FMIA Guest: Kim Pegula On Lessons Learned Leading Bills During Covid

[Mark Long Beach]

I really enjoyed her piece.   Of course there's a bunch of PR in there.  Why wouldn't there be?

 

But I appreciate the open discussion with greater details of people and the ideas and some actions being done.  It's not a series of marketing slogans.  "Black Lives Matter" is a slogan, but it's only a shortcut for discussions around injustice.  I don't just want a slogan, I want action.   Creating awareness allows action to be understood, accepted and followed.  I like what they've done and their explanations around it.

 

Kim Pegula is an easy target.   She's female.  A minority.  Married into money.  In major power position.  Replacing men before her that she's both hired and fired. Made multiple mistakes. AND she's in charge of our beloved sports team. 

 

Mistakes have made no doubt.  Mistakes will always be made when doing new things.   But if something isn't working, STOP doing it.   You wouldn't believe how many people keep doing the things that don't work.  I also want to see success.   Constant change from lack of success is bad too.

 

I've seen lots of good things from Kim and to a lesser extent Terry.  Important admissions of failure and success with logical thoughts behind it.   The goal is long term success and I believe we will have it with the Pegulas, with Kim in particular as an important reason for it.

 

 

[The Dean]

9 minutes ago, Mark Long Beach said:

I really enjoyed her piece.   Of course there's a bunch of PR in there.  Why wouldn't there be?

 

 

 

 

 

 

I did fail to mention in my first post that, yes there is a lot of PR in there. As you note, of course that is to be expected. 

 

And words are just that. The questions are, do those words reflect what is actually going on? Or if not, then will they make the changes necessary for the actions to match the words. 

 

But based solely on the words, I think she did an excellent job.

[Mr. WEO]

3 minutes ago, The Dean said:

 

 

Speaking of overly combative...

 

I can't even decipher your question.

 

If someone gets fired they will be pissed. I was pissed when I found out I was cut out of my father's will. (I was restored a few years later, not that it matters much given the amount of money that will be left. ?)  But we are still family. 

 

Are you suggesting they should be happy because they were treated like individuals by a caring organization even though they lost their job or the whole family thing is BS? Again, words mean different things in different contexts.

 

And he words are  her words, not internet BS. But most comments are written by anonymous posters, not well thought out and simply meant to incite. Like most of your posts, IMO. But trolls will troll. 

 

Not that you are worth my time, but I have worked for companies (and bosses) who treated the staff like meat and others that have treated their employees more like "family". Even when I finally left the company, the difference in the experience while there was dramatic. 

Wow...I bet you could have been even more disingenuous with far fewer words!   

 

Anyway my question was very simple, your bizarre family issue non sequitur not withstanding.  I will slow it down for you though (I’m a helper): 

 

If you were laid off by your company due to its reported financial distress, how would you react to your former  boss’s subsequent boast of arranging  private jet travel for an employee (“family”) who is a millionaire, so this employee would not have to travel on a commercial airline?

 

most wouldn’t huff and puff as much while struggling to answer that one...

[The Dean]

11 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

Wow...I bet you could have been even more disingenuous with far fewer words!   

 

Anyway my question was very simple, your bizarre family issue non sequitur not withstanding.  I will slow it down for you though (I’m a helper): 

 

If you were laid off by your company due to its reported financial distress, how would you react to your former  boss’s subsequent boast of arranging  private jet travel for an employee (“family”) who is a millionaire, so this employee would not have to travel on a commercial airline?

 

most wouldn’t huff and puff as much while struggling to answer that one...

 

 

I think I answered that, but I'll try one more time:

 

If I was laid off by a company I'd be pissed. Period. I'd probably wouldn't interpret anything they said publicly very positively.  The question I would ask is, years later when they've had several/many jobs, "did you like your experience with the company? Do you think they treated you well and fairly when you were there?" Asking anyone anything about their former company right after being sacked isn't a very intelligent way to get an honest, well thought out or reasonable response, most of the time.

 

But since companies layoff/fire/don't renew contracts all the time, then should a company NEVER speak/write publicly about the positive aspects of their culture (or at least what then consider to be positive)?  So, because a recently released employee might not find your public comments acceptable, a company should make no public comments?

Edited July 7, 2020 by The Dean

[Mr. WEO]

1 minute ago, The Dean said:

 

 

I think I answered that, but I'll try one more time:

 

If I was laid off by a company I'd be pissed. Period. I'd probably wouldn't interpret anything they said publicly very positively.  The question I would ask is, years later when they've had several/many jobs, "did you like your experience with the company? Do you think they treated you well and fairly when you were there?" Asking anyone anything about their former company right after being sacked isn't a very intelligent way to get an honest, well thought out or reasonable response, most of the time.

 

But since companies layoff/fire/don't renew contracts all the time, then should a company NEVER speak/write publicly about the positive aspects of their culture (or at least what then consider to be positive)?  So, because a recently released employee might not find your public comments acceptable, a company should make no public comments?

 

 

Boasting about how you treat your workers like family after laying off dozens and using the example she did is definitively "tone deaf".

 

There is no way you can argue otherwise.  It was a ridiculous point she made with the worst possible example.  This is easy.

[The Dean]

1 minute ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

Boasting about how you treat your workers like family after laying off dozens and using the example she did is definitively "tone deaf".

 

There is no way you can argue otherwise.  It was a ridiculous point she made with the worst possible example.  This is easy.

 

 

What's the magic number?

 

I worked for a company that laid off almost 1/3 of their staff (and draconian budget cuts) all while the CEO was completely remodeling her office and the executive staff (including me) spent an obnoxious amount of money on a Napa retreat, complete with fabulous dinners including  $200 bottles of wine, croquet, fancy crystal for wives and spouses, etc. When we returned she went on a 2 week vacation. THAT was tone deaf.

 

Another company I worked for, that operated much differently, was forced to reduce staff during a rough business period. The CEO or upper management did it in person. We all knew changes were coming (I survived only to bag out about 6 months later). The experiences were completely different. I can't remember the statement the company made in the aftermath, but to me, it was very nuanced and not tone deaf at all. 

 

When it come to the Bills and the challenges reduced revenue will bring she says:

Quote

Not knowing what next season may look like, we decided to suspend bonuses, raises, overtime and put in a hiring freeze. That’s a hard message to send to a staff that made the playoffs. Along with our legal and HR teams, I had to decide, do we suspend vacation time? How long will we pay employees not able to work from home? Who is considered essential and what if they live with a healthcare worker

 

That doesn't strike me as tone deaf at all. Remember, this was an article for a FOOTBALL site. No she didn't talk too much about the Sabres layoffs. But she made it clear, they sucked! Changes were coming no matter what the economic impact, I believe.

 

But here's the WEO thing of it all.  Of all the things she  discussed, you are concentrating on one small aspect of the entire article and giving it the most severe interpretation. Congratulations. You make all trolls proud.

 

[Mango]

46 minutes ago, Mark Long Beach said:

I really enjoyed her piece.   Of course there's a bunch of PR in there.  Why wouldn't there be?

 

But I appreciate the open discussion with greater details of people and the ideas and some actions being done.  It's not a series of marketing slogans.  "Black Lives Matter" is a slogan, but it's only a shortcut for discussions around injustice.  I don't just want a slogan, I want action.   Creating awareness allows action to be understood, accepted and followed.  I like what they've done and their explanations around it.

 

Kim Pegula is an easy target.   She's female.  A minority.  Married into money.  In major power position.  Replacing men before her that she's both hired and fired. Made multiple mistakes. AND she's in charge of our beloved sports team. 

 

Mistakes have made no doubt.  Mistakes will always be made when doing new things.   But if something isn't working, STOP doing it.   You wouldn't believe how many people keep doing the things that don't work.  I also want to see success.   Constant change from lack of success is bad too.

 

I've seen lots of good things from Kim and to a lesser extent Terry.  Important admissions of failure and success with logical thoughts behind it.   The goal is long term success and I believe we will have it with the Pegulas, with Kim in particular as an important reason for it.

 

 

 

Some good points here. But a point of contention. I actually don’t see much of a change from Terry “scheming” with Regier without looping in Ted Black. They continue to push a flat management structure, even mentioning it on their zoom call a few weeks ago. They continue to hire people they are comfortable with rather than people who are good at their jobs and elevating them to be better. They quite literally keep doing the same exact thing and producing the same terrible results. 
 

I have questioned some of the moves from McBeane. But holy hell, if the Sabres are the basement of what this ownership is capable of, lock up McBeane for whatever the hell they want for the next 30 years. 

[Mr. WEO]

5 minutes ago, The Dean said:

 

 

What's the magic number?

 

I worked for a company that laid off almost 1/3 of their staff (and draconian budget cuts) all while the CEO was completely remodeling her office and the executive staff (including me) spent an obnoxious amount of money on a Napa retreat, complete with fabulous dinners including  $200 bottles of wine, croquet, fancy crystal for wives and spouses, etc. When we returned she went on a 2 week vacation. THAT was tone deaf.

 

Another company I worked for, that operated much differently, was forced to reduce staff during a rough business period. The CEO or upper management did it in person. We all knew changes were coming (I survived only to bag out about 6 months later). The experiences were completely different. I can't remember the statement the company made in the aftermath, but to me, it was very nuanced and not tone deaf at all. 

 

When it come to the Bills and the challenges reduced revenue will bring she says:

 

That doesn't strike me as tone deaf at all. Remember, this was an article for a FOOTBALL site. No she didn't talk too much about the Sabres layoffs. But she made it clear, they sucked! Changes were coming no matter what the economic impact, I believe.

 

But here's the WEO thing of it all.  Of all the things she  discussed, you are concentrating on one small aspect of the entire article and giving it the most severe interpretation. Congratulations. You make all trolls proud.

 

 
Yes she described the same decisions every other small business owner everywhere has had to make....businesses that did not have most if not all of their expenses covered (and profit all but guaranteed)...just by being IN the business.  

 

So why then mention how well she treated the employee who least needed her unwarranted largess in a time of “financial” distress? 
 

Tossing “troll” out there has always been the only arrow in your tiny intellectual quiver, but....fire away I guess.  As always, I’ll watch it nose dive into the dirt. 

[oldmanfan]

5 minutes ago, Mango said:

 

Some good points here. But a point of contention. I actually don’t see much of a change from Terry “scheming” with Regier without looping in Ted Black. They continue to push a flat management structure, even mentioning it on their zoom call a few weeks ago. They continue to hire people they are comfortable with rather than people who are good at their jobs and elevating them to be better. They quite literally keep doing the same exact thing and producing the same terrible results. 
 

I have questioned some of the moves from McBeane. But holy hell, if the Sabres are the basement of what this ownership is capable of, lock up McBeane for whatever the hell they want for the next 30 years. 

Well, not really with the Sabres.  They had Lindy (maybe should never have let him

leave).  They hired a former vacuous winning coach in Bylsma, a guy recognized as ready for his shot in Housley.  Same with Murray and Botterill, two guys people thought were ready to ascend.  People talk about Patty but he did the same bail out with the Islanders so who knows what really happened there.

 

i see Ralph and Kevyn as their attempt to get the McBean for the Sabres.  A HC who preaches process and works well with th players along with a GM in synch with the HC.

[Lurker]

2 hours ago, The Dean said:

you might come to appreciate an employer that actually cares about their staff and values them as individuals. 

 

The NFL has the quinisential "interchangeable automatons" labor dynamic.   The players know it, the owners know it. 

 

The only ones who don't seem to be a fair percentage of the fans who nod their heads at PR pieces like Kim's...

[RiotAct]

2 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

Boasting about how you treat your workers like family after laying off dozens and using the example she did is definitively "tone deaf".

 

There is no way you can argue otherwise.  It was a ridiculous point she made with the worst possible example.  This is easy.

especially with the whole “maintain the current lifestyle” thing that came to light a few months ago.

[AlCowlingsTaxiService]

4 hours ago, oldmanfan said:

The only owner I can think of that has had actual pro playing experience in their sport is Jeter.  Jerruh played college football but not pros.  If I’m missing any let me know, but this is why I have always found the concept that an owner is bad because they don’t understand a given sport is kind of silly.

 

I found the column enlightening and gave insights into what she and Terry are trying to do and the challenges they face.  Parts of it came off as tone deaf, but overall it was a very interesting read.

A good owner generally knows what they don’t know, and delegate authority in those areas to those who do know. Seems to me as relatively new owners, the Pegulas haven’t yet quite figured that out on the hockey side. Their hires weren’t bad hires:  most in the know expected GMJB, Housley and Bylsma to succeed, yet they didn’t. If they can bumble their way to find a hockey version of McBeane,  all likely will be forgiven 

[AlCowlingsTaxiService]

8 hours ago, Doc said:

 

She might not have been the one who built the empire, but that doesn't even make her close to "dumb."  To say so is idiotic.

 

 

LOL!  No results?  Where, in the NHL?  This is a Bills board.  Take complaints about that team to that board.

She’s certainly a smart woman, but to deny her husbands financial influence on her ascent would be short sighted. Hillary Clinton is also smart, but would most likely be just another Little Rock lawyer without slick Willies influence. 

[Doc]

Just now, AlCowlingsTaxiService said:

She’s certainly a smart woman, but to deny her husbands financial influence on her ascent would be short sighted. Hillary Clinton is also smart, but would most likely be just another Little Rock lawyer without slick Willies influence. 

 

Not denying Terry's role at all.  Just saying that calling her "dumb" is dumb.

[Mango]

1 hour ago, RiotAct said:

especially with the whole “maintain the current lifestyle” thing that came to light a few months ago.

Not just that, I found it a bit manipulative. I worked for a family like this for a number of years while I started my career, waiting tables and bar tending to help pay the bills. They assume that their employees can’t take care of themselves, then hold it over their head. Specifically speaking to the Feliciano (I think it was him) story about chattering a plane for his pregnant wife. The Pegulas didn’t charter a plane for them. They didn’t donate their plane. They helped make the contact. JF is a millionaire with an agent, who represents other millionaires. Who is part of an agency that represents even more millionaires. It’s like bragging about being a good neighbor for helping the guy next door find somebody to work on his transmission. It’s silly. 
 

Literally the entire thing was damage control. For their layoffs and a decade of failure with the Sabres. She said almost nothing.

[Buftex]

3 minutes ago, Mango said:

 

Literally the entire thing was damage control. For their layoffs and a decade of failure with the Sabres. She said almost nothing.

This might be a fair criticism, if there was evidence that the owners failures with the Sabres were the result of penny-pinching, and lack of effort.  I don't believe that to be the case.

[Mango]

4 minutes ago, Buftex said:

This might be a fair criticism, if there was evidence that the owners failures with the Sabres were the result of penny-pinching, and lack of effort.  I don't believe that to be the case.

You don’t have to be cheap and lazy to be really bad at your job. You can bust your ass with tons of cash and still fail. 

[Buftex]

1 hour ago, Mango said:

You don’t have to be cheap and lazy to be really bad at your job. You can bust your ass with tons of cash and still fail. 

No *****. I wasn't arguing anything to the contrary. My point was, there are plenty of pro-sports owners that put in less effort, and spend less money who have the same results... franchises that have been mediocre at best for decades.  I will take the owners that try, and fail, over the ones that are simply cashing checks. If you never put in the effort, you are just waiting to hit lightening in a bottle. I guess I  just think the attitude about them is pretty *****.  We are talking about 1 of their 2 teams, aren't we? 

[Mr. WEO]

7 hours ago, Mango said:

Not just that, I found it a bit manipulative. I worked for a family like this for a number of years while I started my career, waiting tables and bar tending to help pay the bills. They assume that their employees can’t take care of themselves, then hold it over their head. Specifically speaking to the Feliciano (I think it was him) story about chattering a plane for his pregnant wife. The Pegulas didn’t charter a plane for them. They didn’t donate their plane. They helped make the contact. JF is a millionaire with an agent, who represents other millionaires. Who is part of an agency that represents even more millionaires. It’s like bragging about being a good neighbor for helping the guy next door find somebody to work on his transmission. It’s silly. 
 

Literally the entire thing was damage control. For their layoffs and a decade of failure with the Sabres. She said almost nothing.

 

 

"For years we've watched the National Rifle Association use Charlton Heston as a figurehead," Pegula said, adding, "For us to have a face, as an African-American, at least a face that could be in the media, we could fall in behind that."

[Just Joshin']

7 hours ago, Mango said:

 

Literally the entire thing was damage control. For their layoffs and a decade of failure with the Sabres. She said almost nothing.

Maybe the Sabres were not mentioned because it was for a football website.