Richard Parsons is giving up his position as chief executive officer at Time Warner (NYSE: TWX) to be replaced on Jan. 1 by Jeff Bewkes, the current president. Parsons is stepping down, not because the job is done but because his job is done. He is no longer the person for the job and that has become apparent to everyone, including him. There is no angst, there is no acrimony -- he has done some things very well during difficult times, but it's time to move on.

There are those who would have you believe that this move should have come earlier, myself included. But Parsons and the board were not working on my timetable. Parsons will retain his position as chairman of the company. Depending on how quickly his replacement, TWX president Jeff Bewkes implements his ideas for change, Parsons may be leaving a company that does not much resemble the one he has been leading the last few years.

AOL has already changed a lot. We have witnessed AOL being removed from the company name after billions of dollars of write-downs. AOL was converted to an advertising model instead of being subscription-based. It established partnerships with many other companies including Google Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG), which acquired a 5% stake for $1 billion and is now the primary search engine.

Time Warner Cable concluded its acquisition of Adelphia Cable and reorganized to form the independent Time Warner Cable (NYSE: TWC) and is struggling somewhat as the cable market changes with the telcos and satellite media providers joining in the competition for home users by bundling services.

Time Inc. has sold off some magazine titles, closed down others and is still trying to define where its future fortunes will be found.

Earlier today, CNBC's David Faber announced that he has word that Dick Parsons would be stepping down as Time Warner Inc.'s (NYSE:TWX) CEO effective December 31, 2007. Jeff Bewkes is the likely heir apparent, according to Faber, although it seems Parsons may remain as Chairman.

This change at the top may portend unit sales, roll-ups, spin-offs, and even may lead a change in the ownership of Time Warner Cable Inc. (NYSE:TWC).

Management change is becoming almost the norm today. Citigroup's (NYSE:C) Chuck Prince is out, finally, although having Bob Rubin involved for anything more than an interim basis will be a mistake.

Larry Fink has been named as a potential replacement-head for Merrill Lynch (NYSE:MER) and some even have noted that he could be offered top billing at Citigroup (NYSE:C).

You could almost view the break-up announcement of IAC/Interactive (NASDAQ:IACI) as a CEO exit because the five individual units already have the heads named and, at least as of now, Barry Diller is going to stay with the IAC/Interactive parent. He said he'd maintain some role in one or two of the spin-offs but not all of them.

Jon Ogg produces the 24/7 Wall St. Special Situation Investing Newsletter and he does not own securities in the companies he covers.

At a talk on September 20th at New York's 92nd Street Y, Lazard Ltd. (NYSE: LAZ) CEO Bruce Wasserstein took a swipe at Time Warner Inc. (NYSE: TWX), BloggingStocks' parent, for its moribund stock price. At the same time, Wasserstein patted himself on the back for taking all his chips off the table when the stock levitated above $18 following the publication of a Lazard report on Time Warner.

Lazard, which was hired by corporate raider Carl Icahn in February 2006, authored a 343 page report that argued for a breakup of Time Warner and a big stock buyback. Beyond its $5 million fee, Lazard's reward from Icahn was a bonus based on how far above $18 Time Warner stock went. Lazard's report estimated that Time Warner's breakup value ranged between $23.30 and $26.57. Following the report, Time Warner stock rose -- peaking at $22.73 on January 12, 2007 -- before declining to its current $18.99 -- about 50 cents a share above its price in February 2006.

While he claimed to like Time Warner management -- he called CEO Dick Parsons "a lovely, well-liked guy" and president Jeff Bewkes, "a highly regarded management kind of guy" -- Wasserstein blamed Time Warner's moribund stock price on their decision not to follow the recommendations in his report. Wasserstein thought Time Warner took one of his ideas -- a $20 billion stock buyback (Time Warner bought back $12 billion) -- but ignored his other suggestions -- to do more spin-offs and to run AOL more effectively.

There has been more than speculation that Yahoo (NASDAQ: YHOO) is near the center of Microsoft's (NASDAQ: MSFT) radar screen, but perhaps AOL-Yahoo would be better fit. Maybe a deal for AOL will be more likely once Jeff Bewkes replaces Richard Parsons as chief executive of Time Warner (NYSE: TWX). (The Wall Street Journal reported today that Bewkes is likely to take over from CEO Dick Parsons as early as Jan. 1, 2008).

One reason Microsoft does not own Yahoo already is that Yahoo is expensive. Maybe Yahoo has another path to follow. Maybe Yahoo and Time Warner could help each other out. If Time Warner set AOL free to merge with Yahoo than their combined forces might be a better competitor for both Google (NASDAQ: GOOG)and Microsoft.

The current five year deal between AOL and Google made Google the seach engine for the site and since it forked over $1 billlion for 5% of the business, the valuation if it were independant would be $20 billlion. More importantly at the time it was reported that 10% of Googles revenue was generated through AOL. That certainly was incentive to get a deal done. I have seen no current data on this but if it is somewhere in the vicinty then a Yahoo/AOL combination would reduce Googles stranglehold on search and add it to the new company. It might represent as much as a 20% swing in traffic and revenue.

If Yahoo were to be acquired by Microsoft, it would become a part of what is now a very large conglomerate. One that should give some thought to it's own lethargy. Microsoft is losing money on numerous hardware ventures and might be better off refocusing on software, both online and in the business environment. Now that Parsons is stepping aside to let Bewkes lead pehaps there will be the energy and insight to make a move.

On May 31st, BloggingStocks' parent company, Time Warner Inc.'s (NYSE: TWX) president Jeff Bewkes publicly mused about taking AOL public, according to paidContent.org.

Bewkes noted that AOL was at a competitive disadvantage due its lack of an "internet public currency." While that currency enabled AOL to offer $166 billion in stock to buy Time Warner back in January 2000, what would it be worth today?

$24 billion. That's one guess made by multiplying my estimate of AOL's 2007 revenues of $6 billion -- calculated by quadrupling AOL's Q1 2007 revenues of $1.5 billion -- by a price/sales ratio of 4. The latter is based on a review of the price/sales ratios of comparable pure-play internet content firms such as:

• Yahoo! Inc. (NASDAQ: YHOO): 5.9
• CNET Networks, Inc. (NASDAQ: CNET): 3.5
• Baidu.com Inc. (NASDAQ: BIDU): 37.1

I think such a public offering could unlock value because at $24 billion, AOL would be worth 30% of TWX's current $80 billion market capitalization, even though it represents only 12.5% of TWX revenues and a mere 4% of its assets. Moreover, AOL stock could motivate staff and fuel acquisitions.

Peter Cohan is president of Peter S. Cohan & Associates, a management consulting and venture capital firm. He also teaches management at Babson College and edits The Cohan Letter. He has no financial interest in Time Warner stock.

The New York Post reports that plans to make AOL email addresses free for high-speed customers are only the tip of the iceberg; in fact, they say, the Time Warner board is considering much more radical moves. Carl Icahn wanted to spin off underperforming units? Well, then, why not give shareholders what they want?!?

The plan the Post discusses seems much less radical than any Icahn could truly get excited about: they say Time Warner has been talking to the biggie media and internet companies about partnerships, and if that doesn't work out, the board might consider spinning off 20% of AOL to shareholders.

What is 20% of AOL worth? And which 20% might be released into the wilds? This seems an odd proposal, I'd be interested to hear any scuttlebutt you Time Warner watchers have heard on this rumored deal. But even more interesting is the balance of power between Time Warner president Jeffrey Bewkes -- perhaps heir to the Time Warner throne -- and AOL CEO Jon Miller, who the Post says is "playing second fiddle" to Bewkes in the upcoming board meeting discussions about AOL. Will Miller be given the axe, the Post intimates slyly? I hardly even dare ask the question.

Jeffrey Bewkes, president of Time Warner, told his Sports Illustrated magazine division to go take a flying leap when they wanted to partner with AOL's sports channel to build a giant sports web site. Synergies, he told the Wall Street Journal, are bullshit.

As someone who made part of her career not just believing in synergies but putting solid numerical values to them and offering them up, like holy sacraments of PowerPoint, to the strategists at gigantic corporations: this is a hard pill to swallow. And though I see it not working more often than not, I also see so many areas -- yes, within Time Warner, where I work today -- where it does work. Heck, everyday I make my bucks on the back of the synergy.

But instead of calling them "synergies," now, Time Warner is calling them "adjacencies." Sumner Redstone split up Viacom and CBS because the "clout" he was supposed to get from his company's huge size "got us nowhere." Is the day of the synergy over and done with?