Government Bail Outs

[gLing]

So it will save some jobs while leaving Mr CEO still rich.

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

And ask yourself......what kind of CEO are you going to get who is willing to work for less than the market rate?

Oh hell I talk to ours on a regular basis, and really looking at it, they do see things that typical folks just do not, at least the really good ones.

This guy has navigated our company through struggles nobody thought possible, he was originally hiredto get the company "Polished up nd ready for the show-room"

He told the board "Nope, this company has potential you'd be selling yourself short, give me 5 years"

From that point profits have doubled every year since he came on board...So you do have to have a great big bag of knuckles and a lot of heart that's for sure.

I know this....I'm way over compensated

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

So it will save some jobs while leaving Mr CEO still rich.

One point to make is this....CEO's are typically going to make large sums of money regardless, if not for them, then for the other folks....It's always been a dynamic in our business.

Right wrong or indifferent

 

[Strauss]

So it will save some jobs while leaving Mr CEO still rich.

The CEO is rich no matter what, the question is whether he or she has what it takes to turn the company around. For that you look to the Board of Directors and fire their collective asses up. If CEO can't cut it, fire his ass and go looking for the quality you need. Cutting what you're willing to pay for a CEO is a knee-jerk feel good losing proposition in the long run.

 

[gLing]

Oh hell I talk to ours on a regular basis, and really looking at it, they do see things that typical folks just do not, at least the really good ones.

This guy has navigated our company through struggles nobody thought possible, he was originally hiredto get the company "Polished up nd ready for the show-room"

He told the board "Nope, this company has potential you'd be selling yourself short, give me 5 years"

From that point profits have doubled every year since he came on board...So you do have to have a great big bag of knuckles and a lot of heart that's for sure.

I know this....I'm way over compensated

Should your CEO friend earn 60 million as opposed to 30 million and sacrifice jobs to pay for it?

 

[Strauss]

Should your CEO friend earn 60 million as opposed to 30 million and sacrifice jobs to pay for it?

You assume that the additional $30 million would be used to hire employees. That is definitely not true. The number of employees is going to match the need. What would actually happen is the $30 million would either be re-invested in the company or paid out as dividends to the shareholders or retire debt or set up a Brazilian slush fund...whatever, just not employees.

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

Should your CEO friend earn 60 million as opposed to 30 million and sacrifice jobs to pay for it?

One, he has never made 60 o 30 million and not a job has been cut since he came on board, now that's not always the story we hear, that's just MY experience.

He was actually making 25% more and was on his way to retirement, he was made a good offer based on the idea that he had chartered our waters his entire career with a competitor.

But he appears to be a pretty good beacon of integrity. I'm not mad at him because of hs salary, I mean it's a lot, but I am convinced that A.Rod shouldn't make more that's for certain

And A Rod does n fact make more a year than our CEO

 

[gLing]

You assume that the additional $30 million would be used to hire employees. That is definitely not true. The number of employees is going to match the need. What would actually happen is the $30 million would either be re-invested in the company or paid out as dividends to the shareholders or retire debt or set up a Brazilian slush fund...whatever, just not employees.

Very good points. You just shut me down. :surrender

 

[Strauss]

Very good points. You just shut me down. :surrender

Wasn't my intent. Before I went to the darkside (at least according to my former clients) I sat in many boardrooms advising boards and CEOs. I've seen it from both side. It isn't as cut and dry as people like to think.

 

[TheOriginalJames]

Yeah, that's a problem with a mutli-billion dollar corporation. Cut the CEO's salary 50% so that his 30 million dollars will make payroll which is in the neighborhood of $300 million a week....yeah that really makes a difference.
You can't compare a small business with a national corporation.

BTW, I had many a week at the beginning of my career when everybody who worked for me got paid but not me.

Actually yes you can. If a CEO wasn't greedy he doesn't need to take 30 mill a year if the company is in trouble. He can cut back on his personal expenses that you know he'll take out of company income, etc.

It's exactly the same as small business, only on a larger scale.

 

[Strauss]

Fair trade--you hit on my wife, I nail yours!!! :24:

Well that's fair because those really aren't your children.

 

[siasl]

well, then...should the government create

a new agency that would buy troubled assets from hobbled companies.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/17/business/17resolution.html?ref=business

 

[Wookiegirl]

Boo - that's all I have to really say about this.

I'm sick of using tax dollars to bail out big business. I'm even sicker of foreign companies buying up american ones.

Can I have the government come bail me out if I bounce too many checks please? kthanx.

 

[Minor Axis]

The problem is people like Minor picks one or two CEOs that makes huge salaries and paints that as "typical" to tug on people's emotional strings. This is why it is important to know the facts. But this is a very typical tactic of the AFL-CIO and other big unions--to focus on a few CEOs that earn exhorbitant salaries. We've been talking about 30 million compensation as though these are typical when if fact they are very rare.

Gee forget the options, at $6 million average salary, that's only $500,000 a month the big boys make. And exactly why does anyone need to collect $500,000 a month in salary? And this is why you begrudge pilots the $1.50 it cost on your airplane ticket to pay for the pilots salaries... By all means, keep telling yourself that unions are greedy.

If anybody in this forum was wondering whom Mulder roots for, you can stop wondering.

Speaking of bailing out, I heard on the radio that the Fed decided to bail out AIG, because if they did not, they feared it would have triggered a CATASTROPHIC domino failure in the financial markets that would ripple across the economy... Great depression Part II anyone? (see my separate post.) <-should I be smiling about a great depression?

 

[Strauss]

Speaking of bailing out, I heard on the radio that the Fed decided to bail out AIG, because if they did not, they feared it would have triggered a CATASTROPHIC domino failure in the financial markets that would ripple across the economy... Great depression Part II anyone? (see my separate post.) <-should I be smiling about a great depression?

Should have let AIG fold, if it was going too. No great depression just a sale at an advantagous price to another insurer.

Now let's be clear on something before people start posting incorrect information. The 85 billion in loans is just that, a loan, which is running at 11.5% interest (if this wasn't the federal government we'd be calling them loan sharks). Second, the federal government isn't taking over AIG, however, as a condition of the loans AIG is issuing warrants to the federal government (if you don't know what warrants are I suggest going to a financial site and educating yourself, you'll learn a lot :thumbup) which can be exercised under certain condtions which then would give the federal government majority contriol of AIG.

The feds were correct to let Lehman fold (see how capitalism worked...Barclay's steps in to make a pretty penny). The should have let Bear-Stearns fold (J.P Morgan probably could have gotten a better deal in the bankruptcy court).