Isn’t this rich? Bill Gates, the richest man in the whole country, thinks Wall Streeters are paid too much.
The compensation problem is a very interesting problem. I do think compensation is often too high, but it’s a very tough problem to solve.
Gates blamed a 1993 federal law capping executive salaries at $1 million—“a bad milestone”—which he said wound up backfiring, encouraging huge bonuses and stock option awards. He doesn’t like that, he said during a discussion on philanthropy in New York yesterday, but he’s wary of doing anything about it, worrying that, like the ‘93 law, it will just make things worse.
The cap on salaries turned out to be one of the greatest causes to increase compensation.
Indeed, it seems that Gates touched on just about everything except giving away his $50 billion fortune at yesterday’s forum. He blamed too much optimism and ebullience for the financial crisis and said he was “worried” about the federal government owning big stakes in financial companies.
It’s an unnatural situation when the government owns a lot of a private company. Unfortunately, there is a view that that should exist for a long term. There’s some devaluation of what that asset would have been worth if it hadn’t had to go through that kind of management structure. It’s unavoidable.
Like those annoying commercials for Windows 7.
Microsoft’s Bill Gates Says Wall Street Pay Is ‘Often Too High’ [Bloomberg]
Posted by Evil Weezel , Nov 12, 2009 9:03AM
And I think Bill Gates' net worth is too high. Put a cap on Bill Gates and MSFT!
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 9:07AM
He may be rich, but he's still fugly and has a small peen.
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 9:10AM
This is coming from the guy who's greatest contribution is Excel 2003.
=if("Bill Gates"="bankers get paid too much", "die", "live")
Posted by wankers , Nov 12, 2009 9:13AM
None of you w[b]ankers can touch the guy. His net worth is in the wildest of the widest of your wet dreams. Even after you've done your thousandth deal and defrauded city's worth of old people you'll still be poorer.
Just Sayin'
Posted by Effective Date , Nov 12, 2009 9:19AM
@3 awesome
Posted by prince , Nov 12, 2009 9:19AM
The issue is really that the owners of capital(shareholders) are divorced from exercising power which in modern times is in the hands of Boards and institutions. Thus while the private owner would have major issues in paying the compensation we've come to expect, we cannot reasonably expect a board that has no ownership interest to police management.
I still believe that in capitalism, those who lay out the equity should reap the rewards. The factory worker shouldn't get the same pay as Henry Ford
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 9:20AM
Jon, there's a difference between creating one of the most successful IT companies of all time and advising two schmuck companies that a combination will be EPS accretive.
SanFran Retail Liason
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 9:20AM
He's right and I work on wall street.
Its unbelievable how much they pay some of these monkey investment banking analysts. They basically add no value other than raw, bitter labor.
- Former GS banking analyst
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 9:21AM
I'll take Bill Gates' side. His wealth came through building the value of his company, not writing himself a paycheck out of profits that belong to the shareholders.
He got rich while his shareholders got rich; as opposed to Mozilo & Co., who got rich while the shareholders got poor (or Blankfein & Co., who got rich while the taxpayers got poor.)
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 9:22AM
No comparison here. Bill Gates made the bulk of his money building a huge company and he did it in appreciating stock. I'm no fan of Microsoft products, but there's no denying he ran the ship to its lofty heights.
Bankers, by comparison, build nothing. They move money around and siphon off as much as they can. Sounds more like a leech or parasite to me! Current compensation schemes basically reward the losers for gambling the bank on the spin of the wheel. Ridiculous!
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 9:24AM
Gates is such a douche.
Whether people are under or overpaid is a debatable matter between them and their employers. The only thing I'm certain of is that Bill Gates, as an outside and clueless party, has no basis on which to draw any conclusion about Wall Street compensation whatsoever.
Posted by Joe Mac , Nov 12, 2009 9:24AM
@3 excellent.
Erin looks like she needs a shower.
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 9:25AM
@8 = anti-semite. examine your motives.
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 9:28AM
@11 = anti-samsonite. Go back to Nicaragua.
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 9:29AM
Bill should know that while my actual bonus figure is arbitrary, it would not have been justifiable without some clever work in Excel.
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 9:32AM
@15 good point!
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 9:36AM
@8: anti-not-so-fresh - because you are a douche.
Posted by Anal_yst , Nov 12, 2009 9:42AM
@7-11
You clearly have zero clue about the history of Microsoft. It starts a long time ago, in a land called Silicon Valley, with a company called Xerox...
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 9:43AM
So Wall Street employees make too much money by selling products that make the average person's life more difficult by crashing all the time. This coming from the guy who gave the world Windows. Hmmm.
Posted by pfluger , Nov 12, 2009 9:43AM
Bill Gates should be protested for unleashing Vista and other versions of operating software that breakdown constantly, and need to be replaced every few years with new $400 software, as well as for his terrible haircuts.
I encourage MM to "investigate" Gates, and make a movie about Microsoft.
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 9:44AM
8=one of the bottom 5%, obviously.
Posted by Anal_yst , Nov 12, 2009 9:46AM
I should also add "/oversimplification" to the end of my comment @18
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 9:46AM
I create value by investing in start ups. There would not be any microsoft if there were no VC's, junk bonds or financiers who are willing to speculate a software company in 1980s.
Gates is a such a wimp that even the gay hipster from apple ad can kick his ass!
Posted by pfluger , Nov 12, 2009 9:50AM
My theory is that Bill Gates is responsible for the financial crisis.
Because, all these securitizations that we have today would not have been possible before the advent of the microprocessor and spreadsheet software which allowed millions of simultaneous computations within milliseconds.
No Gates, no microsoft, no credit crisis and MBS breakdown.... Lehman, Bear and countless victims of Gates' duplicity make the Madoff scandal look like peanuts, by comparison.
- MM
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 9:55AM
Anal_yst = malnourished plum smuggler
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 9:57AM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/epic/rbs/6549472/RBS-headquarters-to-host-all-day-drinking-parties.html
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 9:57AM
@4 true
@23 Venture capital is useful, but only if there are creative minds to invent and market ideas in the first place. I think it speaks volumes that the two richest people in America (BG and WB) never threw themselves into the New York rat race of trying to chase banking money. Both have been very involved in financial markets, but living in Seattle and Omaha probably gave them some perspective on the ridiculousness of paying douchebag bankers millions of dollars for deal after deal gone bad. Think about how many people got paid handsomely for the AOL - Time Warner merger, Lucent's $20 billion dollar of Ascend (basically an office park in Alameda, CA), Lehman Brothers' disastrous forays into real estate lending, etc.
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 9:59AM
Bill Gates is afraid of black people.
Posted by pfluger , Nov 12, 2009 10:00AM
Bill Gates is the main cause of global warming, which greedy Wall Street traders will capitalize on by trading carbon credits.
- MM
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 10:01AM
Hence why he's donated billions to charities across Africa and the Caribbean.
28 = moron
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 10:03AM
@30 = Robert Mugabe
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 10:05AM
Bill Gates is a ruthless businessman! At least old man Buffet was never accused of unethical behavior. He stole almost every idea Xerox/Bell Labs and screwed Paul Allen of his majority stake. The guy is no angel. He's like Spitzer talking about Ethics at Harvard.
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 10:05AM
@3...classic
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 10:06AM
31 = 28 = uninformed and unfunny
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 10:09AM
@3 Syntax Error. You should learn Excel.
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 10:13AM
@ 34- is the trashing of other posters really necessary? Racist.
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 10:15AM
Fucking Excel monkeys.
Posted by Anal_yst , Nov 12, 2009 10:24AM
@32 speaks the truth. Everyone looks at Gates like some harmless wonder-nerd, but he's a sneaky, conniving, manipulative pr*ck just like everyone else. Microsoft's business practices are just as predatory, not to mention anti-competitive as any other firm around.
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 10:25AM
@32 I killed Paul Allen with an axe in the face, his body is dissolving in a bathtub in Hell's Kitchen.
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 10:30AM
At least Billy gives a reach around. Millions are benefiting from his legacy which is more than I can say for the fucking w[b]anker leaches.
No talent ass clowns.
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 10:30AM
Bill Gates is more powerful than Lloyd Blankfein and Stevie Cohen combined.
Boom goes your mind!
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 10:31AM
@39 You must work in murders and executions, I mean, mergers and acquisitions.
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 10:32AM
@39 Nice AP reference
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 10:39AM
@32, 38/Anal, "just like everyone else who went to Harvard"
-fify
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 10:42AM
@44 FTW
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 10:53AM
@32, 38/Anal
Yes, but Bill owns the equity if the firm that stole, sneaked, etc.
@6 is on the money. Profits belong to owners of capital (I guess this was missed in CFA and/ or MBA classes) When you deviate from this, troubble ensues.
A side point, and my personal pet peeve, is performace attribution. I understand that Maxine and Barney can't be expected to understand this topinc. But, really, did my broker at GS bring in 2MM of fees? I don't think so. If he left for RBS, I'd be happy to let him buy me drinks, but I'm not moving...
Posted by now on buyside , Nov 12, 2009 10:57AM
@40 Really? Why don't you take a look at who the major donors are to every charity/non-profit hospital/church/synagogue in NY and come back to us with your report.
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 11:02AM
@47 See what you did there? you're so myopic that your world view stops at NY.
Stopping at the borders of the USA is bad enough ... but really?
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 11:04AM
@46 To answer your question, you might begin by asking youself; "How much in fees, did I pay my broker?"
I would guess that your answer is probably wide of the mark.
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 11:04AM
@40/48 Bernie Madoff much?
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 11:06AM
suck it billy
-dennis kneale
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 11:24AM
WHO IS BILL GATES CEO.
Posted by pfluger , Nov 12, 2009 11:28AM
Gates didn't give shit to charity until a few years back, when news came out that Gates didn't give shit to charity. Then he started to.
Posted by now on buyside , Nov 12, 2009 11:36AM
@48- OK, take a look at any other city with high financial-sector employment- Boston, Charlotte, Chicago... as for non-US-- aren't we talking about the charitable habits of Americans here? I've no idea what charitable giving looks like in Singapore or Bombay- do you?
Posted by now on buyside , Nov 12, 2009 11:36AM
@48- OK, take a look at any other city with high financial-sector employment- Boston, Charlotte, Chicago... as for non-US-- aren't we talking about the charitable habits of Americans here? I've no idea what charitable giving looks like in Singapore or Bombay- do you?
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 11:38AM
28 Most rich white folks who wear glasses fall into that category.
Posted by NegativeConvexity , Nov 12, 2009 11:50AM
This paradigm inevitably asserts itself when you sit on the board of BRK for too long. This idea does not come originally from BG, he is merely a proxy.
Firms exist to maximize profit for shareholders. Attracting top talent needs to be balanced with overpaying and reckless risk seeking behavior.
This issue is ambiguous at best - the only unequivocal thing i know in life is this: UBS sucks!
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 11:50AM
@55 My point, regardless of when Billy started giving, is that he has more knowledge of charitable giving inside and outside the US than you or I will ever know. I hazard he's aware of giving in Singapore and Bombay.
We're talking about individuals here [i.e. Bill] and not corporate entities [i.e JPM/GS], no?
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 12:04PM
59 comments? This certainly ain't Greggums in disguise. I don't think all of Greggor's posts added up to 59 comments.
Posted by now on buyside , Nov 12, 2009 12:05PM
@55 Correct we're talking individuals. I can only speak to NY b/c that's where I live, but if you look at the hospitals/schools/soup kitchens/etc in this city you'll see a lot of money and time being invested by these "banker types" you so easily revile... of course nobody's given as much as Gates because nobody else has that much to give.
Posted by The Captain , Nov 12, 2009 12:19PM
OK Folks - I was actually at the event last night where Gates allegedly made these comments... They are being taken completely out of context...
He doesn't give a shit how much bankers make or dont make ... he was just trying to argue that pay caps are dumb and have the opposite effect ... that by shifting cash compensation to stock and other instruments... bankers were making more than they would have sans caps ...
You guys should be supporting him for wanting to get rid of caps ... not talking shit
Additionally, he made fun of himself regarding money half the night ... the guy is ok in my book
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 12:25PM
CORRECTION ALERT!!!
Isn’t this rich? Bill Gates, the richest man in the whole country, thinks Wall Streeters are paid too much.
CORRECTION: thinks Street Walkers are paid too much.
Sorry guys, my bad.
Jon
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 12:26PM
Good to know Bill Gates thinks Wall Streeters are paid too much. Don't recall anyone asking him for his opinion on how much money we make.
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 12:29PM
@62 Good to see that Bill likes a little Strange every once in a while. Makes him seem almost human.
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 1:26PM
apple >
Posted by Jimmy , Nov 12, 2009 5:25PM
Bill Gates would be in the poor house without help from the government, being in the IP hocking biz, he is practically a ward of the state.
Posted by guest , Nov 12, 2009 5:38PM
Can anyone name a software product that was first conceived of and written by Microsoft that was commercially successful (defined any way you want with some degree of rational thought).
Even the original Microsoft operating system DOS was actually purchased by Gates from a company called Seattle Computer(the product name was QDOS which stood for quick and dirty operating system).
Windows, Excel, Word etc. were all products that were adapted from products develped by other companies like IBM(OS/2) , Lotus(123), WordPerfect (Word) , Sybase (SQLServer).
Just Saying!