aapl

The Observer reports that Lehman Bros. (NYSE: LEH) CEO Richard Fuld could be out of a job by the end of the year. The Observer states that "Whether a Lehman suitor emerges or not, well-placed sources within the bank are certain that Fuld is set to hand over the reins before the end of the year. 'He is involved less and less with day-to-day executive affairs, and his credibility is shot,' one senior Lehman source said."

The sources for the story are extraordinarily vague, and even if they are reasonably credible, it's hard to imagine who would be able to say with certainty that Fuld is on the way out.

It's not a difficult rumor to believe. The incredible part is that Fuld hasn't already been ushered out to a cushy retirement with a thoroughly undeserved severance package. The stock is off more than 80% in 2008, and Lehman's future as a stand-alone public company is very much in doubt.

While Fuld's firing would obviously be well-deserved, it's probably too late for it to matter one way or another. The distraction and expense of paying him to go away and finding someone else with nothing better to do than leap aboard a sinking ship makes it hard to say whether his departure would even do shareholders any good.

This past week, Sears Holdings Corp. (NASDAQ: SHLD) announced the addition of two new senior executives to replace the departing heads of its business segments. The former head of Motorola's (NYSE: MOT) mobile devices business, Stu Reed, will become senior vice president of Sears's home services unit. His predecessor was Mark Good. Former Procter & Gamble (NYSE: PG) senior executive Guenther Trieb will take charge of the Kenmore, Craftsman, and Diehard brands.

Hoffman Estates, Ill.-based Sears also announced the impending departure of Chief Marketing Officer Maureen McGuire. Senior vice president Richard Gerstein, also of the marketing team, will serve as chief marketing officer of Kmart and Sears.

Earlier this year Chairman Eddie Lampert split the company into five business units. But, the company reported in May its largest quarterly loss since the merger of Kmart and Sears in 2005. The company is scheduled to report second quarter results this week. Analysts surveyed by Thomson Financial on average expect a profit of 33 cents per share, up from a loss of 53 cents in the previous quarter, but still down from net income of $1.14 in the same quarter a year ago. Also, Sears has tended to offer negative surprises in the most recent quarterly reports. Analysts rate Sears as underperforming.

Shares closed Friday at $88.43, which is down 13.4% since the beginning of the year and down 38.4% from a year ago.

Most investors think Sarbanes-Oxley regulations have been the rule of the road in corporate governance since put into law in 2002. That has never quite been true. The law has been challenged in the courts for almost six years, accused of giving the federal government too much power to push public companies around.

What appears to be the final challenge to Sarbanes came to an end as a federal appeals court turned back a legal challenge to the act.

According to The Washington Post, "Businesses have protested that the act imposed costly burdens and provided too little benefit." The cost issue is entirely true, especially for small public companies that have had to stretch financial resources by spending hundreds of thousand of dollars to meet the requirements of the law.

But, it would be hard to make the case that the average shareholder is not better off with more independent corporate audit committees and accounting firms under pressure to perform flawlessly. A look at the number of companies that have had to restate financials because of errors uncovered and enforced by audit committees is a testament to the benefits of the law. The law has ended the habit of giving large institutions a "look" at company prospects and has taken away many of the disadvantages that individual investors have suffered for decades.

Sarbanes has been expensive, but the alternative would have done the common shareholder a great deal of damage.

Douglas A. McIntyre is an editor at 247wallst.com.

General Motors (NYSE: GM) and Ford (NYSE: F) want you to pick up their tab for their decades of excess and managerial incompetence.

The Associated Press reports that the Detroit automakers are likely to ask Congress for $50 billion in low-interest loans to fund modernization efforts, and help them build more fuel-efficient vehicles.

What a load of crap. In 2007, Ford paid cash-burning CEO Alan Mulally $21 million, and GM's Richard Wagoner got a 41% raise to over $14 million for the same year. In effect, our tax dollars will be subsidizing this pay for pulse orgy of bad governance. GM also paid out more than half a billion in dividends in 2007 -- if the company needs billions to invest in modernization, why didn't it cut the dividend a long time ago?

It appears that the auto industry has been counting on a bailout all along, and why not? It looks like they'll be getting it.

Shares of The Steak n Shake Company (NYSE: SNS) are up about 5% today on an analyst report that hedge fund manager turned shareholder activist turned Steak n' Shake CEO Sardar Biglari is "making quick strides" toward a turnaround at the company.

Biglari became chairman of the company back in June after a proxy contest that kicked out a regime that had underperformed for years, and became CEO earlier this month after the board spent a few months looking to bring someone in from the outside.

Biglari certainly qualifies as investor-friendly but he looks like could be overexposed in a role that involves turning around a restaurant chain. He's currently CEO of the much smaller Western Sizzlin Corporation (NASDAQ: WEST) chain, but his prior experience in the restaurant industry is pretty much limited to an investment in Friendly's that culminated in a sale to a private equity firm at a price that, in retrospect, appears to have been too high.

Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (NYSE: GS) is cracking down on how its employees can waste their time while they are at work.

According to Dealbreaker, the top investment bank has blocked Facebook and prohibits workers from posting comments on the snarky Web site. The incident is so noteworthy that the gossip blog has a flashing siren graphic above its post on the topic.

"I'm sure the lot of you are going to argue that the vast majority of financial firms have long blocked access to the social networking site, but Goldman's supposed to be above such pedestrian measures," the blog says, adding that Chief Executive Lloyd Blankfein used to not care about such things as "as long as you're kicking ass (by lying about level three assets)."

Fair enough but times are tough on Wall Street. Investment bankers are scrambling to hold onto their jobs as the credit crunch shows no signs of easing. Nannies who used to care for the children of Wall Streeters are finding themselves unemployed. I am sure the strippers at New York's "gentlemen's clubs" are hurting too.

Even Goldman, the best run of any Wall Street bank, is not immune. Its shares are down more than 25 percent this year. Maybe Blankfein needs to remind Goldman's employees that they should be grateful to have jobs at a time when banks are laying off tens of thousands. They are plenty of eager people who could live without recreational Internet surfing who would love to take their place.

Gas prices are increasing your cost of living and your retirement portfolio has probably been a poor performer of late, with the stock market down year to date following an unremarkable 2007.

But you'll be happy to know that top executives are making more money than ever. An ExecuNet survey of 1,098 business leaders found that executive compensation increased 5.7% over the past year, and is expected to grow an additional 6.2% during the next twelve months.

Doesn't that pretty much expose the whole "pay-for-performance" paradigm as a total fraud? I mean, how can the value of companies, on average, decline more than 5% while the average pay increases more than 5%? All that's happening is that a larger chunk of shareholder wealth is being siphoned off each year and, if the ExecuNet survey is even close to being accurate, it has absolutely nothing to do with performance.

The only solution is improved corporate governance that comes with more active shareholders voting their proxies with the "corporate raiders," who work to unseat the directors who have allowed the shareholder democracy to become a complete joke.

Check out Carl Icahn's latest blog post for more information on corporate governance and how it can be improved.

Harbinger Capital Management -- a hedge fund with the inane specialty of taking activist stakes in companies with entrenched managements and dual-class voting structures -- has raised its stake in Cablevision (NYSE: CVC) to 8.1%, according to a 13-D filed with the SEC.

When Harbinger first reported its 4.9% stake, I wrote that "the company's dual-class voting structure means that the Dolan family controls 75% of the voting rights, giving it full control over the board of directors and the company's future. Philip Falcone, the guy who runs Harbinger, can make all the noise and demands he wants, and he might even get a couple seats on a family-controlled board. But any ideas that Falcone has are the equivalent of going up to the CEO in a bar and telling him how he should run the business. Maybe he'll do what you suggest, and maybe he won't. He'll do whatever he wants, and Falcone's stake isn't going to accomplish anything."

Guess what? Owning 8.1% changes absolutely nothing. Collins Stewart analyst Thomas Eagan tells (subscription required) The Wall Street Journal that "They are sending a message that they want to play a role in the direction the company takes."

Great. But that doesn't mean the Dolans will listen. If they wanted to listen to shareholders, they wouldn't have the dual-class voting structure.

On August 14th, Skechers USA, Inc. (NASDAQ: SKX) made public its offer to acquire Heelys, Inc. (NASDAQ: HLYS) at a price of $5.25 per share. At the time I wrote that the offer seemed low, and Heelys' management seems to agree, issuing a press release stating that "The Board believes the $5.25 offering price does not reflect the value of Heelys and that entering into discussions with Skechers based on their unsolicited proposal is premature at this time."

Today Skechers shot back with its own press release, with chairman and CEO Robert Greenberg stating that "We are particularly disappointed that, after repeated contacts over several months, Heelys will not agree even to discussions or provide us with an opportunity to conduct due diligence. . . We are very interested in continuing our dialogue and, as discussed in Skechers' letter of August 13, we may also be prepared to refine our proposal if additional value can be identified during the due diligence."

So why won't Heelys at least engage in discussions, given that Skechers is indicating that it might raise its bid? This looks like a replay of the Yahoo, Inc. (NASDAQ: YHOO) - Microsoft Corporation (NASDAQ: MSFT) takeover battle on a much smaller scale, with Heelys' brass not inclined to talk about a deal, even if it is in the best interests of shareholders.

If Skechers gets bored with the slow pace of negotiations and walks away, Heelys will have some splainin' to do. Given that the company went public at over $30 per share and now sits at $5.25, it's pretty clear that the management team doesn't know enough about shareholder value to reject a takeover offer without further discussions.

Biovail (NYSE: BVF), a poster child for accounting fraud and the "blame it on short sellers!" diversion strategy, has hired yet another chief financial officer, announcing that Peggy Mulligan will take over for interim finance chief Adrian A. De Saldanha, who had held the position since March.

In March, Biovail paid $10 million to the SEC to settle charges related to improper accounting and false and misleading statements. Former CFOs Brian Crombie and Kenneth G. Howling were implicated in that mess. So Ms. Mulligan has a tough act to follow: she'll have to produce results legally!

Shares of Biovail are trading near their lowest price of this millennium, understandable given that phony accounting and vast conspiracy theories are no longer there to prop up the stock price.

Biovail plans to spend more than $600 million on research and development over the next five years, in an effort to create real shareholder value.

Private equity powerhouse, The Carlyle Group, has more than 500 investment professionals across 21 countries. Of course, some of them are corporate luminaries like Louis Gerstner.

Well, after being the chairman of Carlyle since 2003, he is now departing -- his last day will be September 30th. Although, he will remain as a Senior Advisor to the firm.

Gerstner has had a stellar career. In 1993, he took the challenge of becoming IBM's (NYSE: IBM) chairman. At the time, the company was crumbling.

Despite not having much tech experience, Gerstner set forth an ambitious strategy that not only saved IBM but returned the company to greatness. He even wrote a book about his experience in a book called Who Says Elephants Can't Dance?: Leading a Great Enterprise through Dramatic Change, which is definitely worth reading.

Before his tenure at IBM, Gerstner was the CEO of RJR Nabisco, where he had to deal with the debt-load from a mega leveraged buyout (from KKR). He was also the president of American Express (NYSE: AXP) and a director of management at McKinsey & Co., Inc.

While at Carlyle, Gerstner made a big impact. He helped globalize the firm as well as diversify the investment base. As of now, Carlyle manages about $75 billion in assets across 57 funds and controls a portfolio that has aggregate revenues of $87 billion.

Tom Taulli is the author of various books, including The Complete M&A Handbook and The Edgar Online Guide to Decoding Financial Statements. He also operates MergerBook.com.

Cablevision (NYSE: CVC), one of my favorite corporate governance brothels, met with its disgruntled shareholders and reluctantly agreed to its idea of a shareholder-friendly initiative: a 10 cent per share quarterly dividend.

That works out to a yield of less than 1.3% based on the current share price and, needless to say, the disenfranchised shareholders aren't exactly thrilled. Mario Gabelli, whose fund is a major shareholder and a constant critic of the company's management and governance, told The Guardian that "To pay a 10-cent dividend which is $30 million is nice, but it's not what we wanted. . . They should have authorized a $1 billion buyback and they would use incremental cash flows to fund it. They clearly did not listen to shareholders."

Duh. But here's the thing, Mario: the whole point of having a dual-class voting structure where one family has complete control over the company is that you don't have to listen to shareholders. If the Dolans wanted to listen to shareholders, they wouldn't have adopted that structure in the first place and/or they'd get rid of it now!

I'm all for fruitless struggles based on principles, but it's pretty silly of Gabelli and other activists to be taking on a company where there's no mechanism for holding the board of directors accountable. Maybe they should head over to North Korea and complain indignantly that the regime is not doing a good job representing the interests of the people.

Shares of Biogen Idec Inc. (NASDAQ: BIIB) plummeted on news that its multiple-sclerosis drug Tysabri was linked to brain infections causing death, leaving 4.3% shareholder Carl Icahn with a hefty paper loss.

But Icahn didn't back down. Having already pushed for one unsuccessful effort to sell the company, and having lost a bid for three seats on the board of directors, Icahn filed a 13-D announcing that he had raised his stake to 6.1%, buying in the wake of the brain infection announcement.

As one of the smarter activist value investors going, Carl Icahn's moves are closely watched by investors looking to piggyback off his ideas.

Shares of Circuit City (NYSE: CC), the outhouse of electronics retailing, continue to frustrate investors, falling more than 4% yesterday after the company said that it would delay the completion of a new $45 million distribution facility that had been intended to consolidate the operations of two existing warehouses. Today's paltry bounce of a penny hardly makes up for the bad news.

A piece in today's Wall Street Journal looks at (subscription required) the company's history of missteps that began in 2006 when the company failed to respond quickly to price declines in LCD TVs, and was compounded by cost-cutting moves that involved eliminating the company's most productive employees.

Now the company is running out of money and desperately needs to do a deal. Blockbuster (NYSE: BBI) had made a conditional offer of $6-8 per share back in May, but withdrew it and now the stock is trading under $2 -- and there don't appear to be any new suitors on the horizon.

While the horrific oil spill by the Exxon Valdez happened all the way back in 1989 (yes that was 19 years ago!), Exxon Mobil (NYSE: XOM) is still in litigation over how much it should be forced to pay in damages.

Last month, Exxon Mobil won a big victory when the Supreme Court (in a 5-3 decision) lowered the company's punitive damages from $2.5 billion all the way down to $507.5 million. While this was good news for Exxon Mobil, there was one little detail left to work out -- interest on all that money. Of course, Exxon Mobil does not want to pay that interest, and today the Supreme Court decided that a lower court needs to make this decision.

So just how much interest are we talking about here? Roughly $500 million and counting, as Exxon announced earlier that the victims of the oil spill have requested $488 million in interest. This works out to about $15,000 per victim.

What does this amount mean to Exxon? Ten hours of sales. That's right, ten hours. You would think the company would just pay the money and be done with the whole mess, but Exxon will continue to fight and will have its day in the lower court of appeals.