John O'Neil New Chairman for Echo.

[Braveheart81]

I also think this is a bit of a storm in a teacup.

He is the CEO of the ARU and is the Acting Chairman or Chairman of Echo (i.e. The Star). Chairman is a non-executive role such that his job is to attend meetings and review financials etc. and provide some strategy. This is not a day to day role.

Most CEOs of big companies also sit on the boards of other companies.

If you wanted a CEO who was involved in no other organisations you are already ruling out most high calibre executives.

I think it also ignores the fact that the person is also bringing their collective experience to the job which should be of benefit. The fact that John O'Neill is either acting chairman or chairman of a publically listed company should provide him with additional skills and experience to improve his ability at the ARU.

Wanting someone who does nothing else and has no external directorships seems to hark back to amateur days which are out of step with the modern corporate world.

 

[I like to watch]

Anyone who thinks that the time a director spends is limited to those he spends in the boardroom at the monthly meeting is out of date with a directors role/responsibilities.
Every director I know spends many hours reviewing the board report before each meeting. If they are on comitees then their time each month is measured in days not hours.
A chairman is required to spend much much more time than his fellow directors.
I would estimate that JON would be spending 1/2 his working hours on his new role, given the current position EE is in.

 

[Schadenfreude]

Q: What's the difference between a non-executive director and a shopping trolley?

A: You can fit more food and booze in a non-executive director, and a shopping trolley has a mind of its own.

 

[p.Tah]

Seriously JON is a big boy, he knows if he can handle both roles. He is a professional, if he slips up in one role it's a black mark against his name. He wouldn't venture done this path if he didn't think he could deliver on both.
This is just an excuse to try and kick JON again. Surprised no one has blamed ECHO for the Scotland loss yet

 

[TOCC]

He is acting chairman, not the chairman in the traditional sense.


I think its absolutely horrible that the CEO or Rugby Union within Australia is rubbing shoulders with some of Australia's richest men, what an absurd notion that associating himself with a powerful company could potentially have flow over benefits to Australian rugby, the notion is just ludicrous.... 'facetious comment of the day'

 

[SouthernX]

Rocks in your head if you think David Gallop would be a good fit as CEO of the ARU.

He was the leader of the 2nd biggest sporting cash cow in Australia & has had so many scandals involving high profiled players over the last decade that its prevented the game from growing.

Whether it's Brett Stewart & underage girls of Benji Marshall punching on outside maccas in Kings Cross the game of Rugby League has been tarnished because a ineffective CEO can't control the key figures in his game.

John O'Neil might not be the best guy in the eyes of many rugby pundits & Gallop taking over the reigns of the ARU might not mean Pocock runs out gets tattoos and rape women. But Gallop was a true failure for the game of Rugby League & I don't want him anywhere near rugby HQ making the tough decisions.

 

[Braveheart81]

I don't think you can in any way, shape or form say that the various incidents in the last few years occurred because David Gallop didn't have control over the big players in the game.

They are adults and they make (dumb) decisions on their own.

I think on the whole, the NRL has handled most of the incidents and scandals quite well.

Do we blame your boss if you go out drinking on the weekend and do something stupid?

 

[I like to watch]

He is acting chairman, not the chairman in the traditional sense.


I think its absolutely horrible that the CEO or Rugby Union within Australia is rubbing shoulders with some of Australia's richest men, what an absurd notion that associating himself with a powerful company could potentially have flow over benefits to Australian rugby, the notion is just ludicrous.. 'facetious comment of the day'

Sorry, I don't understand the difference in responsibilities between acting chairman and a chairman in the traditional sense?
This company is engaging in capital raising ATM, a complicated and time consuming exercise. The CEO is only new to the job and requires the Chairman to provide him with much more support than a more experienced operator. There is an unwelcome competitor to Packer(who installed JON as chair)on the register.And BTW they advised the Stock exchange to halt trading just the other day, this is a major decision, all these things require the hands on attention of the chairman, interim or otherwise.
ATM the interim chairman of EE is basically a full time role, so if your happy with that, fine.
BTW he is not rubbing shoulders with Packer, he is his bitch.That's how he got the gig as chair!You think Packer would go to the effort of removing the past chair and appointing someone he was not confident was in step with his thinking?

 

[SouthernX]

I don't think you can in any way, shape or form say that the various incidents in the last few years occurred because David Gallop didn't have control over the big players in the game.

They are adults and they make (dumb) decisions on their own.

I think on the whole, the NRL has handled most of the incidents and scandals quite well.

Do we blame your boss if you go out drinking on the weekend and do something stupid?

No inroads have been made cleaning up the game.

He should of come down harder on these supposed role models earlier because League scandals were out of control.

I know there is a domestic violence culture amongst all cirlces of senior rugby league.. It's not everyone & it's not even the majority.

But when year after year its the NRL posterboy being involved in a alchol related scandal.. It really does leave you questioning are the inmates running the Assylum.

 

[SouthernX]

Gallop might have more success in a code where he doesnt have to worry about the playing group.

But what about other issues like inability to negotiate a new tv deal or not doing enough homework on granting the titans a lisence and them almost going bellyup?

 

[Braveheart81]

The problem is that now everything is so much more in the public eye relative to how it was even a decade ago. Gallop was also dealing with a sport which has had a massive alcohol culture for a very long time. One of the problems that comes with modern professional sport is that the players now have much more money and far more time on their hands. They are also generally young and lack both life experience and much education.

I think Gallop has done some really good things like ensuring that all players from the U20 comp to the NRL are involved in some sort of education or vocational training outside of football.

If you look at some of the controversial figures such as Todd Carney, I think it is a difficult situation. The guy obviously had massive problems which no one had been able to effectively deal with. Is the NRL better to turf him out forever and let him ruin his own life outside of the public eye or discipline him when he makes mistakes and try and turn him into a decent human being? We are only halfway through this season, but it would appear that it is finally working and he has grown up a bit and is behaving.

The Brett Stewart incident was a pretty bad one in that Stewart was so drunk he can't even remember what happened, but the NRL stood him down and eventually he was found not guilty. I don't think the NRL handled that badly. They also came down hard on the Manly club for allowing their players to get so drunk at an official function.

The Benji Marshall incident was a storm in a teacup. If you followed the court case, that should have never gone to trial. It ended up coming out that Marshall did nothing more than push the guy away who was verbally harrassing him and someone else punched him. Marshall never assaulted the guy and should never have been charged with assault.

I generally think Gallop has been good in the NRL and has handled a lot of crap that has happened quite well. All he can try and do is improve the culture in the sport and deal with incidents when they happen. He doesn't have the power to stop incidents happening in the first place.

 

[RedsHappy]

For anyone who doubts that the actual Chairing of EE is not, in its present turbulent and volatile state, a seriously time consuming exercise, have a look at:

http://www.afr.com/p/business/companies/macquarie_group_takes_stake_in_echo_fWan2gsgvNPiWyuwPNj9pO

Having to deal with Packer, Lim and Macquarie Bank all encircling the EE share register, that is an intrinsically time consuming task that must be led by the Chairman on behalf of all shareholders.

 

[rugbyisfun]

For anyone who doubts that the actual Chairing of EE is not, in its present turbulent and volatile state, a seriously time consuming exercise, have a look at:

http://www.afr.com/p/business/companies/macquarie_group_takes_stake_in_echo_fWan2gsgvNPiWyuwPNj9pO

Having to deal with Packer, Lim and Macquarie Bank all encircling the EE share register, that is an intrinsically time consuming task that must be led by the Chairman on behalf of all shareholders.

Spot on.

The bloke needs to pack his ARU desk up quick smart.

 

[TOCC]

Sorry, I don't understand the difference in responsibilities between acting chairman and a chairman in the traditional sense?
This company is engaging in capital raising ATM, a complicated and time consuming exercise. The CEO is only new to the job and requires the Chairman to provide him with much more support than a more experienced operator. There is an unwelcome competitor to Packer(who installed JON as chair)on the register.And BTW they advised the Stock exchange to halt trading just the other day, this is a major decision, all these things require the hands on attention of the chairman, interim or otherwise.
ATM the interim chairman of EE is basically a full time role, so if your happy with that, fine.
BTW he is not rubbing shoulders with Packer, he is his bitch.That's how he got the gig as chair!You think Packer would go to the effort of removing the past chair and appointing someone he was not confident was in step with his thinking?

Acting chairman basically equates to caretaker chairman... Big difference

Someone will be appointed full time in this role, whether that be JON or another person.

 

[I like to watch]

Acting chairman basically equates to caretaker chairman. Big difference

You are obviously saying that this is a short term issue only, not the interim's workload is less than a "full time" chair?
as RH correctly point out, the addition of Mac Bank to the shareholder registry complicates matters enormously for the board and in particular the chair who is at the pointy end of all negotiations/submissions by these shareholders.
Now he is not just dealing with the running of a publicly listed co, he is at the epicentre of all the tactics and brinkmanship that is all part and parcel of gaining control over this co.
He should be on leave with the ARU until this is sorted out one way or another.

 

[TOCC]

You are obviously saying that this is a short term issue only, not the interim's workload is less than a "full time" chair?
as RH correctly point out, the addition of Mac Bank to the shareholder registry complicates matters enormously for the board and in particular the chair who is at the pointy end of all negotiations/submissions by these shareholders.
Now he is not just dealing with the running of a publicly listed co, he is at the epicentre of all the tactics and brinkmanship that is all part and parcel of gaining control over this co.
He should be on leave with the ARU until this is sorted out one way or another.

What I'm saying is that the 'acting chairman' is only a interim position, a full-time chairman will be appointed in the near future, whether that is JON or another person we do not know.
Subsequently, the acting chairman is not the person appointed to revolutionise the structure and direction of the company overnight, to suggest the acting chairman is the person to grip such matters is incorrect.

 

[Braveheart81]

He should be on leave with the ARU until this is sorted out one way or another.

Based on most of the comments so far, if JON took a leave of absence from the ARU, most people would be saying he should be sacked for going on leave during rugby season.

 

[Roundawhile]

O'Neill holds non-executive directorships on a number of public company boards. He is a director of Tabcorp Holdings Ltd (ASX:TAH), Amalgamated Holdings Ltd (ASX:AHD), and of of Echo Entertainment Group Ltd (ASX:EGP). He was appointed chairman of Echo on 8th June 2012, after prior chairman John Story was forced to resign by Echo's board[12].

The above is from Wikipedia.

 

[RedsHappy]

For those above who seem to argue this will be nothing other than a minor, temporary distraction for J'ON, see below in today's Australian.

Get real people.

"John O'Neill May Take a Long-Term Punt on Echo"

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...ho-entertainment/story-fn91v9q3-1226393532679

 

[waratahjesus]

He is under contract to the ARU, if he broke the terms of that contract there would be a problem, he obviously hasn't so this entire thread is about 2 things"

If you like JoN or not.