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.

Pastimes : NNBM - SI Branch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: stockman_scott who wrote (19345)	12/4/2002 9:42:38 PM
From: altair19	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 104155

S2, <Why did a former CEO (who is still worth hundreds of millions) need all those perks and special benefits...?> The facts of the matter are is ...he didn't. The Board approved these measures...he never requested them. This man generated more money for more people, ran a company that grew revenue and profit consistently for 20 years, left as a legacy of a well run company....created far more jobs than he eliminated....this man delivered! He was the guy who put his ass on the line and created enormous wealth, national economic stability, created a healthy benchmark for other companies....built a reputation as an ethical global player. His point about risk aversion...and knee jerk fixes are brilliant. We all should listen to him. Also......he's very human. Altair19

To: stockman_scott who wrote (19345)	12/5/2002 12:10:45 AM
From: abuelita	Respond to of 104155

edit down below: S2 i think the question is, why is a guy who is worth hundreds of millions and is how old now, not just come up with an equitable financial arrangement with his wife in the first place. even if it was 25% which it's felt she's not entitled to - it would have saved him from having to reveal his retirement deal and not have to subsequently return it. phooey, how much money does he need anyway, or her for that matter. whether this man "delivered" as altie says or not, the fact is i think he got greedy at the end. hell, its only money - paper money at that. it can vanish in an instant. how much do you need to make you happy anyway? i know someone like that. he would rather spend all his money on legal fees than concede that his wife of 29 years made a contribution to their partnership and deserved 50% of their assets. it boggles the mind. r1 i just read this: btw, tonight Welch claimed that Bush is a fantastic leader...I think the jury is still out on that. oy - welch has just lost all credibility. jane - go for it!!