SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Tenchusatsu who wrote (748349)10/21/2013 2:18:27 PM
From: i-node  Respond to of 1573901
 
>> It's hard to defend those who pay themselves generously for a job poorly done. Several CEOs come to mind, such as Leo Apotheker and maybe Hector "The Dissector" Ruiz. It would be nice if there was a way to fire them AND revoke their golden handcuffs.

I understand the point; however, they enter into these contracts at arms-length based on the facts and circumstances at the time. They aren't "paying themselves"; the BOD makes the decision to hire or not hire the CEO, so if a mistake is made that is the responsibility of the BOD.

There are CEOs who are not worth what they're paid, for sure. But they're not "paying themselves"; they put an offer on the table, or the BOD does, and the other party accepts or rejects it. This is markets working like they're supposed to.

How much was Sam Walton worth to the company he created (he was, of course, the most under-compensated corporate manager in history, but that's beside the point)? There is no question that the world's greatest retailer was a direct result of one man's leadership. I don't even know how you'd put a price on it. These people have the talent of a rock star and there is no reason they shouldn't earn whatever they can.

Sure, sometimes the BOD makes a bad decision and when they do, there is so much at stake they have to eat the cost of that mistake to get back on track. That's all on the BOD.