Pigs at the trough 2016
Discussion
sidicks said:
crankedup said:
Well said! an indication of the indifference between those that invest real money and those that are paid to invest on behalf of those that pay their wages. And that is where the old age problem lie. In the past 20 years the average CEO pay has grown from 247x median to 1000x median.. As sidicks himself admits ,they haven't, had a problem with this, you read it hear first'!!!!!
It's amazing how you read what you want to hear, but continually fail to understand.These are experts whose focus is on investing to achieve the best returns for their clients and whose interests are entirely aligned with those clients - if they thought that remuneration was excessive and would detract from company share / bond performance they would vote and / or invest / divest accordingly.
The alternative position is held by someone that frequently harps on about 'inequality', who seemingly believes that there is a magic number that is 'fair' for CEO salaries and median salaries, but fails to recognise the extent of changes in the role and requirements of the CEO which simply doesn't apply to the average worker. The same person has zero understanding of how fund managers are involved and engage with boards and their policies, including remuneration.
I know which side is best informed to make those decisions / judgements...
As I have mentioned several times, let's wait for the outcome of the investigatory board. As for changes to the role of CEO of the FTSE companies, I don't buy it. Next you will be telling us they work 25 hours a day.
sidicks said:
Except the key players have been doing this for years - in the last they just haven't had any problems with the remuneration, despite why you claim.
Your innocent statement sums up in one sentence the whole problem surrounding CEO pay and fund manager lindifference to small shareholders concerns and real world life for ordinary workers. Like I have said for years, Fund Managers simply wave through any pay board recommendations.crankedup said:
Your innocent statement sums up in one sentence the whole problem surrounding CEO pay and fund manager lindifference to small shareholders concerns and real world life for ordinary workers.
Small shareholders making judgements on the basis of ignorance or envy are not the sort of people who should be deciding on corporate policy.ceankedup said:
Like I have said for years, Fund Managers simply wave through any pay board recommendations.
You've said lots of things that are incorrect (and continue to do so).Fund managers are aligned to do the right thing for the business - they need the businesses to perform to increase shareholder value.
sidicks said:
crankedup said:
Your innocent statement sums up in one sentence the whole problem surrounding CEO pay and fund manager lindifference to small shareholders concerns and real world life for ordinary workers.
Small shareholders making judgements on the basis of ignorance or envy are not the sort of people who should be deciding on corporate policy.Surely if one set of shareholders/stakeholders can use their emotional outlook to drive the corporate policy, then so should another?
Or is greed more valid than envy?
Mr Whippy said:
Surely if one set of shareholders/stakeholders can use their emotional outlook to drive the corporate policy, then so should another?
It all depends on the clout that those stakeholders have. This doesn't just apply to pay but also to other areas like Corporate Social Responsibility.Mr Whippy said:
But many others make judgements on the basis of greed.
Surely if one set of shareholders/stakeholders can use their emotional outlook to drive the corporate policy, then so should another?
What has making judgements on the basis of shareholder value (which is what the fund managers are being paid to do) got to do with 'greed'??Surely if one set of shareholders/stakeholders can use their emotional outlook to drive the corporate policy, then so should another?
Mr Whippy said:
Or is greed more valid than envy?
As ever, you are very confused!sidicks said:
crankedup said:
Your innocent statement sums up in one sentence the whole problem surrounding CEO pay and fund manager lindifference to small shareholders concerns and real world life for ordinary workers.
Small shareholders making judgements on the basis of ignorance or envy are not the sort of people who should be deciding on corporate policy.ceankedup said:
Like I have said for years, Fund Managers simply wave through any pay board recommendations.
You've said lots of things that are incorrect (and continue to do so).Fund managers are aligned to do the right thing for the business - they need the businesses to perform to increase shareholder value.
crankedup said:
No matter what you may think of small shareholders, they and in some companies, we are the owners of the company.
Indeed, the owners are entitled to run the businesses as they see fit. You just seem to be in denial that the larger shareholders do exactly that.crankedup said:
You really are just another pen pusher button presser that appears to have lost sight of values.
Please stop making personal remarks about things you demonstrably know nothing about.As a reminder:
crankedup said:
I have no objection at all to a good debate or argument, but to simply post this personal insult with worse to follow is unacceptable.
Edited by sidicks on Wednesday 18th May 20:37
Mr Whippy said:
I do understand that my pension company manages my pension and charges an AMC of 1% of my fund total value, and they invest into independently managed funds who charge by taking value from the growth of the fund.
Still wrong - you choose to invest in external funds.Mr Whippy said:
Who is taking a commission for financial advice which I've never received?
"always seek your own independent financial advise" is the tag line of pension provicers, but you're saying I've paid for financial advise and that's the cost I'm unhappy with?
If you've not paid for financial advice it's no wonder you don't appear to have a clue as to the type of policy you have!"always seek your own independent financial advise" is the tag line of pension provicers, but you're saying I've paid for financial advise and that's the cost I'm unhappy with?
Mr Whippy said:
But once again you're avoiding the point I'm trying to make and picking away at details instead.
Fundamentally the details are irrelevant.
'Fundamentally" the details are the thing you are making claims about and you are very wrong!Fundamentally the details are irrelevant.
Mr Whippy said:
Pensions obfuscate the ability for people to vote with their wealth.
Only for people who don't understand them...From the SW website:
Can I switch my investment(s) into other funds?
Yes, you have access to a wide range of investments to choose from, allowing you to change your investment strategy to suit your retirement planning needs. Most plans currently allow investment fund switches each year at no extra charge
Edited by sidicks on Wednesday 18th May 20:49
Edited by sidicks on Wednesday 18th May 21:01
sidicks said:
crankedup said:
No matter what you may think of small shareholders, they and in some companies, we are the owners of the company.
Indeed, the owners are entitled to run the businesses as they see fit. You just seem to be in denial that the larger shareholders do exactly that.crankedup said:
You really are just another pen pusher button presser that appears to have lost sight of values.
Please stop making personal remarks about things you demonstrably know nothing about.As a reminder:
crankedup said:
I have no objection at all to a good debate or argument, but to simply post this personal insult with worse to follow is unacceptable.
Edited by sidicks on Wednesday 18th May 20:37
This is about CEO and Board pay, not the running of the company, you seem to be confused.
crankedup said:
But it's OK for you to throw out personal remarks, seems to me that double standards are at play as well so far as your concerned. If you use insults man up when one or two very mild rebukes head your way.
Double standards? It was your original post about personal insults that I quoted in my response...Treat my comments as insults if you will, I see them more as facts - it's unarguable that you are pretty ignorant about how fund management firms engage with the management of the businesses they invest in on behalf of their customers. Not sure why you'd even deny that?
Your attempted insults towards me were both irrelevant to the discussion and extremely wide of the mark. Unfortunately you are one of the many on PH who seem determined to demonstrate their ignorance by commenting on things they clearly don't understand.
I also see you're still struggling with the different between "your" and "you're"...
crankedup said:
This is about CEO and Board pay, not the running of the company, you seem to be confused.
You seem to be unaware that the CEO runs the company, no wonder you are finding this all so confusing...crankedup said:
But it's OK for you to throw out personal remarks, seems to me that double standards are at play as well so far as your concerned. If you use insults man up when one or two very mild rebukes head your way.
This is about CEO and Board pay, not the running of the company, you seem to be confused.
Careful, he'll start crying and report your nasty posts to a Mod.This is about CEO and Board pay, not the running of the company, you seem to be confused.
legzr1 said:
Careful, he'll start crying and report your nasty posts to a Mod.
Once again you turn up to a thread to add nothing to the topic under discussion, simply to try (and fail) to 'score points'.
How pathetic, and yet somehow not unexpected...
Edited by sidicks on Thursday 19th May 05:32
Sidicks,I understand how you can defend your position.I am dismayed how anybody can defend the obscene pay and bonuses of CEO's.
These days workers,hourly paid, not salaried in general,there are exceptions,recieve no extra pay for weekends,overtime etc.
When I was an apprentice in the 80s we got paid for overtime at time and half,double time on Sunday,bank hloidays was treble time or double with a day in lieu.
All this has stopped but the bosses take no pay cuts,something has to give.
These days workers,hourly paid, not salaried in general,there are exceptions,recieve no extra pay for weekends,overtime etc.
When I was an apprentice in the 80s we got paid for overtime at time and half,double time on Sunday,bank hloidays was treble time or double with a day in lieu.
All this has stopped but the bosses take no pay cuts,something has to give.
0000 said:
Companies used to value loyalty. They don't anymore, unfortunately, with a more mobile workforce it's worth much less. If people are going to stay in a job that doesn't pay overtime companies will quite happily let them.
I do. So do most other small businesses. I have employees that start as apprentices and spend their whole life with me. Rovinghawk said:
smifffymoto said:
All this has stopped but the bosses take no pay cuts,something has to give.
Why not start your own business if it's that good a deal?BTW I'm retired .
smifffymoto said:
Sidicks,I understand how you can defend your position.I am dismayed how anybody can defend the obscene pay and bonuses of CEO's.
I've not defended the pay and bonuses of CEOs. I've disputed the claims that fund managers don't influence board remuneration and make decisions based on maximising shareholder value, as they are paid to do.smifffymoto said:
These days workers,hourly paid, not salaried in general,there are exceptions,recieve no extra pay for weekends,overtime etc.
When I was an apprentice in the 80s we got paid for overtime at time and half,double time on Sunday,bank hloidays was treble time or double with a day in lieu.
All this has stopped but the bosses take no pay cuts,something has to give.
Plenty of workers receive overtime.and bonuses.When I was an apprentice in the 80s we got paid for overtime at time and half,double time on Sunday,bank hloidays was treble time or double with a day in lieu.
All this has stopped but the bosses take no pay cuts,something has to give.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff