For those of you who, like me, sink too much time into CNBC programming, an analogy.
The Carolina Hurricanes are a failing business that is several steps removed from its former glory. Tom Dundon is Marcus Lemonis. He wouldn't have bought this company if there wasn't something good about it; the attendance numbers of 2006-2009 are good indicators that a huge market exists, especially since the market conditions are still similar (no new pro teams in the area).
But something has gone wrong. They were successful and began to rest on their laurels. And Tom/Marcus now has some digging to do. There's skeletons in the closet, processes that don't work like they use to, or perhaps never worked. The guy at the top isn't recognizing the talents of some of the people that already work within the company. There are good people here, but they're being overshadowed by bad processes or employees that may not be working. Tom/Marcus recognizes that some of the people who are the problem now may have been the same people that built them to glory before, but things have gone wrong. They will be fair, and give everyone an opportunity to shape up; this isn't a hostile takeover. But Tom/Marcus owns 51% of this business now, and he will introduce better processes and take advantage of the talents of his people. If people are standing in the way, and show no signs of changing, they will be removed and make way for those who are willing to collaboratively build the business back up.
Early in the episode, Tom/Marcus sits down with the leadership team and looks at the company finances (as he always does with a new business he acquires). And on the balance sheet he sees "what's this loss here? Radio broadcasting?" "Well, yes sir, he's been here for years, he's an institution with the Carolina Hurricanes. He was even here back when the business was in Hartford." "Well, let's have a chat with him."
Cutaway to documentary interview shot of Tom/Marcus discussing his actions in the episode: "I'm meeting with longtime employee Chuck Kaiton, who has undoubted mastered his craft, but is costing the business over $100,000 per year by not adapting his outdated business practices."
And etc.
(This should make very little sense to those who haven't seen the show.)
Based on the scraps that we've gotten, the case can be made that Dundon is not the bad guy in any of these transactions. Dundon got rid of Francis not because he doesn't care about the history of the team, but because he didn't seem to create a collaborative effort (Marcus Lemonis narration voice: the boss doesn't seem to include his employees in the decision making, and acts unilaterally to them, causing them to feel underappreciated, and potentially missing out on some great ideas). He got rid of Nieuwendyk because he didn't do anything (Lemonis narration voice: this business continues to bleed money by paying their friends, without consideration to the value, or lack thereof, they provide). And he parted ways with Chuck in what was likely a difficult decision (Lemonis narration voice: this one was difficult. Chuck has worked hard for this company for years, but his results were simply a drain on the business. Out of respect I gave him an offer to try to make things work at a salary that makes sense for the business, but it was a big cut for him, and I understand why he walked away).
And this isn't a case of Dundon axing everyone willy nilly to bring in his own guys, either. Evidence: both Don Waddell and Rod Brind'Amour already worked for the team. (Lemonis narration voice: it's important to me at any company I invest in that I sit down with every individual to get their take on the way things run around here. I often find that many of the best people to run a company are the ones that are already there, and underutilized for some reason). (Lemonis narration voice: I've been incredibly impressed with the attention to detail, effort, and past experience of Rod Brind'Amour. He knows the business well, and has gained my respect with his dedication to the business). (Lemonis narration voice: Don Waddell has been nothing but helpful to me thus far in my association with the business. While others seem to always put up roadblocks, Don always manages to communicate with me clearly, and when he talks, my BS meter doesn't go off). I can go on with Tulsky, others, etc etc.
I know he has garnered a bad reputation, but in all of his moves and everything I've read about him (definitely read the Burnside piece on The Athletic if you haven't) I can't see him as making anything but careful and calculated decisions for the better of the business. And I certainly can't read any sort of callous or cold intent based on what we know (although, if you want to consider how he made his fortune and count that against him, I can't argue).