|
Truth
will out. After months of rumour and speculation, the pieces of the puzzle as
to what exactly has been going on behind the scenes at Rupert Murdoch's Asian
arm are falling in place (or so we believe). Conversations
Indiantelevision.com has had with industry executives in India and Hong Kong aver
that the countdown to yesterday's announcement of Star CEO Michelle Guthrie's
departure had been set in motion months before. The first inklings of that came
with the creation last March of a new executive structure within Star wherein
Steve Askew was named president of Star Entertainment in addition to COO of Star;
and the appointment less than a month later, of Paul Aiello as president of Star.
Aiello's was a newly created role that put him in charge of developing strategic
and business directions for the pan Asian broadcaster while overseeing corporate
functions including business development, strategy and implementation, Star Ventures,
government affairs and corporate communications. Similarly,
the schism that has riven Star India these past months also directly links back
to events of March 2006 and the shake up in the Indian operations wherein two
units were created - Star Group and Star Entertainment - with Peter Mukerjea made
CEO of Star Group India and Sameer Nair promoted from COO Star India to CEO of
Star Entertainment India. More on that later though. Back
in Hong Kong, meanwhile, the next significant appointment was in September of
David Butorac as president, Platforms. That announcement marked the return to
the News Corp fold of a BSkyB veteran who was then COO of Malaysia's Astro DTH
operator. All
these moves are said to have been orchestrated out of London by BSkyB CEO and
now looking ever more likely heir to the Murdoch legacy, James Murdoch. That James
would have a personal interest in the affairs of Star is not surprising since
his three-year stint as chairman and CEO of Star marked his coming of age as an
entrepreneur. When
James joined Star in May 2000, Star was losing £100 million a year. When
he handed over charge to Guthrie in November 2003 Star's India operations were
extremely profitable and China was beginning to show profitability. Guthrie's
mandate was to drive the company further into these markets and steer it into
DTH, and pure pay TV plays with higher subscription revenues. In
both China (due to political reasons as much as anything) and India (the cycle
of change?) there has been a deceleration but that doesn't really tell the story.
One could argue that it is also down to the advantages of being an owner but there
is no getting away from the fact that during James' reign there was clarity and
simplicity in both executive chains of command as well as corporate structure
and direction. To
say that the executive command structure at Star today is convoluted would be
putting it kindly. And nothing exemplifies this better than the India operations
where there is a strategic/corporate CEO in Mukerjea, an operational CEO in Nair,
and a president in Paritosh Joshi responsible for managing revenues. And there
soon may even be a COO if reports of a move to India of long time Star Hong Kong
hand Sanjay Das pan out as true. We're surprised that the name of long-time Star
loyalist and former India business development head Jagdish Kumar has not cropped
up anywhere in the speculations. According
to our reading of the events of the past few months, James has been preparing
the ground for a return to the lean, mean management style that was in place earlier
and this could more than likely see more executive churn right through the Star
system. At the top of that list of potential near term departures is Askew, currently
on four months' sick leave. A
possible offshoot of this could be that James will sooner rather than later have
a far more role in running the affairs of Star, maybe take on a designation of
chairman of Star or some such.direct And
truth is that Star really means India, the rest of it being not much more than
feeder operations. So James will perforce have to send out a clear message there.
The present neither here nor there two-CEO proposition has proved an unmitigated
disaster. If
the head honchos at Star were convinced that Nair was the man to lead it into
the new and uncertain digital future then they should have gone with him and let
him do his job. The presence of a shadow CEO (Mukerjea) was a huge disservice
to Nair and even more so to Mukerjea, who had helmed the fortunes of Star India
in its period of greatest dominance. POSTSCRIPT:
The reasons for Nair's deciding to quit (informed sources say he put in his papers
on 28 December) remain shrouded in mystery because his is after all the most high
profile media chief executive's job in the country (shadow CEO notwithstanding).
If anyone could be said to have had reasons to quit it was Mukerjea, and by current
reckonings, both have resigned. So there is certainly some serious damage control
that newly inducted CEO Aiello has to deal with when he arrives in India on Monday. |