34 ms·
I'm baffled by Tim Armstrong's rise to the top. I think he got there by virtue of having founded Patch, which never did anything before getting (nearly) shut do
by auctiontheory 13y ago
I'm baffled by Tim Armstrong's rise to the top. I think he got there by virtue of having founded Patch, which never did anything before getting (nearly) shut down .... he seems to constantly piss everyone off, while accomplishing nothing, and yet ... CEO of a major brand?! (Other unpleasant CEOs - I can point to what they've accomplished.)
What am I missing? Does he have some other claim to fame and fortune that is not documented? Or is AOL making a technology or market share comeback that I'm unaware of?
- aheilbut 13y agoIt wasn't Patch. He built up advertising sales at Google starting in 2000.
- dredmorbius 13y agoHe did found Patch in 2007, though I don't suspect that was instrumental in his pick as AOL CEO.
- dredmorbius 13y agoArmstrong joined AOL as CEO in 2009 from Google where he was President of Google's Americas operation. AOL were replacing their former CEO Randy Falco following a number of spectacular business blunders. He's not proven particularly popular. On the other hand, AOL is alive and profitable, which wasn't a sure thing five years ago.