Tag Archive for ‘Intel’
Johnson & Johnson topped a list of companies perceived by American consumers as having the best reputations for corporate social responsibility practices. Months after research for the Index was conducted, the company admitted that it misled regulators and consumers by using contractors to buy defective Motrin painkiller products from store shelves rather than announce a recall.
Investment firm Walden Asset Management recently researched and compiled quotes from sustainability and corporate responsibility reports by several dozen companies in a wide range of industries. The exercise showed, says a Walden executive, that attention to such issues has become vitally important for a company’s business, and that transparent reporting is, as one CEO said, one of “the prices of doing business today.”
The SEC charged that Dell and its founder, Michael Dell, and several former executives did not disclose to investors large “exclusivity payments” the company received from Intel Corporation to not use central processing units manufactured by Intel’s main rival, Advanced Micro Devices Inc. At their peak in the first quarter of 2007, those payments constituted 76 percent of Dell’s operating income.
Dell Inc. said the company and its Chairman and CEO, Michael Dell, are in negotiations with the Securities and Exchange Commission to settle charges related to past dealings with chip-maker Intel. The company revised its earnings to include a $100 million liability to cover the cost of an anticipated settlement by the company with the SEC.
The number of so-called “say-on-pay” votes has increased from only 6 in 2008, when Aflac Inc. became the first to adopt the practice, and 19 in 2009.
In May 2010, Intel will become the first publicly-held U.S. company to hold a “virtual shareholder meeting” to the exclusion of an in-person gathering. While the plan may have advantages – including no cost to attend, and “increased transparency” with more shareholders able to attend – activist investors say Intel’s move would set a “negative precedent” for other companies.