Following last Friday's IED-like earnings bomb from GE, a few supporting analysis comments and opinions to GE shareholders.

::::::::

Note: Consider this the de-facto sequel to Monday's GE/NAACP brand message article.

Author Opening Statement and Recommendation: As a basis for the assessments and opinions in this article, the author utilized and refers to both GE CEO Immelt's Friday CNBC interview and former GE CEO  Welch's guest host comments today on the same program. The author encourages readers to review the transcripts of each and make their own assessment/opinions/conclusions and welcomes any differences in opinions arrived at.

In this author's opinion, last Friday's 7:30AM pre-market opening CNBC interview with GE CEO Jeff Immelt was an utter disaster. Apparently the stock market felt the same way, with the Dow Industrials free-falling more than 250 points on the day. Other major equity indexes fell in sync.

Mr. Immelt appeared about as prepared to address the IED-like earnings bomb GE had just unleashed moments earlier, as he was aware of the earnings details themselves. In other words, in this author's opinion, as if he was "winging it" (the interview). Seemingly not prepared at all, and giving some credence to the sense he may not have known of the disaster until just moments earlier.

To be fair, the real fundamental question no one asked him then, and as far as this author is aware, has still not, but must be asked:

"What did you know and when?"

There's only two apparent possibilities unless by this author's challenge here, Mr. Immelt wants to offer the readers a third:

Note: If he does have a third, then please provide in the article comments section. The author will gladly update the article accordingly. If not, the opinions developed from the interview will follow accordingly.

1) "If" he did (and should have as CEO) know days and/or weeks before the announcement of the emerging earnings problem and did not immediately alert/advise/guide the investment community, he should be promptly removed as CEO, or

2) "If" he did not know until the morning of earnings release as it might too appear, he too should be removed as GE CEO.

Note: A Case Too to Break-up GE to Realize True Share Value?

On item 2), add that this recent event may also further validate the idea that GE is just to darn big for any one person to oversee, grow and manage effectively. Perhaps a silver lining in all this turmoil might be a re-invigorated shareholder campaign to break the company up to release unrealized share value. Adding further credence to a break-up is GE's lackluster, if not horrible stock performance since July 2000 timeframe. Hitting a high of about $58 then, the stock is now at $32, a loss of almost 50%. Meanwhile the Dow is up 15-20% in the same time period.

Whether it was potentially either not immediately promulgating key information to the investment community as it became known or simply not knowing, it appears in fact, either one or the other occurred. There is seemingly no other rational answer or alternative to the news that shocked (and bloodied) Wall Street and by his own observed body language in the interview, seemingly Mr. Immelt himself.

Of course Mr. Immelt, again, if there is a third possibility or reason for the earnings shocker, please feel free to comment on the article to advise the readers. Again, at this point, unless you note otherwise, there appears only the two possibilities noted above.

In either case, it simply and summarily suggests and/or confirms a serious breach and/or disconnect in leadership, oversight and/or "potentially", timely reporting depending of course on more facts to come from the question posed earlier – what did you know and when? A question which MUST (still) be answered.

All in part or in whole being totally unacceptable and intolerable for any corporate CEO, and even more so coming from a CEO of a company of the size and global stature as GE.

Clearly his own business unit leaders failed him, as did his Friday morning staff interview preparers. Ultimately however, Mr. Immelt failed himself by letting all these individuals in domino fashion, collectively do just that - fail him. All indicators so far seemingly suggest leadership being asleep at the switch.

He rhetorically stated multiple times in the interview, "I'm accountable". To that standard he should indeed be "held" accountable. Words are nice, but real career/compensation impact is better, and provides valuable lessons to others potentially nodding off, and in some respect, a small sense of satisfaction to shareholders.

The remainder of this article carries through on that theme and what should follow.

The other question then beyond "what did he know and when?", and which too was not asked, as he seemingly got a free pass during the interview with his charm and charisma, is "Where's the Beef Jeff?". That is, during his personal "I'm accountable" rendition of a Jimmy Swaggart act of contrition, a statement/question by the interviewers that talk is cheap so "Where's the Penance Jeff?" was in order. It never was asked.

Author's Note: Interestingly too, a very animated and cantankerous former GEO CEO Jack Welch was guest host on today's CNBC Squawk Box. Right out of the (squawk) box, he came out swinging at the media in scary tirade fashion, seemingly itching for a fight. Often too his angst seemingly aimed directly at the show's hosts, startling them and one even almost begging to stop being yelled at.

In fact at times chastising host Joe Kernan and the others in a way he was still CEO, often fading in and out of connection/disconnection to GE, in his hyper-defensive posturing discussion references of "we" (GE) until corrected to "they" (GE). That correction by show hosts to remind him he's not part of GE anymore, claiming himself many times he's never been in GE offices since he left 6 or 7 years ago.

He made no bones about his feelings of Friday's debacle, and pulling no punches, overtly and distinctly, putting the most damning admonition of all, by way of his own legendary affirmation comment to the mess, spouting "Jeff screwed up", among other similar statements.

Just a guess, but that smoking gun comment may come back to haunt.

Aside from adding a little (a lot) entertaining flair in telling everyone what they already know, and his own formal acknowledgement of a "screw-up", Mr. Welch unfortunately failed to address that which he is perceived as an expert in – i.e. the "penalty box feature" in all this. Clearly, he has no apparent panache, polish and/or expertise in the role he assumed this morning and if I was a betting author, no future as a news show host.

To this viewer then, it looks like last Friday's "I'm accountable" is about all the satisfaction widow and orphan shareholders will receive for the stock collapse, noting the GE stock slide continued Monday and Tuesday, hitting a fresh 52 week low yesterday, with a slight bounce since, in sympathy with the overall market advance since.

A good guess, if Jack Welch were hypothetically now running the company and Mr. Immelt's business unit was the source of last Friday's numbers/reporting problem, "I'm accountable" would not quite cut it. It would likely be just Step 1. In fact, there would almost certainly be a Step 2. And it wouldn't be a simple slap on the wrist, with kumba ya encouragement to do better the next time.

Just a wild hunch.

Unfortunately, whereas Mr. Immelt seems to think (hope) saying "I'm accountable" is the end all, another shoe as respects "what's the penalty?" appears appropriate, prudent and necessary to drop.

Whether and/or what and when he knew or did not know aside for the moment, he should have at least had a quality crisis interview preparation by his team to simply put out the following basic points instead of the bumbling and stumbling that permeated his commentary and question answers, at least in the eyes and opinion of this interview observer.

In fact, the only prep seemingly received from his crisis management team as received by this viewer, appeared to be "Jeff, tell the viewers you're sorry. They love that fluff stuff" – i.e. vis-à-vis a hollow "I'm accountable".

To be clear and recognizing/acknowledging this author does not have all the earnings specifics, here's then the semblance of a rough draft "suggested" way (or something similar in theme/content) template Mr. Immelt might have used and been prudently prepped with, and pitched/spun the earnings release right off the bat in the interview, but didn't. Had he, he likely could have saved the market and GE stock from collapsing, at least greatly mitigated the losses:

"Good morning everyone.

You know the news. We missed quarterly expectations by 7 cents. Disappointing yes, but let me be perfectly clear – this is not and I repeat not, a reflection on the health and going forward operation of GE and our businesses.

5 of the 7 cents was attributed to the unexpected mid-March Bear Stearns debacle market related fallout. Had that event not happened, that 5 cents or better would have been delivered. Bear Stearns was a totally unexpected and unplanned blip event for us, as it was for all financial services companies. I would note that if it was a total surprise to Bear Stearns leadership, the Federal Reserve and Treasury, one can see how it too took all of Wall Street understandably by surprise, GE included.

We consider the "Bear Stearns Effect" related earnings loss a market aberration and NOT a reflection of the short, intermediate and long term health of our financial services businesses which continue to function and grow and too which our earnings expectations remain solid and strong.

On the other 2 cents, there was unexpected setbacks in the imaging business arising from............, and too some minor recessionary impact.

Bottom line, while I told you a month ago we would hit our earnings guidance, we in fact would have, had these "non-recurring" unexpected factors not subsequently intervened. Therefore, the earnings disappointment should be viewed in the proper context - an unexpected one time hit, and not a reflection of any systemic problems in our businesses and their ongoing operations.

Our expectations going forward dismiss these recent anomalies and we look forward to staying on our strategic and operational business plan and delivering expectation earnings targets.

As for me and putting credence into what I said as respects my accountability, I take full responsibility for this unfortunate situation. I should have prudently known earlier and/or alerted the investment community to these surprises as they occurred. The fact I did not, will necessitate my resigning (author note: or substitute here language for serious compensation impact) upon finding a suitable quality replacement. That in keeping with GE's finest leadership traditions, which is all that matters. We hold our business leaders and employee base to GE performance standards and associated rewards and penalties. I should be treated no differently.

Bottom line: I'm expendable. GE credibility is not.

With that benchmark, in the broader GE sense, my career is irrelevant. GE has built its reputation on unquestionable credibility, never disappointing and I will ensure we continue that theme going forward with my departure and ensuring GE caliber quality leadership in my succession.

That is a guarantee I can truly keep.

Thank you.

Questions?"

Had he said something along these lines in a commanding, opening statement, the stock market would have likely discounted the event as an aberration, and not viciously spanked GE stock (and its poor shareholders). It too would have mitigated if not obviated the credibility assault, and provided better support for the GE share price and market overall last Friday and going forward.

What was needed during that unique pre-market window opening, was delivering a crisp, credibility preserving interview and ring-fencing the earnings disappointment as a one time aberration, concluding with a statement that the CEO, not only shareholders, will take the hit too.

In this author's opinion, he did not take the hit. Instead, he simply sought "accountability without penalty", selfishly choosing to weather the storm and retain power, which means GE will now have a long roe to hoe, in terms of the company regaining credibility with Wall Street and with that too, shareholders ultimately recouping their related losses.

A bigger man would have done the right thing for the good of the whole (company, employees and shareholders) – step aside.

Bottom line, Mr. Immelt has stated "I'm accountable", as if in a way implicitly saying "Isn't that enough and oh by the way, please don't punish me". He did not add that latter piece. Shareholders should consider finishing the spanking Wall Street began on them last Friday and reboot his statement to include a suggested "and" as follows:

Yes, you are accountable Mr. Immelt..."And" you will be accordingly punished, the same as we were. Our pain is now your pain.

Next to Bear Stearns shareholders, GE shareholders must now be considered the second most stunned and angry group these days. Perhaps they should now band together and actually take Mr. Immelt up on his multiple, placating, and gratuitous "I'm accountable" interview statements, by responding with the requisite penalty – departure or at least a hard hit to his pocketbook, as they themselves took.

Now that's true accountability. One that elevates the words to action and shareholders pain to "debacle partnership" – i.e. we're (really) in this together. Your pain really is my pain. We both lost. Now we have a common base to rebuild upon.

Anyone using "EZ Pass" knows it adds value in terms of time saved. This author finally capitulated after years of saying gonna gonna gonna and secured an EZ Pass tag three months ago. Assessment - an absolutely wonderful service. It deserves all the kudos for delivering better than expected service (results) to its customers. In fact, deserving of a premium rather than discounted price.

No CEO however, should ever get an EZ or rather "Free Pass" for being so "apparently" totally out of touch from the reporting and/or operations of its business, and causing such significant damage with Wall Street. Even Mr. Welch this morning stated GE has the best financial systems in the world. So it's really hard to find any room for excuse.

The result being the economic damage to those common people (small investors/shareholders – working class families, widows, orphans etc.) who believed in the hype and invested their limited, precious financial assets. They put all their faith in that particular person's caretaking of their assets for "in the bag" results, yet instead only received share price collapse.

George Bush senior was always chided for appearances of not being involved in key government business. Recall the old Democratic Presidential campaign chant in 1988 - "Where was George?". Might it not be time for Wall Street analysts and GE shareholders to unleash their own derivative version of this battle cry, with a change of GE leadership proxy, spearheaded by the slogan "Where was Jeff?", punctuated by a follow-on "Where was the Board?".

Mr. Immelt, your personal brand image has been severely tarnished and with your own statement that you are "accountable", so too should it carry an equivalent substantive rebuke. Do you not agree?

As "General" Schwarzkopf embodied leadership in the Army, GE shareholders looked to you as their leader, their own venerable "General" Electric.

Schwarzkopf delivered for his constituents, the American people, and was accordingly promoted to icon status. It seems however, your failure to deliver to your constituency, GE shareholders, as you essentially all but guaranteed, if not arguably providing "a guaranteed guarantee", should yield an equivalent, yet degraded change in rank and personal branding, as in demotion from "General" Electric to "Captain" Chaos.

Finally, as the late Senator Lloyd Bentsen might have been inclined to say if he were alive today and a GE shareholder - "Mr. Immelt, you're no Jack Welch".

And after watching Mr. Welch's wild (sometimes scary) fire and brimstone tirade this morning on CNBC, maybe you'd prefer he stick with "you're no JFK".

Authors Bio:

The cleverest of all, is the man who calls himself a fool at least once a month

- Fyodor Dostoyevsky

It is a curious fact that people are never so trivial as when they take themselves seriously...Some cause happiness wherever they go; others whenever they go

- Oscar Wilde

The situation is what it is...so deal with it...and then as General Patton inspiringly told his tankers...ADVANCE!!

- Brock Novak