avebury killed us but was it ams fault, page-4

http://www.webwire.com/ViewPressRel.asp?aId=53484

That article clearly articulates Michelmore's role in the "growth" strategy that the board was looking for and he would have spruiked to get the position. Thats how it works, potential CEO candidates present themselves to the board with their vision and strategy of what to do with the business. The board accepts the candidate who bests fits their direction which they believe will deliver that growth and value. AM would have been in discussions with board well before announcement of appointment in Nov.

He was appointed in Nov 2007 although officially in the role Feb 2008. To say he was "handed" the decision to buy Allegiance in late Dec 2007 is a bit too cute. That would have been the first thing he supported and was going to be the hallmark of his "growth" strategy. Bottom line is AM fought for the Allgeience takeover, upping the price to win it in the end, then spent his way into oblivion without any thought for hedging to protect the company during a cash burning building phase. Just would be nice for him to admit it rather than play the general saving the day.

whateva