Executive pay

[bluefrog]

I can understand the 1million + salaries for executives. These are the best and brightest of corporate talents. They have large responsibilities and much is required of them.

I don't get why they receive such huge bonuses and stock options. Do these people increase the value of the corporations that much? What can they do that deserves 10s of millions of dollars?? Can they speak 7 languages? Factor large numbers in their head? Walk through walls?

Could someone explain this to me?

 

[Paxil]

One million? A company I recently worked for was paying a 53 million compensation package to their top exec.

A think in some cases they are not the brightest... but they are the face and personality a company wants at a top.

What scares me sometime is their compensation packages are so closely tied to stock that they will do whatever they can to raise stock price... which many times is not good for the employees of the company. It is an interesting balance. Stock price will go up if you ship jobs overseas etc... but is it good for the employees? Many times they really don't care... they care about pleasing the stock holders who only care about the stock price and the $$$ in their pockets.

 

[blazerboy30]

I can understand the 1million + salaries for executives. These are the best and brightest of corporate talents. They have large responsibilities and much is required of them.

I don't get why they receive such huge bonuses and stock options. Do these people increase the value of the corporations that much? What can they do that deserves 10s of millions of dollars?? Can they speak 7 languages? Factor large numbers in their head? Walk through walls?

Could someone explain this to me?

It is what the companies are willing to pay them. What other explanation do you need?

 

[Idog1976]

I can understand the 1million + salaries for executives. These are the best and brightest of corporate talents. They have large responsibilities and much is required of them.

I don't get why they receive such huge bonuses and stock options. Do these people increase the value of the corporations that much? What can they do that deserves 10s of millions of dollars?? Can they speak 7 languages? Factor large numbers in their head? Walk through walls?

Could someone explain this to me?

Look Bluefrog you have to pay for top talent. Guys who can destabilize the global economy while feathering their own nest AND dumping their losses in the lap of taxpayers deserve to be reimbursed for their talent. Listen Capitalism means private profit...and public loss. It means you bilk the little guy and produce nothing of value. Most importantly it means you loot your home country and offshore your profits, the ones you don't spend on campaign contributions for BOTH parties that is.

P.S. In case you couldn't tell I was sarcastic, and of course what I wrote is NOT the definition of Capitalism. These robbers hide behind Capitalism of Adam Smith while behaving more like the upper echelon of the Kremlin or Vladamir Putin's inner circle. Private gain, public loss. These guys have done more to undermine REAL Capitalism then Marx ever dreamed of. What scares me is these thieves have legitimized Anti-Capitalist rhetoric when what they practice isn't Capitalism at all but is some kind of oligarchical financialism that destroys real American businesses (See CIT [it supplies credit to real American businesses] and how they are being held hostage by Goldman Sachs) by denying them the lifeblood of credit.

It's a sad, sad time in America. Capitalism means a free market. By contrast what alot of these hedge fund and Wall Street guys want is a controlled market. They want to be able to trade before anyone else (flash trading) they want their losses to be covered (bailouts by Bush and now Obama) and they want to have all their activities be opaque and completely unregulated by even common sense and accepted accounting practices (dark pool trading and OTC derivatives). I wish everyone in the US understood the scam the financial folks in collusion with the FED are running. It's the very definition of a Ponzi scheme.

 

[Idog1976]

It is what the companies are willing to pay them. What other explanation do you need?

So, say a major Heroin dealer should be well compensated because the market will bear it? Just because mindless black box hedge fund shareholders will give their buddy a boost doesn't mean it's good for the company, the workers, the consumer or the American economy.

I for one think people should be compensated based on their ability to add to the REAL economy not their cleverness in cooking books and carving off workers. There is a difference between cutting the fat and gutting a business before deploying a golden parachute and fleeing to a competitor. I don't think this is the government's responsibility to fix (they won't fix it in any real sense anyways), but it for damn sure is a massive problem in this country.

 

[bluefrog]

One million? A company I recently worked for was paying a 53 million compensation package to their top exec.

You're confusing salary with total compensation. Usually salaries are under 2 million but the bonuses, stock options, and other compensations often go into the 10s of millions.

It is what the companies are willing to pay them. What other explanation do you need?

This is definitely over simplifying the situation. Companies don't just say "oh we have an extra $100 million, let's give it to the CEO." Stockholders wouldn't go for that either. There has to be something else going on.

 

[blazerboy30]

Look Bluefrog you have to pay for top talent. Guys who can destabilize the global economy while feathering their own nest AND dumping their losses in the lap of taxpayers deserve to be reimbursed for their talent. Listen Capitalism means private profit...and public loss. It means you bilk the little guy and produce nothing of value. Most importantly it means you loot your home country and offshore your profits, the ones you don't spend on campaign contributions for BOTH parties that is.

P.S. In case you couldn't tell I was sarcastic, and of course what I wrote is NOT the definition of Capitalism. These robbers hide behind Capitalism of Adam Smith while behaving more like the upper echelon of the Kremlin or Vladamir Putin's inner circle. Private gain, public loss. These guys have done more to undermine REAL Capitalism then Marx ever dreamed of. What scares me is these thieves have legitimized Anti-Capitalist rhetoric when what they practice isn't Capitalism at all but is some kind of oligarchical financialism that destroys real American businesses (See CIT [it supplies credit to real American businesses] and how they are being held hostage by Goldman Sachs) by denying them the lifeblood of credit.

It's a sad, sad time in America. Capitalism means a free market. By contrast what alot of these hedge fund and Wall Street guys want is a controlled market. They want to be able to trade before anyone else (flash trading) they want their losses to be covered (bailouts by Bush and now Obama) and they want to have all their activities be opaque and completely unregulated by even common sense and accepted accounting practices (dark pool trading and OTC derivatives). I wish everyone in the US understood the scam the financial folks in collusion with the FED are running. It's the very definition of a Ponzi scheme.

Can you please provide some data showing the percentage of executives receiving compensation over, say, $20million per year that are heading a financial institution that had to be bailed out?

You're on one of your long diatribes and rants without any data to back it up. Do ALL executives do what you are describing above?

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

One million? A company I recently worked for was paying a 53 million compensation package to their top exec.

A think in some cases they are not the brightest... but they are the face and personality a company wants at a top.

What scares me sometime is their compensation packages are so closely tied to stock that they will do whatever they can to raise stock price... which many times is not good for the employees of the company. It is an interesting balance. Stock price will go up if you ship jobs overseas etc... but is it good for the employees? Many times they really don't care... they care about pleasing the stock holders who only care about the stock price and the $$$ in their pockets.

Good post, Paxil.

Especially the part about CEO's doing anything to raise the stock price- even to the detriment of the workers to the point of selling out the company and seeing thousands of employees let go. It isn't right.

 

[MrJayremmie]

I think it is sick that they get rewarded for their recent failures. But in this country, you have a right to get as much as you can, and while we have every right to be outraged, there is nothing we can (really) do about it.

But the companies that NEEDED OUR MONEY to operate, well they SHOULD NOT be giving out these disgusting bonuses, as I believe we own part of the company, do we not? I'm fine with regulating top Exec's salaries until they pay us back.

 

[blazerboy30]

I must have misread the thread title, but I didn't see where the OP was specifically targeted at the financial firm executives that have received bailouts.

If it is not specifically targeted at them, please provide some data showing what % of executives in this country fell into that category.

 

[elcap15]

Why is there only outrage over executive pay? Why isnt there outrage over ridiculous pay for other enterprises, like say professional sports, or Hollywood?

 

[bluefrog]

Yeah, I wasn't really addressing them in particular.

It is upsetting to see them giving out such large bonuses but the government should have stipulated that these were prohibited before giving them the bail out.

It's unfair to make up these rules as we go along.

 

[bluefrog]

Why is there only outrage over executive pay? Why isnt there outrage over ridiculous pay for other enterprises, like say professional sports, or Hollywood?

I would say in professional sports you can see the talent that warrants large pay. You can see the person making great touch down passes or gravity defying dunks. These are unusual talents that only a few elite people have. These athletes are also under the scrutiny of a larger audience.

Same with Hollywood. The actors and actresses that consistently make huge box office draws warrant larger pay. They help make a product that brings in large revenues. They are a select few that are capable of making of making laugh, cry, and scream "yeah!" when they impale a bad guy.

What talents do these executives have that deserve these compensation packages?

 

[BrianFromWA]

I would submit that the CEO of Amazon.com does a better job at his job than Eddy Curry does at his, yet is being paid ~100x less.

 

[blazerboy30]

I would say in professional sports you can see the talent that warrants large pay. You can see the person making great touch down passes or gravity defying dunks. These are unusual talents that only a few elite people have. These athletes are also under the scrutiny of a larger audience.

Same with Hollywood. The actors and actresses that consistently make huge box office draws warrant larger pay. They help make a product that brings in large revenues. They are a select few that are capable of making of making laugh, cry, and scream "yeah!" when they impale a bad guy.

What talents do these executives have that deserve these compensation packages?

Geez this is just a strange and naive post. I don't even know where to start.

 

[bluefrog]

Geez this is just a strange and naive post. I don't even know where to start.

Thanks for contributing

 

[Idog1976]

Can you please provide some data showing the percentage of executives receiving compensation over, say, $20million per year that are heading a financial institution that had to be bailed out?

You're on one of your long diatribes and rants without any data to back it up. Do ALL executives do what you are describing above?

NO, there is never an ALL case and that is just stupid baiting on your part without addressing the greater point. So just to be clear, you think it's cool that we bail out billionaires for their mistakes that destabilize the economy eh? I notice you didn't acknowledge what I was saying about paper pushing financial folks vs. executives that produce real things. I have no problem with Steve Jobs being well compensated his company creates actual products. I have no problem with execs who produce jobs in our economy.

I'm talking about execs who behave in those kind of behaviors which is a VERY significant minority. The behavior I describe is fairly common in the financial industry and hedge funds. As usual you are disputing what I wrote without addressing the bulk of what I was saying and just nit picking spelling or verbiage when you know very well my point is valid.

 

[Idog1976]

Thanks for contributing

Yep that's why he defends financial execs who gutted our economy. He produces as much as they do...zilch!

 

[bluefrog]

I would submit that the CEO of Amazon.com does a better job at his job than Eddy Curry does at his, yet is being paid ~100x less.

Eddy Curry won't be earning more than Jeff Bezos for much longer.

 

[blazerboy30]

NO, there is never an ALL case and that is just stupid baiting on your part without addressing the greater point. So just to be clear, you think it's cool that we bail out billionaires for their mistakes that destabilize the economy eh?

Dude, try making a point without building a strawman. This is seriously beyond utter stupidity.

I notice you didn't acknowledge what I was saying about paper pushing financial folks vs. executives that produce real things. I have no problem with Steve Jobs being well compensated his company creates actual products. I have no problem with execs who produce jobs in our economy.

I'm talking about execs who behave in those kind of behaviors which is a VERY significant minority. The behavior I describe is fairly common in the financial industry and hedge funds. As usual you are disputing what I wrote without addressing the bulk of what I was saying and just nit picking spelling or verbiage when you know very well my point is valid.

Obviously there are greedy, evil, malicious executives out there. Nobody is disputing that. The question: is that number a substantial percentage? If not, then you seem to be advocating government intervention because of a small percentage of bad-apples.

Provide some data to back up your long rants and diatribes instead of just building strawmen and making personal attacks.

 

[bluefrog]

Dude, try making a point without building a strawman. This is seriously beyond utter stupidity.

Obviously there are greedy, evil, malicious executives out there. Nobody is disputing that. The question: is that number a substantial percentage? If not, then you seem to be advocating government intervention because of a small percentage of bad-apples.

Provide some data to back up your long rants and diatribes instead of just building strawmen and making personal attacks.

Could you provide some data that shows executives deserve these huge compensations? ("deserve" meaning they increased the value of the company significantly after taking the position)

 

[blazerboy30]

Could you provide some data that shows executives deserve these huge compensations? ("deserve" meaning they increased the value of the company significantly after taking the position)

I don't have to. The fact that companies / board-of-directors have offered and paid these compensation packages is proof.

Are you working under the assumption that CEOs just get to choose their compensation and how they are compensated whenever they like, without any other approval necessary? If so, then I see where your confusion is coming from.

Further, why do you care if the CEO of Microsoft makes $50 zillion per week? If you don't agree with it, don't buy their products.

 

[Idog1976]

Dude, try making a point without building a strawman. This is seriously beyond utter stupidity.




Obviously there are greedy, evil, malicious executives out there. Nobody is disputing that. The question: is that number a substantial percentage? If not, then you seem to be advocating government intervention because of a small percentage of bad-apples.

Provide some data to back up your long rants and diatribes instead of just building strawmen and making personal attacks.

I specifically said no government intervention. That's just more proof you look for nits to pick and ignore the argument like a good little right wing media soldier. If you aren't aware of the utter havoc wrecked by the financialization of this country then you are the one who needs to bone up on current events. Do you know what flash trading is? How about Dark Pool trading? OTC derivatives? Do you have any understanding about financials and the way the US and UK have been destroyed by financialization? Which countries boomed the hardest during the bubble years? Now which countries have crashed the hardest?

The country you and I love is being annihilated by these financial organizations which are selling us out to Chinese taskmasters who pay slave wages to their people. You talk about building a straw man when your arguments are "paper tigers" all rhetoric and zero substance. You don't even make a point you just nit pick others. I used the "straw man" to illustrate that you are sticking up for people who have gutted this once proud nation. I'm pro-business and pro-capitalism. I'm strongly against Keynesianism and Central Banks controlling a nations currency. If anything I'm probably VASTLY more conservative then you when it comes to monetary policy

Executive pay isn't a problem in many industries. I submit that the financial industry has destroyed this country and it's a slowmotion implosion. I also believe in performance based pay which should include actual wealth created not numbers created out of whole cloth (like financials earnings this quarter), but real actual wealth created by real goods and real jobs IN THIS COUNTRY. It kills me how Republicans defend these globalizing financial corporations/banks that have done more to build up our enemies then anyone ever. China would still be a wasteland if our leadership hadn't sold us out to CEO's and stockholders that outsourced our real economy while creating short term profits.

I hope you live a LONG, LONG life to see just how horribly wrong you are about so many, MANY things.
P.S. I hope your Chinese is up to snuff.

 

[bluefrog]

I don't have to. The fact that companies / board-of-directors have offered and paid these compensation packages is proof.

Are you working under the assumption that CEOs just get to choose their compensation and how they are compensated whenever they like, without any other approval necessary? If so, then I see where your confusion is coming from.

Further, why do you care if the CEO of Microsoft makes $50 zillion per week? If you don't agree with it, don't buy their products.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it's necessarily a bad thing. I know these things are negotiated. I know this. I just want to know what they do that warrants the kind of money they get.

Your argument seems to be: they do because they do

 

[blazerboy30]

I specifically said no government intervention. That's just more proof you look for nits to pick and ignore the argument like a good little right wing media soldier. If you aren't aware of the utter havoc wrecked by the financialization of this country then you are the one who needs to bone up on current events. DO you know what flash trading is? How about Dark Pool trading? OTC derivatives? Do understanding antyhing about financials? You talk about building a straw man when your arguments are "paper tigers" all rhetoric and zero substance. You don't even make a point you just nit pick others.

Executive pay isn't a problem in many industries. I submit that the financial industry has destroyed this country and it's a slowmotion implosion. I hope you live a LONG LONG life to see just how horribly wrong you are about so many MANY things.

P.S. I hope your Chinese is up to snuff.

Damn dude. You talk (type) in circles. It is hard to even parse the gibberish for an actual point to the rambling.

Here, I'll provide some structure for you:

1) The OP was that executives don't seem to deserve their huge compensations.
1b) There was no specific mention in the OP of executives in the financial industry.

2) You've turned it into long diatribes about the financial industry.

3) Is the number of executives running firms that received bailouts is a large number compared to the total number of executives in the country receiving "$10million" in compensation?

4a) If (3) is "no", then you are off on a random tangent.
4b) If (3) is "yes" then there is something to be discussed.

5) Unless you can provide data with respect to (3), then you are just hijacking the thread to go on a rambling whine-fest.

 

[yakbladder]

...and making personal attacks.

Physician, heal thy self.

 

[blazerboy30]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it's necessarily a bad thing. I know these things are negotiated. I know this. I just want to know what they do that warrants the kind of money they get.

Your argument seems to be: they do because they do

No, my argument is that it isn't my place to decide what they deserve (unless they are receiving a lot of my money through tax dollars or my stock purchases). I really don't care. If I have a problem with the CEO or his compensation, I can simply not buy their product.

The board of directors and other executives should be deciding if others deserve their compensation.

 

[bintim]

Being a major victim of this recession, this thread just pisses me off. I tried to give Idog76 some rep, because I loved his sarcasm, but I gave him some the other day and it won't let me give him more.

 

[bluefrog]

If I have a problem with the CEO or his compensation, I can simply not buy their product.

The board of directors and other executives should be deciding if others deserve their compensation.

Point noted.

It's tough to know who to boycott though. I could think "No way is Robert Iger worth $51,229,341! That's outrageous! I'm never seeing another Disney movie". But in actuality Mr. Iger may be able read minds in which case he totally deserves that money.

The public doesn't exactly have the whole picture.

 

[Idog1976]

Damn dude. You talk (type) in circles. It is hard to even parse the gibberish for an actual point to the rambling.

Here, I'll provide some structure for you:

1) The OP was that executives don't seem to deserve their huge compensations.
1b) There was no specific mention in the OP of executives in the financial industry.

2) You've turned it into long diatribes about the financial industry.

3) Is the number of executives running firms that received bailouts is a large number compared to the total number of executives in the country receiving "$10million" in compensation?

4a) If (3) is "no", then you are off on a random tangent.
4b) If (3) is "yes" then there is something to be discussed.

5) Unless you can provide data with respect to (3), then you are just hijacking the thread to go on a rambling whine-fest.

http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2009...ncial-meltdown-wall-st-pay-party-goes-on.html

Wells Fargo, Merril Lynch, AIG and Citigroup all took bailouts or arranged buy outs and all paid out Billions in bonuses even when they took millions or billions in losses. Add in Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan with their taking from the lending window to short other industries/financials after getting the uptick rule removed and you have the MAJORITY of major american investment banks. Infact, you might have every last one of them. Most of these executives have multi-year contracts that are quite analogous to Eddie Curry in that they still get paid even when they don't perform.

Look I don't have the time or inclination to do YOUR research for you.


Your spelling and grammar are excellent. I hope your Chinese is just as good. Continue to defend these guys and your "Engrish won't help you much round eye."

I'm sorry that you don't pay any attention. I'm more sorry that you and bintim can't switch places. These financial executives (they ARE executives that are grossly overpaid so I'm on topic bud) have destroyed our economy and shorted the snot out of many healthy businesses. Now that they are holding CIT hostage the real businesses of middle America are unable to roll over day to day business loans even when they have a profitable business. So please STFU and do some research.

That is all.

Oh, and as usual