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 : Mainstream Politics and Economics -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (49992)	8/2/2013 12:28:21 AM
From: Broken_Clock	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 85487

"But why is it you support unions employees getting special treatment when their performance is inadequate, yet you object to CEOs being paid when there is a perception their performance is inadequate?" I never have. Supporting unions is not one stop shopping. in fact, there are successful millionaires i admire. Here is one: shs.umsystem.edu it is said at the end of his life he tithed 90% of his earnings I've never heard anything bad spoken of him

To: i-node who wrote (49992)	8/2/2013 2:47:53 PM
From: TimF	1 Recommendation Recommended By i-node Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 85487

I don't follow that stock, so I don't know whether that was bad performance on his part or whether perhaps other factors were at work. Even if it was his fault, and the company would have done great without him, it doesn't seem enough of a decline to call "in to the ground", esp. because its still around and profitable today (7 years after he left the company). Pfizer’s stock was trading at about $45 a share; when his tenure ended five years later, Pfizer’s stock was floundering at under $36 a share. On McKinnell’s watch, the value of the company declined by $137 billion. Under $36 probably means over $35. If it was $35, then that's $10/share equaling $137bil of market cap, which would mean each dollar of share price equals $13.7bil in market cap, leaving a market cap of $479.5 billion even at the end of his tenure, and $616.5bil before that. Not that I follow the stock either but I don't recall it ever having such a high market cap. Its only a bit over $200bil today, and on the long term charts such as finance.yahoo.com; it never seems to get much more than 50% higher than it is today.