It's true that cheap labor can be found elsewhere. Is the quality better? In most cases no. But to your point about smarter , more capable executive teams being worth billions. It would be my opinion based on obervation and experience, that in the heavy manufacturing sector the entire board of directors of any company could all drop dead of heart attacks and the production line wouldn't miss a beat. Would the stock take a hit? Short term, probably, but the product line would never hit a hitch. They would all be replaced with another bunch of good old boys who would sit around the boardroom in a big circle jerk telling each other how smart they are. Business would continue as usual.
So this is trickle down?
- Thread starter CaptainObvious
- Start date
It's true that cheap labor can be found elsewhere. Is the quality better? In most cases no. But to your point about smarter , more capable executive teams being worth billions. It would be my opinion based on obervation and experience, that in the heavy manufacturing sector the entire board of directors of any company could all drop dead of heart attacks and the production line wouldn't miss a beat. Would the stock take a hit? Short term, probably, but the product line would never hit a hitch. They would all be replaced with another bunch of good old boys who would sit around the boardroom in a big circle jerk telling each other how smart they are. Business would continue as usual.
I disagree about the quality point here - remember Toyota and Nissan, and later Samsung etc? Excellent quality, they took the American developed statistical quality control principles (Deming et al) and applied them to perfection, killed their competition. Same is happening in China as we speak, Malaysia, etc.
Wrt to boards of companies, who cares? They have no power and they shouldn't have any imo. It is the Executive team that matters, and you better be ready to pay top dollar for the best you can afford of those folks. Second rate talent kills you, it's a lot more like the Olympics than people think.
The quality issue was a problem during the 70's and 80's, maybe even the 90's, but not so much today.
Seems we're talking about a different cast of characters in our discussion about the BOD and who is part of an executive team. It you're talking about those that actually get things done, then yes, they are a valuable asset to the company. The dead weight on the Board is just that, dead weight. This includes most CEO's, Executive Directors and CFO's, all of whom delegate all the work being done and usually don't have a f'n clue what's actually happening. They like to take all the credit when things are going well, but they dummy up quick when the investigations into wrong doing begin. Then it's, hey, I'm not really in charge of anything. Other people did that.
Most of what you wrote is dead wrong, but I agree that the best CEO is priceless, at least to some companies. Apple is the obvious example.
The problem is that few CEOs are Steve Jobs, yet they all expect to be paid like him. Actually, they expect to be better paid, since he was a $1 a year guy as i recall.
Warren Buffett is generally considered the best investor of this era. He buys and runs companies. Do the CEOs of his companies get these mega-comp packages? Obviously not. If they asked for them, he would drop them like a bad habit. No doubt they are well paid, but they are employees, not royalty. Somehow the companies are able to limp along with the weak management that his tight-fisted approach produces.
The Captain is right. I used to drive past a graveyard on the way to LaGuardia airport in NYC. It always reminded me of the adage that graveyards are filled with indispensable people.
I could swallow my distatste for obscene compensation if there were some penalty, like termination with no golden parachute, for failure. There isn't. Usually the underperformers hang on for years, making a total mockery of the Larry Kudlow type arguments about ruthless corporate efficiency. When they are finally let out to pasture, there is is a hefty termination package, or in the truly outrageous cases, a hefty bonus paid out of government bailout money.
There is a reason the Board is supposed to manage the company. They answer, theoretically at least, to shareholders. The CEO is supposed to answer to them, not the other way around as it is done at most companies. If a CEO wants to run everything with no oversight, he should start his own company, but few of these corporate drones have the ability to do that.