But on the other hand, this is a corporation, and the real power is in the position of Chief Executive Officer -- the job we all know she should (if she has half the ambition she seems) truly desire. Not only that, but the rest of the world agrees she's the best candidate for the position. This perfect opportunity to give her the title for which her career has been grooming her? It's been passed over, and we all have to wonder: what were they thinking? and, will she ever be the bride? and, if you were her, wouldn't you be updating your profile on HotJobs about now?
Every deep discussion of the Semel resignation contains the same perplexed question. Various answers to the why not Sue? conundrum include "because she's not an outsider" and "I just don't know." Could it be because she doesn't have the coding geek background? Because she's a woman? Or is the board really (as many suggest, but I don't buy) just biding their time until ... something ... to name her CEO?
Come on. If Susan was going to be named CEO, now would be the time. Why put off any longer? If the board really was happy with her in the role, the job would be hers, effective immediately. Last time they reorganized the entire company to give her a new-and-improved title. This one, to me, says "you know honey, maybe you're just not CEO material." What do you think?
Gallery: The faces of Yahoo