GM cuts executive salaries
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 658
From: Madisonville, Louisiana
Re: GM cuts executive salaries
really good stuff on this message board. I'm glad to see Scott stopping buy as well. I think Darth Xed has the CEO pay problem pegged as far as why they get so much money. Scott makes some good points as well about the busy schedule upper management is required to keep. IF you dropped the pay of the upper executives even to a million dollar cap you would probably find out that a lot of them don't really want to be there. The company would probably go farther down the crapper while you scramble for replacements as well.
Here is a question for those of us in here (including myself) who would actually like to be the CEO of a company one day. What are you doing to put yourself in a position to become a CEO or even be qualified to be a CEO?
Here is a question for those of us in here (including myself) who would actually like to be the CEO of a company one day. What are you doing to put yourself in a position to become a CEO or even be qualified to be a CEO?
ALMIGHTY MEMBER
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 2,298
From: Detroit, MI USA
Re: GM cuts executive salaries
There is not enough money in this world for me to want to be CEO........or even a VP at General Motors. -- or Ford or DCX for that matter.
I've seen it.
It isn't what those on the outside think it is.
I've seen it.
It isn't what those on the outside think it is.
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 547
Re: GM cuts executive salaries
Originally Posted by Fbodfather
There is not enough money in this world for me to want to be CEO........or even a VP at General Motors. -- or Ford or DCX for that matter.
I've seen it.
It isn't what those on the outside think it is.
I've seen it.
It isn't what those on the outside think it is.
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 547
Re: GM cuts executive salaries
Originally Posted by Robert_Nashville
Some of what I’ve read here has made good points but frankly, I’m appalled by some of the comments submitted in this thread.
Many of the comments seem to be rooted in envy, jealously, and a disheartening lack of understanding of the principles that made the United States the preeminent economic power in the world. Suggesting such things as salary caps or making statements that certain executives “make too much” are simply asinine.
Private ownership (rather than government ownership), competition and the opportunity to make ANYTHING of your life that you want is what has made America strong and the only things that will keep it strong if, in fact, it can be saved from those who’s policies would make the United States a socialistic state were those policies enacted.
Who are any of YOU to decide how much an executive of a major corporation should make?
Who are any of YOU do decide it isn’t “fair” for a CEO to make $X.XMillion/year while Joe Worker makes $15/hour?
Blaming your situation on “old boys club” rules and suggestions that high-income earners are there only by accident of birth or luck are simply rationalizations for your own lack of accomplishment.
Only the owners of a company (stockholders) have the right to decide how much they can and should pay their employees (from CEO to janitor) and if they make bad choices they will pay the price. We as consumers certainly have a voice by virtue of our purchasing decisions but we have no right to dictate because we aren’t taking the risks of ownership.
Are there bad and/or “overpaid” CEOs – of course there are. Do some people have an automatic advantage because of the family they are born into you – sure they do.
So what?
If you want to make more money or be more successful (by whatever standard you measure success) then the only person standing in your way is the man or woman you see in the mirror.
Many of the comments seem to be rooted in envy, jealously, and a disheartening lack of understanding of the principles that made the United States the preeminent economic power in the world. Suggesting such things as salary caps or making statements that certain executives “make too much” are simply asinine.
Private ownership (rather than government ownership), competition and the opportunity to make ANYTHING of your life that you want is what has made America strong and the only things that will keep it strong if, in fact, it can be saved from those who’s policies would make the United States a socialistic state were those policies enacted.
Who are any of YOU to decide how much an executive of a major corporation should make?
Who are any of YOU do decide it isn’t “fair” for a CEO to make $X.XMillion/year while Joe Worker makes $15/hour?
Blaming your situation on “old boys club” rules and suggestions that high-income earners are there only by accident of birth or luck are simply rationalizations for your own lack of accomplishment.
Only the owners of a company (stockholders) have the right to decide how much they can and should pay their employees (from CEO to janitor) and if they make bad choices they will pay the price. We as consumers certainly have a voice by virtue of our purchasing decisions but we have no right to dictate because we aren’t taking the risks of ownership.
Are there bad and/or “overpaid” CEOs – of course there are. Do some people have an automatic advantage because of the family they are born into you – sure they do.
So what?
If you want to make more money or be more successful (by whatever standard you measure success) then the only person standing in your way is the man or woman you see in the mirror.
I suggested real world salaries. Yes. You really have no idea who I am or who I have worked for, and what I have done.
I have the right to say that CEO is out of hand just as much as you say it is not.
But let me ask you this, is it working?
Thank you.
besides, there is a point to paying less money, for one the company is LOSING money, for two, they should be tested to see if they are there to become millionaires, or to make the company the best it can be. If you offer them less money, and they stay, they obviously want to make it work, and will. If they don't and leave for more money, then they were only there for the money.
500k is nothing to sneeze at, and I am sure they would all make enough to live off. When things get better, then the pay will get better.
Yes I think a company should have a salary cap, people should not go there thinking they will be able to get 30m out of a company that is losing money.
I just suggest you study economics and business for a while, and maybe you'll understand my point. If you don't want to great, you don't need to.
Last edited by 5thGen; Feb 15, 2006 at 08:41 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 2,947
From: Springfield,OH. U.S.A.
Re: GM cuts executive salaries
Here is a question for those of us in here (including myself) who would actually like to be the CEO of a company one day. What are you doing to put yourself in a position to become a CEO or even be qualified to be a CEO?
You would have to have came from the right background, attended all the right schools, know the right people, then if you're lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time, maybe you could become a CEO of a major company. I'm not naive enough to believe an MBA from Ohio "U"(for example)would even get me considered for a VP's secretary.
And I'm with Fbodfather, there's not enough money in the world to make me want that position with the current baggage attached to it...I could never ask my lowest compensated employees to take cuts, and layoffs while negociating bonuses and job security for my top compensated employees.
Banned
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,938
Re: GM cuts executive salaries
Originally Posted by 5thGen
try studying Business and economics for 11 years and studying hundreds of companies, including ones that made it, ones that didn't and ones that are not what they could be.
I suggested real world salaries. Yes. You really have no idea who I am or who I have worked for, and what I have done.
I have the right to say that CEO is out of hand just as much as you say it is not.
But let me ask you this, is it working?
Thank you.
besides, there is a point to paying less money, for one the company is LOSING money, for two, they should be tested to see if they are there to become millionaires, or to make the company the best it can be. If you offer them less money, and they stay, they obviously want to make it work, and will. If they don't and leave for more money, then they were only there for the money.
500k is nothing to sneeze at, and I am sure they would all make enough to live off. When things get better, then the pay will get better.
Yes I think a company should have a salary cap, people should not go there thinking they will be able to get 30m out of a company that is losing money.
I just suggest you study economics and business for a while, and maybe you'll understand my point. If you don't want to great, you don't need to.
I suggested real world salaries. Yes. You really have no idea who I am or who I have worked for, and what I have done.
I have the right to say that CEO is out of hand just as much as you say it is not.
But let me ask you this, is it working?
Thank you.
besides, there is a point to paying less money, for one the company is LOSING money, for two, they should be tested to see if they are there to become millionaires, or to make the company the best it can be. If you offer them less money, and they stay, they obviously want to make it work, and will. If they don't and leave for more money, then they were only there for the money.
500k is nothing to sneeze at, and I am sure they would all make enough to live off. When things get better, then the pay will get better.
Yes I think a company should have a salary cap, people should not go there thinking they will be able to get 30m out of a company that is losing money.
I just suggest you study economics and business for a while, and maybe you'll understand my point. If you don't want to great, you don't need to.
You are correct...I have no idea who you are or who you've worked for nor do I know why you take personal offense at general comments which were not directed to you (or anyone else in particulare) resulting in an apparent need to impress me with your years of study.
And yes, you have the right to say anything you want...you don't have the right, thank God, to dictate what other people "should" make or to determine what a "real world salary" should be for someone.
If your eleven years of studying hundreds of companies have convinved you that those who risk nothing (such as you) should dictate to those who risk all what they shoudl make; than I'd suggest you spend a few more years in study.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,180
From: Yadkinville, NC USA
Re: GM cuts executive salaries
I mean none of this with sarcasm or malice, I am just answering your questions bluntly. It's late, and I am heading for bed, so no time for doodling...
NO, actually, telling someone that expressing their opinion is asinine... is asinine.
I have not seen a single word anywhere in this thread where anyone has said government should intervene, set limits, regulate salaries, or take over anything in any business. How on earth has anyone indicated that a socialistic state is desired?!?!
I can argue that the American spirit, our desire to give when we have nothing to give, our desire to work when we are exhausted, our desire to share when we have not enough for ourselves, and our fortitude to fight a good fight instead of running for the easy-out - THESE things are what make the American a better person, and make our country the greatest one on earth. It has not a damn thing to do with competition or opportunity - there are entrepreneurs in every country on earth, and there is competition everywhere. Do you really think the USA is the only country with millionaires or big companies? Our PEOPLE make our country great - not business policy.
I am the guy who makes the product that my company sells to generate revenue.
I am the guy who converts goods into salaries.
I am the agent of the company that customers see and associate with.
And most important - I am a shareholder.
All of these issues (and more to be sure) give me the right to have an opinion of how much my company's CEO is entitled to make.
Without ME, and all of the others like me, the CEO would not exist.
We are interdependent on each other (or we should be anyways), but as is the case all to often these days, the senior-most management alienates itself from the common working man, and looks down on them as a less-significant person. In fact, most senior management has no concern for "labor" (as they are titled on accounting sheets), and consider "employees" to be nothing more than operating expenses or overhead. LET'S BE HONEST ABOUT IT.
My company just layed-off 75 more people in 2 of our local plants today. I just lost 3 close coworkers that didn't deserve what they got... at all. The email that went out at 2pm today referred to these people as "positions that are not required to operate at our current levels". WTF kind od justification is that?!?! They sent labor intensive jobs to China, then said they needed to let go of people here because we aren't busy enough... OMG, talk about diplomatic immunity.
See above.
When the CEO starts making something the company can sell to generate revenue... we'll discuss it further.
Until then, show me a company that has CEO's but no workers...
I can definitely show you companies with workers but no CEOs.
Survival of the fittest...
Nobody has "blamed" anybody for anything that I have seen?!?!
Some have stated that they would like a shot at being a CEO, but I don't think they are b1+ch1ng about NOT being a CEO right now.
Are you trying to say the "old boy's club" doesn't happen or that it's fair and justified?
Most employees are shareholders, so why shouldn't they have the right to decide how much money their officers make?
Because the BOD issues huge salaries and gigantic stock options to each other, and ensure that they maintain a controlling interest in the company - that's why.
And if that isn't bad enough, they get their mutual fund/investment buddies to buy enough shares to maintain control. (No, it's not a far-fetched scenario either - just look at Enron. Or Merril-Lynch, Schwab, Shearson-Leehman, or any of the others who pled-out on insider trading and false sales tactics to generate sales of shares to investors in the last few years.)
It's the "So What?" part of this statement that I have the big problem with.
A huge part of the content in this thread is the fact that there are people in positions of power and authority that HAVE NO BUSINESS BEING THERE. They are not qualified, not capable, not worthy, and sometimes not even interested in the job they were given, but they sit in a chair, make a few photo shoots, go to board meetings once a month, and draw a HUGE check.
That's pure and total BULLSH1+!!! They don't deserve it, they shouldn't be there, and they are both a drain on the company and demoralizing to the hardworking people in that company trying to earn a living and keep their job.
Thats - "So what".
Very insightful comment.
Keen how you specifically noted "by whatever standard you measure success"... because there are so many different ways it is perceived.
If only more CEO's thought that employing American people, supporting American families, investing in communities, maintaining the environment, and operating a business legally and ethically was as much "success" as maximizing profits, eliminating overhead, and providing value to shareholders no matter what it takes... well I think we'd all be a lot better off.
But that's just MY opinion.
Sorry if this came off as harsh. Didn't mean it to, but there's definitely a gap between our social positions and our expectations for people to treat others as they would want to be treated.
Originally Posted by Robert_Nashville
Some of what I’ve read here has made good points but frankly, I’m appalled by some of the comments submitted in this thread.
Many of the comments seem to be rooted in envy, jealously, and a disheartening lack of understanding of the principles that made the United States the preeminent economic power in the world. Suggesting such things as salary caps or making statements that certain executives “make too much” are simply asinine.
Many of the comments seem to be rooted in envy, jealously, and a disheartening lack of understanding of the principles that made the United States the preeminent economic power in the world. Suggesting such things as salary caps or making statements that certain executives “make too much” are simply asinine.
Private ownership (rather than government ownership), competition and the opportunity to make ANYTHING of your life that you want is what has made America strong and the only things that will keep it strong if, in fact, it can be saved from those who’s policies would make the United States a socialistic state were those policies enacted.
I can argue that the American spirit, our desire to give when we have nothing to give, our desire to work when we are exhausted, our desire to share when we have not enough for ourselves, and our fortitude to fight a good fight instead of running for the easy-out - THESE things are what make the American a better person, and make our country the greatest one on earth. It has not a damn thing to do with competition or opportunity - there are entrepreneurs in every country on earth, and there is competition everywhere. Do you really think the USA is the only country with millionaires or big companies? Our PEOPLE make our country great - not business policy.
Who are any of YOU to decide how much an executive of a major corporation should make?
I am the guy who converts goods into salaries.
I am the agent of the company that customers see and associate with.
And most important - I am a shareholder.
All of these issues (and more to be sure) give me the right to have an opinion of how much my company's CEO is entitled to make.
Without ME, and all of the others like me, the CEO would not exist.
We are interdependent on each other (or we should be anyways), but as is the case all to often these days, the senior-most management alienates itself from the common working man, and looks down on them as a less-significant person. In fact, most senior management has no concern for "labor" (as they are titled on accounting sheets), and consider "employees" to be nothing more than operating expenses or overhead. LET'S BE HONEST ABOUT IT.
My company just layed-off 75 more people in 2 of our local plants today. I just lost 3 close coworkers that didn't deserve what they got... at all. The email that went out at 2pm today referred to these people as "positions that are not required to operate at our current levels". WTF kind od justification is that?!?! They sent labor intensive jobs to China, then said they needed to let go of people here because we aren't busy enough... OMG, talk about diplomatic immunity.
Who are any of YOU do decide it isn’t “fair” for a CEO to make $X.XMillion/year while Joe Worker makes $15/hour?
When the CEO starts making something the company can sell to generate revenue... we'll discuss it further.
Until then, show me a company that has CEO's but no workers...
I can definitely show you companies with workers but no CEOs.
Survival of the fittest...
Blaming your situation on “old boys club” rules and suggestions that high-income earners are there only by accident of birth or luck are simply rationalizations for your own lack of accomplishment.
Some have stated that they would like a shot at being a CEO, but I don't think they are b1+ch1ng about NOT being a CEO right now.
Are you trying to say the "old boy's club" doesn't happen or that it's fair and justified?
Only the owners of a company (stockholders) have the right to decide how much they can and should pay their employees (from CEO to janitor) and if they make bad choices they will pay the price. We as consumers certainly have a voice by virtue of our purchasing decisions but we have no right to dictate because we aren’t taking the risks of ownership.
Because the BOD issues huge salaries and gigantic stock options to each other, and ensure that they maintain a controlling interest in the company - that's why.
And if that isn't bad enough, they get their mutual fund/investment buddies to buy enough shares to maintain control. (No, it's not a far-fetched scenario either - just look at Enron. Or Merril-Lynch, Schwab, Shearson-Leehman, or any of the others who pled-out on insider trading and false sales tactics to generate sales of shares to investors in the last few years.)
Are there bad and/or “overpaid” CEOs – of course there are. Do some people have an automatic advantage because of the family they are born into you – sure they do. So what?
A huge part of the content in this thread is the fact that there are people in positions of power and authority that HAVE NO BUSINESS BEING THERE. They are not qualified, not capable, not worthy, and sometimes not even interested in the job they were given, but they sit in a chair, make a few photo shoots, go to board meetings once a month, and draw a HUGE check.
That's pure and total BULLSH1+!!! They don't deserve it, they shouldn't be there, and they are both a drain on the company and demoralizing to the hardworking people in that company trying to earn a living and keep their job.
Thats - "So what".
If you want to make more money or be more successful (by whatever standard you measure success) then the only person standing in your way is the man or woman you see in the mirror.
Keen how you specifically noted "by whatever standard you measure success"... because there are so many different ways it is perceived.
If only more CEO's thought that employing American people, supporting American families, investing in communities, maintaining the environment, and operating a business legally and ethically was as much "success" as maximizing profits, eliminating overhead, and providing value to shareholders no matter what it takes... well I think we'd all be a lot better off.
But that's just MY opinion.
Sorry if this came off as harsh. Didn't mean it to, but there's definitely a gap between our social positions and our expectations for people to treat others as they would want to be treated.
Last edited by ProudPony; Feb 16, 2006 at 06:28 AM.
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 547
Re: GM cuts executive salaries
Originally Posted by Robert_Nashville
What a bunch of self-aggrandizing bovine scatology.
You are correct...I have no idea who you are or who you've worked for nor do I know why you take personal offense at general comments which were not directed to you (or anyone else in particulare) resulting in an apparent need to impress me with your years of study.
And yes, you have the right to say anything you want...you don't have the right, thank God, to dictate what other people "should" make or to determine what a "real world salary" should be for someone.
If your eleven years of studying hundreds of companies have convinved you that those who risk nothing (such as you) should dictate to those who risk all what they shoudl make; than I'd suggest you spend a few more years in study.
You are correct...I have no idea who you are or who you've worked for nor do I know why you take personal offense at general comments which were not directed to you (or anyone else in particulare) resulting in an apparent need to impress me with your years of study.
And yes, you have the right to say anything you want...you don't have the right, thank God, to dictate what other people "should" make or to determine what a "real world salary" should be for someone.
If your eleven years of studying hundreds of companies have convinved you that those who risk nothing (such as you) should dictate to those who risk all what they shoudl make; than I'd suggest you spend a few more years in study.
If you want to resort to name calling, keep it up, it's amusing that you use words most people have to bust out the dictionary for in order to make an insult, that no one uses in every day speech, yet you say I am self inflating.
I have risked more than you know. I also am on the inside of a company that you will hear of in the next 12 months.
Why did I take personal offense? I didn't.
You obviously did.
I simply replied to the statement about "those who suggested salary caps", because I was one of “those”. The post said “who are you to suggest”, thereby asking who I am. So I answered with a brief description.
Should I clear it with you next time I decide to answer a question that was apparently asked of me??
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,022
From: Newhall, CA USA
Re: GM cuts executive salaries
Proud gets it right . . . as usual.
I'm the one who called out the "good old boys club." I am also, by definition, a CEO. I founded and currently run a bicoastal advertising agency with $22M in net cap billings. Not a big deal, especially when compared to GM, but I do very well--when the company does well. See www.centric.com.
I started with NOTHING. As in, no money, no clients, no knowledge of the industry (my degree is actually in engineering). My parents couldn't give me $500 to start the company. We started in a spare bedroom of a house I was renting, about a decade ago.
Have I seen many contracts go to "the friend of the boss who went to Harvard?" Yes.
Have I seen us miss bidding on big projects, because we don't play golf (or basketball) with the right people? You bet.
Have I seen our own work, passed off to "golden key" agencies, so they can have an unfair advantage when bidding against us? Yep again.
So maybe I have a weird mindset . . . one in which the best company doing the best work should get the job. But it sometimes doesn't work that way. Personal experience makes me qualified to comment on this.
Does it get in the way of my success? Nope.
Oh, and busy? Try running a bicoastal advertising agency and being a professional author at the same time: www.xcentric.com is my "night job."
I'm the one who called out the "good old boys club." I am also, by definition, a CEO. I founded and currently run a bicoastal advertising agency with $22M in net cap billings. Not a big deal, especially when compared to GM, but I do very well--when the company does well. See www.centric.com.
I started with NOTHING. As in, no money, no clients, no knowledge of the industry (my degree is actually in engineering). My parents couldn't give me $500 to start the company. We started in a spare bedroom of a house I was renting, about a decade ago.
Have I seen many contracts go to "the friend of the boss who went to Harvard?" Yes.
Have I seen us miss bidding on big projects, because we don't play golf (or basketball) with the right people? You bet.
Have I seen our own work, passed off to "golden key" agencies, so they can have an unfair advantage when bidding against us? Yep again.
So maybe I have a weird mindset . . . one in which the best company doing the best work should get the job. But it sometimes doesn't work that way. Personal experience makes me qualified to comment on this.
Does it get in the way of my success? Nope.
Oh, and busy? Try running a bicoastal advertising agency and being a professional author at the same time: www.xcentric.com is my "night job."
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 658
From: Madisonville, Louisiana
Re: GM cuts executive salaries
Is it me or is it getting a little harsh in here?
I disagree about the MBA from Ohio "U" comment. Mainly because it shouldn't be the degree that gets you the job. The MBA gets your foot in the door and then you have to prove yourself from there. I am naive enough to think that a good education, from any good school, will get me started if I play my cards right.
Any ways I hope we quit throwing insults back and forth because that doesn't interest me.
Originally Posted by 90rocz
Putting all theory aside, most of us CAN'T put ourselves in a position to become a CEO, outside of starting our own company.
You would have to have came from the right background, attended all the right schools, know the right people, then if you're lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time, maybe you could become a CEO of a major company. I'm not naive enough to believe an MBA from Ohio "U"(for example)would even get me considered for a VP's secretary.
And I'm with Fbodfather, there's not enough money in the world to make me want that position with the current baggage attached to it...I could never ask my lowest compensated employees to take cuts, and layoffs while negociating bonuses and job security for my top compensated employees.
You would have to have came from the right background, attended all the right schools, know the right people, then if you're lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time, maybe you could become a CEO of a major company. I'm not naive enough to believe an MBA from Ohio "U"(for example)would even get me considered for a VP's secretary.
And I'm with Fbodfather, there's not enough money in the world to make me want that position with the current baggage attached to it...I could never ask my lowest compensated employees to take cuts, and layoffs while negociating bonuses and job security for my top compensated employees.
Any ways I hope we quit throwing insults back and forth because that doesn't interest me.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 658
From: Madisonville, Louisiana
Re: GM cuts executive salaries
Originally Posted by centric
Proud gets it right . . . as usual.
I'm the one who called out the "good old boys club." I am also, by definition, a CEO. I founded and currently run a bicoastal advertising agency with $22M in net cap billings. Not a big deal, especially when compared to GM, but I do very well--when the company does well. See www.centric.com.
I started with NOTHING. As in, no money, no clients, no knowledge of the industry (my degree is actually in engineering). My parents couldn't give me $500 to start the company. We started in a spare bedroom of a house I was renting, about a decade ago.
Have I seen many contracts go to "the friend of the boss who went to Harvard?" Yes.
Have I seen us miss bidding on big projects, because we don't play golf (or basketball) with the right people? You bet.
Have I seen our own work, passed off to "golden key" agencies, so they can have an unfair advantage when bidding against us? Yep again.
So maybe I have a weird mindset . . . one in which the best company doing the best work should get the job. But it sometimes doesn't work that way. Personal experience makes me qualified to comment on this.
Does it get in the way of my success? Nope.
Oh, and busy? Try running a bicoastal advertising agency and being a professional author at the same time: www.xcentric.com is my "night job."
I'm the one who called out the "good old boys club." I am also, by definition, a CEO. I founded and currently run a bicoastal advertising agency with $22M in net cap billings. Not a big deal, especially when compared to GM, but I do very well--when the company does well. See www.centric.com.
I started with NOTHING. As in, no money, no clients, no knowledge of the industry (my degree is actually in engineering). My parents couldn't give me $500 to start the company. We started in a spare bedroom of a house I was renting, about a decade ago.
Have I seen many contracts go to "the friend of the boss who went to Harvard?" Yes.
Have I seen us miss bidding on big projects, because we don't play golf (or basketball) with the right people? You bet.
Have I seen our own work, passed off to "golden key" agencies, so they can have an unfair advantage when bidding against us? Yep again.
So maybe I have a weird mindset . . . one in which the best company doing the best work should get the job. But it sometimes doesn't work that way. Personal experience makes me qualified to comment on this.
Does it get in the way of my success? Nope.
Oh, and busy? Try running a bicoastal advertising agency and being a professional author at the same time: www.xcentric.com is my "night job."
Cool story and I'm glad you are doing well for yourself. I would also like to clarify myself by saying that the sort of things you mention definately go on and are not at all rare. But to say "you have to be in the right family or go to the right school" or whatever the case may be is kind of a defeatist attitude and really doesn't serve people well. Not that Centric is saying that he is just sharing his personal experience.
Banned
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,938
Re: GM cuts executive salaries
Originally Posted by centric
Proud gets it right . . . as usual.
I'm the one who called out the "good old boys club." I am also, by definition, a CEO. I founded and currently run a bicoastal advertising agency with $22M in net cap billings. Not a big deal, especially when compared to GM, but I do very well--when the company does well. See www.centric.com.
I started with NOTHING. As in, no money, no clients, no knowledge of the industry (my degree is actually in engineering). My parents couldn't give me $500 to start the company. We started in a spare bedroom of a house I was renting, about a decade ago.
Have I seen many contracts go to "the friend of the boss who went to Harvard?" Yes.
Have I seen us miss bidding on big projects, because we don't play golf (or basketball) with the right people? You bet.
Have I seen our own work, passed off to "golden key" agencies, so they can have an unfair advantage when bidding against us? Yep again.
So maybe I have a weird mindset . . . one in which the best company doing the best work should get the job. But it sometimes doesn't work that way. Personal experience makes me qualified to comment on this.
Does it get in the way of my success? Nope.
Oh, and busy? Try running a bicoastal advertising agency and being a professional author at the same time: www.xcentric.com is my "night job."
I'm the one who called out the "good old boys club." I am also, by definition, a CEO. I founded and currently run a bicoastal advertising agency with $22M in net cap billings. Not a big deal, especially when compared to GM, but I do very well--when the company does well. See www.centric.com.
I started with NOTHING. As in, no money, no clients, no knowledge of the industry (my degree is actually in engineering). My parents couldn't give me $500 to start the company. We started in a spare bedroom of a house I was renting, about a decade ago.
Have I seen many contracts go to "the friend of the boss who went to Harvard?" Yes.
Have I seen us miss bidding on big projects, because we don't play golf (or basketball) with the right people? You bet.
Have I seen our own work, passed off to "golden key" agencies, so they can have an unfair advantage when bidding against us? Yep again.
So maybe I have a weird mindset . . . one in which the best company doing the best work should get the job. But it sometimes doesn't work that way. Personal experience makes me qualified to comment on this.
Does it get in the way of my success? Nope.
Oh, and busy? Try running a bicoastal advertising agency and being a professional author at the same time: www.xcentric.com is my "night job."
Banned
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,938
Re: GM cuts executive salaries
Originally Posted by 5thGen
I simply stated how and why I came to my conclusions.
If you want to resort to name calling, keep it up, it's amusing that you use words most people have to bust out the dictionary for in order to make an insult, that no one uses in every day speech, yet you say I am self inflating.
I have risked more than you know. I also am on the inside of a company that you will hear of in the next 12 months.
Why did I take personal offense? I didn't.
You obviously did.
I simply replied to the statement about "those who suggested salary caps", because I was one of “those”. The post said “who are you to suggest”, thereby asking who I am. So I answered with a brief description.
Should I clear it with you next time I decide to answer a question that was apparently asked of me??
If you want to resort to name calling, keep it up, it's amusing that you use words most people have to bust out the dictionary for in order to make an insult, that no one uses in every day speech, yet you say I am self inflating.
I have risked more than you know. I also am on the inside of a company that you will hear of in the next 12 months.
Why did I take personal offense? I didn't.
You obviously did.
I simply replied to the statement about "those who suggested salary caps", because I was one of “those”. The post said “who are you to suggest”, thereby asking who I am. So I answered with a brief description.
Should I clear it with you next time I decide to answer a question that was apparently asked of me??
There is a difference between barbs directed toward comments or a point of view as opposed to those directed to someone personally – you and ProudPony seem to have the same trouble making that distinction.
I don’t take personal offense but I do take great offense whenever suggestions/comments are made that are so contrary to the principles that continue to make the opportunities we enjoy in the US the envy of the world. As such, suggestions that someone’s salary is “unfair”, “capping” someone’s salary at some artificial level and like suggestions demand a response.
When I am directing a question at you I'll try to always use your screename so as to avoid any confucion but by all means, please feel free to check in with me first before replying to a question if you are unsure if it was directed at you.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 1999
Posts: 2,610
From: Cincinnati, OH
Re: GM cuts executive salaries
Honestly I have no problem with CEO's making $x million a year. Maybe it's just me being a young idealist, but from what I've seen of a CIO's of huge companies (CIO because I am in IT), they have 20x the responsiblity that I do, and they're reporting to the CEO. That's insane responsibility.
You're giving up your life to be a Rick Wagoner or a Jeff Immelt type CEO. This is from an interview with Jeff...
What parts of your ordinary life have you had to give up for this job? Do you ever get to watch The West Wing or ER?
You have to have different ways to interact with the world. What I'll do is get a bunch of tapes of TV shows and watch them when I fly. I still protect working out every day. I get up at 5:30 in the morning, work out for an hour at home, doing the treadmill, the stair stepper, and the elliptical trainer. I flip between CNBC, Imus, and ESPN during the hour of cardiovascular. At least half the nights, maybe 60%, I'm away from home. Probably the one thing I've tried to hold on to is a relationship with my family, particularly my daughter, Sarah. When I got the job, she was a freshman in high school. She's graduating this year and going to Boston College. As best we could, we gave her a fairly normal life. Beyond that, there's nothing that is normal. You're on 24 hours a day, seven days a week. I'm thinking about the company all that time. My wife and I are great friends, so it's something that both of us have adjusted to. But there is nothing typical. It's constantly about being on.
Is there a certain time at night you try to get to sleep?
When I'm at home, I'm usually asleep by 10:00 or 10:30. If I put my head down at your feet right now, I'd be asleep in 30 seconds. I can sleep anywhere, anyplace, anytime.
To agree with part of what Proud said, a lot of good CEOs will come out of companies when they've been around for 20 years. Immelt has been with GE since the 80's, and so was one of the other guys in the running for CEO to take over Welch's job - Bob Nardelli. Nardelli went to Home Dept and the company is struggling. Maybe it's just a case of being pasionate about what you do. These guys are passionate about GE because they'd be there for a while and knew the company, but did Nardelli know anything about construction supply? GE is doing well (no matter what the street says) and Home Dept is struggling.
You're giving up your life to be a Rick Wagoner or a Jeff Immelt type CEO. This is from an interview with Jeff...
What parts of your ordinary life have you had to give up for this job? Do you ever get to watch The West Wing or ER?
You have to have different ways to interact with the world. What I'll do is get a bunch of tapes of TV shows and watch them when I fly. I still protect working out every day. I get up at 5:30 in the morning, work out for an hour at home, doing the treadmill, the stair stepper, and the elliptical trainer. I flip between CNBC, Imus, and ESPN during the hour of cardiovascular. At least half the nights, maybe 60%, I'm away from home. Probably the one thing I've tried to hold on to is a relationship with my family, particularly my daughter, Sarah. When I got the job, she was a freshman in high school. She's graduating this year and going to Boston College. As best we could, we gave her a fairly normal life. Beyond that, there's nothing that is normal. You're on 24 hours a day, seven days a week. I'm thinking about the company all that time. My wife and I are great friends, so it's something that both of us have adjusted to. But there is nothing typical. It's constantly about being on.
Is there a certain time at night you try to get to sleep?
When I'm at home, I'm usually asleep by 10:00 or 10:30. If I put my head down at your feet right now, I'd be asleep in 30 seconds. I can sleep anywhere, anyplace, anytime.
To agree with part of what Proud said, a lot of good CEOs will come out of companies when they've been around for 20 years. Immelt has been with GE since the 80's, and so was one of the other guys in the running for CEO to take over Welch's job - Bob Nardelli. Nardelli went to Home Dept and the company is struggling. Maybe it's just a case of being pasionate about what you do. These guys are passionate about GE because they'd be there for a while and knew the company, but did Nardelli know anything about construction supply? GE is doing well (no matter what the street says) and Home Dept is struggling.
Banned
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,938
Re: GM cuts executive salaries
ProudPony,
Calling an opinion asinine is not calling the person asinine.
Suggesting artificial salary caps or that one person's salary is "unfair" is socialism whether the "state" is involved or not. I agree it is "people" that have made our country great but private ownership of property (including businesses) and the unlimited potential for reward are cornerstones of American prosperity and are what entices people to do/be all those things you describe in your comments.
I’m not saying that all employees of a company aren’t important but while you are the “guy who makes the product” and all those other things you mention and while you certainly have the right to opinion (and I didn’t say you didn’t have the right to an opinion); only being a shareholder gives you the right to have a say in what your employees (including the CEO) make.
And no, I did not say the “old boy’s club” doesn’t happen or that it’s “fair”…what I DID say is that using that as an excuse for a lack of success is a rationalization.
Calling an opinion asinine is not calling the person asinine.
Suggesting artificial salary caps or that one person's salary is "unfair" is socialism whether the "state" is involved or not. I agree it is "people" that have made our country great but private ownership of property (including businesses) and the unlimited potential for reward are cornerstones of American prosperity and are what entices people to do/be all those things you describe in your comments.
I’m not saying that all employees of a company aren’t important but while you are the “guy who makes the product” and all those other things you mention and while you certainly have the right to opinion (and I didn’t say you didn’t have the right to an opinion); only being a shareholder gives you the right to have a say in what your employees (including the CEO) make.
And no, I did not say the “old boy’s club” doesn’t happen or that it’s “fair”…what I DID say is that using that as an excuse for a lack of success is a rationalization.