HOW FIVE WOMEN CEO'S DESTROYED CONFIDENCE IN THE U.S. ECONOMY
Scientific Evidence that Men and Women are Designed Differently

Company HPQ
CEO Carly Fiorina
Date CEO Dec-99
Shares (millions) 3060
Price/ share $13.43
Current Market Capitalization ($ millions) 41,096
Market High 68.00
Total Loss ($ millions) (166,984)

Company XRX
CEO Anne Mulcahy
Date CEO 1-Aug-01
Shares (millions) 667.4
Price/ share $7.01
Current Market Capitalization ($ millions) 5,118
Market High 11.50
Total Loss ($ millions) (2,997)

Company LU
CEO Patricia Russo
Date CEO 7-Jan-02
Shares (millions) 3,390
Price/ share $1.73
Current Market Capitalization ($ millions) 5,938
Market High 7.30
Total Loss ($ millions) (18,882)


Company AVP

CEO Andrea Jung

Date CEO Nov-99
Shares (millions) 238
Price/ share $48.74
Current Market Capitalization ($ millions) 11,501
Market High 55.00
Total Loss ($ millions) (1,491)

Company MIR
CEO Marce Fuller
Date CEO Oct-01
Shares (millions) 402
Price/ share $3.78
Current Market Capitalization ($ millions) 1,519
Market High 48.00
Total Loss ($ millions) (17,770)

Total 65,172

(208,124)

*Data as of August 30, 2002

This $208 billion dollar loss is a 76% reduction in the value of the above five corporations' stock, from a market capitalization of $273 billion to $65 billion, since they appointed women as CEOs.

Compare this to the 34% loss in the NYSE, and the "mere" $70 billion loss at Enron which has captivated the jewsmedia's attention ad infinitum.

Avon Products

Andrea Jung became CEO in November 1999.

Xerox

Anne Mulcahy became CEO on August 1, 2001.

Lucent Technologies

Patricia Russo became CEO on January 7, 2002

Mirant

Marce Fuller became CEO in October 2001.

Hewlett Packard

Carly Fiorina became CEO in July 2000, bans Easter Holiday August 6, 2000.

Spherion Corporation

Cinda A. Hallman becomes CEO on June 3, 2002

Mattel Corporation

Conversely, while the above corporations were adding women to their CEO ranks and losing hundreds of billions of dollars, Mattel was firing Jill-The fact is that I worked with a man, and that man is no longer here. Somehow it then gets said that I don't get along with men-Barad, their first woman CEO and increasing their stock value 2.6 fold. When she was fired in February 2000, Mattel's stock market value skyrocketed from $9 to $23. If just firing one woman CEO would cause Mattels' stock value to increase $6 billion, then the above five corporations firing the women CEO's who lost their stockholders $208 billion should expect to at least recover this loss and raise their stock market capitalization back to $273 billion, for a 4.2 fold gain.

In addition, such an increase in these five industry leaders should have a parallel effect in the stock market in general.

By comparison, the $70 billion Enron loss which has captured all media attention as of late is only a third of what these girls cost their stock holders:

As if to highlight the absurdity of permitting women like Jill-The fact is that I worked with a man, and that man is no longer here. Somehow it then gets said that I don't get along with men-Barad to have power and authority over the men who made their companies successful, Women Entrepreneurs, Inc., makes the following ludicrous, unsupported, and completely unfounded public statement on their web site:

"As of 2004, there are an estimated 10.6 million privately-held firms in the U.S. that are 50% or more women-owned, accounting for nearly half (48%) of all privately-held firms. These firms generate $2.46 trillion in sales and employ 19.1 million people nationwide."

A mild sanity check will tell you that 19.1 million employees, most of them part-time and women who constitute less than 14% of the labor force, cannot produce 25% of GDP. A quick check with the US Census Bureau's 1997 Economic Census will tell you that what Women Entrepreneurs think women contribute to the economy is SIXTEEN TIMES (16X) greater than what they actually contribute.

Furthermore, we have this from the Census Bureau itself, an organization very easy even for women to find, especially wilth the internet:

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

Women owned 6.5 million nonfarm U.S. businesses in 2002, employing 7.1 million persons and generating $939.5 billion in business revenues. These women-owned firms accounted for 28.2 percent of all nonfarm businesses in the United States, 6.4 percent of their employment and 4.2 percent of their receipts. The 2002 Survey of Business Owners (SBO) defines women-owned businesses as firms in which women own 51 percent or more of the interest or stock of the business. The data in this report were collected as part of the 2002 Economic Census from a large sample of all nonfarm businesses filing 2002 tax forms as individual proprietorships, partnerships, or any type of corporation, and with receipts of $1,000 or more. Table A (xls 19kb) shows the number of firms and revenue for all U.S. businesses in 2002 by gender of ownership. In addition to the 6.5 million majority women-owned firms, there were 2.7 million equally male-/female-owned firms with $731.7 billion in receipts.Women Summary of Findings

Rather than contributing $2.46 TRILLION to the economy, the total payroll from women owned firms is less than 5% of GDP. How could an organization which seeks to enhance the credibility of women as managers and administrators be so misled by their own hype, particularly when access by internet to the actual Census Bureau data is so quick and easy? Isn't there even one woman in that organization who could have taken A MERE FIVE minutes to check out the data before over-representing women's contribution to GDP by SIXTEEN FOLD, making them look more foolish than ever?

To underscore that question, the answer is in another Census Bureau study which illustrates that:

- Adding women to the ownership of a man owned business reduces its potential receipts by $323,300 or 55.5%. - Adding men to the ownership of a woman owned business increases its potential receipts by $108,100 or 71.5%. - Completely removing women from ownership increases potential receipts by $431,400 to four fold greater than a woman owned business with no men owners present.

This sixteen fold over-representation of the contribution of women businesses to the economy is symbollic of the hyper-inflated opinion feminists have of themselves. The actual data which shows that removing women from ownership of small businesses increases receipts four fold, and removing women as CEO's from major corporations increases stock values four fold, makes feminists the laughing stock of nations, the bone heads of history, and an abomination before God.

But it also makes HP's management a laughing stock. Do these folks even look at Census Bureau studies like the above before making multi-billion dollar mistakes like hiring Carly as CEO, then letting her get away with replacing Easter holiday with Martin Luther communist King Day? HP could have saved their shareholders billions of dollars if they'd realized that this objective study of the effects of women in management from the Census Bureau is far more credible than words out of the mouth of dress-for-success Carly Fiorina. How could she ever have convinced the board to take such a risk, and make such a huge mistake?

To HP's credit, they finally fired Carly and replaced her with a man who was hired by NEC at about the same time Carly was hired by HP--and who took NEC's stock in exactly the opposite direction that Carly took HP's. The factor by which NEC's stock increased is equivalent to the factor by which HP's stock decreased, putting Japan right in the driver's seat of this industry.

Link to the article.