3 ms·
The article in the NYT today reported that the board fully supported the decisions he had made but didn't like the way he was communicating the changes inside a
by Element_ 15y ago
The article in the NYT today reported that the board fully supported the decisions he had made but didn't like the way he was communicating the changes inside and out of the company. Whether or not that is the real reason they fired him is anyones guess I suppose.
- r00fus 15y agoIt's the only way they come out looking competent, so I guess that's what they're running with. I don't see how Leo would go rogue... he was clearly a fall guy and he might have been ok with it.
- alexqgb 15y agoAs a creature of the board - as opposed to an internal hire with a built-in power base - he's actually the last person you'd expect to go rogue. Indeed, the big criticism of high-level external hires is that they're insufficiently independent and easily manipulated. For a guy whose credibility was already in tatters, $35 mm to be a fall-guy for hire seems like a pretty good deal. I suspect he felt the same way when he signed up. I just wonder if he realized the payout was going to come so swiftly.
- slantyyz 15y agoOH at Apotheker's job interview... HP Board: We think we want to focus on the enterprise, but we need a hatchet man to cut the consumer stuff. We know it's going to be unpopular and destroy your reputation, and we're going to fire you for doing that. We're willing to pay you about $30M for your trouble. You in? Apotheker: Hell, yeah.