus non organic? who really cares; it depends upon your perception really
Check Dclusters posts and MBAHotties posts; not exactly ringing endorsements
Of course you would think that my statements about Andy and recruiters was weak and not worth it; it disputes what you think of me as being vicious when in fact I was being pragmatic and somewhat complimentary
It was not I who mentioned that you had no women in management; that was hottie. You did have a CMO there for a while, now she is gone. Your GC is a women; bravo!
I cannot speak to recent developments in the company this is true but the line of people behind me who must have thought they too were being "persecuted" is a very long one.
I never mentioned that your company is set up by geography
Adjoined is in fact a private company and they can release whatever numbers they want to Kennedy; until I see it in an audited annual report its certainly within my rights to view these numbers with a bit of scepticism. You've been floating those stock options out there as a beneift for so long now, people would have to wonder if they will ever come to fruition.
The 50 million dollar number is probably a revenue number; curious to see what the earnings numbers might be. Those are noticably absent
It seems that you have found me out with even a peek into my personnel file; I would think those files are confidential and not for public discussion. You may have put your company at risk for a lawsuit on that one.
Look Number 181204, I mean you no disrespect; we cannot agree to disagree and probably never will. As I mentioned to you earlier good luck to you at Adjoined; its time to move on |
| Message: |
CorpLias (Chicago Jane), it did not take contacting HR to determine who you and Mild Mannered Reporter (Country Bob) were. It was all on this Board! I checked with my colleagues in Atlanta, and it took them all of 5 minutes to figure it out by looking at the posts. These particular guys are ex-AT Kearny and former MBA??s who know this site well. You referred to yourself as ??heading up a SOX practice?? and Bob fingerprinted his posts with his classic ??core franchise?? type catch-phrases, along with his trademark too many ??o??s behind the word ??sooooo??.
You assert that you ??mean no disrespect??, yet every time you open your cyber mouth, you in fact do precisely that. You fake spontaneous dialogue on a board with your own ex-supervisor to propagate lies about your former employer?! Shame on you! Believe me when I tell you that your feelings towards Adjoined exist in a greater reciprocal manner from the group that you were once a part of. Failures such as yours are a rare situation for this organization.
The root of the problem sounded like it resided in Country Bob. Apparently he was long on promises and woefully short on delivery (and these are some of the nicer things that were said!)
I also followed up with our finance group about your incessant ??organic versus acquired growth?? assertions. For a private company we are very open with our top-line numbers as we are proud of them.
As far as acquisitions go, an accurate timeline follows:
In 2000, our founding year, the company did no acquisitions. In 2001, Adjoined acquired LogicSpan which was a small firm (about 14 people). In 2002, we did no acquisitions. In 2003, May to be precise, we acquired Plaut??s Outsourcing Division which accounted for about $7 million of our $38 million in revenue that year. In 2004, we did no acquisitions. Of the $50 million in revenue done in 2004, well less than 20% of it could be tied back to an acquired revenue trail of any kind. This means 80%+ of our growth has come by means of organic growth through 2004. The Cima acquisition was not done until Jan 2005, so it would not be represented by any of this history yet (another inaccurate assertion of yours). But, as you say, who cares?
As for the bottom line, as a private company we do not disclose earnings ?? as no private company would. Get this however, the company raised money only once - in Sept of 2000 Adjoined raised $25 million of venture funding. This is public record. The company has never raised money since, but rather has funded its own working capital growth and the acquisitions mentioned by its own positive cash flow. What does that say about earnings?
Even though, as a private company, we are not required to have audited financials, we have an audit every year. Our current auditors are PricewaterhouseCoopers. We only release financials on certain occasions, the last of which was when our CEO spoke at the annual SG Cowan Technology Conference in Boston last fall. That??s also public record!
I am actually glad you pushed me to do this research. It has made me feel even better about where I work.
Finally, our finance department is preparing a presentation that our CEO will be giving at the annual investor meeting of one of our tier-1 VC??s in May. They are apparently showcasing Adjoined as a top investment of this decade! So much for the ??VC rumor mill??. Seems like Country Bob (mmr) not only cannot get the content of his fabrications right, but he cannot get the timing right!
As for slander - to use a public message board to simulate a dialogue with a prior subordinate/supervisor and to propagate overt inaccuracies so as to damage a company??s reputation? My guess is that could be called slander. But I??ll let others (like our legal department) decide that for certain.
Until then, the best way for anyone reading your deranged assertions to determine if they hold even a glimmer of truth, will be to see if they in fact come true! Stay tuned. I am sure glad I am on this side of the bet!
|
|
