An Australian newspaper reported Mr Spierings is to be replaced by Air New Zealand chief executive Christoper Luxon.
Mr Luxon has been lauded for his work at Air NZ, but even if he does not want the job, and Fonterra is correct in denying Mr Spierings' imminent departure, there will be many who think it is time for him to go.
The report tied Mr Spierings' departure to the weak performance of its Australian arm and may have been triggered by criticism both Fonterra and Murray Goulburn have faced in cutting their forecast milk payouts to Australian farmers, which prompted the Australian Government to announce a support package of low-interest loans. Murray Goulburn chief executive Gary Helou recently stepped down after the Australian dairy co-operative cut its profit guidance.
"There is no substance to the rumour,'' a Fonterra spokesman said. "Our response is absolutely and categorically no.''
Chief executives have their own cycle from when they are appointed, making some necessary changes before moving on to their next assignment.
Mr Spierings joined Fonterra in September 2011 and his tenure so far has been anything but smooth sailing for New Zealand's largest company and one of the largest milk companies in the world.
During his time at the top, Mr Spierings was forced to apologise in 2013 over a botulism scare that prompted China and Russia to stop importing some dairy products from New Zealand.
Primary Industries Minister Nathan Guy laid the blame for the botulism false alarm firmly at the feet of the dairy company.
The report showed the Government and Fonterra did not trust each other when it came to food safety and the dairy company was unwilling to trust the Ministry of Primary Industries.
Other criticisms of Fonterra's response included its lack of a crisis plan, the time it took to alert the ministry and its customers and to trace affected products, and the company's communications failures.
Job cuts have also been a feature of Mr Spierings time at Fonterra. The number of jobs set to go from Fonterra as a result of a review of its business rose to 750 from a previously announced figure of 523, resulting in savings of $103million a year, the company announced in September last year.
One-off savings resulting from the review, such as improving working capital, had enabled the co-operative to support its farmers during challenging market conditions, Fonterra said at the time.
One of the talking points during the redundancies and the hurt farmers had been experiencing as Fonterra milk payouts slump, was Mr Spierings' salary, which rose last year to nearly $5million, or up 18% on what he was paid in 2014.
The Otago Daily Times asked Craigs Investment Partners broker Peter McIntyre for his take on Mr Spierings, particularly on the amount the people at the top of Fonterra were being paid as the milk price slumped.
The co-operative model meant Fonterra keeping money aside in the good times to pay out when times were tough. Mr McIntyre believed Fonterra had paid out too much during the hard times and had not concentrated enough of value-added investment.
Fonterra had concentrated on "brown paper bag exports'' of milk powder and building new processing plants. Many people believed the money would have been better spent on value-added plants, such as cheese processing, he said.
It was a similar situation to the Australian mining industry when miners were calling the iron boom a ``super cycle'' that would never end.
"These guys [at Fonterra] made some interesting decisions and are open for criticism. At the end of the day, they have to visit their farmer shareholders and look them in the eye. If they haven't performed as they should have, they must face the criticism.''
However, Mr Spierings was only implementing a strategic plan agreed to by the board and there would not be pressure to go only on the chief executive, Mr McIntyre said.
As a percentage of dairy production, New Zealand made up only a small part and Fonterra was forced to be an exporter and get product offshore so production from New Zealand factories could be sold.
Fonterra was caught as a price taker rather than a price maker, otherwise it would end up with coolstores full of product. The co-operative was also a processor of last resort, perhaps explaining the misalignment of investment in New Zealand on the off chance it might have extra milk to process, he said.
There was a rebound coming in dairy prices. But, in the meantime, Fonterra needed to take care of the things it could control, like staff morale, its communication with farmers and its costs.
Also, no-one really knew how the low milk price was hurting farmers, Mr McIntyre said.
"We don't know how many farmers are really struggling and it is not in the interests of banks to sell farms as it lowers their equity. We all know there is a lot of pain out there.''
Early in May, Fonterra slashed the price it pays Australian farmers for its milk, as it attempted to improve the profitability of its transtasman subsidiary.
It now expected to pay its Australian farmers $5 kg/ms for the 2015-16 season, down from $5.60.
Mr McIntyre said Fonterra competed in Australia by paying cheese prices for milk, rather than milk powder prices - meaning it paid more for its supplies.
Australian farmers received more for milk because of the big domestic market and Australian cheese exports. New Zealand's market was smaller and Fonterra exported more milk powder rather than cheese, he said.
