It definitely would have started under the old CEO's watch, but perhaps just as a contingency plan and as a negotiating tactic. That's just smart.

Actually pulling the trigger on the plan? Trading reputation for short term dollars? That piece of stupidity is all on the new CEO. They have about $10 billion in the bank and in long term investments, so they don't need the short term cash which would be the only possible justification for this kind of stupidity.

It happened on his watch - something this big definitely had his stamp on it.

It sure had his signature because after all he is the executive but it doesn't mean he had any power to pull it off nor to shut it down.

I think that at those levels and in such companies, investors are really pulling the strings. In other words, CEO is the first level of management. Disposable and convenient for all matters.

Edit: but ok, perhaps that's just my point of view.