So I heard this as a rumour yesterday and then it was confirmed by at least one member of staff I know at the park. Apparently a whole bunch of management was let go in the last couple of days including one CEO... Anyone else know details on this?

There was a small piece in the GC Bulletin a few days ago stating 6 Senior Staffers had been layed off will have a look to see if I still have it.

Edited August 6, 200817 yr by Jordan M

It is always sad when people get fired, even if you didn't like them. But damn, a decent sacking. Maybe MLE have decided to take the park in a "New" direction? One can only hope that the "New" direction is a decent Direction.

Yeah will be very interesting to see what changes if the CEO is gone.

Perhaps MDMC was the flop we all thought it was. Then again if its MLE, and not specifically DW, it might not be theme park related, as MLE covers a whole lot more than that...

It was a ML Attempt at cutbacks. Several positions were made 'redundant', and I hear theres a chance they arent finished yet. Although i will confirm that DW still has a CEO.

I want to make a correction that it is the COO (2nd in charge) and not the CEO that was axed... sorry for the initial minor error.

i think it sounds more like a DW cut off, seen as the article was in the gold coast bulletins, and i havent heard anything from a few mates of mine that are high up in AMF which are one of ML companies.

Hmm.. redundancies would probably reflect a defensive stance taken by DW to cut costs due to the current economic conditions (i.e. Lowish attendance or even cash spent per person). I wouldn't call it unexpected! Over the last month or so a number of big name companies have cut staff at the middle to upper management level and used the economic conditions as a reason. Whether or not this occurs at other theme parks is a mystery.. I guess it depends on how well they are performing in times of low disposable income...? I have always wondered how important the roles of these management types are when they can so easily be made redundant...!?! I mean a COO would obviously have a lot of importance in the company to hold such a title.. and then just to get rid of them? Do the rest of the lower management now share these roles and would they ask for extra $$$ to do so? I guess it's just business... TMB

It was nothing to do with DW, it was a ML decision. They were in park early-mid june evaluating all of the departments and staff, and looking for ways to cut back. The COO position was obviously deemed unnecessary and was therefore abolished. So were several other positions. It happens once every couple of years, they come through, they cut back, they leave. Always the same.

That's so weird because at WVTP the COO runs his but off, probably doing even more day to day than the CEO. It's bizarre that ML feel they don't need this position.

The COO position (or Chief Operating Officer) is in essence a redundant position - don't get me wrong - obviously WVTP's COO is valuable, but not every company requires one. The CEO can function as the COO also, but it depends on what roles are needed and utilised in each business. I used to work for a company owned by a husband and wife team. He was the CEO, and handled all of the financial and "business" related matters, while the COO handled all the staff and "people" related matters. They functioned very well as each had their own strengths which were complimented by the others strengths, and the tasks they performed were well suited to them. as the name implies, the Chief Operating Officer typically functions as a day-to-day operating style position - managing the daily jobs and tasks at hand, while the CEO steers the business, financial planning, forward thinking and planning etc. The CEO is typically the visionary and directional, whereas the COO finds out what the CEO's vision is, and then does the daily chores required to make the vision happen. In a large company, while a COO might do a lot, there isn't a whole lot that they do that cannot be done by the more minor and middle management. At the end of the day, it really is a position that isn't always necessary... but it certainly does help a business to have one.

Damn I got excited there for a minute. I was hoping Dreamworld's CEO Stephen Gregg might have been given the sack. Get rid of him and his pathetic sports related attractions I say!