Can we stop being theatrical. The truth probably is that it was a joint decision because a new direction had been decided and both parties see little upside in stringing things out. I don’t think the board would sack SN at this sensitive juncture (even if they thought it was necessary). At the very least, they’d have a new CEO ready to go. And maybe SN sees some upside in leaving immediately in terms of the signal it sends to the market (remember he is a major shareholder and will want the best acquisition price on a full or partial sale) and doesn’t want to enact a policy he isn’t 100% on board with. Who would?,Especially as he has given his heart and soul to the company (Poyntons words not mine) Might be reading too much into the tea leaves, but it is interesting that he finishes as CEO on Feb 14 but will no longer sit on the board. I wonder why? Perhaps to minimise his knowledge of ongoing discussions with external parties (or at least give the impression of this). After all, this could easily be considered inside information in a few short weeks. All signs, including the stuff SN said at the AGM and the constant peer comparisons in company presentations, point to an imminent transaction.
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)