http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21549196/Stan O'Neal walks away from Merrill Lynch with 161+ million. Is that fair to stockholders?
Is this is emblematic of some kind of a problem?
- Thread starter windsurf
- Start date
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21549196/Stan O'Neal walks away from Merrill Lynch with 161+ million. Is that fair to stockholders?
twaddle
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2006
- Messages
- 1,703
Executive compensation is obscene, IMO. The idea that execs and boards are doing things that are in the best interest of shareholders is quaint, but that's not what drives them.
If you want to make real money, become an exec of a public company. We passive investing schmucks get the leftovers. And sometimes, after dilution and this kind of compensation, there's not much left over.
If you want to make real money, become an exec of a public company. We passive investing schmucks get the leftovers. And sometimes, after dilution and this kind of compensation, there's not much left over.
youbet
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Not to defend the over compensated O'Neal or the dumbass Merrill Lynch board, but the 161 mil is a little different than the bonuses and deferred compensation packages we read about other fired CEO's walking away with. O'Neal walked away with stock options he had earned in prior years but had not yet exercised. I think it would be difficult to withdraw the options or change the associated rules relating to exercising them once they have been granted.
Edit: Oooops.... Part of the 161 mil was deferred compensation.
"his deferred compensation stands at $5.4 million, according to the company"
Edit: Oooops.... Part of the 161 mil was deferred compensation.
"his deferred compensation stands at $5.4 million, according to the company"
bow-tie
Full time employment: Posting here.
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2004
- Messages
- 688
I find exec compensation to be totally ridiculous. But methinks that 161 millions keeps the 'climbers' crawling all over each other to get to the top of the crawdad bucket.
I'll keep my 40 hrs a week and bi-weakly pittance, thanks, instead of trying to hit the executive ranks lotto.
I'll keep my 40 hrs a week and bi-weakly pittance, thanks, instead of trying to hit the executive ranks lotto.
travelover
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2007
- Messages
- 14,328
Didn't Chevy replace the Emblematic with the Powerglide? 
Darryl
Full time employment: Posting here.
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2007
- Messages
- 577
It is ridiculous, I'll never forget the night grandma said nobody should make over 100K a year (that one took a while to get past).
Some of these numbers are truly obscene and yes it is on the board. If the exec asks and they get then that's the deal. Key people can definetly make a difference now to the person doing the hiring guess how much (I mean accurately measure) and pay accordingly.
Me thinks 161M difference would be the exception not the rule.
Some of these numbers are truly obscene and yes it is on the board. If the exec asks and they get then that's the deal. Key people can definetly make a difference now to the person doing the hiring guess how much (I mean accurately measure) and pay accordingly.
Me thinks 161M difference would be the exception not the rule.
