dcl0sc
Striker
For doing what she was told?Surely she has to take some responsibility for the financial shitshow we turned ourselves into?
Very harsh.Good riddance.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
For doing what she was told?Surely she has to take some responsibility for the financial shitshow we turned ourselves into?
Very harsh.Good riddance.
There's at least one misogynistic comment on this thread tbf, but I generally agree. Lowes didn't inspire much of the grubbier stuff on here, thankfully. Probably due to her relatively low profile. That being said, there's plenty of posters on here who will have decided about her competence long before there was tangible evidence available simply because she's a woman. That was certainly the case on here with Byrne long before it became clear she was poor at her job. That's just human nature, unfortunately.I think that a bit of an easy out mate.
She's overseen everything from almost overspending into financial oblivion under Short to penny pinching asset stripping under Donald and everything in between. If a man was FD and this had happened his sex would not even be mentioned - just his incompetence. A bit like Rodwell. She doesn't get criticism because she's a woman in my opinion based on the very limited amount of threads there have been on her and I don't recall seeing any sexist or misogynistic comments about her on here. Just comments about the general financial performance of the club under her watch.
Yes, it is. When I was training only people in the corporate recovery department did ACCA, not sure why that was. But the departing FD qualified in 1999, after she had left public practice. I know plenty of colleagues who got bounced from the firm for failing ACA exams and then qualified ACCA or CIMA working in industry though.Really? That's unusual. My wife qualified ACCA (now FCCA) from PW, and that's only because she was working in the trust department, and was part-qualified when she joined. As I recall, she was the only certified in the Birmingham office.
There's at least one misogynistic comment on this thread tbf, but I generally agree. Lowes didn't inspire much of the grubbier stuff on here, thankfully. Probably due to her relatively low profile. That being said, there's plenty of posters on here who will have decided about her competence long before there was tangible evidence available simply because she's a woman. That was certainly the case on here with Byrne long before it became clear she was poor at her job. That's just human nature, unfortunately.
Yes, it is. When I was training only people in the corporate recovery department did ACCA, not sure why that was. But the departing FD qualified in 1999, after she had left public practice. I know plenty of colleagues who got bounced from the firm for failing ACA exams and then qualified ACCA or CIMA working in industry though.
For doing what she was told?
Very harsh.![]()
Not if the owner is writing a chequeSurely she has to take some responsibility for the financial shitshow we turned ourselves into?
She was a club director and sat on the board for 10 years, if she's not responsible for financial management then what was her job? It may well be that her hands were tied and she was working in difficult circumstances but her job title and board level position suggests at least some level of responsibility and influence though.
Anyone categorically stating on here that she was bad at her job or we're well rid is poor form though, as only people who have worked with her directly would know what she's really been like. Could just be that KLD wants to bring in his own senior team and she's pretty replaceable.
Not if the owner is writing a cheque
If I was raising valid objections and being ignored, that would be my signal to start looking for another job where I'd actually be valued,
Yep agree,plus isnt one of KLD new directors earmarked for this.Imight of misread but sure at least one is a financial wizardShe was a club director and sat on the board for 10 years, if she's not responsible for financial management then what was her job? It may well be that her hands were tied and she was working in difficult circumstances but her job title and board level position suggests at least some level of responsibility and influence though.
Anyone categorically stating on here that she was bad at her job or we're well rid is poor form though, as only people who have worked with her directly would know what she's really been like. Could just be that KLD wants to bring in his own senior team and she's pretty replaceable.
I agree, but in that situation she can only really advice, rspecially if you have an owner will to cover the losses each month.The owner writing an annual cheque to cover all losses should not absolve our finance dept of all fiscal responsibility, any serious FD worth their salt would be able to see that it was unsustainable.
Depends on her priorities, perhaps she'd be unlikely to get a similar position/salary if she left?
Says a man who's clearly never done it and/or had his pet project vetoed because it was financially preposterous.
The owner writing an annual cheque to cover all losses should not absolve our finance dept of all fiscal responsibility, any serious FD worth their salt would be able to see that it was unsustainable.
Depends on her priorities, perhaps she'd be unlikely to get a similar position/salary if she left?
I am with you GOM. I have seen it close-up.
You can't have it both ways though. She was a director and boards share collective responsibility for the impact of their decisions. If she stayed because she liked the title and the money despite not being involved or listened to in decision making, then she's as open to criticism as if she had made all the poor decisions herself.The owner writing an annual cheque to cover all losses should not absolve our finance dept of all fiscal responsibility, any serious FD worth their salt would be able to see that it was unsustainable.
Depends on her priorities, perhaps she'd be unlikely to get a similar position/salary if she left?
I agree, but in that situation she can only really advice, rspecially if you have an owner will to cover the losses each month.
I'm sure she could see it was unsustainable, I think everyone in the club would see that, its seeing it and being able to do something about it.
You can't have it both ways though. She was a director and boards share collective responsibility for the impact of their decisions. If she stayed because she liked the title and the money despite not being involved or listened to in decision making, then she's as open to criticism as if she had made all the poor decisions herself.
You can't have it both ways though. She was a director and boards share collective responsibility for the impact of their decisions. If she stayed because she liked the title and the money despite not being involved or listened to in decision making, then she's as open to criticism as if she had made all the poor decisions herself.