I really don't understand what Loeb is doing here. At this point in Thompson's career, whether he has a CS degree or not just seems completely immaterial. I can appreciate the "trust" issue, but Yahoo is in such a bad place that distracting the executive team even more seems like a really bad idea.

The only thing that makes sense to me is that Loeb has his own candidate he wants in the top spot, so he's going to torpedo anybody he can to get that person there.

He wants control of the board. And at this point, he probably does not care much about the executive team or the stock price. The lower it goes, the more he can buy and thus put even more pressure to get his people on the board.

To what end? Does he think he can run the company better? Of course, given some of the decisions that have come out of Yahoo, he might be able to.

From what I can tell as an outsider: Loeb thinks the company is valued at $18 - $20 range or possibly higher (thanks to its Asian assets). If he can drive down the price, he can load up some more.

Once he gets a significant voice in the company (via more board members), he will force them to sell their Asian assets, quickly driving up the price to the desired range. Having loaded up at around $15 and assuming it hits $20, you're looking at a quick 33% ROI. That's what hedge funds do; they don't usually invest for the long haul.

Yea it's all a bit odd - it's certainly not right that Thompson lied on his resume, but it's not clear why Loeb as a stakeholder in a fragile company would want to hurt it further.

He runs a hedge fund - someone should investigate whether he has a short position on the stock.

"Loeb, chief executive of hedge fund Third Point, which holds 5.8 percent of Yahoo's shares"

"Yahoo, whose revenue slid by more than a fifth last year"

Loeb might just be looking for a scapegoat.

I'm not sure what you're implying. He doesn't run Yahoo. He makes no managerial decisions. He doesn't even sit on Yahoo's board.

But he's responsible for his fund investing a huge amount in a bad stock. He's probably trying to find a scapegoat for that decision.

Yahoo was doomed when it stopped focusing on product and technology. The "media" company angle doesn't really work for it or another dinosaur: AOL.

The engineers need to take back the company and run it.

In my opinion, he should resign.

and rightly he should. as ceo, he really needs to be able to express the complexity of functions in big-o notation. for shame.

He should at least be able to derive an efficient algorithm to not being a lying sack of shit. He should probably resign it's not about the usefulness of the CS degree itself, I don't think anyone would argue that point. It's about an organization that is all but on the brink of both cultural and perhaps total collapse (at least as we know it in its current form), and then the leader of that organization brings a distraction like this into the mix, you've got to be kidding me. The only argument that makes some sense for why he shouldn't go is that he hasn't really been there for any time at all. But he is absolutely heaping more shit onto an already steaming pile. He shouldn't have even mentioned it in the first place, I doubt it had very much to do with him getting hired, and if it did, let's get the board members who think college major is a sufficient condition for hiring a Fortune 500 CEO out of there.

Does anyone have a copy of the full memo?

The snippets posted in the article didn't make it sound like an apology at all -- more of an "I'm sorry people were so upset about this, but let's forget it." No real admission of guilt or explanation of why he did it or anything. There very well may have been in the "extended memo" though, I'd be curious to see it.