News CEO Announcement - New CEO is.... No-one

[VelvetSledge]

I don't care for politics.

This is a football forum, y'know, about football.

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/forums/society-religion-and-politics.46/

Use it.

 

[ManWithNoName]

I don't care for politics.

This is a football forum, y'know, about football.

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/forums/society-religion-and-politics.46/

Use it.

You heard the rules people. No analogies. At all. You want to make an analogy? GET OUT!

 

[Burzum]

I think we should target a good Labor man.

 

[fishardansin]

So I can liken him to Mother Theresa, Pol Pot or Napoleon .... but anyone in the current Australian parliament is taboo?

Also my past references were in response to the Peta Credlin sock puppet troll account that is allowed to opperate on our board, which is why I used the "good labor man" quote.

I'd also like to point out that I'm not being particularly partisan. I am dismayed at the chaotic "leadership" shown by Abbot and Rudd before him. They have both trashed the place when not in the lodge either with Rudd white anting his party and Abbot being one of the most obstructionist opposition leaders in living memory.

There is a sense of chaos coming out of Essendon with these sorts of announcments. Also like Abbot Little seems to be appointing only supporting views in all positions.

Releasing this information 4 days after AGM and 5 days before xmas is an act of deceit. They could have mentioned this prior to the AGM. So either our board is completely unagreeable, the leadership is paralised with indecision or they are trying to sneak through massive structural change without asking membership if they agree.

With Little being at the helm I am 100% sure it isn't indecision. The other two options are ugly.

 

[eth-dog]

I think we should target a good Labor man.

Wayne Swann come on down!

 

[Nifft]

You heard the rules people. No analogies. At all. You want to make an analogy? GET OUT!

Life is like a box of chocolates....

 

[VelvetSledge]

You heard the rules people. No analogies. At all. You want to make an analogy? GET OUT!

I love a good analogy, but the amount of threads we've had that have turned into Labor v Liberal s**tfights is a pain in the arse.

 

[fishardansin]

I love a good analogy, but the amount of threads we've had that have turned into Labor v Liberal s**tfights is a pain in the arse.

Lets admit they're both total rubbish and in a democracy you get the leaders you deserve ..... well the ones Rupert thinks you deserve.

 

[fishardansin]

Wayne Swann come on down!

Oh god no. You thought the cheering meter thing was bad ... wait till the boys walk out to Springsteen!!

 

[Peta Credlin]

Also my past references were in response to the Peta Credlin sock puppet troll account that is allowed to opperate on our board, which is why I used the "good labor man" quote.

Yay, looks like I have a new friend!

Not too happy about this TBH, I'd prefer the Chairman and CEO position to be separate, this reeks of a power grab.

At the same time, I'm happy with a couple of the promotions and it's nice to Corcoran not return.

 

[eth-dog]

Oh god no. You thought the cheering meter thing was bad ... wait till the boys walk out to Springsteen!!

The cheering meter was better than the s**t we served up this year at the 'G. * that was embarrassing.

 

[Darealrath]

The cheering meter was better than the s**t we served up this year at the 'G. **** that was embarrassing.

Remember the "Let's Get Loud" J-Lo debacle from about 10 years ago? How did we not get done for poor governance on that one?

 

[Old Campaigner]

I'm sure these decisions have been made for a very good reason.

Maybe. It would be nice if they'd come out and explain the decision, back it up with some real evidence for why it will work and let everyone know what they hope to achieve by it so the members can judge their performance accordingly. The timing of it makes me a little suspicious both of how effective they expect it to be (i.e. no acceptable candidates were found for the CEO job) and the motives for doing it.

However with the new structure I can see both the benefit of having more people at the top meaning more oversight, but also potentially the problem of having to many chiefs and not enough indians at the executive level.

Regardless of what happens with this we should remain a relatively strong club should the new structure fail, so the risk to us is nowhere near as great as it would be for a club like WBD to try the same thing.

 

[Whispering_Jack]

Yay, looks like I have a new friend!

Not too happy about this TBH, I'd prefer the Chairman and CEO position to be separate, this reeks of a power grab.

At the same time, I'm happy with a couple of the promotions and it's nice to Corcoran not return.

If it is a temporary thing until we find the right person I can handle it. Long term, not so much.

 

[eth-dog]

Remember the "Let's Get Loud" J-Lo debacle from about 10 years ago? How did we not get done for poor governance on that one?

I don't. If it was circa 2003 I was 10, so...

 

[DonsRule]

If it is a temporary thing until we find the right person I can handle it. Long term, not so much.

As someone else put it at Blitz, combining Chairman and CEO's roles is someone common in the US.

It's quite common in American companies. A quick peruse through the Dow Jones shows at least Chevron, American Express, IBM, Boeing, Procter & Gamble, DuPont, General Motors, JP Morgan Chase, AT&T, ExxonMobil, General Electric, all combine CEO and Chairman roles.

 

[Whispering_Jack]

As someone else put it at Blitz, combining Chairman and CEO's roles is someone common in the US.

It's quite common in American companies. A quick peruse through the Dow Jones shows at least Chevron, American Express, IBM, Boeing, Procter & Gamble, DuPont, General Motors, JP Morgan Chase, AT&T, ExxonMobil, General Electric, all combine CEO and Chairman roles.

I know the precedence is there in the US, but I am more talking about as a good fit, I would rather a dedicated CEO and then a chairman after that.

 

[DonsRule]

I know the precedence is there in the US, but I am more talking about as a good fit, I would rather a dedicated CEO and then a chairman after that.

I'm skeptical of the decisions too, tbh. But most of it out of my league. So not totally sure what to make of it.

 

[The Jet]

Wayne Swann come on down!

Steve Bracks would be my choice

 

[The Jet]

As someone else put it at Blitz, combining Chairman and CEO's roles is someone common in the US.

It's quite common in American companies. A quick peruse through the Dow Jones shows at least Chevron, American Express, IBM, Boeing, Procter & Gamble, DuPont, General Motors, JP Morgan Chase, AT&T, ExxonMobil, General Electric, all combine CEO and Chairman roles.

And lets not forget WWE. Vince McMahon has both titles whilst Triple H is the companies COO.

 

[eth-dog]

Steve Bracks would be my choice

Nah, wasn't great with the business side of things. Had the charisma but Brumby was the brains

 

[DapperDon]

So I can liken him to Mother Theresa, Pol Pot or Napoleon .... but anyone in the current Australian parliament is taboo?

Also my past references were in response to the Peta Credlin sock puppet troll account that is allowed to opperate on our board, which is why I used the "good labor man" quote.

I'd also like to point out that I'm not being particularly partisan. I am dismayed at the chaotic "leadership" shown by Abbot and Rudd before him. They have both trashed the place when not in the lodge either with Rudd white anting his party and Abbot being one of the most obstructionist opposition leaders in living memory.

There is a sense of chaos coming out of Essendon with these sorts of announcments. Also like Abbot Little seems to be appointing only supporting views in all positions.

Releasing this information 4 days after AGM and 5 days before xmas is an act of deceit. They could have mentioned this prior to the AGM. So either our board is completely unagreeable, the leadership is paralised with indecision or they are trying to sneak through massive structural change without asking membership if they agree.

With Little being at the helm I am 100% sure it isn't indecision. The other two options are ugly.

Mother of god will you shut the * up about politics.

 

[Zach Package]

And lets not forget WWE. Vince McMahon has both titles whilst Triple H is the companies COO.

yeah, and we all know how well they're going right now

 

[Phone]

Don't really care about the CEO role being made redundant.

 

[Old Campaigner]

I wonder if Little is putting himself into a position he'll be hard to remove from and he'll end up becoming our Schwab/Connolly?