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.
Microcap & Penny Stocks : TSIG.com TIGI (formerly TSIG) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Zeev Hed who wrote (23718)4/4/1999 1:43:00 AM
From: ztect  Respond to of 44908
 
Sorry Zeev, don't know what country you've been living.....

BUT....

Relative to corporate America, the compensation of Gordon is relatively tame.

Note his salary is for the next five years. His compensation the past year was $178,846.
If the company achieves many of the goals as per the terms of current agreements and of its
business plan, the fourth and fifth year salaries of Gordon's compensation agreement will
look like a bargain...

Maybe you should direct your concerns about excessive executive compensation
to a myriad of other threads like Chrylser, Merck, Citicorp, and many other non performers...

=================
Some back ground on Executive Compensation from Paywatch...http://www.paywatch.org/paywatch/problem/index.htm
=======

"Chances are if you're reading the newspaper or watching the news (or
surfing the web), you're hearing about another mega-million dollar
pay package awarded to a company executive. Whether it's Sanford Weil
and his $230 million pay bonanza from Travelers Group, or Richard
Scrushy's $107 million package from HealthSouth, the deals go on and
on. "

If you think executive pay is spiraling out of control, you're right.
Among 365 major U.S. companies, CEO pay climbed 35% in 1997.
Executive pay, including stock options, reached $7.8 million in
1997, up from $5.8 million in 1996.
[Business Week, April 20,
1998].

While CEO pay soared, corporate profits rose only one seventh that
rate at 5%. And factory employees' pay rose only 2.6% [Business Week,
April 20, 1998]. Yet these statistics only scratch the surface:

The pay disparity between CEOs and U.S. workers is increasing to
alarming levels. In 1965, CEOs made 44 times the average factory
worker's salary. Today, CEOs make 326 times the average factory
worker's pay
[Business, April 21, 1997; Business Week, April 20,
1998 ].

The average CEO makes 728 times more than a minimum wage worker in
the U.S. If the minimum wage (which was enacted in 1960), had risen
at the same rate as executive pay, it would stand at nearly $41 an
hour as opposed to $5.15 [IPS/United for a Fair Economy, April 23,
1998)

CEO pay is rising so fast that it's hurting the bottom line at
American companies. A recent research report by London-based economic
consulting firm Smithers & Co. showed that by recalculating the
profits of the 100 largest U.S. companies adjusting for the value of
executives' stock options plans 11 firms went from profit to loss
and another 13 had their profits cut in half [Financial Post, July
11, 1998].

===========================================
TSIG....

freeedgar.com

Item 10. Executive Compensation.
The following information discloses all plan and non-plan compensation
awarded to, earned by, or paid to the Company's Chief Executive Officer and each
of the four highest paid executive officers of the Company and/or its
subsidiaries.
13

Summary Compensation Table

The following table sets forth all compensation, including bonuses,
stock option awards and other payments, paid or accrued by the Company and/or
its subsidiaries during each of the fiscal years ended December 31, 1998, 1997
and 1996, to or for the Company's Chief Executive Officer and each of the other
executive officers of the Company and/or its subsidiaries whose total annual
salary and bonus exceeded $100,000 for the year ended 1998.
Annual Compensation
-------------------------------------------------
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e)
Name Year Other
and Ended Annual
Principal December Salary Bonus Compensation
Position 31 ($) ($) ($)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert P. Gordon, 1998 178,846

Additional Language

Pursuant to an employment agreement dated December 4, 1998, the Company
engaged Robert P. Gordon to continue to serve as Chairman (an officer position)
for a term of five years. Pursuant to the agreement, Mr. Gordon will be paid a
salary of $360,000 per year.

The Company's Board of Directors is responsible for reviewing and
determining the annual salary and other compensation of the executive officers
and key employees of the Company and its subsidiaries. The goals of the Company
are to align compensation with business objectives and performance and to enable
the Company and its subsidiaries to attract, retain and reward executive
officers and other key employees who contribute to the long-term success of the
company.
The Company and its subsidiaries provide base salaries to its executive
officers and key employees sufficient to provide motivation to achieve certain
operating goals.

================================
Random Look at other levels of Executive Compensation in other businesses and industries

Example 1: Novacare

COMPENSATION OF EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE COMPANY

The following table sets forth information for the fiscal years ended June
30, 1998, 1997 and 1996 concerning the compensation paid or awarded to the Chief
Executive Officer and each of the four other most highly compensated executive
officers of the Company during each such year.

SUMMARY COMPENSATION TABLE <TABLE><CAPTION>
LONG TERM
COMPENSATION
ANNUAL COMPENSATION AWARDS ALL OTHER
NAME AND ---------------------------------- OPTIONS COMPENSATION
PRINCIPAL POSITION YEAR SALARY($) BONUS($) OTHER($)(1) (#) ($)(2)
---------------------------- ---- --------- -------- ----------- ------------ ------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C>
John H. Foster(3)........... 1998 $580,266 $487,670 $128,374 0 $100,584
Chairman of the Board 1997 553,899 389,100 66,627 0 36,303
1996 530,865 0 2,000,000 590,451
Timothy E. Foster(4)........ 1998 500,000 243,835 7,395 0 71,381
Chief Executive Officer 1997 495,482 194,550 0 31,091
1996 403,750 100,000 1,500,000 48,957
James W. McLane(5).......... 1998 457,500 195,068 0 217,213
President and Chief 1997 70,274 0 850,000 0
Operating Officer
Daryl A. Dixon.............. 1998 374,000 249,282 134,867 153,492
President and General 1997 364,628 219,776 0 120,152
Manager -- Long Term Care 1996 315,000 142,616 155,766 137,895
Services Division
Ronald G. Hiscock(6)........ 1998 295,174 164,576 155,011 45,424
President and General 1997 272,903 175,944 0 18,282
Manager -- Outpatient 1996 199,022 125,612 232,518 28,520

============================

Example 2: eBay

. Summary Compensation Table

Long-Term and Other
Annual Compensation Compensation
--------------------------------- -----------------------
Number of
Securities
Fiscal Other Annual Underlying All Other
Name and 1998 Principal Positions Year Salary Bonus(1) Compensation(2) Options Compensation
--------------------------------- ------ -------- -------- --------------- ---------- ------------

Margaret C. Whitman...... 1998 $145,833 $100,000 $1,500 7,200,000 $34,894(3)
President and Chief 1997 -- -- -- --
Executive Officer

Example 3: IFR Systems

SUMMARY COMPENSATION TABLE
ANNUAL COMPENSATION
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LONG-TERM
COMPENSATION ALL OTHER
NAME AND SALARY BONUS OTHER ANNUAL AWARDS COMPENSATION
PRINCIPAL POSITION YEAR ($) ($) COMPENSATION(1) STOCK OPTIONS(#) ($)(2)
----------------------------------- --------- --------- --------- ----------------- ----------------- -------------

Alfred H. Hunt, III ............... 1998 $ 275,000 $ 160,000 $ 48,341 57,500 $ 8,388
PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE 1997 $ 265,000 $ 120,711 $ 46,080 45,000 $ 13,900
OFFICER 1996 $ 250,000 $ 72,320 $ 44,812 0 $ 15,970
Jeffrey A. Bloomer ................ 1998 $ 140,000 $ 115,000 $ 4,319 62,500 $ 10,775
TREASURER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL 1997 $ 120,000 $ 47,373 $ 4,319 22,500 $ 10,811
OFFICER 1996 $ 90,000 $ 15,136 $ 0 0 $ 8,551
Iain M. Robertson ................. 1998 $ 184,000 $ 155,000 $ 19,324 67,500 $ 0
MANAGING DIRECTOR IFR LTD. 1997 $ 165,000 $ 71,478 $ 15



To: Zeev Hed who wrote (23718)4/4/1999 3:07:00 AM
From: ztect  Read Replies (4) | Respond to of 44908
 
Zeev.....

You are displaying some pretty blatant ignorance especially regarding
your statement...

"...That it attempted an acquisition of another inept company (CCI) just to cancel it few month later, tells me that the management is playing around and getting paid for it...."

You obviously have absolutely no clue what transpired and what were the reasons for canceling this relationship. If you understood what transpired, you'd understand that the company wasn't at fault and actually ended up with the benefits of the acquisition without having to compensate the director of the to be acquired company CCI which misrepresented itself to TSIG.

Why don't you show some humility for a change and ask an insightful question or two?

As for the executive compensation the company didn't pay the director $360,000 for the past 10-K, if you care to read his compensation was $178,000 plus or minus....the $360,000 is annuallly for the NEXT five years and actually is indicative of the future earnings of the company which you disregard simply becuase you appear not to be capable to comprehend marketing.

From my understanding of your own marketing capability and ability to generate investor dollars in your own intersts is that you have in the past sollicited people on SI including me directly....If this is the savvy from which you formulate your critiques, I have to say I'm a little bit less than impressed. Btw, weren't you sanctioned by SI for these activities.

Sorry if you construe any or parts of this post as being personal or an affront, but I have to say that I'm a bit offended by your PM's to me stating your disinterest and unwillingness to do dd, yet later participating on the thread as an antagonist who obviously has NOT made any effort to formulate a balanced perspective by doing any dd.

I've always been bemused by what Tm said about you...that is that
Zeev is really one snake in the grass...For all my own disagreements with Tm, on this issue I may have to finally agree with him.

Going to sleep now.

Have a good night.

Sincerely,

ztect (spelling not checked)

btw...would you also care to equate what the dollar amount
from the inside sales was to which you refer from last year
....here I'll help....NOT MUCH....




To: Zeev Hed who wrote (23718)4/4/1999 3:11:00 AM
From: Ellen  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 44908
 
I asked you to show where you saw, as you had stated, that insiders had sold 2.2 million shares in 1998.

Your response:
>> Ellen, I summed up the insiders sales from Yahoo.

biz.yahoo.com; <<

So now I have to ask why did you just "sum up" what is listed there? Each and every item listed there states "Planned Sale." NOT "Sold." How many were ACTUALLY sold? Also, did you realize that some of those are the SAME shares - that the 144 was just renewed? So 2.2 million isn't even accurate to start with.

>> A company that has its main division file bankruptcy <<

Please. VSI is not the "main division." Do you know what the divisions of TSIG are?

>> That this bankruptcy still exposes TSIG to potential liabilities is just another sign of inept management. That it attempted an acquisition of another inept company (CCI) just to cancel it few month later, tells me that the management is playing around and getting paid for it. <<

I'm beginning to think you aren't objective at all and WANT to paint as negative a picture as possible by selectively using only partial data that SEEMS to validate what you say.

The liability regarding the VSI asset assigned to TSIG is really not a large amount is it? Do you know if they have already allotted contingent funds for this?

As far as what you characterize as an "attempted" acquisition, TSIG terminated pursuit when audited financials from Piercy weren't provided. Why do you WISH to characterize this as less than savvy on TSIG's part? Have you read the 8K re: the termination?

Sad to say, but you disappoint. I was genuinely expecting objective input from you. But it isn't objective at all. Or necessarily accurate either. I do NOT say this because you don't view TSIG and its potential as "glowingly positive" or such, but rather because of your selectiveness in what (partial) data you use. Not to mention the inaccuracies.



To: Zeev Hed who wrote (23718)4/4/1999 3:35:00 AM
From: Ellen  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 44908
 
Meant to add:

>> If that was not enough, he has been selling shares as recently as early this year <<

and

>> He sold 550,000 shares last year and Michael Gordon, I presume a relative close to the "table" sold another 250,000 shares last year. <<

I don't see Rob Gordon's name there anywhere. Please show where you get this "data" that he sold shares this year (and how many? you didn't say) and 550,000 shares last year. And even if he did, so what? And if this Michael Gordon sold 250,000 shares, so what?

That's not a lot, relatively speaking. What's your point?



To: Zeev Hed who wrote (23718)4/4/1999 8:21:00 AM
From: REW  Read Replies (5) | Respond to of 44908
 
There is a clearing of points as to whether the internal structure of TSIG can handle the eminent influx of business, which has already been growing. A check to review the DD done by the members of this board would have explained this. It is now apparent the desire of you and your cohorts lack this desire so I will explain to the best of my knowledge.

As should be known there is not the need for a high volume of individuals to be sitting in receipt of incoming business as it is handled, for the most part, by the programing installed.

There are already in place a system of monitors available to be manned as the need for operators increases. These individuals can be in place as soon as hired and trained for a couple of days.

There are also plans available to almost double the available approx 60 monitors. The space is available for immediate conversion as deemed necessary. There are also further plans available for the conversion of a kitchen/eating area for the same purpose. That looks to be able to accomodate an additional bay of about 40 monitors.

Every business that has the immediate forcast of rapid growth must hire with the appearance of being top heavy for a short period in order to govern the expansion of the business in as orderly a manner as possible.

It would appear Gordon's salary has been cleared to have the ability to increase as the revenues increase to accomodate. Just because there is an admission of an authorized increase in salary does not mean it is taken yet.

Marty has gone to TSIG for the purpose of obtaining answers to the questions concerning the shares and other items. His report containing these explanations will be posted for this forum next week.

Continuing the discussion at this point is redundant and serves no purpose but to further erode investor confidence. At this point that is the only purpose I and others can gleen from the continuing posting by you and your cohorts.

At this point there can be no conclusion drawn but to recognize the sole purpose of the invasion of this forum by your faction is to cause this socalled death spiral on your own. Since there has been no action taken to date by TSIG to initiate this action, the results will be directly attributed to dialogue brought to this forum by non-shareholders with no desire to become shareholders and only a desire to cause direct damage to the value of another's investment.

I also find it amusing and disturbing that this barage on the board of TSIG occurs as the persons with the clearing answers are unavailable for response. It also will become clear to the posters that there will be no indications from the attacking force to clear up their negative postings by trying to find any answers on their own. This is not the function of an unfriendly attack.

Your initial interest was brought by the attackers and was informative. That phase is now over. Continuing in the dialogue will place you in their category. I had the initial feeling you were not wanting to be placed in their category. This will be made apparent with how you handle any continuing dialogue. As you stated amply in the beginning, there are many other interests for your perusal so it now becomes a wonderment why dropping all other interests to become involved in TSIG's interests so rapidly rose to the top or your priorities.

Respectfully

Bob