WeWork CEO stepping aside amid questions about company | TribLIVE.com
U.S./World

WeWork CEO stepping aside amid questions about company

Associated Press
1718270_web1_1718270-1a1098cbc3f7433a8e37cf649c18b40d
AP
Adam Neumann, co-founder and CEO of WeWork, attends the opening bell ceremony at Nasdaq in New York on Jan. 16, 2018.

NEW YORK — WeWork’s charismatic but controversial CEO is stepping aside from the company he founded, another moment of reckoning between a fast-growing tech company and its disenchanted investors.

The New York-based company, which runs trendy communal office spaces, said Tuesday that Adam Neumann will remain on its board as non-executive chairman. WeWork’s Artie Minson, formerly co-president and chief financial officer, and Sebastian Gunningham, formerly vice chairman, will become joint CEOs of the company.

Neumann’s magnetic personality and WeWork’s carefully designed spaces and cool offerings — like free beer and meditation classes — gave it the aura of a tech company. It was initially valued at $47 billion by private investors.

But Wall Street began raising questions after the company delayed a planned initial public offering earlier this month. The company was having trouble drumming up interest in the offering after revealing massive losses in its IPO filings. WeWork’s revenue rose sharply to $1.8 billion in 2018, but the company lost $1.6 billion the same year.

Adding to the problems were questions about Neumann’s behavior. He used some of his WeWork stock to secure a $500 million personal loan prior to the IPO. He also drew criticism after The We Company — WeWork’s recently renamed parent — paid him nearly $6 million for the trademark “We.” He returned the money following the backlash.

Potential investors also questioned the company’s governance. Neumann owns four of the buildings WeWork leases, for example.

“While our business has never been stronger, in recent weeks, the scrutiny directed toward me has become a significant distraction, and I have decided that it is in the best interest of the company to step down as chief executive,” Neumann said in a statement.

Leaders with strong personalities at other companies have taken a hard fall. Uber co-founder and CEO Travis Kalanick was forced to resign in 2017 after allegations of sexual harassment at the company and an incident in which he yelled at an Uber driver. Silicon Valley investment firm Benchmark Capital, which pushed for Kalanick’s ouster, is also the second largest shareholder for WeWork.

Uber’s lackluster IPO this year has caused some investors to look more sharply at tech darlings like WeWork. Some suggest WeWork isn’t even a tech company at all, but a real estate company that integrates technology into its services.

In the end, skepticism about when or if WeWork will become profitable is the biggest reason for the public market’s chilly reception, more than the concerns about Neumann, said Kathleen Smith, principal at Renaissance Capital, a provider of institutional research and IPO funds.

“It’s about the business,” she said. “They’re going to need more than just that change if the goal is to try to tap the public market again.”

Sometimes, investors are willing to be patient with companies that are losing money but growing rapidly. Amazon is the poster child for this, and it’s become one of the most valuable companies in the world following years of losses.

“With WeWork, they weren’t even showing that progression,” Smith said.

Israeli-born Neumann co-founded WeWork in 2010 with one shared office in Manhattan. It now operates in 111 cities worldwide and serves 527,000 members.

In a joint statement, Minson and Gunningham said they are evaluating the optimal timing for an IPO.

“Our core business is strong and we will be taking clear actions to balance WeWork’s high growth, profitability and unique member experience,” they said.

Categories: Business | Wire stories
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.