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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (316581)	12/20/2006 7:32:31 AM
From: Elroy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577884

Want to do the same for CEOs? Limiting CEO pay somehow seems like a good idea, I'm just not sure how. Certainly outght to be some deriliction of fiduciary duties in the failed CEO that the board has to give $20 million to just to get the guy to leave the company. But the theory isn't the same as being an entertainer or athlete. I'm saying plenty of entertainers and athletes will still work for much lower wages because of love of the job. Some CEO jobs can be hellish and unpleasant. You'd have a hard time arguing that most employees will want to be the CEO even if they don't have the financial reward. If you manage an office for $100k, then get the opportunity to become CEO which means 50% more work per week and a relocation, but the same $100k pay, are you going to pursue the CEO job? Probably not. But many artists and athletes would still perform/play if their pay were significantly cut.