The material and information contained on this blog is for academic and educational purposes only. No representation is made about the accuracy of the information. By using this blog site you understand that this information is not provided in the course of an attorney-client relationship and is not intended to constitute legal advice. Transmission or receipt of information contained in this web site does not create an attorney-client relationship. Furthermore, transmission or receipt of any correspondence will not create an attorney-client relationship between you and any author of this blog. No assurance is given that any correspondence, via e-mail or otherwise, between you and any author will be secure or treated as confidential or privileged. Please do not send any author any confidential or privileged information. This blog site should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed attorney. Should the reader of this blog need legal advice or require an answer to a specific question, such advice be sought from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to serve as an advertisement or solicitation of legal or other business. In particular, the author does not intend or desire to solicit through this blog the business of anyone in any state or other jurisdiction where this web site, or the use thereof, may not be in compliance with any law or ethical rule.The material contained on this blog represents the personal views of the individual authors and do not necessarily represent the views of any organization that any author is affiliated with or with the views of any other author whom might post on this blog.
"I presided over the worst deal of the century, apparently."
Gerald Levin and Steve Case on CNBC two days ago. At least he recognizes that where the blame for that deal should lie. This was actually a very reflective discussion about the complications of doing big deals and responsibility in the C-Suite following the financial crisis.
Steve Case made an interesting comment when thinking about the AOL/TW deal. He said that AOL/TW might have been better off if the managements of both companies were swept out and the combined company were run by an entirely new management team. Much like a new administration sweeps out the old every four years in DC. AOL/TW might have been better off if the board got rid of the incumbent managers on both sides and hired a new set of hands to manage what was a new company. That's an interesting concept that will no doubt be unpopular. This segment is worth watching if you have the time.