The company has appointed the former CEO of BP PLC (NYSE: BP), Tony Hayward, as its interim chairman. Hayward is the senior independent director and deputy chairman of Glencore Xstrata.

Bond, who is 70 years old, had already said he would step down as chairman after a search for a new chairman had been completed. Shareholders did not want to wait that long apparently.

Shareholders rejected the original terms of the merger agreement between Glencore and Xstrata, which Bond had negotiated. They were especially unhappy with the generous retention packages being recommended for Xstrata executives. Bond’s decision to step down came following that rejection.

A second director, Steve Robson, was also rejected by shareholders in a proxy vote, and he resigned before today’s annual meeting.

Hayward presided over BP at the time of the explosion and sinking of the Deepwater Horizon, which claimed the lives of 11 workers and dumped millions of barrels of crude into the Gulf of Mexico. Hayward took a lot of heat for the seemingly cavalier manner in which he responded to the disaster, and he resigned under pressure in July 2010. He is currently the CEO of a small oil company with operations in Kurdistan.

Brokerage firm CLSA has a report out from Mike Mayo after it surveyed shareholders of J.P. Morgan Chase showing that large holders would likely sell their shares of the largest bank by assets. It was put as high as a 10% price drop, valued at some $20 billion, if Dimon leaves and those shareholders hit the ejection button.

Mayo talked about a leadership vacuum at Chase and no clear successor. What is interesting is that Mike Mayo has had public anti-Dimon posturing for some time and the firm has an Underperform rating on shares of J.P. Morgan Chase. We would note that men such as Ken Langone and Warren Buffett have been vocal supporters of Jamie Dimon.

Dimon’s controversy has been in the aftermath of the London Whale losses and this is the key reason we have Wells Fargo & Com. (NYSE: WFC) ahead of J.P. Morgan on America’s 7 Safest Large Banks. That being said, 24/7 Wall St. thinks that investors would flock heavily into the next bank stock that Jamie Dimon went to if he left.

Duke, who is 63 years old, has not announced a retirement date, but a report at Bloomberg News cites “a person familiar with the situation” as saying that Walmart may name a successor in the next several months. The leading candidates are Walmart U.S. chief Bill Simon and international chief Doug McMillon.

While Walmart has never gone outside the company for a CEO, maybe it’s now time to reconsider that strategy. The internal candidates bear at least some responsibility for the problems that Walmart now faces: slipping U.S. sales, increasing demands from workers and labor unions for better working conditions and pay, and, of course, the bribery allegations in Mexico.

Why not look outside for someone who doesn’t carry any of that baggage and may in fact do something to fix those problems? Because that’s not the Walmart way. Walmart instead adopts a bunker mentality, denies everything, and outwaits (not ‘outwits’) its critics. It’s worked this long and there’s no reason to expect that it won’t work again.

Simon, who had a 25-year career in the U.S. Navy and Naval Reserve before turning to business, joined Walmart in 2006 and may be best suited to carry on the Walmart tradition. McMillon, who began his Walmart career in 1984 as a summer hire and is a native of Arkansas, has more Walmart blue in his blood and that may carry the day.

Krzanich has been Intel’s chief operating officer since January 2012, but he first joined Intel back in 1982. He will assume the new CEO role at the Intel annual stockholders’ meeting on May 16.

Mr. Krzanich is 52 years old. Here is the biggest takeaway being toward the shift into smartphones and tablets where the company has been absent:

I look forward to working with our leadership team and employees worldwide to continue our proud legacy, while moving even faster into ultra-mobility, to lead Intel into the next era.

As COO, Krzanich led an organization of more than 50,000 employees over the Technology and Manufacturing Group, Intel Custom Foundry, NAND Solutions group, Human Resources, Information Technology and Intel’s China strategy.

Renée James, 48, was promoted to be president of Intel, and she also will assume her new role on May 16. She was chairman of Intel’s software subsidiaries Havok, McAfee and Wind River, and she currently serves on the board of directors of Vodafone Group PLC (NASDAQ: VOD) and VMware Inc. (NYSE: VMW) and was chief of staff for former Intel CEO Andy Grove.

Avon’s fortunes have been awful for two years, mostly because former CEO Andrea Jung ruined the company through wild expansion. Her replacement, Sheri McCoy, has done nothing to reverse the slide.

Avon announced both Chairman Fred Hassan’s departure (he severed his relationship so sharply that he will not stay on the board) and the name of his replacement:

Fred Hassan has resigned from the Avon Board of Directors in order to focus more time on his other professional commitments. Mr. Hassan serves as a non-executive chairman of Bausch + Lomb and is a Managing Director, Partner at Warburg Pincus LLC. He also serves on the Board of Time Warner, Inc.

Doug Conant, who currently serves on the Board, has been elected to the position of non-executive Chairman. Both are effective immediately.

“Avon is a great company and I am honored to have served on the Board of Directors,” said Mr. Hassan. “However, my other professional commitments have intensified, requiring more focus. So I have decided it is in the best interest of Avon for one of my Board colleagues to take on the Chairmanship.”

If he was so honored to serve, why did he leave so quickly?

The chairman of the company’s compensation committee, James McNerney, CEO of Boeing Co. (NYSE: BA), was reported by Bloomberg to be unhappy with McDonald after P&G was forced to cut its forecast three times in a year. The irony of that is best left to another day.

P&G announced a layoff of 5,700 employees last year, as well as other cost cutting measures totalling some $10 billion by 2016 to help offset rising commodity costs. That has certainly helped the company’s bottom line, but it’s nothing more than a near-term fix.

McDonald may also get a shareholder challenge led by activist investor William Ackman of Pershing Square Capital Management. Ackman’s hedge fund owns about 1% of P&G’s stock, and while he’s currently busy with Herbalife Ltd. (NYSE: HLF) and J.C. Penney Co. Inc. (NYSE: JCP), if he smells blood in the water here, McDonald could face a tough opponent. Ackman probably thinks he waited too long for results from his hand-picked CEO for Penney’s and is not likely to make that mistake again.

When the notion of replacing McDonald came up last year, many thought that it was premature. After all he’d been at the head of P&G for only about three years and those were the toughest years for the U.S. economy since the Great Depression. But as the quarters roll along and P&G’s performance doesn’t improve, McDonald’s tenure in the corner office gets shakier.

Shares of P&G hit a bottom of around $45 in May of 2009 and have since climbed to an all-time high of more than $82. But growth was pretty flat for the two year to January of 2013, when they turned sharply higher as commodity prices fell and the company’s cost reduction program showed some results. Neither force, however, demonstrates much of a strategic vision.

P&G’s shares are down about 4.8% in mid-afternoon trading today, at $78.05 in a 52-week range of $59.07 to $82.54.

Cook really cannot be blamed for Apple’s current problems, at least if part of the Steve Jobs legend is true. According to that legend, the products Apple has released recently, and will over the next year or so, were designed by Jobs. Its current generation of engineers has not made its stamp on Apple’s future.

The primary case against Cook is that he is neither charismatic nor inventive. But the charisma Jobs had did not sell products — the products did. A product introduction only serves to show the world what is coming. The consumer eventually makes his own judgment.

Apple’s products have been flanked to some extent, particularly by new smartphones from Samsung. The Korean company’s Galaxy SIII and probably its newer S4 are considered worthy competition for the iPhone. That advantage could end when a new version of Apple’s smartphone comes out.

Apple also faces competition for its iPad product. Google Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG) Android-based tablets have taken part of its market share. Again, a new iPad may end that erosion.

However, the market position of the iPad and iPhone are not Apple’s entire future. And its future is what should keep Cook his position. Apple’s reputation for innovation has been hurt for now. It will only take one hit product to change that for awhile. An iWatch could be the catalyst, or an advanced version of Apple TV. Apple almost certainly has enough brand equity in the market so that consumers will flock to a revolutionary product, if it breaks the mold of older ones in the same sector. It would be unwise to gamble that Apple has run out of ideas and strong execution.

Many of Apple’s most critical products still work and work well. The App Store may have competition from stores that sell Android-based applications. But the number of apps a store has available is not a sign of profitability. Recent research shows that in 2012 the Apple App store brought in three and a half times more revenue than Android stores did. Consumers clearly think more of Apple’s software products — and they said so with their wallets. Also, iTunes continues to be the dominant distribution channel for music in the world. That is a position it has held for years, and nothing shows that has changed much.

Set aside Apple’s product development and consider the situation in the Apple board room. Its directors have to consider who might replace Cook. Who might match the mythical position Jobs held in the industry? Who could take the reigns of Apple and keep its culture intact and its most important employees in place? Such a person does not exist. Apple’s board will not take the risk that Cook can be replaced even by a highly regarded executive, and to some extent that is because there is none, and to some extent because a change could splinter Apple’s hierarchy.

Cook’s jobs as CEO is safe for now and will be for some time. Apple’s ability to change markets is not gone, and its new products almost certainly will demonstrate that. Also, Cook is irreplaceable. There is no other Steve Jobs in the world, and Apple’s board knows that.

A recent IDC report blamed a poor reaction to the operating system for a 14% drop in PC sales in the first quarter. The news dragged down the shares of PC manufacturers and chip providers. The Windows 8 case against Ballmer can be added to Microsoft’s late entry into search and its lack of success in the mobile markets.

The speculation gets married with more speculation about who would take Ballmer’s job. Much of the guessing centers around Microsoft chairman and founder Bill Gates. He left day-to-day responsibilities behind when he retired more than a decade ago. He currently spends much of his time giving away his fortune. However, Gates may feel that his legacy is at stake as Microsoft flounders. Wall St. would not accept many of the other alternatives because few people have the background to turn around the world’s largest software company. The best candidates, including Google Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG) Chairman Eric Schmidt, are not going to leave their current positions.

The news media has pointed out that the board was irresponsible to retain Ullman again. One of the reasons given for the board’s actions was that it could find no one else to take such a challenging job. The other is that J.C. Penney will be sold soon, so its hardly matters who is CEO.

The excuse that Ullman was the board’s only choice should be rejected. Tim Nichols, who runs the company’s stores, and Liz Sweney, chief merchant, have watched Johnson’s mistakes and learned from them. Even board member Leonard Roberts, former head of RadioShack Corp. (NYSE: RSH) would have been preferable. The electronics retailer was troubled, but Roberts has no legacy record with J.C. Penney. Wall St. would have more confidence in an executive or a board member who has spent time at the company recently than Ullman, who left J.C. Penney in disgrace.

If the company is to be sold, Chairman Thomas Engibous could have taken the reins in the meantime. The former CEO of Texas Instruments (NASDAQ: TXN), he at least has experience operating a large public company.

Under Ullman, shares of J.C. Penney dropped 60%. Revenue was $18.5 billion five years ago. Net income was $572 million. The company has not posted numbers that strong since.

Johnson will be long gone before Ullman sets a new strategy for J.C. Penney. The least the board could do is to put someone in place who would  have given investors hope, instead of a primary architect of J.C. Penney’s demise.

J.C. Penney has violated one of Wall St.’s primary rules. CEOs who leave because they lacked merit as operators should never return to a company, no matter how desperate its board is.

The office of the chairman includes non-executive board chairman Archie Dunham, acting CEO Dixon and Chesapeake’s CFO, Domenic Dell’Osso Jr. Chesapeake, the country’s second-largest producer of natural gas, has been shedding assets for the past two years or so and has focused on development of liquids-rich plays while natural gas prices remain depressed.

Chesapeake also settled a dispute with Gastar Exploration Ltd. (NYSEMKT: GST) today. Chesapeake filed a suit against Gastar in October last year, seeking a rollback of some 2005 transactions between the firms and additional reimbursement of some well costs. Gastar paid $85 million to repurchase 6.78 million shares of its stock from Chesapeake and to acquire acreage totaling about 157,000 acres and about 2.8 million barrels of proved oil equivalent.

The timing of the Gastar announcement probably was not coincidental. Chesapeake’s share price is down about 12% in the past 12 months, even though it has recovered from a low of around $13 to around $20 since last May. That is still a far cry from a near $70-a-share peak in June of 2008.

Chesapeake’s CEO search almost certainly will turn up someone from outside the company to take over from McClendon and Dixon. The company was built by leasing massive amounts of land, confirming that the oil and gas assets were actually there and then flipping the leases for a profit. Now, liquids production is the important thing, and that is a costly and technical business requiring an experienced production executive and large amounts of capital. The company owns some high-quality leases and only needs some time and some guidance to transform itself into a production company and no a leasing firm.