TheNiche Posted November 9, 2008 Share Posted November 9, 2008 I'm not sure you would get much agreement on this statement right now.Case in point: CMBS issuance. It fell off a cliff.I'm not saying that Wall Street doesn't make mistakes. But once it knows the consequences, it doesn't repeat them. ...it creates whole different ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crunchtastic Posted November 9, 2008 Share Posted November 9, 2008 I was thinking Aveo....or maybe a t-shirt. " GM went tits-up and all I got was this stupid t-shirt! " Pension? WTF is a pension? I will be the first generation in a while to enjoy a significantly lower standard of living in old age than my parents. I've worked in the same business for 20 years, and I don't have a pension. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted November 9, 2008 Share Posted November 9, 2008 Continuing to push CDOs and CDSs for years after the extraorinary riskiness of them is known sounds suspiciously similar to pumping out Tahoes and Suburbans even as the price of gas skyrockets. The only time Wall Street reins itself in is during bankruptcy and perp walks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crunchtastic Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 Continuing to push CDOs and CDSs for years after the extraorinary riskiness of them is known sounds suspiciously similar to pumping out Tahoes and Suburbans even as the price of gas skyrockets.Hey, that wasn't me, or even my company. We're just shilling life insurance and annuities, despite the new zero-interest economics. Our parent, that's another issue. There's no buyer on the horizon, so I reckon I'm toast by the end of Q1, latest. No buyer, no severance. The good thing is, it's giving me time to get a few things in order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNiche Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 Hey, that wasn't me, or even my company. We're just shilling life insurance and annuities, despite the new zero-interest economics. Our parent, that's another issue. There's no buyer on the horizon, so I reckon I'm toast by the end of Q1, latest. No buyer, no severance. The good thing is, it's giving me time to get a few things in order.As of this moment, CNBC is reporting that you get to keep your job.AIG got bailed out again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crunchtastic Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 As of this moment, CNBC is reporting that you get to keep your job.AIG got bailed out again.and it only cost another $40 billion! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJones Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 Only reason I'm for the bailout is b/c I'd hate to see what happens to Detroit and it's surrounding ares if GM goes Bankrupt....It could possibly turn into a post Katrina New Orleans..You haven't seen Detroit lately have you ? It is more post-APOCALYPTIC than post-Katrina. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jm1fd Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 Pension obligations did not cause GM sales to drop 45% in October over October 2007. And, if people cannot get a loan to buy a GM product, shouldn't GM management...you know, the same people who run GMAC...share some of that blame, too?What? Cerberus manages GM? 51% of GMAC is owned by Cerberus.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 GM stock may become worthless within 12 months Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
houstonmacbro Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 On a related topic I just heard that AIG is now not getting the $125 billion they were going to get in the original plan, but $150 billion.WTF?!?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeebus Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 You haven't seen Detroit lately have you ? It is more post-APOCALYPTIC than post-Katrina.I have a friend who visited family in Detroit over the summer. That is exactly how he described it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MetroMogul Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 The Feds seem determined to keep AIG up and running at all costs; any speculation on why this company deserves repeated bailouts and not others such as say, Lehman Brothers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNiche Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 The Feds seem determined to keep AIG up and running at all costs; any speculation on why this company deserves repeated bailouts and not others such as say, Lehman Brothers?Not sure. I suspect that it may have to do with differences between banking and insurance industries and also size, such that there is not a suitable buyer with the capacity to digest it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
west20th Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 You haven't seen Detroit lately have you ? It is more post-APOCALYPTIC than post-Katrina.And it has been for over 20 years now. I went there for a seminar in '83 and all I can think was "well Cleveland isn't so bad". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark F. Barnes Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 Pelosi, Reid and Frank have petitioned the FED for another $50 billion to Bail out the big three Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crunchtastic Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 Not sure. I suspect that it may have to do with differences between banking and insurance industries and also size, such that there is not a suitable buyer with the capacity to digest it.Lehman had their hands in a lot of deals, but was, relatively speaking, small potatoes. The failure of AIG's commerical and industrial insurance lines would affect all types of industrial production, construction, and shipping. That includes every corner of the oil, gas and military contracting world. The plan is to sell everything that is not global industrial, commerical, maritime, etc. Think of it this way-- part of AIG can't be allowed to fail. Knowing what part that is, the dots are easy to connect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BryanS Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 Pelosi, Reid and Frank have petitioned the FED for another $50 billion to Bail out the big threeAt least we'll know where that money goes. So far, the FED has lent 2 trillion $$$ to the "banking industry" ... yet, we have no idea, and the FED won't tell us... where that money went. I can't wait until the lying liars are GONE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
houstonmacbro Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 At least we'll know where that money goes. So far, the FED has lent 2 trillion $$$ to the "banking industry" ... yet, we have no idea, and the FED won't tell us... where that money went. I can't wait until the lying liars are GONE.I still say there is something fishy about all of this. Not only that but do the American people get to share in the equity or ownership positions of these companies?It's our money, but what are WE actually getting for its use to save these companies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNiche Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 At least we'll know where that money goes. So far, the FED has lent 2 trillion $$$ to the "banking industry" ... yet, we have no idea, and the FED won't tell us... where that money went. I can't wait until the lying liars are GONE.Who is lying? How can they be lying if they're not telling you anything? There's a point to be made that they should be more transparent. But it isn't the least bit evident (yet) that anybody is lying.You need to cool it. Angry ranting isn't very productive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNiche Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 It's our money, but what are WE actually getting for its use to save these companies?We get to avoid the total collapse and dissolution of our financial institutions, a halt to all lending and most kinds of investment, and basically would have to either endure a second great depression or a state-run economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJones Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 Hey it is just paper, (well, cotton and fibers) the Govt. will print more. The big 3 need the bailout, and as long as they put in the provisions for halting CEO and upper-level payouts. I see no problem. They have also promised to build MORE eco-friendly cars, so, what is the beef here ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNiche Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 Hey it is just paper, (well, cotton and fibers) the Govt. will print more. The big 3 need the bailout, and as long as they put in the provisions for halting CEO and upper-level payouts. I see no problem. They have also promised to build MORE eco-friendly cars, so, what is the beef here ? Yeah, that's right. Because pissing off the people in charge is going to motivate them SOOOOO much. Seriously, a gigantic company in financial distress needs the best leadership there is if it wants even the slightest chance at turning around. That leadership is bought from the labor market. It is an investment. And they'll get what they pay for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJones Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 Yeah, that's right. Because pissing off the people in charge is going to motivate them SOOOOO much. Seriously, a gigantic company in financial distress needs the best leadership there is if it wants even the slightest chance at turning around. That leadership is bought from the labor market. It is an investment. And they'll get what they pay for. Pigs get fat, and HOGS get slaughtered Niche. Hence you have Enron, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Big 3...etc. etc. You got to start somewhere, and this can be turned around if you simply put goals in place. Not automatic golden parachutes if a CEO jumps, you can put items in place for certain goals reached. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sifuwong Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 Next thing you know, we could be asking other countries to bail out our banks, auto industries, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNiche Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 Pigs get fat, and HOGS get slaughtered Niche. Hence you have Enron, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Big 3...etc. etc. You got to start somewhere, and this can be turned around if you simply put goals in place. Not automatic golden parachutes if a CEO jumps, you can put items in place for certain goals reached. Golden parachutes are a tool in the HR box. Individual firms can use them properly and get constructive results or misuse them and screw things up. And they are custom-made for each situation. As a result, it is difficult to levy a valid general criticism against them. While it is tempting to say that the compensation should be based entirely upon performance, actually crafting a mechanism to ensure that management will act in the interests of shareholders is frequently more difficult than you might think. Moreover, any rational candidate for management is going to recognize that even the best leadership may be inadequate given the dire circumstances; either the prospective reward for a turnaround has to be ridiculously high or there has to be a safety net in the form of a golden parachute in order for the expected mean compensation scenario to be sufficiently lucrative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 Golden parachutes are a tool in the HR box. Individual firms can use them properly and get constructive results or misuse them and screw things up. And they are custom-made for each situation. As a result, it is difficult to levy a valid general criticism against them.While it is tempting to say that the compensation should be based entirely upon performance, actually crafting a mechanism to ensure that management will act in the interests of shareholders is frequently more difficult than you might think. Moreover, any rational candidate for management is going to recognize that even the best leadership may be inadequate given the dire circumstances; either the prospective reward for a turnaround has to be ridiculously high or there has to be a safety net in the form of a golden parachute in order for the expected mean compensation scenario to be sufficiently lucrative.Good to see you defending the CEOs and golden parachutes, Niche, as well as giving trillions to banks that they then refuse to lend. It is a dirty job defending those who took the US economy into the crapper, but someone's gotta do it. When the Republicans placed re-election above defending their CEO and Wall Street buddies, I thought this may mean the end of an American icon...the overpaid executive. But, thankfully, you are coming to their aid.Godspeed, my friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNiche Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 Good to see you defending the CEOs and golden parachutes, Niche, as well as giving trillions to banks that they then refuse to lend. It is a dirty job defending those who took the US economy into the crapper, but someone's gotta do it. When the Republicans placed re-election above defending their CEO and Wall Street buddies, I thought this may mean the end of an American icon...the overpaid executive. But, thankfully, you are coming to their aid.Godspeed, my friend.I find it ironic that your objections to golden parachutes are based on moral hazard when that is exactly what they are meant to solve, and also that someone whose career is in sales doesn't have an appreciation for how performance-based compensation plans can end up backfiring on the owners or turning away really good prospective employees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJones Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 I find it ironic that your objections to golden parachutes are based on moral hazard when that is exactly what they are meant to solve, and also that someone whose career is in sales doesn't have an appreciation for how performance-based compensation plans can end up backfiring on the owners or turning away really good prospective employees.I do appreciate HOW a golden parachute is supposed to work. The same problems have faced all these companies that are getting bailed out now. You had dirty execs pulling the wool over the shareholders eyes and selling off all their interests and taking the easy way out (quitting and taking the parachute, in some cases, ALL the parachutes), rather than trying to figure a way out of the mess they specifically caused. There should be an internal audit as soon as a CEO announces his departure, and THEN if everything is on the up and up, only THEN can he/she recieve their parachute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudemeister Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 I don't like the idea of bailing out any more companies, especially General Motors since they have produced nothing but crap, however I can understand the motive behind it.Alot of the jobs in places such as Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, and parts of Illinois depend on the auto industry which without it these places would be decimated since it would send a shockwave through these places. Besides countries such as Japan and Europe also subsidize their automakers.For example if the Energy market were to totally collapse in Houston, it would have the same effect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNiche Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 I do appreciate HOW a golden parachute is supposed to work. The same problems have faced all these companies that are getting bailed out now. You had dirty execs pulling the wool over the shareholders eyes and selling off all their interests and taking the easy way out (quitting and taking the parachute, in some cases, ALL the parachutes), rather than trying to figure a way out of the mess they specifically caused. There should be an internal audit as soon as a CEO announces his departure, and THEN if everything is on the up and up, only THEN can he/she recieve their parachute.Oh, I agree on this! If there's any indication that an executive has blatantly disregarded his fiduciary duty to shareholders or that the conditions triggering a golden parachute clause have not been met, then the lawyers need to be on top of things and act accordingly. If they can get away with not paying up, they shouldn't. If an executive broke an agreement or the law, then they need to file a lawsuit against him.And if the folks that negotiated the compensation package when the executive was hired turned out to have really screwed up, then they don't need to be in that role anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.