Comments on: John Roth Wants Nortel’s Help!

By: yes4aapl

yes4aapl — Sat, 26 Dec 2009 10:04:44 +0000

ya ya
listento Proto he has never been wrong seence I met him in 2004 after the accounting fraud
he is well known public person talking openly about Nortel's frauds on tv
so who are you mr zero?
zeroman?
what level of iq shows your name_id zeroman?
just stfu

By: yes4aapl

yes4aapl — Sat, 26 Dec 2009 05:04:44 +0000

By: 4merEmployee22

4merEmployee22 — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 15:26:07 +0000

Mr. John Roth wants NORTEL's help??????????

I want NORTEL's HELP too! BY GIVING ME MY "RETIREMENT ALLOWANCE"!!

BUT THE FREAKIN" BANKRUPTCY COURT WONT ALLOW IT!!! nor the

MONITOR!!

By: whopperscan

whopperscan — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 07:59:44 +0000

Has he actually been taken to court for anything? Or is he just worrying, reacting to all the negative publicity and messages from pensioners and the like, that he is no doubt receiving?

It's called Karma, John….

By: Many

Many — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 16:32:40 +0000

I was also in Carling on 9/11, though not in a meeting with Roth. I was with a group trying to clean up after his stupendous mess. I argue that the Nortel-Bay merger was more successful than the Synoptics-Wellfleet merger. If Roth had done any due diligence at all he would have realized how fragmented Bay and their products were. Bay was never a competitor to Cisco, and the main reason Nortel "acquired” Bay was because Lucent was a huge Bar reseller and it bought Nortel access to most of the Lucent customer base. The Bay acquisition rivaled Lucent’s acquisition of Ascend for sheer stupidity.

I remember trying to get two Bay product management people (one from Boston and the other from Santa Clara) to even talk together about such elementary look and feel commonality as the Bay RS and common MIB definitions. No dice. They hated each other. The only think that held that company together long enough to be acquired was David “Captain Adrenaline” House.

Not finished yet, Roth acquired such uncomplimentary businesses with no products as Xros, and CorTek and under Roth’s misleadership made complete fools of themselves trying to market Sonoma, Clarify, Qtera, Promatory, Altion, Architel adnausium under a common Nortel brand that confused the market completely.

Roth should share a cell with Madoff.

I agree with your basic assesment about the manor in which the "force reductions" were handled, but at that point nothing surprised me.

By: Many

Many — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 16:02:52 +0000

Roth was the biggest crook of them all. He stole ten times more money from Nortel than anyone that followed him. Don't forget his trusted CFO was none other than F Dunn, the Canadian poster boy for accounting fraud. Where and when is it you think the Nortel accounting fraud was invented? Guilt by association? You betcha.

Roth is a either a crook, stupid or both. He wasted huge amounts of time, capital and good will on stupid optical follies, not realizing (or maybe he did) that optical innovations and bandwidth multipliers doomed his strategy. If he has bothered to talk to customers and their finance people instead of playing with his classic car collection he would have seen it coming soon enough to refocus away from Optical and onto products that customers wanted. When he did realize it he beat a hasty retreat with dubious excuses, marooning thousands of employees and taking 100million + of much needed capital.

Chandran was another crook, who knew one year prior that the NA optical market was drying up and the customers were on very thin ice, but said nothing. Roth’s firing of Chandrin was probably the sole good deed of his tenure. This good deed was immediately nullified by putting Dunn in charge.

I hope John Roth is financially wiped out and he and his family have to live in a dumpster.

By: less

less — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 16:55:03 +0000

I knew some guys had a problem.Their power bill was killing them.They told their people to cut back. They removed light bulbs throughout their building. They turned the thermostat up 5 degrees. Then they checked their network -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3WGxVvVc8I&feat...

By: zeroman

zeroman — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 19:43:13 +0000

hey proto. simple question. if Chandra was making all the decisions what was Roth doing. come on don't be so naiive. you are just like one of those evil nortel backstabbers.

By: wasthere

wasthere — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 19:03:51 +0000

Excellent assessment indeed. Never saw so much spending then during the Roth years. I remember asking to myself : How can we make money by spending so much like if we had unlimited revenues. In fact we weren't making money it was just a smoked screen. Roth initiated the 'right angle turn' buying a business a month with all these new employees added to the headcount but was not prepared for the cliff that followed. After the telecom collapse in 2000 it did cost a fortune to Nortel to let go all these people hired during the frenzy(95,000 at the peak).

Maybe Roth was a visionary like you say but he was more obsess by making the share go up then to manage prudently the company.

By: zeroman

zeroman — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 18:28:59 +0000

Roth left at the right time. Ok so he acquired a whole slew of companies, some which made no sense. but what were the 3 CEOs since 2000 doing? if Roth were sued then they should go after every exeuctive since 2000 since they were the ones who goofed it all up wasting millions in crap products that never made it to market. need i bring up opc, interceptor, neptune, metro next?

What's next? 1 billion to defend Jean Monty, Paul Stern. This is ridiculous if creditors want to start suing every CEO. waste of time and money.

no matter what anyone says the sole CEO responsible is Mike Z. he says Nortel was not a normal company for the past 6 years. well 3 of them were on his watch and he did nothing to get the company on the right path. in fact his big bloated egghead ego turned back the sale of Enterprise to Avaya and CDMA to Nokia, which would have brought in over 3 billion cash.