Hey, how many other countries are there where a cast member of Deliverance can climb to the top?
Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:
<img src=http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg.com/p/ap/20060416/capt.ny11304160537.exxon_riches_ny113.jpg?x=229&y=345&sig=7Xr84S9BLL3o8xtEcJBSxQ-->
Exxon Chairman Gets $400 Million Retirement Package Amid Soaring Gas Prices
Exxon Made Record Profits in 2005
April 14, 2006â - Soaring gas prices are squeezing most Americans at the pump, but at least one man isn't complaining.
Last year, Exxon made the biggest profit of any company ever, $36 billion, and its retiring chairman appears to be reaping the benefits.

Somebody said that's around 1% of the company he raked in? Haven't done the math. And BTW, it doesn't feel like that 500% up figure in the article above is right even with the 2 splits in the 90s. I don't remember it that way.Quote from Pekelo:
Without taking sides, here is a moral question:
Let's suppose YOU ARE the retiring CEO of a Big Corporation. Your lawyers, big board members make you a wonderful golden package of let's say 100 million dollars. Completely legal, you were doing a good job, your company made outstanding profits while you were the boss.
Would you take it, or would you say: "No thanks, but I think it is overdoing it a bit, our janitor makes only $8 an hour. I am perfectly fine with 5 million. After all I already have my houses,cars,etc."
Answer honestly....
Very good post. I don't know if and what the cap should be, but compensation should probably not be decided by board directors who play musical chairs at the director level in various companies and vote outsized compensation packages for one another with a nod and a wink. These guys can only be characterized as clean to the extent that one hand washes the other. The collusion may be legally deniable, but it is certainly palpable.Quote from AAAintheBeltway:
Typically, the CEO selects the Board, who typically are his cronies. They get huge options themselves, so are grateful to him. I expect he orchestrated it behind the scenes.
To answer your question however, no I don't expect him to turn it down. Few do. Yet most people consider it not only obscenely excessive, but just wrong. That's why I've reluctantly decided this is the sort of market failure that justifies government intervention. Put a cap on CEO compensation for public companies. Make it generous, say $5 mill a year. If they don't like it, let them start their own private companies and actually create wealth.
Call me a socialist, but the fact is, it's a rare CEO who can justify his compensation package. This is opportunistc theft, pure and simple and it should be against the law.
Quote from Thunderdog:
Very good post. I don't know if and what the cap should be, but compensation should probably not be decided by board directors who play musical chairs at the director level in various companies and vote outsized compensation packages for one another with a nod and a wink. These guys can only be characterized as clean to the extent that one hand washes the other. The collusion may be legally deniable, but it is certainly palpable.
Quote from AAAintheBeltway:
Typically, the CEO selects the Board, who typically are his cronies. They get huge options themselves, so are grateful to him. I expect he orchestrated it behind the scenes.
To answer your question however, no I don't expect him to turn it down. Few do. Yet most people consider it not only obscenely excessive, but just wrong. That's why I've reluctantly decided this is the sort of market failure that justifies government intervention. Put a cap on CEO compensation for public companies. Make it generous, say $5 mill a year. If they don't like it, let them start their own private companies and actually create wealth.
Call me a socialist, but the fact is, it's a rare CEO who can justify his compensation package. This is opportunistc theft, pure and simple and it should be against the law.