Inexplicable

RattyMouse · May 27, 2014

Is this success or failure? I thought the latter, but seeing the dollar amounts, I'm not so sure.

http://247wallst.com/consumer-products/2014/04/17/kodaks-former-ceo-gets-double-for-nothing/

AgX · May 27, 2014

The same for the former Agfa CEO who was heading the company at the time of the sale and enigmatic demise of their consumer branch, and who then did not want to bother with his former employees, who later succeeded at court.

The only difference is that Kodak got worse.

Well, one thus could argue it's not the money, but the person that gets all that money.

But yes, these are sums involved in the industry today.

pentaxuser · May 27, 2014

I wonder what union represents all these CEO's to get no-lose deals like this? It makes the UAW even at its height of power look like babes in the woods

Good job the rest of the world of business is a very fair place where the strong look after the weak, ensure that the playing field is always level etc, etc

pentaxuser

Xmas · May 27, 2014

CEOs live in another world.

Like Kings it is rare for them to get the chop or be popular and their replacements can be worse.

The success of the company and their benefits are independent.

AgX · May 27, 2014

In Switzerland there was recently a failed plebescite on legally confirming wages in an enterprise to max. ratio of 12/1 between largest and smallest income.

I assume in case of success the employees with lowest income would just have been outsourced then.

Jaf-Photo · May 27, 2014

Oh, dear. What incentive does the board create if they isolate the top management from the consequences of their actions, the well-being of their company or even real world considerations?

I think the result speaks for itself.

Rick A · May 27, 2014

I think the word you are looking for is "obscene".

David Brown · May 27, 2014

The board hired him to do a job, and he probably did it. Not the job you wanted done? You're not on the board.

snapguy · May 27, 2014

rules

The rules for Big Money are not the same as for us peasants. If you and I go bankrupt we have to take a class in finances because it is clear to Them we are so damn dumb it is pathetic. Would you like to guess how many CEOs of bankrupt billion dollar companies are forced to take such demeaning classes? Zip, zorch, nada.
Companies don't really go bankrupt they are reorganized. They are allowed to screw their workers out of their promised pensions while the CEOs go shopping for multi-million dollar yachts and Rolls Royces. If you look into it the board of directors are just pimps they really do not control the CEOs finances. It is a disgrace. So what else is new?
Fighting Big Money and Obscene Greed in the good ole USA is like Ukraine fighting Czar Putin. Lots of Luck.
A certain Italian-owned corporation went belly up and us peasants paid $15 billion for the pleasure of being able to talk about the "Big 2.1 American Car Companies."
But remember there is an old saying "it is immoral to let suckers keep their money."

Jeff Kubach · May 27, 2014

I could use a 'failure' like that!

Jeff

Vonder · May 27, 2014

David Brown said:
The board hired him to do a job, and he probably did it. Not the job you wanted done? You're not on the board.

+1

But at the same time, I have the gut feeling the guy's a moron.

Jaf-Photo · May 27, 2014

David Brown said:
The board hired him to do a job, and he probably did it. Not the job you wanted done? You're not on the board.

They hired him to run one of the largest brands in the world into the ground?

It sounds unlikely, although it did happen in a fictional movie called The Hudsucker Proxy (it's a good one).

Also, I'm no stranger to the boardroom. Board members and CEO:s are often tapped from various old boys' networks. If anyone should rock the boat by speaking up on moral issues or voicing dissent over unreasonable decisions, they are usually told they don't have the stomach for business. Then they will be replaced and never tapped again.

Also, the logic behind payouts like this one is that anyone could screw up. If you punish someone for screwing up by withholding their payouts, then you could be the next one punished if you screw up.

All this will of course be disguised in words like you need to pay best bucks for the best brains and the big payouts are necessary because there is no job security in the management business. It's rubbish of course. There are plenty of skilled and self-less people who would run a company for a modest pay. They are just never asked to do it.

cliveh · May 27, 2014

Why is it that with footballers, musicians and people who have a practical talent you can somewhat equate their earnings with that talent, but with directors they can be totally incompetent and be rewarded.

Ken Nadvornick · May 27, 2014

David Brown said:
The board hired him to do a job, and he probably did it. Not the job you wanted done? You're not on the board.

So the implication here is that the board's plan all along was to intentionally drive their company directly into bankruptcy, and to drive the value of their equity stakeholder's positions to zero?

Ken

pentaxuser · May 27, 2014

Jaf-Photo said:
Also, I'm no stranger to the boardroom. Board members and CEO:s are often tapped from various old boys' networks. If anyone should rock the boat by speaking up on moral issues or voicing dissent over unreasonable decisions, they are usually told they don't have the stomach for business. Then they will be replaced and never tapped again.

Difficult to believe that Uncle Joe didn't have more empathy for capitalism based on the above observation

pentaxuser

Jaf-Photo · May 27, 2014

pentaxuser said:
Difficult to believe that Uncle Joe didn't have more empathy for capitalism based on the above observation

pentaxuser

He took it one step further by sending them to Siberia. If they were so lucky.

But I think cronyism exists everywhere, in democracies and dictatorships. The difference is that in a democracy, cronies who don't play nice risk being ostracised. In a dictatorship they risk being killed.

Ken Nadvornick · May 27, 2014

Pay for globe-trotting CEOs soars to new heights
The New Zealand Herald via AP; May 28, 2014

"While pay for the typical CEO of a company in the Standard & Poor's 500 stock index surged 9 per cent last year to $US10.46 million, it rose a scant 1.3 per cent for US workers as a whole. That CEO now earns 257 times the national average, up from a multiple of 181 in 2009, according to an analysis by The Associated Press and Equilar."

Ken

M6F6E6 · Jul 12, 2014

"Steal a little and they'll throw you in jail; Steal a lot and they'll make you a king." Bob Dylan - Infidels - Sweetheart Like This

CatLABS · Jul 12, 2014

RattyMouse said:
Is this success or failure? I thought the latter, but seeing the dollar amounts, I'm not so sure.

http://247wallst.com/consumer-products/2014/04/17/kodaks-former-ceo-gets-double-for-nothing/

Clearly, unregulated capitalism works, and everybody is a winner, its the American dream come true.

The only inexplicable thing here is the title of the thread, which should be more explicit as to the content of the post.

Inexplicable

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency