Hey, lemouth, nice to hear back from you, with my next post I'll consider as linkedIn material I'll check the function again (Hive was blacklisted on twitter). Palnet was not showing the picture of my post (which is decisive to be recognized and seen) this time so I had to add it separately, let's see.

Thanks for the additional ERC link,one can turn and twist this whole event till vomiting. No. 4 for instance is for me the most lame argument. Everyone who has once been on top in a political position very well knows that an income needs to be secured anyway after one's appointment. Being still involved in his business activities made his position not a lethal one. There is also the question of whether one would like to have a (business) experienced practitioner at the top or an armchair ivory tower person. Well this "private public partnership" personified in Ferrari failed.

I've always wondered why some of my professors had such dusty views and were forced to become bureaucrats rather than interesting leadership personalities. In such an environment, with such a logic of running the risk of being cut off very quickly, one will beware of change. Many of the people I've met, for example in the United Nations, will never in their lives understand what entrepreneurship means. Bottom-up is also something completely different than re-potting a plant in a glass house, well that's the tension we have to bear. Ferrari may have asked the right questions at the right time with the wrong people.