forlanssister 3,066 Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 If that's factual then it looks like the promised antidote is just a different strain of poison. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,200 Posted September 3, 2013 Author Share Posted September 3, 2013 Compromise might not be preferable, as suggested by McMurdo, but is perhaps the most likely outcome when you consider the various delays. Also, given McMurdo has access to GreenCo and Media House, I'd fancy he knows more than he is letting on about the ongoing negotiations. I do though think that McMurdo should make it clearer whether he is writing his blog in a paid capacity. In the interests of transparency, that is. Possibly just the latest in a long line of gambits based on outdated info. McMurdo will have his sources but he'll only be given the information they want him to use and IIRC he's been wrong just as often as he's been right. Essentially, compromise may seem agreeable but as long as McCollco think they're going to be outvoted then I can't see them accepting any 'likely' deal. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewarty 1,896 Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 Possibly just the latest in a long line of gambits based on outdated info. McMurdo will have his sources but he'll only be given the information they want him to use and IIRC he's been wrong just as often as he's been right. Essentially, compromise may seem agreeable but as long as McCollco think they're going to be outvoted then I can't see them accepting any 'likely' deal. Agreed. But the longer this negotiation continues, the less I'm convinced of the strength of McCollco's hand. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,200 Posted September 3, 2013 Author Share Posted September 3, 2013 Agreed. But the longer this negotiation continues, the less I'm convinced of the strength of McCollco's hand. It's certainly a difficult situation to read. I change my mind on a daily basis... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 Nurse!! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 Don't like the sound of that compromise for a couple of reasons. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davie P 4 Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 What would be the point of adding PM and FB to the board if BS (in particular) remains. Do we now have a further two non executives overseeing the role of BS? He is either competent to do the job or he isn't. In my opinion, I don't think that he is and would like to see him replaced, but to carry an additional cost of say 50k per annum per non executive to oversee the financial director's performance just seems ludicrous! I could live with CM remaining as CEO but he needs to ensure that substantial cost cutting is implemented to get us to a sustainable level. Potentially, and based upon Bill's blog, you could then have John McClelland - Chair Frank Blin - head remuneration and audit committee? Paul Murray - ? BS - Financial director BS - Non executive IH - Non executive SE - Non executive JE - Non executive They will definitely need to cut Ally's salary to be able to afford that lot! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 Hopefully the part about Sandy Easdale being appointed to our board of directors is just more loony tunes nonsense. Having one of those brothers on our board is more than enough already, but both of them? Give me strength! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewarty 1,896 Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 What would be the point of adding PM and FB to the board if BS (in particular) remains. Do we now have a further two non executives overseeing the role of BS? He is either competent to do the job or he isn't. In my opinion, I don't think that he is and would like to see him replaced, but to carry an additional cost of say 50k per annum per non executive to oversee the financial director's performance just seems ludicrous! I could live with CM remaining as CEO but he needs to ensure that substantial cost cutting is implemented to get us to a sustainable level. Potentially, and based upon Bill's blog, you could then have John McClelland - Chair Frank Blin - head remuneration and audit committee? Paul Murray - ? BS - Financial director BS - Non executive IH - Non executive SE - Non executive JE - Non executive They will definitely need to cut Ally's salary to be able to afford that lot! They also need to have a Nominations Committee. ** ** no sniggering at the back 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 can the whole board not be replaced at the AGM anyway???? If so, what real benefit is there of adding a couple of folk, then their positions be up for a vote a few weeks later..... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.