Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Mike

Steve Stone

Recommended Posts

[quote user="hogesar"]But Parma, this is almost an opportunity for a free attack at the board. Thus a conspiracy theory is vital for this. Thats irrespective of the fact we have limited information and most of those criticising unlikely have any relative experience to pass comment.[/quote]
I have not viewed this thread as a '' free attack on the board '' hoggy but a discussion on the new set up answerable to the board. Concerns have been raised which is quite understandable based on past history of people being appointed to high positions within the club who seem to disappear into the night so to speak with Stone being the latest.
As for people you perceive as not having any relative experience to pass comment that is just a flippant remark unless of course you yourself are in a position to make such a judgement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Hoola Han Solo"]Did you not read the pink un memo TIL? The owners, board or club are never to be discussed in a critical or negative way.[/quote]
That''s unfortunately, missing the point completely. Nothing wrong with criticism. But snide remarks based on something we don''t even have half a story of is petulant and lacking in credence, whichever way you look at it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Jim Smith"][quote user="PurpleCanary"]
And I think Icecream Snow''s view may well be at least half the explanation for Stone leaving - that he found he was to an extent sidelined from much of what a traditional football chief executive does.
[/quote]

I agree with your last point Purple but for me the question is how or why has that situation arisen
. Is it because it actually transpires that it was only the accounting/financial stuff he was any good at (meaning his appointment as CEO initially was perhaps a little hasty) or have certain people been recruited/promoted into roles over the last couple of seasons that have seen him becoming increasingly sidelined and ultimately feeling he''s just back doing his old job and his future arrives elsewhere. Or to put it another way is this the end game of a "power struggle"
between certain executives at the club.

My unease with this new arrangement is that one of the reasons often cited for things going astray in the latter part of McNally''s reign was that he had too much (unquestioned) control over the exec and footballing functions of the club and the wider infrastructure/structure was not there. Now the infrastructure appears to be there but much if it is very heavily tied to Webber.[/quote]
Jim, I don''t know the answer to that. I have no inside info. In this case I am just going on what I know about NCFC from the outside and what I know generally about power structures etc in business. It could be either of those or a combination of both, or none.
It is possible Stone was seen as a very safe pair of hands, especially as a stand-in, but that the board decided it wanted more dynamism. But my guess is that, for whatever reason and however it came about (which came first - the chicken or the egg, as it were), Stone finding himself increasingly in a bit of an executive cul-de-sac was a significant factor in him leaving. Which is why I was careful to say I thought Icecream Snow had provided some of the explanation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="4th floor"][quote user="Icecream Snow"][quote user="4th floor"]
Can someone explain how we got from McNally and Bowkett, to Jez Moxley, and to today''s situation? I can see several job titles, but I''m not sure who''s doing what. It all sound a bit like musical chairs to me.
[/quote]
Jez Moxey replaced McNally as Chief Executive, and Ed Balls replaced Bowkett as Chairman.
I think Balls had proposed a new structure with a Sporting Director. When Jez Moxey left, Steve Stone was keen on the job, but felt he didn''t have the footballing experience required.
So then we ended up with Daniel Farke as Head Coach, Stuart Webber as Sporting Director, and Steve Stone as Managing Director, with Webber taking some of the responsibilities from the old Chief Exec and Manager roles.
Ben Kensell has been doing the Sales & Marketing role and gets the Chief Commercial Officer title, which sounds like the same role with additional influence and power. Bethnal says Zoe Ward''s been doing the agent liaison work on top of other duties.
It sounds like the division of work between Kensell, Webber and Ward left Stone preparing the accounts, and arguably you don''t need someone at board level to do that.[/quote]Thanks, that''s a good summary. It looks to me as if we''ll be relying on Michael Wynn-Jones, Ed Balls and Delia''s nephew to oversee the whole thing.
[/quote]
Phillips was in business, but perhaps more importantly Foulger has been a director for 22 years, so it is a fair bet he knows a bit about the ins and outs of financing a football club and how to oversee that. I do not see any problem with not having a specific chief finance officer on the board.And I think Icecream Snow''s view may well be at least half the explanation for Stone leaving - that he found he was to an extent sidelined from much of what a traditional football chief executive does.
[/quote]No disrepect to Foulger or Phillips, but I don''t believe it''s an accident that our upturn has happened since Ed Balls and Tom Smith arrived on the scene. Them two seem clever chaps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perfectly reasonable to question the new structure and indeed the people & their relationships, that sit within the new structure.

I think it is fair to question why we are having issues getting a settled structure, with the departure of Moxey & now Stone.

I think it is fair to question whether Webber now has too much power and whether it is sensible to have a husband & wife team in the new structure and all the potential issues that can arise from that relationship (as most successful companies do not allow it).

It''s also fair to voice disappointment at Steve Stone''s exit given most people thought he was doing a great job under difficult circumstances.

Been no abuse or "snidey comments" apart from the usual suspects that like to shut down debate & opposing views.

This is not an attack on anyone, it''s a voicing of concerns which shows our passion for our club.

Crack on people...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="4th floor"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="4th floor"][quote user="Icecream Snow"][quote user="4th floor"]
Can someone explain how we got from McNally and Bowkett, to Jez Moxley, and to today''s situation? I can see several job titles, but I''m not sure who''s doing what. It all sound a bit like musical chairs to me.
[/quote]
Jez Moxey replaced McNally as Chief Executive, and Ed Balls replaced Bowkett as Chairman.
I think Balls had proposed a new structure with a Sporting Director. When Jez Moxey left, Steve Stone was keen on the job, but felt he didn''t have the footballing experience required.
So then we ended up with Daniel Farke as Head Coach, Stuart Webber as Sporting Director, and Steve Stone as Managing Director, with Webber taking some of the responsibilities from the old Chief Exec and Manager roles.
Ben Kensell has been doing the Sales & Marketing role and gets the Chief Commercial Officer title, which sounds like the same role with additional influence and power. Bethnal says Zoe Ward''s been doing the agent liaison work on top of other duties.
It sounds like the division of work between Kensell, Webber and Ward left Stone preparing the accounts, and arguably you don''t need someone at board level to do that.[/quote]Thanks, that''s a good summary. It looks to me as if we''ll be relying on Michael Wynn-Jones, Ed Balls and Delia''s nephew to oversee the whole thing.
[/quote]
Phillips was in business, but perhaps more importantly Foulger has been a director for 22 years, so it is a fair bet he knows a bit about the ins and outs of financing a football club and how to oversee that. I do not see any problem with not having a specific chief finance officer on the board.And I think Icecream Snow''s view may well be at least half the explanation for Stone leaving - that he found he was to an extent sidelined from much of what a traditional football chief executive does.
[/quote]No disrepect to Foulger or Phillips, but I don''t believe it''s an accident that our upturn has happened since Ed Balls and Tom Smith arrived on the scene. Them two seem clever chaps.[/quote]

I am personally in a similar position to Stone where I work - and have reached the same conclusion that I am rapidly moving back to just being a beancounter so have reluctantly decided to resign. I could continue to take the money but it isn''t making me happy or fulfilled. Go Steve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Perhaps SS wasn''t socialist or religious enough?.....Or maybe when told to by the Club Matriarch, was unable (or refusing) to magically turn the trophy cabinet into boxes of Bud Lite?......''Dilly Dilly!''....cried the Neppers Tom ''Lookey Likey'' in the Bud Lite advert......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Have posts been deleted because I can''t find the ones trying to shut down debate. I guess it would help if I could ever work out who the "usual suspects" are....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok i can Confirm the reason for the late News from Media was Because Steve Stone was only SACKED yesterday he has not left for another job

From a 100 % source who knows all the details

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="norfolkngood"]Well Til that''s the truth people can either believe it or not ! by the way check your PM ;-)[/quote]
[Y]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sacked for trying to place a six figure bet on big Sam being next manager 🙄

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="norfolkngood"]Ok i can Confirm the reason for the late News from Media was Because Steve Stone was only SACKED yesterday he has not left for another job

From a 100 % source who knows all the details[/quote]
I made the point at the outset that Stone''s phrase about "...seeking new challenges..." was usually a face-saver by executives who left a company unwillinly or unhappily and didn''t have a new job to go to. That aspect does not surprise me at all. And the timing of a day here or there doesn''t seem important. But sacking, otherwise called dismissal, is a precise term. It means the company terminating a contract of employment. That is not the same as the employee agreeing to leave, for whatever reason and however arranged. And sackings can often lead to claims for unfair or constructive dismissal. Stone may have been sacked, but so far the press coverage has given no hint of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Believe me Purple this person knows the story as i imagine so does the media

i might add i do not know the Reason just yet also it is very unlikely i will be able to post on here when i do

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="PurpleCanary"]
But sacking, otherwise called dismissal, is a precise term. It means the company terminating a contract of employment. That is not the same as the employee agreeing to leave, for whatever reason and however arranged. And sackings can often lead to claims for unfair or constructive dismissal. Stone may have been sacked, but so far the press coverage has given no hint of that.
[/quote]
Assuming that he was surplus to requirements, it was arguably better for the club to a have a positive resolution, and non-disclosure agreements with a healthy payoff are commonplace. Both sides would be able to afford good solicitors and be able to keep their reputations intact. I doubt "Managing Director gets made redundant" would have gone down well as a headline.
Having said that, the timing is suspect, with the "indefinite leave" comments here on the board earlier in the week, and the AGM is next month. But they also haven''t announced that they''re looking for a replacement.
Eitherway it''s cost cutting, poor performance or misconduct, and whatever it is, it''ll be carefully smothered in a non-disclosure agreement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="norfolkngood"]Believe me Purple this person knows the story as i imagine so does the media

i might add i do not know the Reason just yet also it is very unlikely i will be able to post on here when i do[/quote]
Took too long replying to Purple - I think you''re making it too obvious now [;)]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The posts this evening will probably bring another outburst of Pink Un and poster bashing on a certain Twitter account.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="PurpleCanary"]
[quote user="norfolkngood"]Ok i can Confirm the reason for the late News from Media was Because Steve Stone was only SACKED yesterday he has not left for another job

From a 100 % source who knows all the details[/quote]
I made the point at the outset that Stone''s phrase about "...seeking new challenges..." was usually a face-saver by executives who left a company unwillinly or unhappily and didn''t have a new job to go to. That aspect does not surprise me at all. And the timing of a day here or there doesn''t seem important. But sacking, otherwise called dismissal, is a precise term. It means the company terminating a contract of employment. That is not the same as the employee agreeing to leave, for whatever reason and however arranged. And sackings can often lead to claims for unfair or constructive dismissal. Stone may have been sacked, but so far the press coverage has given no hint of that.
[/quote]
This is an interesting development. Reading the thread if the reason for his sacking was any or all of the reasons suggested on this thread for him leaving he will win an unfair dismissal case without doubt...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To be honest, football is a different animal to any other business and even if he was sacked, he’ll probably already have agreed a settlement to leave!

Still it doesn’t effect me, I’m just happy to see three key youngsters sign contracts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...