Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: snoman who wrote (124811)	5/8/2001 10:19:21 PM
From: Kevin Podsiadlik	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

That reminds me of the experience Ben & Jerry of ice cream fame went through attempting to hire a new CEO for their company. Being good liberals, they had a policy that no one in the company could make more than a certain multiple of the lowest-paid worker's salary. At the time, IIRC, that came to a little under $200,000. So they set out to recruit a CEO who was willing to accept their corporate salary cap. Shockingly enough, they did not find a single qualified applicant willing to run the company for the salary offered. People make large salaries because other people are willing to pay them large salaries. Why this fact makes people angry is beyond me.* But I guess I was born dumb too. -- *Actually that's not true, I have heard of the concept of "envy". Seems a sad policy under which to run one's life, though.

To: snoman who wrote (124811)	5/9/2001 11:59:48 AM
From: Robert Rose	Respond to of 164684

snoman, yours is an interesting post, but it was directed at the wrong person. my view is probably somewhere in between yours and skeeter's. at any rate $60k gets you nowhere and $120k doesn't do much better. regards, rob :)

To: snoman who wrote (124811)	5/9/2001 12:20:07 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

>>This type of thing just blows me away, please forgive me, I just have to rant a bit.<< snoman, regarding my post about about naveen soaking other investors. you have a point. i really came off bad and sounded greedy. let me clarify, though. one point i was trying to make was that these business plans are both so poor that a reasonably savvy business person ought to have seen through the fluff. naveen apparently did and bezos didn't (but the consolation "prize" for bezos is still quite nice, economically speaking - not morally speaking). a 2nd point that can be made is that if you sell people what they want, it is not wrong to make money. even if you may personally think the idea is dumb. i do not think it is immoral to start a web company and sell a ton of shares b/c you own a ton and don't believe in the long term viability of the business model (i don't know if this is possible, but if it were...). after all, you may be wrong and everyone else may be right. it would be prudent to offer caution when you felt folks were going nuts pricing your company, though. now, if you misconstrue the potential above your own belief system or you don't work your hardest then that is unethical. but if you just lay out the facts and cash in on your equity then that is another issue. a third point is that what one does with the wealth after someone has it was not addressed at all so no inferences can be made. helping others to become better contributors to family and society is a noble cause. enabling people is not. i would also point out that your analogies are rather weak. did a mouse choose to be a mouse? no. did an investor choose to throw their dough at net stocks? yes. did africans choose to be enslaved (or jews or a plethora of other peoples)? no. did investors choose to be in net stocks? absolutely. in addition, an investor could have left at any time. i bet slaves throughout history wish they had this opportunity. btw, wrt "smart" and "dumb," my personal belief is that good fortune plays a bigger role in outcomes than any other single factor. perhaps this view would help to put wealth in perspective. also, wrt your moral salary guide, there are folks in mexico (or many other countries) that have moral salary guidelines like yours... except your salary is above their immoral limit. they can't fathom how you can be so selfish. of course, many live in landfills. both you and they have a point. a very good point. i would go further and say it isn't how much you make, it is what you do with what you make. as an example, is making a million and spending $900k on improving the welfare of others immoral? i sure don't think so. in any case, thanks for giving me something to ponder. life is not about dollars and cents but about developing rewarding relationships with other people and adding value to their lives. sometimes this point gets lost in the fray.