My initial reaction was 'Bloody hell' but thinking about it, it waslikely to happen once the takeover was complete and there had been a period of transition. He had obviously already stepped down from one position. It does seem quick but there are two ways of looking at it:
1) it was a gross misconduct incident and he was sacked without notice - unlikely I would have thought and would trigger an issue with the bonds
2) As Harrow suggests he was a CEO of a plc, had actually achieved quite a bit in challenging circumstances and is now a director of a small football. The drop in responsibility is significant, maybe the challenge had gone? The point being maybe he wanted to quit and rather than serve a notice the period was paid upfront. Probably suited both parties, especially if he has a job lined up. (On our side we get someone in with a more long term view)