Dick Grasso grabs 139 million $$

Quote from Wong Lee:
More...

i have never understood why people named "richard" are called "dick."

Originally, I believe "Richard" was shortened to "Rick". Given the penchant for rhyming words several hundred years ago, "Dick" evolved from "Rick".

do we call girls named "michelle," "pussy?"

What about girls named "Constance"?
 
Essentially, Grasso is a bureaucrat getting paid a star's salary. So, yeah I do see quite a difference between A. Rod and Grasso. It strikes me as similar to politicians who run for elected office to get rich, it sets up a huge conflict of interest...

Quote from TM_Direct:



nobody else can hit a ball??? Its a kid's game for christ's sake...25 million to play a gamne that he woul dplay anyway...how do you know what grasso does???
More...
 
Quote from vulture:

Essentially, Grasso is a bureaucrat getting paid a star's salary. So, yeah I do see quite a difference between A. Rod and Grasso. It strikes me as similar to politicians who run for elected office to get rich, it sets up a huge conflict of interest...
More...


Well right there is the problem....the NYSE is a PRIVATE MEMBERS club...it is not run by the government and they are self regulated...if you don't want to use them, you don;t have to but they are a members only group. Imnot saying his pay isn't outrageous, But i find it very ODD that traders here on ET are so upset and asking what does he do to deserve it.....Im sure there are a lot of guys mopping floors right now trying to figure out how traders can make millions using software and somebody elses money and company.
 
The question of what a professional athlete should be paid should be a direct function of how much the teams owners and advertisers can make as a result of this athlete. If nike makes 100M from A-Rod then 25M seems fair. And if fans want to pay $75 for a ticket that is great.

However, where I vehemently disagree with the process is when states and/or municipalities are asked to use tax dollars to build stadiums. Stadiums which on the whole are a loser for localities in terms of ROI.

So the question again comes back to risk, and are the pros willing to take the risk without handouts from the public? I suspect no.


The same applies to Grasso and the NYSE. The exchange is more of an Oligopoly than a free trade business. ECNs could easily replace the exchange. Trading costs are artificially high and the business is essentially protected from real competition. (Look at how long fixed commissions took to drop)

I suspect seat prices would plummet and all the good old boys would be out on the street if true competition were introduced. I hardly feel as a consumer, or a business owner that what these clowns are doing serves any purpose other than their own.
 
I have never seen Cramer be such a slobbering suck up. It was disgusting. This guy embodies everything Cramer claims to be against yet there he was, not only defending him but doing it in such a groveling manner it was actually funny.

Why should we care? Because this guy is supposed to be not only running the exchange but overseeing compliance. There have been serial scandals under his watch. There is a huge conflict of interest when he appoints the compensation committee. I don't see that he's done an especially great job. The NYSE has lost huge chunks of business to Nasdaq and other exchanges and seen its former preeminence dimmed considerably.

This is a semi-monopoly that we are all forced to support. It enjoys important privileges granted by Congress because it supposedly operates in the public interest, not just as a private business.
 
Quote from AAAintheBeltway:

I have never seen Cramer be such a slobbering suck up. It was disgusting. This guy embodies everything Cramer claims to be against yet there he was, not only defending him but doing it in such a groveling manner it was actually funny.

Why should we care? Because this guy is supposed to be not only running the exchange but overseeing compliance. There have been serial scandals under his watch. There is a huge conflict of interest when he appoints the compensation committee. I don't see that he's done an especially great job. The NYSE has lost huge chunks of business to Nasdaq and other exchanges and seen its former preeminence dimmed considerably.

This is a semi-monopoly that we are all forced to support. It enjoys important privileges granted by Congress because it supposedly operates in the public interest, not just as a private business.
More...


Not to be the Grasso defense team, BUT,,,NASDAQ is done....I have heard that they will be filing for bankruptcy within the next 12-18 months unless some dramatic change in the market appears....The NYSE has done a good job over the last few years of at least staying stable....specialist take a lot of heat sometimes but do you think NAZ MM's are any better??? But whether NYSE lost money or not ONLY effects the MEMBERS of the exchange, whereas NASD member firms are more reliant on NAZ for their livelihood ( including being govern by the NASDR) ....NYSE is self regulated and if they lose $$. the members share it ..
 
Quote from OxonianTrader:

I don't see anything wrong with Grasso's pay package. 138 million dollars is the American Dream. I congratulate him....

:cool:
More...

One dollar for every strand of hair he lost due to stress............
 
I guess I was wrong to question it. I'm sure the big firms are pleased with all the positive publicity that has ensued over what should be considered a private matter for Mr. Grasso and his family.

I think the important thing to remember is how important it is for NYSE to retain a high achiever like Mr. Grasso, a real leader with a commanding presence and the respect of the entire financial and regulatory community, plus incredible credentials including graduating from high school and beavering away as a drone at the Exchange for 30 years. You can't buy that, at least not cheaply. Also, let's not overlook the need to keep him adequately incentivized. We know from countless proxy statements both how incredibly important this is for a CEO and how apparently difficult it can be, given the humongous sums required to "incentivize" these men and women.

I'm with Jim Cramer on this one. I think we should applaud anyone who can exercise the leadership skills required to convince a bunch of rich companies you regulate to agree to give you a lavish pay package. Isn't that what this country is all about? Just like Jim suggested today, if you disagree you must be some kind of socialist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top