I miss nothing, just that i m not doing hasardous speculations.
It was known apparently in the industry, such decisions are not rendered public before they are actualy acted.
http://techreport.com/blog/27183/amd-ceo-transition-is-a-natural-next-step
When did Read announce he was stepping down? Oh, wait, he didn't.
Maybe because English isn't your native language you are missing the nuance of the whole thing.
In this case, my natural skepticism is dampened by a nugget I picked up at CES back in January. It wasn't anything I could report, but a well-placed industry source suggested to me that Dr. Su would very likely replace Read as AMD's CEO "within the next six months."
I miss nothing, just that i m not doing hasardous speculations.
It was known apparently in the industry, such decisions are not rendered public before they are actualy acted.
http://techreport.com/blog/27183/amd-ceo-transition-is-a-natural-next-step
Actually in the US they have to be disclosed to the public by law. It's why CEO's announce that they will be stepping down a year in advance.
In this case, my natural skepticism is dampened by a nugget I picked up at CES back in January. It wasn't anything I could report, but a well-placed industry source suggested to me that Dr. Su would very likely replace Read as AMD's CEO "within the next six months." Of course, since this is AMD, the schedule was optimistic, but that prediction proved accurateand it lends credibility to the notion that this move was in the works for a while.
I agree strongly with this. Read would not have had the knowledge about the semiconductor industry required to be making the decisions that a CEO is supposed to make. He did have great business knowledge though, and saved AMD from destruction. They're not out of the woods yet though, and at this point they need to somehow become competitive again in the CPU space, despite their limited funds, or else they'll be yet another fizzled-out semico.Rory's job was to fix the company and find the next Jerry. I think he has done well in both regards. Lisa Su is an extremely capable person whom if she wasn't CEO at AMD, would eventually be the CEO at a similar technology company.
any more commentary? is that a good thing or bad thing[or maybe that is too simple a question?]?
I saw this mentioned on another forum:
http://techreport.com/blog/27183/amd-ceo-transition-is-a-natural-next-step
Why does it matter, exactly? Who cares if he was fired or not?The fact that he heard someone taking about a hypothesis doesn't mean that the transition was agreed, especially because this is happening 4 months after she took the COO role. Why bother with creating and giving the role to Lisa Su when she was supposed to take the CEO role a few months down the road? And why bother the investors with sudden news when they could do a staged, controlled transition if things were really already in place? Sorry, I don't buy it. Succession plan my ***.
Why does it matter, exactly? Who cares if he was fired or not?
That's already pretty clear, no? Graphics definitely aren't going to save them, as they were never a big money maker for them, and they're arguably in the toughest spot vs. Nvidia they've been in since they purchased ATI. And their CPU offerings are laughable, really, and that's not changing anytime soon.Just points to AMD not completing their turnaround anytime soon.
Because if the BoD had released a statement saying that Read left for "personal reasons" or that he will be leaving in 6 months to a year or any public statement about Read's transition plans at all, that would mean the BoD thinks AMD's turnaround plan is basically done and Read did his job well.Why does it matter, exactly? Who cares if he was fired or not?
An informed individual should already have seen that AMD still has work left to do, though. Whether or not Rory Reed was fired should make no difference to them.Because if the BoD had released a statement saying that Read left for "personal reasons" or that he will be leaving in 6 months to a year or any public statement about Read's transition plans at all, that would mean the BoD thinks AMD's turnaround plan is basically done and Read did his job well.
Instead, we got a quiet notice that Lisa Su is now CEO. Read between the lines and it means Read was fired, the BoD was not happy with something he did or did not manage to do, and that more importantly, AMD's turnaround is still incomplete or flawed in some way.
The difference is the internal company confidence in the leaving CEO and the state of the company he is leaving. That shows whether AMD thinks it is done fixing the damage. Su basically says that she will have to do some more damage control.
An informed individual should already have seen that AMD still has work left to do, though. Whether or not Rory Reed was fired should make no difference to them.
Work left to do? The point is that the BoD firing Rory is an acknowledgement that the strategy isn't working and they need to go in a different direction. Maybe he clashed with the board about changes; maybe Q3 is so bad that they needed a fall guy.
Actually in the US they have to be disclosed to the public by law. It's why CEO's announce that they will be stepping down a year in advance.
I dont like AMD really but Rory is much better and maybe even better than Jen-Hsun HuangI knew Rory's days were limited. I had a feeling. I wonder if Lisa Su is fit for the position.
The only reason he would be let go so suddenly before the holidays are three reasons.
Personal misconduct
Extremely unprofitable and need to make shareholders happy before holidays.
Already planned and they wanted to kick start the new year with the changes already in place.