I agree with both posts. Are shareholders a priority? By all means, yes. But you have to think more long term to keep them coming back to buy more shares.
1. Sales force, (a large factor in stock growth) is as good as what you give them to work with. Lip service only goes so far. If they buy and it does not workout, think of it as a restaurant review, most people only remember the bad things, and will tell all of their associates. If you "do what you have to do to get the product sold", and something is left out in the process, well, the pipeline will shrink. With the quotas expected, shortcuts will be taken out of fear of people loosing their jobs. Remember, negative reinforcement is only a short term gain. With long term, it is counterproductive. Don't you want to still be here in 10 years?
2. Refusing to listen to the offices that have concerns and that buy based on the trust they put in the AM. The bubble will burst if you keep it up. Do the best you can to make them happy and show them respect by LISTENING TO THEM, TAKE THEIR CONCERNS SERIOUSLY, AND DO WHAT YOU CAN TO GET THOSE NEEDS MET. REMEMBER, THEY ARE YOUR CUSTOMERS, AND WE ARE OBLIGATED TO GIVE QUALITY CUSTOMER SERVICE. Perhaps after that, they will continue to buy and refer to other offices they associate with. (hello, organic growth).
3. Business 101, yes, bottom line is what we are looking for. However, corporate image is a large part of that. Valeant could use some points in that department, and now OraPharma for the first time in a long time could use those points as well. Valeant has no reputation known for be caring or compassionate. That has to change. If you are going to buy stock in a corporation, would you choose a company you know does not care about the public in the long run and profits. Or, a corporation that proves it cares thru action and STILL profits. (somebody upstairs fell asleep during this lesson in business school apparently) It is in the business school textbook.
This btw, was not a complaint, simple advice. Done