Re: Aig
 

I agree, and personally I think the whole bonus issue is a red herring that people are seizing on for political advantage. I was responding to your theory that no one would ever agree to comp that was based on zero salary with high upside.

Re: Aig
 

Apparently, TM and GGG were busy finding a bunch of needles in the haystack, while I was off working.

Care to reconsider your position on this?

Re: Deep Thought
 

Are you stoned again?

Re: Aig
 

I am reconsidering my position as well. After reading those articles and thinking about what else Joe AIG might have accrued during his $1 year, I've decided that if I were he I would not feel "totally burned".

I would, however, be very put out.

Hay in the Needlestack, anyone?
 

FBettys, whatever you do, don't roll in the hay with Club.

Re: Aig
 

Did someone say "put out?" It's Thursday night and I have somewhere to be.

Re: Aig
 

Only because the Babe hit 46 dingers that year.

Re: Aig
 

Those (and TM's) are examples where the CEO's are also the founders/major SH of the company. Not the same thing.

Re: Aig
 

good one

Re: Aig
 

Sears?

Re: Aig
 

what was the thing about spittle trays?

Re: Aig
 

Why leave it aside? Isn't it enough that these guys were taking a "bonus" that was deferred compensation so structured for tax reasons?

Re: Aig
 

Which Sears CEO are we talking about (I didn't see it listed in that article)? Was Ed Lampert ever CEO? If so, yeah, he fits the description.

Re: Aig
 

I don't know. Multo got Paigow in the divorce.

Re: Aig
 

I never suggested he filmed it.

Re: Aig
 

The very first name on that list, Chambers of Cisco, wasn't a founder (or even in the Company in its pre-public days). I don't think Lee Iacocca founded GM. What shares they got they got mostly as part of compensation. There are others among the contemporary examples in that article who are similarly situated.

As to the older examples, please identify which of the following were founders or major SH of the Company:

I suspect the $1 a year guys at AIG have substantial equity stakes. Does anyone know what kind of grants AIG has been making now that it's price is way down.

I respect your ability to argue a distinction where none exists, but think it would be more convincing if coupled with rudimentary reading skills.

Nate Silver's summary of the Republican anti-Budget
 

Re: Aig
 

didn't he take the $1 at Chrsyler? (he also didn't start Chrsyler)

Re: Aig
 

Let's deem this a friendly amendment.

(oops).

Re: Nate Silver's summary of the Republican anti-Budget
 

I did not know that the RNC had purchased LnT's IP from the bankrutpcy estate. Interesting strategy.

Re: Aig
 

Oh, for God's sake. TM cited the CEOs of AIG, Citibank, and the Big 3. You think those individuals founded those companies, or are "major shareholders"? If so, you have a very loose definition of "major".

Also, the article GGG linked had this quote: "The dollar-a-year men included GE CEO Philip Reed, Sears executive Donald Nelson, Ford production chief Ernest Kanzler, and General Motors President William S. Knudsen." I don't know who any of those people are -- are you saying that they are the founders or major shareholders of their companies?

And what's the difference, anyway? Are you saying Steve Jobs' contribution is less meaningful than whathisname from AIG, because he only, like, founded the company? I was pointing out that many execs have taken no salary, in exchange for upside for future performance. For Jobs, the upside comes in the form of stock value increase (which, of course, he would get if any CEO did a good job, and he just sat on the deck drinking appletinis....)

A very quick search also reveals Google CEO Larry Schmidt (not the founder, not a "major" shareholder unless you define that extremely loosely), Terry Semel of Yahoo!, and many, many others.

You can discount these all you want, find any differences that you want. That just proves you're a lawyer.

Re: Aig
 

oops. STP. That's why I'm paid more than $1/year.

Re: Aig
 

I just looked up Chambers because I was curious. In 2008 he made $375K in salary. I don't know where the article got $1.

Give me the fucking teriyaki bowl!
 

Step one: CNN's own babyfaced Ed Henry asks The Question of Obama, to which Obama gives The Answer.

Step two: Post presser, CNN replays it and discusses it about 94 times over the following 3 hours.

Step three: Ed Henry wallows in self-indulgence, writing a play-by-play of how he came up with and delivered The Question.

Step four. Ed, somewhat unsurprisingly, gets mocked pretty mercilessly for it.

Like I say, the media is a predictable mark, but there's something that I just like about that piece. Give me the fucking teriyaki bowl really captures it quite nicely.

Re: Give me the fucking teriyaki bowl!
 

His play by play makes him sounds like a child and a complete idiot. He should worry about his job security.

Re: Give me the fucking teriyaki bowl!
 

which one is "him" and "he?"

Re: Give me the fucking teriyaki bowl!
 

Ed Henry.

Re: Aig
 

From 2002.

http://news.cnet.com/Cisco-CEO-draws..._3-960745.html

I know, I know. Just a needle in the haystack. Plus, he founded the company and is the major shareholder. Just like Vikram Pandit founded and owns Citigroup.

Or is "2002" a distinguishing factor all on its own?


eta: The fact that the article GGG linked was written in 2003 suggests that it wasn't about 2008 salaries.

Re: Aig
 

I admire your persistence in the face of all evidence. This is better than arguing with Hank about creationism.

I get to score each post as a victory, right, Hank?

Re: Aig
 

It was the first one that came up on google. I didn't check the other 31 million + results on google.

Try searching "dollar a year ceos".

Yes! 35-0 on this topic alone!

Re: Give me the fucking teriyaki bowl!
 

w
a
t







e
r

Re: Give me the fucking teriyaki bowl!
 

Whiff.

TM

Re: Aig
 

This is a joke. The proposition I was fighting was the it is common (or not uncommon) for CEO's to take $1 in salary and the rest on the come. The situation with Chambers in 2002 was after the bubble burst and a symbolic/PR gesture. Others that were listed were, indeed, company founders (like google). Iococca did it as part engendering confidence for his turn around plan. But these examples are not the same as a non-CEO executive agreeing to work for free and just play the up. That just doesn't happen.

Re: Aig
 

That Sears EVP in the article will be glad to hear that. As to the rest, well, I'm bored. I'm going to go shoot fish in another barrel.

Re: Aig
 

Who knows how often it happens? When it does happen with non-CEO types, it's clearly not news or something that is google-able. Your point is taken that CEOs usually do it for one of two reasons--they are either making a big show of how they plan on doing a great job for the company or there are tax implications. But jumping up and down about the lack of $1 salaries out there doesn't really mean much since there are surely many executives who agree to much lower salaries than they would normally in exchange for stock options or a performance based bonus or even a large, non-performance-based back end payment.

In short, the whole point of this argument is stupid.

TM

Re: Aig
 

You're right. It doesn't happen.

Except in a post-bubble situation, or to engender confidence that the execs can turn a failing company around. Which, of course, does not apply to the Big 3, Citibank, AIG, or anyone else in these booming economic times.


Let's argue about whether water is wet.

Re: Aig
 

Just for laughs, I went and looked at the post that started this. You said "I have never seen an executive work for $1 and play the rest on the up."

Not, "I have never seen it, except in 2003 or from founders or major stockholders or after burst bubbles or when the guy had a name like Iacocca or when my google search revealed that five years later he started getting a higher salary or when the exec was just the CEO."

I've never seen water that was wet, except when it was in its liquid form.

Re: Aig
 

Come on, man, the guy can't breath underneath that pile.

At least stop kicking and elbowing him while you smother him.

Re: Aig
 

You're relying on the guy who took a $1 salary in 1941 as head of the War Production Board*, not as a Sears employee? Really? He was making $70,000/year before that at Sears**.

*A job with "authority greater than any U.S. citizen except the President himself has ever had". "The People Win", Time, January 26, 1942.

**Ibid.

Re: Aig
 

Ibid? Really? Have we sunk this low?

TM