Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Automattic's board forces CEO Matt Mullenweg into leave of absence

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 351 posts

Re: Automattic's board forces CEO Matt Mullenweg into leave of absence

#151

Post by FreakLegion »

Spinfusor wrote: post #49
reticulates wrote: post #27

I think it is easy to underestimate how big of a deal this is. Matt has a stranglehold on Automattic and Wordpress, it is not possible to remove his control over the ecosystem and he is volatile. Ousting him as CEO is almost certain to cause a major reaction from Matt, so, for Automattic to make this decision is a very big deal. The right decision for the long term but the hard decision. I expect we will see Matt try…

If he has 84% voting share, can't he just fire the board?

In most venture-backed companies no, because board seats are one of the things you give major investors in exchange for their money.

In this case? Possibly! Ann Dunwoody and Sue Decker look like independents, and he might be able to unilaterally replace either or both of them.

Re: Automattic's board forces CEO Matt Mullenweg into leave of absence

#152

Post by jrflowers »

> One person speculated that the timing may have something to do with Mullenweg’s annual trip to the Burning Man festival, after which he tends to return “with ideas.” This year’s festival ended on September 7.

HN needs to allow some html in comments so we can put ‘lmao’ in and tags

Re: Automattic's board forces CEO Matt Mullenweg into leave of absence

#153

Post by FreakLegion »

chris_wot wrote: post #56
Spinfusor wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If he has 84% voting share, can't he just fire the board?

If Mullenweg attempts to fire the board that just suspended him, he would be weaponizing proxy votes against the very investors who originally granted them. While founder proxies are often structured to be irrevocable, using them to purge the board would almost certainly trigger a massive legal battle, attempts by investors to breach or revoke the proxy agreements, and severe financial instability for the company. Wh…

> While he technically holds the votes required to disband the board

This is very unlikely. True Ventures almost certainly controls at least one seat. (Until Phil Black left last year they actually held two seats, but that doesn't mean they had the right to. Either way, at the moment it's just Toni Schneider.)

Re: Automattic's board forces CEO Matt Mullenweg into leave of absence

#154

Post by throwup238 »

munificent wrote: post #110

> One person speculated that the timing may have something to do with Mullenweg’s annual trip to the Burning Man festival, after which he tends to return “with ideas.” This line is so perfectly on the nose it could be in a McSweeney's article and yet here it is in reality. We are truly on the weirdest timeline.

Many Burning Man guides, including the original arctic monkey guide that I first read about 20 years ago, specifically warn against making any life altering decisions for weeks after Burning Man.

Decompression is a bitch when coming down from half a dozen psychedelics.

Re: Automattic's board forces CEO Matt Mullenweg into leave of absence

#155

Post by riffraff »

ljm wrote: post #111
Spinfusor wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If he has 84% voting share, can't he just fire the board?

If he's lost the confidence of the board and does that, how much is his company worth?

Does it matter? He owns it and doesn't plan to flip it, and they have enough income to go on for a long time.

Re: Automattic's board forces CEO Matt Mullenweg into leave of absence

#156

Post by Aurornis »

ChoosesBarbecue wrote: post #20

I am so curious why now, what changed? The WPEngine saga was started two years ago.

Unless there's a full on scandal or emergency, boards don't force CEOs out quickly. This would have been building for years with multiple rounds of trying to de-escalate and get the situation under control.

Re: Automattic's board forces CEO Matt Mullenweg into leave of absence

#157

Post by plorkyeran »

rpgbr wrote: post #105
gkoberger wrote: post #8

Unfortunately, this is for the best. WordPress powers a large percentage of the internet, and I'm not sure what's going on with Matt (who I've always liked) but something turned the past few years. He's been behind unforced error after unforced error as CEO, and I hope a break helps him gain some perspective (although I don't see him being brought back). WordPress has been his life for 23 years. Doing the same thing…

"Unfortunately" for whom? I'm pretty ok, even happy, with him out.

The unfortunate part is that he became someone you’re happy to see out. I think he’s absolutely become a net negative for Wordpress, but that wasn’t always the case.

Re: Automattic's board forces CEO Matt Mullenweg into leave of absence

#158

Post by ValentineC »

SwellJoe wrote: post #148
pathartl wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not convinced that sort of legacy lock in exists in the web space. It moves fast and its value is in the content. In the age of AI, migrating that data makes it trivial to move away from a risky platform. I cut my development teeth on WP and managed some fairly large sites. There are far more interesting and well developed alternatives out there.

Sure, but, even with AI and the technical competence to steer it, it's still a pretty big lift to switch from, e.g. WordPress with billing and various other stuff to some ad hoc other thing. Even when I decided I was done with managing content in WordPress and moved it out to a Hugo static site for my company website, I still kept the commerce stuff in WordPress just because it works and we know it works from a decad…

They'll continue to have plenty of existing passive revenue as long as WooCommerce users continue to use Stripe, and large enterprises continue to buy in to WP.com VIP.

Re: Automattic's board forces CEO Matt Mullenweg into leave of absence

#159

Post by consp »

gottorf wrote: post #77
datakan wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Had a President make a big ordeal about leaving "for health reasons". His LinkedIn had him at a new company within a couple months doing the same thing. Had a CISO leave for "personal" reasons. Talked to him a couple years later and yeah, he was fired. Steal 20$ out of a cash register and make the local news. Waste a billion dollars at a corp and make insane decisions and ride out on a golden parachute. Its a fucked…

In fairness, I don't think stealing $20 makes the local news these days, unless you live in a town of 300 people. There's a lot of antisocial behavior that goes unreported. But moreover: I guess there's a presumption, whether fair or not, that well-paid executives overseen by wealthy boards of directors are pre-vetted and act in good faith, whether or not those actions pan out and make money; versus robbery or violen…

I would argue there is a broad difference in ethicality and reason between the bottom and top of the food chain, making these examples less clear cut. If your plan as a low level employee doesn't work out you still get fired and the consequences are far greater.

Re: Automattic's board forces CEO Matt Mullenweg into leave of absence

#160

Post by dylan604 »

Aurornis wrote: post #149
datakan wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Had a President make a big ordeal about leaving "for health reasons". His LinkedIn had him at a new company within a couple months doing the same thing. Had a CISO leave for "personal" reasons. Talked to him a couple years later and yeah, he was fired. Steal 20$ out of a cash register and make the local news. Waste a billion dollars at a corp and make insane decisions and ride out on a golden parachute. Its a fucked…

> Steal 20$ out of a cash register and make the local news. Waste a billion dollars at a corp and make insane decisions and ride out on a golden parachute. Getting pushed out of a position is very career damaging at the executive level. Those golden parachutes are pretty rare, too. Most of the executives I know from companies you haven't heard of (and some that you maybe have) who were pushed out took a huge hit to t…

> And come on, stealing $20 doesn't register these days

and come on, you know exactly what is meant here. An individual steals something, they get punished. Executives of the largest banks create a scheme that ultimately crashes the world economy and nobody goes to jail. Quibbling on the example's use of $20 is just strange

Post reply on HN