Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
freddiemac: our esteemed leades: he gets 19.8 million. What'w wrong with this pictur
Old 07-18-2008, 05:31 PM   #1
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 352
freddiemac: our esteemed leades: he gets 19.8 million. What'w wrong with this pictur

WTF:Freddie Mac CEO gets $19.8 million in '07 - Mortgage Mess - MSNBC.com
__________________

__________________
windsurf is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 07-18-2008, 07:43 PM   #2
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,543
don't buy the stock if you don't want to pay him
__________________

__________________
al_bundy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2008, 05:28 AM   #3
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Tadpole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,174
I've never thought about the CEO's. Did they privatize these agencies so that the big guys could make big salaries? I've seen articles about lawyers, judges, and financial types screaming over their low federal salaries which are capped.
__________________
Tadpole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2008, 09:35 AM   #4
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,820
Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post
don't buy the stock if you don't want to pay him
I'm concerned that the gov't is going to force me to buy the stock.
__________________
Independent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2008, 09:55 AM   #5
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Spanky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 4,046
CEOs are highly rewarded when their company stock prices skyrocket resulting from risk taking but hardly or never penalized when profits or stock prices plummet. Obviously their total compensation decline during the "bad" years but never in the negative territory. Over an extended period of time, say 10 years, the CEOs collect hugh compensation even though profitability may not have improved at all. No wonder so many people aspire to be CEOs.
__________________
May we live in peace and harmony and be free from all human sufferings.
Spanky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2008, 11:17 AM   #6
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
kcowan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Pacific latitude 20/49
Posts: 5,735
Send a message via Skype™ to kcowan
One of the problems is deferred compensation in the form of stock options. Options are only "in the money" when the price increases from the date of grant. These options ore good for multiple years then expire.

This leads to the recurring phenomenon that the CEO makes lots of moves to increase the business, then cashes in when these initiatives are winding down (i.e. stock prices increase slows or reverses).

It creates horroble optics but is unlikely to change. What makes it worse is when the board fires the CEO for the price slowdown and then he gets a big severance package AND has to cash in all his options.
__________________
For the fun of it...Keith
kcowan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2008, 12:26 PM   #7
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
ladelfina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,713
There is never ANYthing that ever justifies reigning in a CEO salary (this opinion offered in not so many words by MBA sis with her concordant exec.-friendly conditioning).

If thing are going well, they must be highly compensated.

If things are going poorly, they must be even MORE highly compensated to ensure "retention".

Rinse, repeat, and keep ratcheting upward.

Bottom line: companies on the higher end of exec. compensation have been shown to tend to the lower end of performance. Chicken or egg, I cannot say.
__________________
ladelfina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2008, 02:37 PM   #8
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,543
Quote:
Originally Posted by kcowan View Post
One of the problems is deferred compensation in the form of stock options. Options are only "in the money" when the price increases from the date of grant. These options ore good for multiple years then expire.

This leads to the recurring phenomenon that the CEO makes lots of moves to increase the business, then cashes in when these initiatives are winding down (i.e. stock prices increase slows or reverses).

It creates horroble optics but is unlikely to change. What makes it worse is when the board fires the CEO for the price slowdown and then he gets a big severance package AND has to cash in all his options.
and the way the media reports these things you'd think the CEO was getting a check from the company

i don't follow these things that much, but it seems like most CEO's have options with strike prices at $.01 or some other low amount
__________________
al_bundy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2008, 02:38 PM   #9
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,543
Quote:
Originally Posted by Independent View Post
I'm concerned that the gov't is going to force me to buy the stock.
the plan i've heard was the government is going to buy a new class of preferred stock paying 10% divs just to give the companies some cash. not exactly a tax payer bailout

if its the debt you are worried about, anyone who has bought a home in t he last 40 years has benefitted from the implied bailout via lower interest rates
__________________
al_bundy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2008, 08:01 PM   #10
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,820
Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post
the plan i've heard was the government is going to buy a new class of preferred stock paying 10% divs just to give the companies some cash. not exactly a tax payer bailout

if its the debt you are worried about, anyone who has bought a home in t he last 40 years has benefitted from the implied bailout via lower interest rates
I hope you are right about the terms, and I hope Freddie can generate the profits to pay the dividend.

Like I said, I'm "concerned".
__________________

__________________
Independent is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Does anyone know what might be wrong with me? summer2007 Health and Early Retirement 27 06-27-2008 01:58 PM
Something is seriously wrong with me... LeatherneckPA Other topics 2 11-09-2007 05:46 PM
Is C/W wrong? mickeyd FIRE and Money 17 12-12-2006 07:25 AM
What's Wrong Here? haha Other topics 8 12-06-2006 11:58 AM
There must be something wrong with me. newguy88 Hi, I am... 7 06-07-2006 07:02 PM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:26 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.