That's a success story per theory of capitalism. Notice they're not griping about the fact that they could collectively do CEO pay at $100-300k with same results given underlings effectively run the company. They didn't even gripe much about her overdone ckmpensation. No, they were pissed that she tried a turnaround instead of something that would only benefit one group: the shareholders.<p>Serve's their asses right. A taste of their own medicine. She certainly did fail in the turn around because it was beyond saving. She succeeded as a capitalist. Now, she has the capital to invest in better models that care about stakeholders instead of just shareholders. Interesting to see what she does next.
Is there any sort of compelling evidence that CEOs ought to be paid so much money? Seems like you get a fairly sweet haul whether you help the company thrive or run it to the ground.