>You seem to assume a good CEO equals a successful company
the only assumption i see is the counter to that - a bad CEO equals an unsuccessful company. and i don't think that's a very controversial assumption.
the only assumption i see is the counter to that - a bad CEO equals an unsuccessful company. and i don't think that's a very controversial assumption.
Long term value, employee satisfaction, and customer satisfaction are all intertwined. New management is more likely than not to harm at least one of those 3 .
Seems to imply there is an issue with a CEO of a space company previously working on Kindles.
> Bezos had the former Honeywell CEO in charge of Blue Origin, which to me was such an odd choice
Also seems to imply the CEO is bad because their previously only worked at Honeywell on thermostats.
In my mind none of the above has anything to do with how good or bad a CEO is. Perhaps I am misreading it. In which case ignore me.