and the shares will be worth $30,000. But if Bob sells his 100 Class A shares, he will have no vote on the Class C stock worth $30,000. Q. Is this a new strategy for Google? A. No. Since it went public in 2004, Google's founders have emphasized the need for long-term governance. They believe they need to retain the voting power to do that. The stock structure had been designed from the start to leave power with Page, Brin and Schmidt. Page and Brin argue that Google will be more successful if it concentrates on the long term, even if that means short-term stumbles in meeting Wall Street's targets for earnings and revenue. The founders note that it took three years for the first phones based on Google's Android operating system to come out and another three years for the system to reach critical mass. They don't want investors voting with short-term interests in mind. "These kinds of investments are not for the faint-hearted," the founders said. Q. So is this a split or a dividend? A. It's neither in the traditional sense. The stock is effectively being split, as the value of each share will be cut in half. Stock splits allow smaller investors to buy shares, but in this case, the move is driven more by a desire to retain control and less by shareholder pressure. It can be considered a dividend, but instead of getting cash, investors will get stock. Q,toms outlet. Is this decision final? A. Existing shareholders must approve the plan at Google's annual stockholder meeting on June 21. Because Page, Brin and Schmidt control the majority of votes, it's expected to pass. Q. When will this happen? A. Google will announce details after the plan's likely approval in June. Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information,toms outlet, please see our Comments FAQ,cheaptomsshoessalei.com. An insider's guide to politics and policy, available on the iPad or as a PDF download.
By ANNE D'INNOCENZIO, Associated Press NEW YORK (AP) Innocent until proven guilty? Maybe not if the defendant is a CEO and the jury is a company's board of directors. Best Buy's CEO Brian Dunn resigned this week after the retailer's board launched an investigation into his "personal conduct." The 28-year Best Buy veteran joins a list of big-name CEOs who stepped down or were fired after getting into trouble for their actions outside of the corner office. The alleged offenses and the punishments have varied widely from lying to cheating. Some wound up leaving their companies with a golden parachute. Mark Hurd, former CEO of Hewlett-Packard Co., for instance, resigned and received a severance package worth $30 million after an internal investigation by the company uncovered some expense-account irregularities. Others, like business magnate Martha Stewart, suffered more severe consequences. Stewart was forced to resign from her namesake media empire and spent five months in a West Virginia jail after being con Related articles:

• cheap toms shoes the maximum fine topped out at $10
• tomsoutletsalecheap.com By SARAH DiLORENZO
• cheaptomsshoessalei.com mments FAQ. An insider's guide to politics and policy