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 : Sioux Nation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (163577)	3/18/2009 12:39:29 PM
From: altair19	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 361627

Wharfy, <If there were profits> There were profits in the majority of the company - it's the guys who sold the derivative instruments that brought the entire company down. The way most bonus programs work is not barracks law where one-fails all fail...otherwise, no one who was good at sales or management would come and work there. As for not giving a pitcher with a 6.0 era a bonus...agreed..no bonus. So then, if you had a 360 hitter on the same team with 100 RBI's would you give him a bonus? Herein lies the question and philosophical argument of all bonus plans...can you be a winner on a losing team? I've seen companies go both ways on it. The ones that said yes, you can be a winner on a losing team, have usually done better than companies that said no over the long haul. Now that I consult to a school, I don't work problems like that any more. Altair19