Nov 11, 2009, 10:34am
Nov 10, 2009, 8:45am
Those looking for retribution against the executives of failed companies will quickly see that prosecutions won't come easy. The law gives executives wide latitude to run their business, no matter how terrible their decisions. And even convictions would seem an incomplete conclusion given that a system -- political and regulatory -- also failed the public.
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
Sep 15, 2009, 2:22pm
I sense some judgment from the Bloomberg reporter here re:...
More »
Sep 15, 2009, 2:00pm
Tudor BVI Global: August 2009: 0.5% YTD: 12.5% ...as for...
More »
Sep 09, 2009, 11:27am
Goldman Sachs partner managing director Richard Kimball Jr. apparently got...
More »
Sep 09, 2009, 10:15am
Ladies, if you've been looking to work under one of...
More »
Posted by guest , Oct 28, 2008 10:07AM
first
Posted by guest , Oct 28, 2008 10:07AM
The way to punish a stupid CEO is to sell his stock. Not sue him...
Posted by guest , Oct 28, 2008 10:10AM
I hate it "first" comments. People who get excited for being the first to post are sad. That said, I was first. It was my first time so I had to do it. I apologize to everyone.
Posted by guest , Oct 28, 2008 10:13AM
and yet financial success, still not at all tied to comp.
so we're good.
is MS going to zero today?
GS now shorting itself?
-retail
Posted by guest , Oct 28, 2008 10:15AM
@3 Nice try, but next time skip the EP-esque TLDR comment and hit that damn post button
Posted by guest , Oct 28, 2008 10:16AM
If execs break laws while losing money, they should go to jail.
If just "losing money" was criminal, everyone in the energy business would be in jail by now.
Posted by guest , Oct 28, 2008 10:18AM
I'm totally an escapegoat in all of this.
Posted by guest , Oct 28, 2008 10:18AM
Trying again...
If an exec breaks the law AND loses money at the same time, he/she should go to jail.
If just "losing money" was criminal, everyone in the energy business would be in jail.
Posted by Tau , Oct 28, 2008 10:19AM
Retribution?
Hogwash - the average American needs to realize that many of these 'high-powered' executives lost 95% of their net worth in this debacle (with that number growing by the day). I fail to understand how that is not punishment enough. Granted, this was self-induced pain To An Extent - they flew too high on mortgage-backed wings and the market b*tch-slapped them back to earth. That's the double-down beauty of equity ownership in the companies you work for - you f*ck up - hello poor house. Nobody should be able to say with a straight face that Jimmy Cayne or Dick Fuld were single-handedly (or double-fistedly) responsible for our little economic hiccup.
Posted by VOL IS KING , Oct 28, 2008 10:21AM
@4
companies are always short themselves. they sell (issue) shares when they think their share price is too high to buy shares (to cover) when they think the prices is too low don't they? Well goldman was issuing shares at $115, looks like those "geniuses" have done it again!
Posted by guest , Oct 28, 2008 10:23AM
@8 So are you implying that if said exec breaks the law and MAKES money, he/she should not go to jail???
How about just "If an exec breaks the law, he/she should go to jail" ??
Posted by guest , Oct 28, 2008 10:26AM
absolutely, VOL CAPS.
buffett enjoying salomon redux
-retail
Posted by guest , Oct 28, 2008 10:28AM
"Hogwash - the average American needs to realize that many of these 'high-powered' executives lost 95% of their net worth in this debacle (with that number growing by the day). "
You're deluded if you think Dick Fuld lost 95% of his net worth with the collapse of Lehman.
Posted by GinNTonic , Oct 28, 2008 10:29AM
@11
It's analagous to the statement: there is no such thing as a rogue trader who makes money.
There's a culture or view that those who make money while "breaking / bending the rules" are just cunning or out-smarting the competition
Posted by guest , Oct 28, 2008 10:29AM
Hogwash - the average American needs to realize that many of these 'high-powered' executives lost 95% of their net worth in this debacle (with that number growing by the day). I fail to understand how that is not punishment enough.
Well it depends on how much they started with, doesn't it? These CEOs banked enough during the good years that losing 95% of their value isn't going to make me feel sorry for them.
Posted by guest , Oct 28, 2008 10:38AM
Where did all these retail scrubs come from? EP, the site's been circling the drain ex-Carrey. Fix it.
-/B/
Posted by Tau , Oct 28, 2008 10:43AM
@13:
Fuld's equity stake (incl. options) in LEH was worth $1.2 billion back in the heyday. What's that worth today? Doughnut. If he was a smart man, which I'm sure he was, he was socking away for the day he would get punched in the face. But you try losing an integer off the front of your stash. Dude got eff'd in the A. 95 might be aggressive but it's ballpark.
@15:
They banked that much because the firms were hemorrhaging money. I agree that it is a notable failure of the finance compensation system that professionals are paid when they make money but are not, in turn, required to give money back when they lose money - but how is that different from any other circumstance of employment in existence? It is just that much more notable because of the sheer magnitude of cash being thrown around. Is it wrong? Maybe. Should it be changed? Hell no - at least not until I retire.
Posted by guest , Oct 28, 2008 10:46AM
@5 1 and 3 are the same person retard.
Posted by guest , Oct 28, 2008 10:55AM
ex-Carry @16.
no bankers left, wizard.
carry on iwa jima-ing it.
-retail
Posted by guest , Oct 28, 2008 11:04AM
Its all about the MARKS....they knew that they were about as truthful as the proverbial "i promise I won't...." (well you know)....its the marks that will bring someone to the Martha Stewart Wing.
Posted by guest , Oct 28, 2008 11:45AM
survival of the unfit
Hogwash - not just about stock or net worth, it extends way beyond that. Tens of thousand of employees are directly impacted by stupid exec decisions. These employees don't get nearly as many options as the CEOs. Even if they lost 95%, they're still living large.
http://www.weeklyta.blogspot.com
Posted by Tau , Oct 28, 2008 11:59AM
@21:
Have we forgotten that employment is an implied, risk-bearing trade, not a right?
Are employees satisfied with being lemmings when times are good but equally happy to heap blame on higher-ups when times go to sh*t? It was the hundreds of thousands of 'stupid' decisions made by lower-rung employees that created our current predicament. The failure of these executives lay in their inability to fix them.
Posted by guest , Oct 28, 2008 12:23PM
"Lower-rung employees." 22, you must be Dick Fuld's butler.
Posted by guest , Oct 28, 2008 12:47PM
shoeshiner
Posted by Tau , Oct 28, 2008 1:04PM
@23:
I refer to the help by their first names. Only the proletariat think they're referred to as 'butlers'
@24:
I appreciate the offer but we have a guy who comes by the office. His name is Felipe
Posted by guest , Oct 28, 2008 1:20PM
#2: It's not the CEO's stock, it's the shareholders CEO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"The way to punish a stupid CEO is to sell his stock. Not sue him...
"
Posted by guest , Oct 28, 2008 1:20PM
Yo what about writing insurance contracts their bodies couldn't cash? Isn't that insurance fraud? What would happen Cherry Coke fat man if everyone smashed their honda and he could pay?
Posted by american bandersnatch , Oct 28, 2008 1:29PM
@27 - Excellent comment. The insane are underrepresented on this site.
Posted by vbierschwale , Oct 28, 2008 2:11PM
I don't personally believe you can jail someone because a company under their leadership went under.
For example, I did a lease purchase of a run down bowling center and tripled sales but still went broke with too many repairs to make.
That doesnt make me criminal, nor should it.
The problem with poor leadership in a corporation is not that we should punish the CEO, but that we need a means of holding them accountable and for voting them out of their leadership position should the share holders not feel that the leader is watching out after their best interests.
Once again, in my opinion, it is not a failure of the leadership, it is simply a matter that we did not choose to vote with our dollars.
Virgil
http://www.KeepAmericaAtWork.com
Posted by guest , Oct 28, 2008 2:16PM
@28 check out the Israel article... the insane are represented. We're all here in a trailer park in Massachusetts.
Posted by guest , Oct 28, 2008 2:20PM
Give it one month- You'll be amazed at what's illegal. Show trials incoming.