Outrageous Executive Perks

vienna · 04-05-11, 02:32 PM

http://finance.yahoo.com/career-work/article/112473/outrageous-executive-perks-kiplinger?mod=career-salary_negotiation

All I really need is a red Swingline stapler...

When will shareholders wake up and realize that these outrageous perks, bonuses, and salaries are taking away from their dividends? Every dollar wasted on these idiotic compensation agreements is a reduction in their share of the profits.

the_tyrant · 04-05-11, 02:54 PM

In my opinion management is just like talent
if your sports team has no talent, or your movie production has no stars, its really hard for you to succeed

this is why shareholders are willing to pay management large amounts of money

Ducimus · 04-05-11, 03:24 PM

Ehh... my opinion and this subject should probably be well known by now. Not that i give a rats ass about shareholders. I'll just rant and leave now.

*rant* *rant* *rant* *rant*
*rant* *rant* *rant* *rant*
*rant* *rant* *rant* *rant*
*rant* *rant* *rant* *rant*

/leave

AVGWarhawk · 04-05-11, 03:31 PM

If it were not for the shareholders that invested in the upstart company were would the management and workers be?

After all, the shareholders are taking a gamble with their money that Joe will show up and make widgets. Sam will managed Joe. Becky will market the widgets and sell them at a profit. The shareholder wants their originally invested amount and then some for lending the money. What a fine business model!

Armistead · 04-05-11, 03:48 PM

Some of these CEO's get 300-600 million in stock options on top of salary, bonuses, etc...

Poor terds....

vienna · 04-05-11, 06:44 PM

It's really a matter of perspective:

Let's say the average U.S. salary is $50,000 per year. Let's say an executive earns $1,000.000 per year. The executive's salary is equivalent to 20 (twenty) time more than the average salary or 20 years worth of an average worker's effort. What did the the executive do that is worth 20 years of an average worker's annual salary? Now take an executive earning $10,000,000 per year; this is equivalent to 200 (two hundred) year's woth of an average worker's annual salary. Did ths executive do somethig in that one year that is worth 200 times the average worker's effort or 10 time the first excutives effort?

There was a time when major corporations were helmed by the people who actually built their companies fom the ground up (Ford, Edison, etc.) and probably deserved large salaries since they initially stuck their necks out and took the risk. Today, corporations are helmed by people who have taken really no risk (the 'golden parachute' sees to that) and are essentially caretakers, at best, or, at worst, seeking to merge or sell their corporations (with an eye to enriching themselves further) with little concren to who down the food chain will be affected or if jobs will be lost overseas. The example of sports figures large salaries is often brought up as a defense of large executive salaries, but I never heard of an executive having a career-ending injury while enjoying their steak-and-two-martini lunch.

Ducimus · 04-05-11, 07:26 PM

Quote:

There was a time when major corporations were helmed by the people who actually built their companies fom the ground up (Ford, Edison, etc.) and probably deserved large salaries since they initially stuck their necks out and took the risk. Today, corporations are helmed by people who have taken really no risk (the 'golden parachute' sees to that) and are essentially caretakers, at best, or, at worst, seeking to merge or sell their corporations (with an eye to enriching themselves further) with little concren to who down the food chain will be affected

I highlighted the parts where you hit the nail on the head.

Platapus · 04-05-11, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vienna

It's really a matter of perspective:

Let's say the average U.S. salary is $50,000 per year. Let's say an executive earns $1,000.000 per year. The executive's salary is equivalent to 20 (twenty) time more than the average salary or 20 years worth of an average worker's effort. What did the the executive do that is worth 20 years of an average worker's annual salary? Now take an executive earning $10,000,000 per year; this is equivalent to 200 (two hundred) year's woth of an average worker's annual salary. Did ths executive do somethig in that one year that is worth 200 times the average worker's effort or 10 time the first excutives effort?

Well, yes actually they did. The company made money while they were in charge. Being a CEO is like being the Captain of a ship.

If things work out great, the CEO takes the credit
If things don't work our great, the CEO gets the blame

Just like a Captain, whether the Captain did or did not do a good job is irrelevant.

What I can't understand is CEOs with huge benefits who don't make money for their company.

AngusJS · 04-05-11, 10:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Platapus

Just like a Captain, whether the Captain did or did not do a good job is irrelevant.

What I can't understand is CEOs with huge benefits who don't make money for their company.

Exactly. At least in olden times, the captain would go down with the ship. But today's CEO captain pushes his own sailors out of the way to take a lifeboat all for himself.

What a great system.

Castout · 04-05-11, 11:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_tyrant

In my opinion management is just like talent
if your sports team has no talent, or your movie production has no stars, its really hard for you to succeed

this is why shareholders are willing to pay management large amounts of money

Nothing personal but

this I found to be

Pretty much like what Singapore syndicate has been saying when in actuality they are nothing more than bullies and murderers and just plain arrogant bastards.

Sailor Steve · 04-06-11, 02:17 AM

The problem I have with all your complaints is that you seem to think your opinions matter. I agree with most of your arguments, but it's the board members who make those decisions, and their opinions are the only ones that mean anything.

the_tyrant · 04-06-11, 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Castout

Nothing personal but

this I found to be

Pretty much like what Singapore syndicate has been saying when in actuality they are nothing more than bullies and murderers and just plain arrogant bastards.

Well if you think about it, why is management talent in such huge demand?
High level management is in high demand, and it seems like companies are willing to pay lots of money for top management.

Now from what my introductory business textbook and what i see from movies
Management is crucial for the success of the company.

so are the shareholders over paying management?
maybe, maybe not

is it worth it?
i don't know

but the shareholders seem to be willing to pay

Feuer Frei! · 04-06-11, 08:14 AM

Shareholders, and to this day still believe that good corporate governance is a value adding proposition, as opposed to a cost.
And so they should.
Often times, executives are eligible to receive corporate benefits including life cover, the use of a company car or cash equivalent, medical insurance and such like. Other benefits can include the use of a company jet for personal activities, apartments, and the retention of a personal secretary.
What shareholders typically want to know are details of clauses that may affect the amount of money paid out. If there is a change of control, what happens to stock options? If the CEO's contract is terminated, how much is the company contractually required to pay out?
Excessive payouts to terminate contracts may result in ineffective executives remaining in jobs simply because the company cannot afford to terminate their contract.
The reality is that the advisory vote in many countries rarely results in significant public dissent.
The advisory vote is a chance for shareholders to voice their views on executive remuneration at a company, usually taking the form of a vote on the remuneration report of a company. Whilst the advisory vote is necessarily non-binding, it does provide the company
with an illustration of the views of shareholders on executive remuneration packages.

Shareholders should not ultimately decide executive pay packages - this is the responsibility of the remuneration committee, and ultimately the board.

MothBalls · 04-06-11, 10:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

The problem I have with all your complaints is that you seem to think your opinions matter. I agree with most of your arguments, but it's the board members who make those decisions, and their opinions are the only ones that mean anything.

I bet half of them were up all night worrying about what was being said about them in the Subsim General Topics forum.

August · 04-06-11, 10:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vienna

What did the the executive do that is worth 20 years of an average worker's annual salary?

They got someone willing to pay it. In a free society that is all a person should ever need to justify.

04-05-11, 02:32 PM	#1
vienna Navy Seal Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Anywhere but the here & now... Posts: 7,711 Downloads: 85 Uploads: 0	Outrageous Executive Perks http://finance.yahoo.com/career-work/article/112473/outrageous-executive-perks-kiplinger?mod=career-salary_negotiation All I really need is a red Swingline stapler... When will shareholders wake up and realize that these outrageous perks, bonuses, and salaries are taking away from their dividends? Every dollar wasted on these idiotic compensation agreements is a reduction in their share of the profits.

04-05-11, 03:31 PM	#4
AVGWarhawk Lucky Jack Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: In a 1954 Buick. Posts: 28,253 Downloads: 90 Uploads: 0	If it were not for the shareholders that invested in the upstart company were would the management and workers be? After all, the shareholders are taking a gamble with their money that Joe will show up and make widgets. Sam will managed Joe. Becky will market the widgets and sell them at a profit. The shareholder wants their originally invested amount and then some for lending the money. What a fine business model! __________________ “You're painfully alive in a drugged and dying culture.” ― Richard Yates, Revolutionary Road

04-06-11, 02:17 AM	#11
Sailor Steve Eternal Patrol Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: High in the mountains of Utah Posts: 50,369 Downloads: 745 Uploads: 249	The problem I have with all your complaints is that you seem to think your opinions matter. I agree with most of your arguments, but it's the board members who make those decisions, and their opinions are the only ones that mean anything. __________________ “Never do anything you can't take back.” —Rocky Russo

04-06-11, 08:14 AM	#13
Feuer Frei! Navy Seal Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Valhalla Posts: 5,295 Downloads: 141 Uploads: 17	Shareholders, and to this day still believe that good corporate governance is a value adding proposition, as opposed to a cost. And so they should. Often times, executives are eligible to receive corporate benefits including life cover, the use of a company car or cash equivalent, medical insurance and such like. Other benefits can include the use of a company jet for personal activities, apartments, and the retention of a personal secretary. What shareholders typically want to know are details of clauses that may affect the amount of money paid out. If there is a change of control, what happens to stock options? If the CEO's contract is terminated, how much is the company contractually required to pay out? Excessive payouts to terminate contracts may result in ineffective executives remaining in jobs simply because the company cannot afford to terminate their contract. The reality is that the advisory vote in many countries rarely results in significant public dissent. The advisory vote is a chance for shareholders to voice their views on executive remuneration at a company, usually taking the form of a vote on the remuneration report of a company. Whilst the advisory vote is necessarily non-binding, it does provide the company with an illustration of the views of shareholders on executive remuneration packages. Shareholders should not ultimately decide executive pay packages - this is the responsibility of the remuneration committee, and ultimately the board. __________________ "History is the lies that the victors agree on"- Napoleon LINK TO MY SH 3 MODS

04-05-11, 02:54 PM	#2
the_tyrant Admiral Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Canada Posts: 2,272 Downloads: 58 Uploads: 0	In my opinion management is just like talent if your sports team has no talent, or your movie production has no stars, its really hard for you to succeed this is why shareholders are willing to pay management large amounts of money

04-05-11, 03:24 PM	#3
Ducimus Rear Admiral Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 12,987 Downloads: 67 Uploads: 2	Ehh... my opinion and this subject should probably be well known by now. Not that i give a rats ass about shareholders. I'll just rant and leave now. rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant rant /leave

04-05-11, 03:48 PM	#5
Armistead Rear Admiral Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: on the Dan Posts: 10,880 Downloads: 364 Uploads: 0	Some of these CEO's get 300-600 million in stock options on top of salary, bonuses, etc... Poor terds....

04-05-11, 06:44 PM	#6
vienna Navy Seal Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Anywhere but the here & now... Posts: 7,711 Downloads: 85 Uploads: 0	It's really a matter of perspective: Let's say the average U.S. salary is $50,000 per year. Let's say an executive earns $1,000.000 per year. The executive's salary is equivalent to 20 (twenty) time more than the average salary or 20 years worth of an average worker's effort. What did the the executive do that is worth 20 years of an average worker's annual salary? Now take an executive earning $10,000,000 per year; this is equivalent to 200 (two hundred) year's woth of an average worker's annual salary. Did ths executive do somethig in that one year that is worth 200 times the average worker's effort or 10 time the first excutives effort? There was a time when major corporations were helmed by the people who actually built their companies fom the ground up (Ford, Edison, etc.) and probably deserved large salaries since they initially stuck their necks out and took the risk. Today, corporations are helmed by people who have taken really no risk (the 'golden parachute' sees to that) and are essentially caretakers, at best, or, at worst, seeking to merge or sell their corporations (with an eye to enriching themselves further) with little concren to who down the food chain will be affected or if jobs will be lost overseas. The example of sports figures large salaries is often brought up as a defense of large executive salaries, but I never heard of an executive having a career-ending injury while enjoying their steak-and-two-martini lunch.