Tuesday 22nd October 2013

Charles Morgan: plot thickens

Autocar reveals why Morgan board - and family - deposed Charles Morgan

---

There are always two sides to every story and last week's reports of Charles Morgan's shock departure from the firm set up by his own grandfather mainly gave his. Lingering suspicion there might be more to it than that appear to have been confirmed, Autocar reporting on having seen a document detailing four counts of misconduct that led the board to dismissing him.

The already very public spat between Morgan C and the board of Morgan Motor Company - which includes his sister, brother in law, two nephews and a niece - continues apace then, the public airing of dirty washing at least shedding light on the motivation for deposing him.

Support for Charles Morgan on Twitter continues, the man himself perhaps quieter on social media than he has been traditionally (no update to his blog, for instance) but his wife and friends keeping up the pressure for him to be reinstated. Something that appears increasingly unlikely in light of these revelations.

[Source: Autocar]

[rubystone]

I guess Morgan is privately owned? Is Charles "guilty" of running the company as if he owned it then? After all, to the world at large, Charles Morgan, not any number of persons with the name "Price", IS Morgan.

When I read the word "misconduct", I feared something really serious. Having read the article I see nothing of the sort and one might see these matters of "misconduct" as mere "convenience" in order to justify a decision which has its origins in "family matters".

After all, any privately owned company with such a public figure at its head would have sought to air its dirty washing behind closed doors. That fact that this is public suggests that there was a very serious breakdown within the walls at Pickersleigh Road.

[rubystone]

geepee said:

The reasons quoted do not seem to me to be enough for a dismissal - however I'm sure that will be decided in court.
A board of top execs? - Or a family with their own agenda.
If they were making that decision, and it was a considered decision - then they should have been better prepared for the ensuing PR disaster.
The fact that they're not better prepared leads me to believe that they have acted hastily and are now playing catch-up (badly).

Couldn't have put it better myself. Intrigued as to who owns the company though....