The split has been a long time in the making. Owners of the old Motorola got one share of Motorola Mobility for each eight shares they owned and the remaining company then underwent a one-for-seven reverse stock split. The two halves had been trading separately on a “when issued” basis for a while now.

Both of the company’s leaders praised the move and promised that only good things will come of it.

“After more than two years of planning, today we begin operating as a financially strong, independent company trading on the New York Stock Exchange,” Motorola Mobility CEO Sanjay Jha said in a statement, touting the company’s smartphone and video business.

Motorola Solutions’ CEO Greg Brown sounded an equally optimistic note.

“With a purpose-driven brand and a strong balance sheet, we are very well positioned for the future,” Brown said.

For now, the two companies have joint custody of the name and logo. Motorola has also split its Web site in two (see below) with options pointing to each of the now separate Motorolas. Or would that be Motorolae, or perhaps Motoroli?

Motorola filed the details Tuesday afternoon on its plan to split itself in two. The spinoff of the cellphone unit will take place Jan. 4, with holders getting one share of the mobile unit, known as Motorola Mobility, for every eight shares of Motorola they own. The remaining Motorola company will then have a one-for-seven reverse stock split, which would have the effect of boosting the per-share price (but not the inherent value) of the suddenly smaller company.

The split will be made before the market opens on Jan. 4 to shareholders of record as of Dec. 21.

“Today’s announcement marks another important milestone toward the upcoming separation that is expected to benefit Motorola, its stockholders, as well as each company’s respective customers and employees,” Motorola’s co-CEOs Greg Brown and Sanjay Jha said in a statement. “We look forward to taking advantage of the opportunities before us as we begin the new year as two independent, publicly traded companies.”

Motorola Mobility will trade under the ticker symbol MMI, while the remaining Motorola, known as Motorola Solutions, will use the ticker symbol MSI.

Whether all this splitting and name changing will boost the company’s value remains to be seen.

Iger did express cautious optimism about the online video plans that Comcast (CMCSA) and Time Warner (TWX) have been floating. Both imagine a world where cable or satellite subscribers get extensive access to TV programming on the Web, as long as they can prove that they are paying customers. But Iger also made it clear that he was going to go ahead and move his content online on his own terms. He didn’t need to mention Hulu, but it couldn’t have been clearer.

[Addendum: Quick reaction among my press colleagues is that Iger was more skeptical than optimistic about the Comcast/Time Warner plans. The key distinction: Iger is saying that stuff ABC broadcasts--which the cable guys don't pay him for--will be available for free online and not part of whatever walled garden Comcast/Time Warner wants to set up. Other content, though, is up for grabs.]

Unfortunately, Iger only presented the keynote address and didn’t stick around for the following panel: Glenn Britt/Time Warner Cable (TWC), Greg Brown/Motorola (MOT), Dinni Jain/Insight Communications,  Thomas Rutledge/Cablevision (CVC), Amy Tykeson/BendBroadband. I’ll come back to that one later.

Here’s my live coverage of Iger’s speech. The following notes are paraphrased unless they’re within quote marks.

References Walt Disney himself and his love of technology. He loved TV, embraced it wholeheartedly. “If Walt were alive today, he would be devoted to ESPN, he would be incredibly proud of the Disney Channel…and he would see cable as a wonderful world….Let me state the obvious. Cable television is vitally important to our company.”

Running through Disney’s cable assets: Disney Channel, ESPN, etc. Disney needs cable to survive and is bullish on cable. Lots of love for cable. [Detecting theme here.]

Let’s pretend cable doesn’t exist. Let’s pretend I make this proposition: I will offer you lots of TV, drama, etc. Lots of great stuff, in HD. What will it cost: $60 a month, or 20 cents an hour. Your response: “That’s Comcastic. Where do I sign up?” Iger’s point: Cable’s great, and we need to explain to consumers how great it is.

“As an industry, we have to look past technological threats, and we basically have to consider technology a friend, not a foe.” Many opportunities. “History is full of lessons for people willing to learn them.” Radio battled TV, TV battled cable, movie business fought VCRs, etc. “You can’t slow the pace of technology.”

Online content, new medium platforms and authentication. “The consumer is king, not us, the content provider, and not you, the distributor.” We have to be mindful of that. They’re telling us they love content, they love access and playability, and they want great navigation. “They view the computer as an entertainment device.”

Explains iTunes deal from 2005. We moved to iTunes a couple years ago to remain relevant and to begin to expand and diversify revenue streams. Ultimate monetization unknown, but that’s OK, but we believe content providers will eventually be fairly compensated.

“I also had an ulterior motive. I wanted to challenge the status quo.”

Regarding “authentication” [Time Warner/Comcast plans]: May be an “interesting” opportunity for consumers. On the other hand, preventing people from watching any shows online unless they were cable subscribers would engender a backlash. Important not to take away online video programming that’s already out there, and not to throttle access.

“We’re open to hearing more….But we’re curious about its practicality,” in terms of technology and other factors. And worried about potential backlash from consumers. Also thankful that some cable guys now working to combat piracy. Thanks for your time, and good luck.

That’s it for Iger. I’ll summarize the rest of the panel later on. Important thrust of Iger’s comments: Here’s our logic in putting more and more of our stuff on the Web for free: Because that’s what consumers want. So don’t complain to me about my Hulu deal.

Former Motorola CFO Paul Liska thought he’d been let go because the company was postponing the spinoff of its cellphone unit. Imagine his surprise when he read in Crain’s Chicago Business that he’d actually been fired for cause.

In a recent SEC filing, Motorola (MOT) said Liska was “involuntarily terminated for cause” and therefore must repay his $400,000 signing bonus and forfeit the stock options he received when he signed on with the company.

An odd disclosure, given the way in which Motorola’s leadership handled Liska’s departure. Asked about the circumstances surrounding his exit on a Feb. 9 earnings call, Motorola co-CEO Greg Brown had this to say:

“[Paul] did a lot of good work here and helped us get a lot of the heavy lifting done around this separation and preparation for separation which–as we talked about–remains the commitment to our strategy going forward and he was also very helpful in getting after along with the businesses and the other leaders in the organization, cost reduction initiatives. That said, I think the business environment’s changed, and given the environmental changes, we thought the change was appropriate at this time as well in that position.”

If that was the case, why was he fired for cause, which Motorola defines as–among other things–”willful and continued failure to substantially perform duties” and “gross misconduct”?

We may soon find out. Liska has reportedly filed suit against Motorola for wrongful termination.

[Image credit: Someecards]

Former Motorola CFO Paul Liska thought he’d been let go because the company was postponing the spinoff of its cellphone unit. Imagine his surprise when he read in Crain’s Chicago Business that he’d actually been fired for cause.

In a recent SEC filing, Motorola (MOT) said Liska was “involuntarily terminated for cause” and therefore must repay his $400,000 signing bonus and forfeit the stock options he received when he signed on with the company.

An odd disclosure, given the way in which Motorola’s leadership handled Liska’s departure. Asked about the circumstances surrounding his exit on a Feb. 9 earnings call, Motorola co-CEO Greg Brown had this to say:

“[Paul] did a lot of good work here and helped us get a lot of the heavy lifting done around this separation and preparation for separation which–as we talked about–remains the commitment to our strategy going forward and he was also very helpful in getting after along with the businesses and the other leaders in the organization, cost reduction initiatives. That said, I think the business environment’s changed, and given the environmental changes, we thought the change was appropriate at this time as well in that position.”

If that was the case, why was he fired for cause, which Motorola defines as–among other things–”willful and continued failure to substantially perform duties” and “gross misconduct”?

We may soon find out. Liska has reportedly filed suit against Motorola for wrongful termination.

[Image credit: Someecards]

The handset maker this morning said it will cut compensation and benefits packages for its employees in order to “better align with industry norms”–industry norms in Motorola’s case being the ongoing collapse of its post-Razr phone business. To that end, the company will permanently freeze its U.S. pension plans and temporarily suspend all matching contributions to 401(k) plans. It won’t be offering salary increases this year, either. And, in a sympathetic nod to Motorola’s (MOT) long-suffering employees, co-CEOs Greg Brown and Sanjay Jha will take 25 percent salary reductions. Brown will forego any 2008 cash bonus. Jha will forfeit a portion of his guaranteed 2008 bonus equivalent to that and take the remainder in restricted stock.

“The sustained downturn in the global economy requires that we take these difficult but necessary steps,” said Brown and Jha. “While serving our customers remains a top priority, we are equally focused on our cost structure, and we will continue to implement appropriate measures to conserve cash and reduce expenses.”

Happy holidays, Schaumberg.

On the CEO search, we’re making very good progress and I will obviously keep you posted, and when we have something to announce, we will do so accordingly.”

– Motorola CEO Greg Brown, Jul. 31, 2008

When Motorola CEO Greg Brown told investors last Thursday that the company was making progress in hiring a CEO for its mobile division, he wasn’t kidding. This morning the company named former Qualcomm (QCOM) COO Sanjay Jha to the position.

“Sanjay’s technical expertise and industry experience make him ideally suited to lead mobile devices,” board Chairman David Dorman said in a statement.

Great news for Motorola (MOT), which has spent months searching for an executive to run its handset division, with several candidates reportedly refusing the job. With that position finally filled, the company is firmly on track to spin off the division as a separate company in the third quarter next year, as planned.

Then begins the arduous task of reversing the ongoing collapse of the company’s post-Razr phone business and its share price which is down more than 61 percent since Oct. 2006.

Motorola added another dancer to its conga line of disappointing quarters today, posting an ugly first-quarter loss. The ongoing collapse of its post-Razr phone business continued to weigh heavily on the company, which lost $194 million in the quarter ended March 31. That’s significantly worse than its year-ago loss of $181 million. Sales fell about 21% to $7.45 billion, from $9.43 billion a year ago. Mobile-devices losses were $418 million on sales of $3.3 billion, down 39% from the year-earlier quarter.

Suffice to say, the gruesome performance fell short of Wall Street expectations. Motorola (MOT) shares slipped into the mud following the news. They’re trading around $9 right now, down some 4%.

Not to worry, though, says CEO Greg Brown. Motorola, which plans to shed its money-losing handset division in 2009, is well positioned for recovery. “Motorola is still a huge business and an iconic company,” he told USA Today. “I see a vibrant, very successful mobile-device business with a fresh portfolio that is aggressive and competing effectively [in the global market]. These elements, I think, will allow it to compete ferociously in the future.”

“Our decision to separate our Mobile Devices and Broadband & Mobility Solutions businesses follows a review process undertaken by our management team and Board of Directors, together with independent advisers,” CEO Greg Brown said in a release. “Creating two industry-leading companies will provide improved flexibility, more tailored capital structures and increased management focus–as well as more targeted investment opportunities for our shareholders.”

On a conference call with Wall Street analysts, Brown said the decision to carve out its handset business was the result of an evaluation process announced in late January, not a move engineered to appease billionaire investor-provocateur Carl Icahn who sued the company in a Delaware court Monday demanding access to minutes of board discussions about the division’s potential spin-off.

“It was a tough decision because I love the job,” said Zander. “I will be 61 in January and it is time to make way for one of the younger guys.” Sure is. With Motorola’s global market share slipping into the mud–it now ranks No. 3 after Nokia and Samsung with around a 13% share, down from about 21% just a year ago–the company is in desperate need of a turnaround.

Whether Brown’s the guy to do it remains to be seen. Certainly, investors aren’t so sure. “There are some investors who are disappointed that they didn’t bring in somebody from the outside,” Kaufman Brothers analyst Raimundo Archibold told Bloomberg. “This would have been an opportunity to bring in some fresh blood.”

Joan Lappin, president of Gramercy Capital Management, agreed. “I don’t see him as a person who is going to come in and razzle-dazzle the troops,” she said. “He’s kind of a bland guy.”