[satfrat]

Mighty sweet Doug!

[opnly bafld]

Have you by any chance driven through Illinois in the last few days?

[doug s.]

Have you by any chance driven through Illinois in the last few days?

nope, i am in maryland.  and, it's not been on the road in a year, but that should change soon.     i know a guy who lives in illinois w/a red one, tho.  he's active in the pantera club , mebbe it's his...

doug s.

[lonewolfny42]

Coming....A new Mini for California.......

[ooheadsoo]

Hate to rain on your parade here but you, like me, need to start keeping our money within these borders.  Lots of people within these borders depend on it.  I'm serious.  It's serious.  We do.  My daughter is buyin a Saturn Vue.  She brought a test drive by our house.  Seems like a good vehicle to me.

Don't forget, Toyota, Honda, and the like all assemble their US market cars right here in the US!  Very few Japanese cars sold in America are made in Japan.  They have corporate headquarters here on American soil.  I think they may actually have more employees on American soil than do the American car companies, given how poorly the US auto makers have been performing for the last decade or two.  America is not the only country outsourcing jobs.

[bprice2]

Nice station wagon!  Did you say you spent $40k on that little beauty? 

BTW...you can apologize for calling me an asshole anytime now.

Just the post, not the person,,, OK? I apologise to the person but I'll stand behind what you did to my thread

Well, sir, that was awfully gracious of you...I accept.  I guess it turns out we have a couple of things in common.  We're both Cowboys fans and we're unemployed.  I guess those two attributes make me a little grouchy.  But all the same, the topic of your now defunct thread disgusts me.

Happy Election Day,

Brett

[maxwalrath]

It's all paid up and then I got discharged from my job of 35 years. I've been unemployed for over a year now and listen to my system a lot!

 

[jimdgoulding]

quote-  GM- bleeding around 1 billion a month, their cash is sure to run out soon.  They will be looking for government help or perhaps go into bankruptcy which would allow them to restructure and eliminate costly union contracts.  They have sold off much of their interest in GMAC so they are no longer providing the loans needed, believe it or not they are offering cash to their dealers to finance with SOMEONE ELSE!  Things are not looking good, but thank goodness Rick Wagoner is still going to make millions this year after his $16M+ in 2007!

I'd like for someone to kindly explain in brief how this works.  Does this guy and other CEO's answer to no one?  Do stockholders approve this?  Please.  Thanks.     

[Kevin Haskins]

They answer to a board of directors that hired him.   

The bottom line with this CEO outrage, it is a free country and I'm free to pay someone what I think they are worth.   A CEO I should be free to pursue as much compensation as he/she can find.   It really is nobody's business what I or anyone else gets paid so long as it is legal and ethical (it isn't legal or ethical to hire a hit-man).   

[jimdgoulding]

Does the board of directors answer to the stock holders?   Most folks I know work for salary or commission.  They may recieve performance bonuses.  I was the beneficiary of this many times.  But that was based on positive growth and even then there was a cap.  I understand your point of view but I still don't understand the reason.  When I was self employed, I could and did pay myself whatever I wanted.  Awarded bonuses to employees.  Fixed amount cash bonuses were awarded on the occasion of an exceptional performance to an individual but percentage bonuses were awarded quarterly to managers for exceeding the business plan*.  I get the feeling that an exceptional performance for CEO's may have it's own definitions.  I suppose that if a loss of business is in the plan and not as much was lost as was expected that's a good thing but rewarding a CEO or management under those circumstances doesn't seem as constructive as investing in one's product or service or expansion.  What am I missing??

*to clarify, not a percentage of the profits but a percentage of their salary in addition on a scale on improvement.

[Bob in St. Louis]

Hmm, kinda reminds me of professional athletes with contracts....$20 Million a year for "X" amount of years regardless of performance.

[Kevin Haskins]

Does the board of directors answer to the stock holders? 

Yes.. indirectly they do.   If they don't, people either don't buy the stock or they sell what they have.   It is a self regulating system.

 Most folks I know work for salary or commission.  They may recieve performance bonuses.  I was the beneficiary of this many times.  But that was based on positive growth and even then there was a cap.  I understand your point of view but I still don't understand the reason.  When I was self employed, I could and did pay myself whatever I wanted.  Awarded bonuses to employees.  Fixed amount cash bonuses were awarded on the occasion of an exceptional performance to an individual but percentage bonuses were awarded to managers for exceeding the business plan.  I get the feeling that an exceptional performance for CEO's may have it's own definitions.  I suppose that if a loss of business is in the plan and not as much was lost as was expected that's a good thing but awarding a CEO or management under those circumstances doesn't seem as constructive as investing in one's product or service or expansion.  What am I missing?

The entire basis of our society is based upon the freedom for us to pursue life as we see fit.  As long as it doesn't hurt someone else, and/or is a legal activity then I have no business telling you how much to pay your barber, mechanic or the person you hire to run your company.  

By what principle would I have the right to tell you what you deserve to be paid for an activity?  What you are worth is directly related to what someone is willing to pay you.   If I have nothing to do with the transaction, why should I have any say in what you get paid?  

If those CEOs got paid a bundle and performed poorly, their shareholders and board of trustees are the ones who should decide what to do about it.   I'm sure they won't go on pouring millions of dollars into a looser.  If the shareholders think that hiring a guy for 25 Million a year is a good business move, more power to them.    It is their right to do with their money as they see fit.    

[jimdgoulding]

If you're refering to me, Rockin Bobby, it wasn't like that at all.  Based strickly on performance to plan.    

Kevin-  There has been a lot of tweaking of a company's value.  Sometimes stockholder's may not know they are pouring millions into a loser.  Thanks for your reply.  The CEO would be accountable to me.  And in the case of fraud, I would do all that is legal to recover money paid to that person or persons in error.  But them I'm goofy or utopian or something cause I think everybody should be accountable to everybody.

[Bob in St. Louis]

If you're refering to me, Rockin Bobby, it wasn't like that at all.  Based strickly on performance to plan.  

No no, Jim. Your plan sounds excellent. I was refering to Wagonner[sp] making that much despite the companies performance.

Bob

[Kevin Haskins]

If you're refering to me, Rockin Bobby, it wasn't like that at all.  Based strickly on performance to plan.    

Kevin-  There has been a lot of tweaking of a company's value.  Sometimes stockholder's may not know they are pouring millions into a loser.  Thanks for your reply.  The CEO would be accountable to me.  And in the case of fraud, I would do all that is legal to recover money paid to that person or persons in error.  But them I'm goofy or utopian or something cause I think everybody should be accountable to everybody.

And I'd be all in favor of you pursuing a legal approach to recovering money that was illegally or immorally taken from you as a shareholder.   

 

[doug s.]

Does the board of directors answer to the stock holders? 

Yes.. indirectly they do.   If they don't, people either don't buy the stock or they sell what they have.   It is a self regulating system.

 Most folks I know work for salary or commission.  They may recieve performance bonuses.  I was the beneficiary of this many times.  But that was based on positive growth and even then there was a cap.  I understand your point of view but I still don't understand the reason.  When I was self employed, I could and did pay myself whatever I wanted.  Awarded bonuses to employees.  Fixed amount cash bonuses were awarded on the occasion of an exceptional performance to an individual but percentage bonuses were awarded to managers for exceeding the business plan.  I get the feeling that an exceptional performance for CEO's may have it's own definitions.  I suppose that if a loss of business is in the plan and not as much was lost as was expected that's a good thing but awarding a CEO or management under those circumstances doesn't seem as constructive as investing in one's product or service or expansion.  What am I missing?

The entire basis of our society is based upon the freedom for us to pursue life as we see fit.  As long as it doesn't hurt someone else, and/or is a legal activity then I have no business telling you how much to pay your barber, mechanic or the person you hire to run your company.  

By what principle would I have the right to tell you what you deserve to be paid for an activity?  What you are worth is directly related to what someone is willing to pay you.   If I have nothing to do with the transaction, why should I have any say in what you get paid?  

If those CEOs got paid a bundle and performed poorly, their shareholders and board of trustees are the ones who should decide what to do about it.   I'm sure they won't go on pouring millions of dollars into a looser.  If the shareholders think that hiring a guy for 25 Million a year is a good business move, more power to them.    It is their right to do with their money as they see fit.    

kevin, you're right.  that's why i will only buy a car made by an off-shore company - their ceo's typically get only 15-20 times the salary of their average white collar workers, instead of the 150-250 times the white collar salaries typically garnered by domestic-owned car company ceo's.  same across the board for other off-shore vs domestically owned companies.  and, sure, domestically owned companies sometimes can their ceo's.  and give them huge golden parachute deals on their way out.  nice reward for them driving their companies into the ground.  i loved it hearing carly fiorina, ex-head of hp giving her take on some politicians ability to run a company like hp - like she could run it?!?     she got canned & got a nice severance when they kicked her ass out...   

ymmv,

doug s.

[jimdgoulding]

Right on K.  Right on Bob.  Yer makin a believer outta me, Doogay.  I want to spend my money in the most responsible way I can tho who can be all that conscious of how to do it.  That is to say where it will do the most good for the most people including myself.  I despise people who knowingly exploit other people.  Get an agreement based on common interest or change whatever would make you do otherwise.

[TheChairGuy]

Frankly, Rick Wagoner has done a stellar job navigating GM the past half-decade...don't take that to mean I think the compensation of the vast majority of publicly held companies isn't absolutely outrageous.

In fairness to him, his compensation is less than the $16million for 2007 indicated....and he runs the 5th largest company (in terms of sale) in the world. 

http://thecarblogger.blogspot.com/2007/04/gms-rick-wagoner-getting-29-increase-in.html

He was pretty much dumped a sorry hand when he took over....and $3.00+ a gallon gas goes a long way to damning him further.  But, if you look at the vehicles now out in the US, they are top-notch in quality - the equal of any in the market for similar money.

If gas at the pump falls further, they get some positive scores at Consumer Reports, JD Power and the car mags, muddle thru without burning thru all their cash...he may well be the guy that saves General Motors.  Not sure what that is worth (and AGAIN, I'm not of the mind that any of these CEO hessians should be getting this kinda' coin).

btw, the day after I read what the Wells Fargo CEO made in 2005 ($22 million!! ), I pulled my money out entirely and placed it in a nice local bank (where I get better money market rates and less 'gotcha' fees)

doug s., behold!, you can now buy a GM car.  I'm sure there's rank and file at GM making $70K...or only about 20x less than the CEO of the $200 billion parent 

John

[Bob in St. Louis]

Don't get me wrong, I love GM. I've owned nothing but for the past few decades. In fact, I've been thinking about buying stock in "The General". Hell, it's got nowhere to go but up at this point.
How's THAT for being a 'fan boy' of GM? 

Regarding "New car opinions"....Just ask me, I'll give you a list of several GM vehicles.  aa
{Of course, I'll give you a list of a few GM's I wouldn't touch as well}

Bob

[TheChairGuy]

Don't get me wrong, I love GM. I've owned nothing but for the past few decades. In fact, I've been thinking about buying stock in "The General". Hell, it's got nowhere to go but up at this point.
How's THAT for being a 'fan boy' of GM? 

Bob

Wrong Bob...there is '$0' for it to go.  What a stock is valued at when they file bankruptcy (a distinct possibility in this case) as all debts, and shares held by common shareholders are (normally) wiped out. 

They take your cash down with 'em.  Momma' won't like that if they do.

Don't be fooled by a $2.00 price...it's priced that low for a reason 

John (former KMart shareholder at $4 who thought much the same as you several years ago )