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: combjelly who wrote (792512)	6/29/2014 8:35:43 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576866

>> They are unrelated in that the companies with the best paid CEOs don't outperform CEOs who are paid substantially less. Often the companies with less compensated CEOs outperform companies with the "rockstar" CEOs. There is a pretty ridiculous assumption in there, which is that the CEO is the only variable when in fact there are thousands. For example, a CEO may be highly compensated because he or she is an expert at turning around losers, and it may be a loser that is hiring him. There is a vast difference between running a company that is teetering on bankruptcy versus one that has plenty of cash. Or between one that has a good product line and one having an end-of-life product line. Or (fill in thousands of variable here). A CEO can only be judged with respect to the company he it going to work for and those he's worked for in the past. Sometimes, the business relationships alone are worth the pricetag. >> 1) BOD members are often CEOs who sit on each others BOD. So there is a direct monetary incentive to keep the wage spiral going. Some are, some aren't. But shareholders have absolute control over it via a democratic process. >> 2) Most shareholders have no say in the compensation package. Sure they do. They vote for against the BOD; and they can vote with their feet. Exactly as it should be. >> Many times, the bulk of the CEO compensation package is warrants. There are various compensation schemes, and for major companies these are almost always worked out by compensation analysts, the function of which are to create mutually workable compensation packages. Not one party to the transaction need accept if it is unacceptable to them. >> To pay for the exercized warrants, there is often a stock buyback plan. These are not necessarily bad, but some companies do a lot of stock buyback, like Walmart. They buyback enough stock every year that it amounts to over $14k/year per employee. To maintain profits, they need to squeeze their employees harder. To do that, they cap raises, don't employ enough people to keep the shelves adequately stocked and engage in wage theft. Walmart is far from the only company that does this. Oh, bullshit. Employees get squeezed harder because they are increasingly expensive and becoming less and less necessary.