From Conference Call, we can read pressure coming from BOD. I think Ben was fired. The way he is leaving town, everything tells me, Ben is leaving without a golden parachute. They've waited a little bit to kick his as...
Ben said he didn't seek reappointment because he is not good at execution. However, he also said that ALU is ahead of schedule on executing its plan. Does that make any sense? If he was voluntarily retiring, wouldn't he have just said that - time to take it easy and spend more time with the kids? So while he probably officially "retired," I am sure he was told the Board would not reappointed him before he decided to not seek reappointment. Firing by another, kinder and gentler name.
Somehow, I don't think he got the CEO job at BT because "he was not good at execution"
And if that were true, and the board of BT hired him anyway, they must have been suffering from a mass psychosis at the time. I mean, what board would hire a CEO who is not good at execution?
Obviously, Ben's statement is just a transparent excuse for leaving. Maybe because he knew his contract would not be renewed. Or perhaps because he has little confidence in ALU's trajectory as a company? He was sick of the politics? Or that he thinks that no plan is going to make a difference without a great deal of luck, and he doesn't like those odds. Etc.
Whatever. But what is obvious, I think, is that the ALU Board did not hire Ben with any expectation that he was not good at execution. After all, this was a time when ALU was hemorrhaging business and cash.