Are you thinking of perpetual diluting CEOs like Aron and Cohen?
Share offerings
- Thread starter wxytrader
- Start date
And in DIP financing for a restructuring the existing shares become restricted and are either paid out or carry over to the new company. They should never be cancelled in a restructuring. When the banks got the bailout money in the financial crisis the first thing they did was hand out bonuses to the c-suite lol
Last edited:
Nah one or two bad apples can't ruin the batch...the index will always recover...unlike single stocks. IMO there is nothing more foolish than investing in a single company. I would max out my risk at 10% of my capital.
I'm just not a ridiculous socialist.
Managing a $100 million dollar plus enterprise is the last place where you should be going cheap. I'd much rather pay people well to do that than pay grown men hundreds of milions of dollars to play a kids game. (And I don't really thank athletes pay should be regulated if we did away with government subsidies for their teams.)
CEOs in general work really really hard and they take on some actual legal responsibility.
CEOs who walk into the job with enough money that they can not take a salary and live off the gains of the stock are an anomaly. The generally get to that position by having already done a good job for ten plus years.
Also you want a CEO who can think long term, not one who has to artificially pump the stock price every quarter.
But socialists only see what others have. They never think about what it took to get it.
Don't like it? Don't buy stock in it. But don't block me from doing so.
"But one also finds in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to want to bring the strong down to their level, and which reduces men to preferring equality in servitude to inequality in freedom." -Alexis de Tocqueville
FWIW I do have a problem with CEOs of failing companies paying themselves retention bonuses and things like that, but it's completely reasonably for the CEO of my local credit union to just receive a normal salary rather than engage in ridiculous nonsense to pump share price every quarter so that he can afford to pay his mortgage and maybe have things like heath insurance.
The real problem is conflicts of interest. Regular salary is fine. Paying yourself and all the board members millions while taking on financing from someone like Bain Capital and wiping out the shareholders should be a ticket to a cell.
I'm not talking about capping salaries earned, I'm talking specifically about share offerings and how salaries & bonuses are calculated.
Oh boy flying around in corporate jets enjoying corporate functions all around the world...sounds like a grind. Whoever is actually at the top of the company is doing way less work than the people who are doing the day-to-day. There's nothing easier than being the boss. Don't let anybody tell you different. Don't believe me if you gave the CEO a choice between the job he's doing now or to work a 9:00 to 5:00 on the line for the same money. Which would he pick?
A ceo should not be able to enrich himself with shareholder money...they should have to turn profits.
Imagine if your boss at work on friday payday said that he just raised his salary, so he is reducing all the wages to compensate...that is essentially what a share offering is that results in bonuses or salary increases.
Most CEOs are not very saavy when it comes to making profits or running a company....no ceo is worth more than 100-250k per year. This is why I don't invest because I'm not interested in filling the pockets of these charlatans.
For the record athletes earn what they are paid, but it's based on what they can bring into the franchise...and they are competing against a MUCH larger pool of talent. How many kids grow up and want to become CEO's? How many little league CEO tournaments are there? But even then they only get that money because of fans. I mean I never watch anything on sports. I couldn't care less. Then you have the sports for players pay to get played. That's different. They earn it because they're competing against the best players in the world and they only get paid when they perform... This is how CEOs should work. They should Play to get paid. Cap their salaries at 250K and the rest should be bonuses based on profits. The way it is now is more socialist because CEOs get 100s of millions of dollars regardless of their performance...
I mean look at this...its utterly ridiculous.
https://aflcio.org/paywatch/highest-paid-ceos
Look at PINS in 2022 they lost 96M, so if they literally had an empty chair as CEO they might have been profitable lol. Worth every penny right?
Last edited:
Spoken like some who has met about zero CEOs.
It's like you're not only ignorant but proud of it.
If being a CEO is so damn easy why aren't you one?
Hahaha!
Pinterest is an internet growth stock. It does not currently have significant profits, nor has it had meaningful profits in the last 5 years. The whole case for the stock is the growth of top line revenue.
The notion that it would magically turn into.a stable business making money without a CEO is financially moronic. It never has been that.
Nothing like having a guy who can't even understand financial statements lecturing you about how dumb CEOs are.
The bigger the company the easier it becomes because you have all the resources. It is much harder to run a medium to small business. BTW You never answered my question. If you offered a ceo the same wage to make sandwiches all day which would he choose? Yeah, he'd choose ceo.
So if they aren't making profits why is the CEO getting paid 96M a year????
I'm starting to think you are a disgruntled ceo on here like in undercover boss lol.
You never answered my question. If being a CEO is so damn easy, why aren't you one?
Surely you can whip up some offering docs in a few minutes and have investors throwing cash at you in no time!
Would I take a job with minimal responsibility, no overtime, no legal responsibility and no travel for the same wage as CEO, sure!
Of course it's a stupid question because the value I would contribute to the organization would not match the pay. Thus no job. Sorta like how if paying a company $100 million for shares doesn't get you $100 million worth of shares there's going to be no payment.
I don't know why you are so be-dazzled by CEOs lol...
https://www.firmex.com/resources/videos/the-12-biggest-ceo-facepalm-moments/
So a CEO is going to make sandwiches all day long for 100M a year versus being a CEO? Yeah right...he's going to take the easier job as CEO.
I don't think the CEO's job is that easy. For one thing he has to put up with the whining, crying sandwich makers.