I hold no brief for British Airways and their merger with American Airlines, but I wonder if others reacted in the same way as me to the interview this morning on Today with Willie Walsh and Richard Branson. Branson was appalling. He stuttered his way through the interview, seemed not to have marshalled his arguments and was living in the 1990s. His chief executive should have done the interview. He would have been able to fire back at Walsh.
It's a real lesson in media management which I suspect Branson's people will be too frightened to tell him.
25 comments:
Living in the 1990s? Miaow, Iain. You b***h.
Personally, I liked the 1990s...
But Branson's radio presentations have always been poor.
perhaps the fact that he has dyslexia does not help - as my son is struggling with this at present and has problems communicating maybe you should give him a break Iain. You ran a bookshop Richard Branson has done slightly better give him a break for christs sake.
Hilarious! I wasn't aware that dyslexia affected the conduct of an interview. Give him a break? The man wasn't briefed. Did you actually hear the interview?
What did that man do to upset you? You never miss an opportunity to slag him off.
Untrue. I fly Virgin whem I got to the US generally. I did slag off their departures procedure some time ago, but I don't recall any other occasion. Enlighten me!
I just thought it was an incredibly bad interview performance from someone who clearly wasn't on top of their subject.
Iain - I agree Branson was appalling - Walsh won that about 6-2.
I find he is normally very good, but clearly he came with a pre prepared bit and was not expecting Walsh to take a slight diversion from the script. Branson could not cope.
for good standup presentation michael o'leary from easyjet leaves messrs walsh and branson standing
He was better later on BBC Breakfast
Maybe it was because he nearly lost his balls in his bungee jumping of a Las Vegas hotel recently http://ayyyy.com/2007/10/11/dope-on-a-rope/
I suppose it was Branson.Stuttering less-has he been for media training at long last?They'll have to find some tougher meat for Willie to chew up next time.
Why is it when Branson is such a successful business man that I find it very very difficult to watch and listen to him and think of a snake oil salesman?
I try to like and support those people that have brought so much employment to this country but with Sir Richard Branson he is just so unlikeable.
am I alone?
I watched him on Sky this morning, and he came across as a spolit little boy, who kept changing the percentage figure that BA/AA would hold of the market. I think he was not briefed properly by his PR people, nor was the back-drop up to the normal Branson standard. Very poor
O'Leary should have done it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfIY24BErBE
The idiot is backing all the wrong causes - time he retired and went back to selling condoms!
I cannot understand all the venom and spleen venting and the corrosive twitter about a man who is probably the single biggest asset to brand UK.
Ask anybody in the street to name the head of a major corporation and nine times out of ten you will hear "Richard Branson" - he is his own brand identity and only the Queen and the Pope get near him on that score.
His employees have a high satisfaction level and he is infinitely approachable. Many employees have a "Richard" story to tell about a meeting with him.
He is not an angel. But he is dealing with the likes of Willy Walsh and BA, who are prepared to risk jail to screw him ( and you) over.
Let us be clear, he is powerful and nicer than Michael O'Leary. He is offering flights to stranded XL punters at £75 a pop and Michael O'Leary is doing FA.
Branson is a well known dyslexic. It is not unusual for someone with this to be poor in certain communicative skills, and yet he does it and he works like stink.
Why on earth do you little people think it's ok to rubbish an entrepreneur, a great English eccentric and a valuable contributor to our economy.
By all means criticise him for shoddy business practices (if you can find any, which I doubt)and keep a sharp eye on his motives, but calling him "a snake-oil" salesman, and lambasting him for stuttering is cheap and shitty.
gotta go with the weasel.....
Branson's inability to defend or put a case is well known. There was a toe curling interview once on Panorama about his train company. He thought he was going to talk big vision stuff etc., but when the interviewer asked him detailed questions he went to pot, and tried to stop the interview.
His strengths are twofold. One he puts on a show and generates publicity with stunts. These create the impression that the Virgin Empire is bigger than it really is. He is very good at it. Second, he is smart enough to hire good people to run his companies. And he has some very able people working for him.
I don't really care about his stunts or bleating. Its all self-serving. And to be expected One thing that does bother me is the way his empire is financially structured. It mostly seems to be offshore in BVI, for reasons of secrecy and lower taxes. Nothing unlawful in that of course. But it does catch in the craw when he presents himself as a man of the British people etc. with populist gestures. Paying taxes here would be a more meaningful contribution to his fellow citizens than stunts wouldn't it?
Clearly Branson is a very successful business man but I'm certain he hasn't achieved these heights by being the 'man of the people' he presents himself as being.
I remember too well the failed bid for the Lottery franchise and the subsequent nod from Blair that he'd get it a second time around... Branson, spitefully said that 'he didn't want it now'! And that was after months of telling the nation how much better he'd be at running the thing (and how rubbish Camelot have been)... Between him and the Government, they ruined an existing success story and I don't think the Lottery has attracted the huge numbers of players since then.
I don't have a lot of sympathy for Branson. Sure BA have used their muscle to keep him out of the market somewhat but then Branson isn't trying to compete with BA on a level playing field, he simply wants (even expects) to be allowed to poach BA's most profitable routes. Meanwhile he shows little interest in taking over the less profitable routes that BA and others also operate.
Personally, I rather like the man... but I'd never do business with him.
When he appeared as a new young entrepreneur years ago, I liked him for his enthusiasm and ideas. Now, he wants to dabble on anything and everything media, leisure and travel etc.. etc.. I subscribe to his internet broadband and my experience is that the delivery is poor and the service is expensive. His Virgin Money invests poorly. His Virgin stores sells movie DVDs at a price a third more expensive than say at HMV stores.
He should stop getting into every market and concentrate running his existing ones better.
Wrinkled Weasle
One of the reasons that people like me do not trust him ishis relentless self promotion.
It frequently comes across as 'look at me look at me'
I have been a regular user of his trains need I say any more about what I think of the services he provides
Who needs to be an orator in his position?
Branson is not, and has never been, an asset to anyone except for himself.
I have dealt with him personally on a number of occasions and his cuddly public image is a far cry from his selfish, arrogant and often quite stupid real persona.
Let's also not forget that his initial break in business was a VAT fraud for which he was apprehended but, after the intervention of his High Court Judge father, not prosecuted like anyone else would have been.
Branson is a self serving secretive businessman just like many others, there is really nothing that special about him other than his talent for self publicity.
Branson projects a rebellious 'anti business' ,'down with the kids' persona. For that reason, he is a monstrous hypocrite. I'm not sure he even has the sense to realise it.
Iain Dale said...
"Untrue."
Okay Iain. I'll take your word for it. Sorry.
Post a Comment