Board that was called out on its policies and direction… with huge loss of trust and confidence… reasserts its control, plays for time, regroups, consolidates its hold… appoints a sacked director to be Interim CEO… which does nothing for trust…
…and meanwhile, declines to appoint the Interim Chair the EGM was called to put in place, even though he’s trusted, trustworthy, competent, moderate, highly experienced, deeply aware of Nominet, and above all… actually wanted.
I said before, that this remnant Board is simply the continuation of the Rogue Board that was excoriated in the EGM, who collectively waved through actions like the forum closure, and before that backed the Driven Consortium (£500,000 to £1 million squandered?), White Space/Spectrum (possibly similar sums), the bargain basement acquisition of the multiple registry service contracts (bargain basement returns more probably, and in all likelihood the most costly diversification), and CyGlass (£5million plus staffing costs, and all other expenses of running that business… for what return?)
It is clear that the Board wants to plot their own course, and obstructed the appointment of Sir Michael as Chair at each step (including the spurious refusal to let members ‘elect him’ when that was not what the Resolution said).
At this juncture, I’m afraid the Board is at odds with a huge part of their own Company membership - the people who delegate power to them and can take it away.
I have absolutely no trust or confidence in this Board. Trust was gone already, because as I say they are tainted by their collective silence and endorsement of the Russell-Wood regime and policies. Again and again, in my view, they do the stupid thing, the tone deaf thing, and the last chance they had to try to win back trust would have been to appoint two skilled and experienced people, who were actually wanted, were actually trusted… but they have chosen to blow that chance… and what’s left is a huge vacuum of leadership.
Also, once this Board consolidates its power, you can be sure (at least I think so) it will do whatever it can to marginalise the membership structure which it can see is a threat to their control of the company. How feasible this is, I will leave to others to assess, but I should not be surprised to see an attempt to dislocate the access to wholesale domains, from the membership structure (potentially with rising membership fees) so that being a registrar is separate from being a member. In addition I should not be surprised to see them increasing voting caps to 10% or higher, so they can ‘rule’ in collusion with a small group of their largest customers. In short, there could be a risk of a kind of disenfranchisement. If/once that happens, they can (of course) take the company in the direction they choose. So decisions over whether to remove the Board now should factor in what might happen if they are not removed. If anyone cares to offer any feedback on these risks and how realistic the threat may be, it would be interesting to hear your views. I also really urge people to try to attend the web-based meetings on Apr16 and May6 with the Acting Chair and the Interim (recently sacked) CEO. However pointless you feel it is to attend, I think there’s value in communicating feelings and asking questions. I’m pushing questions on squandered money. But there are plenty of other issues that deserve to be voiced.
…and meanwhile, declines to appoint the Interim Chair the EGM was called to put in place, even though he’s trusted, trustworthy, competent, moderate, highly experienced, deeply aware of Nominet, and above all… actually wanted.
I said before, that this remnant Board is simply the continuation of the Rogue Board that was excoriated in the EGM, who collectively waved through actions like the forum closure, and before that backed the Driven Consortium (£500,000 to £1 million squandered?), White Space/Spectrum (possibly similar sums), the bargain basement acquisition of the multiple registry service contracts (bargain basement returns more probably, and in all likelihood the most costly diversification), and CyGlass (£5million plus staffing costs, and all other expenses of running that business… for what return?)
It is clear that the Board wants to plot their own course, and obstructed the appointment of Sir Michael as Chair at each step (including the spurious refusal to let members ‘elect him’ when that was not what the Resolution said).
At this juncture, I’m afraid the Board is at odds with a huge part of their own Company membership - the people who delegate power to them and can take it away.
I have absolutely no trust or confidence in this Board. Trust was gone already, because as I say they are tainted by their collective silence and endorsement of the Russell-Wood regime and policies. Again and again, in my view, they do the stupid thing, the tone deaf thing, and the last chance they had to try to win back trust would have been to appoint two skilled and experienced people, who were actually wanted, were actually trusted… but they have chosen to blow that chance… and what’s left is a huge vacuum of leadership.
Also, once this Board consolidates its power, you can be sure (at least I think so) it will do whatever it can to marginalise the membership structure which it can see is a threat to their control of the company. How feasible this is, I will leave to others to assess, but I should not be surprised to see an attempt to dislocate the access to wholesale domains, from the membership structure (potentially with rising membership fees) so that being a registrar is separate from being a member. In addition I should not be surprised to see them increasing voting caps to 10% or higher, so they can ‘rule’ in collusion with a small group of their largest customers. In short, there could be a risk of a kind of disenfranchisement. If/once that happens, they can (of course) take the company in the direction they choose. So decisions over whether to remove the Board now should factor in what might happen if they are not removed. If anyone cares to offer any feedback on these risks and how realistic the threat may be, it would be interesting to hear your views. I also really urge people to try to attend the web-based meetings on Apr16 and May6 with the Acting Chair and the Interim (recently sacked) CEO. However pointless you feel it is to attend, I think there’s value in communicating feelings and asking questions. I’m pushing questions on squandered money. But there are plenty of other issues that deserve to be voiced.
