Comments on: Talking To Fellow Directors About Replacing A CEO

By: Cheap_Condoms

Cheap_Condoms — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 16:05:13 +0000

Now, with the help of an extremely successful CEO, (let's call him Yogi) I am seeing the truth and realizing that company founders often have little reason to assume that they will make successful CEO's, lead to liquidity and further on. It seems the role of the founder and the role of a CEO are very distinct and different jobs, both of which are unlikely to be done well by one same person.

By: Cheap Condoms

Cheap Condoms — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 19:42:04 +0000

I don’t mean that the VC should be only a cheerleader, but that she should include lots of tough love type stuff that may not necessarily feel like support at the time.

By: cheap condoms

cheap condoms — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 15:07:29 +0000

By: whenwego

whenwego — Mon, 12 Sep 2005 23:02:26 +0000

This is a classic VC failure. Clearly, as the owner of a large chunk of stock, the founder/CEO is as interested in “creating value” as the VC. The problem is, the two see the issue differently. Now, instead of listening to the other and signing on to that point of view, if either party goes off on their own tangent, that is a classic sign of failure. And guess which party does this almost all the time? The VC. Why? EGO. And who suffers? Shareholders. It has always amazed me that VCs are so unwilling to engage the founders in this dialog, but would rather shoot first. Must be their lack of commitment to value and overcommitment to EGO!

By: Texas Venture Capital Blog

Texas Venture Capital Blog — Fri, 09 Sep 2005 03:33:54 +0000

Getting fired is no fun!

Brad Feld’s post yesterday "Talking To Fellow Directors About Replacing A CEO" provides an interesting perspective on the topic of firing the CEO of a venture backed company:
"A wise and extremely successful VC (let’s call …

By: Daniel Nerezov

Daniel Nerezov — Thu, 08 Sep 2005 08:00:52 +0000

I used to get upset when founder CEOs got fired and joined the entrepreneurial chorus to bitch about vulture capitalists and other assorted predators.

Now, with the help of an extremely successful CEO, (let’s call him Yogi) I am seeing the truth and realizing that company founders often have little reason to assume that they will make successful CEO’s, lead to liquidity and further on. It seems the role of the founder and the role of a CEO are very distinct and different jobs, both of which are unlikely to be done well by one same person.

I say, if you’re going to be a founder, concentrate on what you’re good at, show proof of concept, put a team together and hand the reigns over to a capable professional who is specifically trained for the role of a CEO.

Get that out of the way, make a buck and go back to what you enjoy most. Leave managing the bureaucracy to people who are good at it, do another start up, put together plans, go around and pitch who’ll ever listen, get the thing off the ground and get back to having fun again. Besides, why over concentrate risk? Diversify your exposure to early stage private equity. Do startups quickly and move on.

I say, replacing the founder CEO, is just a natural thing which is good for the company an is something which should be expected and even initiated by the founders themselves. Maybe it�s time entrepreneurs took a pointer from Fred Wilson, wrote an investment thesis and stayed away from doing things they�re not good at (meaning, not being the best, meaning, there are other guys who can do that particular thing better).

By: Executive Compensation

Executive Compensation — Thu, 08 Sep 2005 01:54:56 +0000

Replacing A CEO

Brad Feld has some interesting thoughts on replacing a CEO. It does not sound like an easy decision, even in the private company context.