Listening
Gold Member
- Aug 27, 2011
- 14,989
- 1,650
- 260
[I agree that some of the CEO's are less than stirling individuals. But there are many good ones out there.
Regardless.....
In my world, if a guy is making 20 million, that means somehow the market thinks he is worth it. I don't agree, but that is what happens.
People get pissed.
I always ask what does economics teach. It says that if someone is making that kind of money...someone will come in and offer to do the job for less...that is the nature of competition. But, the company isn't going to give itself out to the lowest bidder.
So the way you get that money (and the money of his next in liners) is to compete for it. Start your own company. Get aggresive.
Otherwise, you turn power over to them and suck on what they give you. They balance how much they give you with how much discomfort you would avoid if you stay (and not shop yourself around).
The market will take care of things. But, if people are not motivated to go into the market....well then it isn't as efficient.
Actors and athletes.
Watch how they are marketed.
Now put a quality CEO in the same scenario.
That is the way captialism works.
Nothing wrong with it.
It is the unquality CEO's that the market can't get at. While you never know the entire story, there is the Roger Smith debacle and the Jill Barad mess (ran Matel into the ground and got 50 million to step away). What I am saying is that if you think they are making to much, then your only recourse is to go into the market after some of that cash.
What I want, as a stockholder, is to be able to join with others to cut the balls off anyone who isn't doing their high priced job.