Which of these CEOs are (or were) worth their pay?

None of them listed are worth that much

They don't hold up the company, thus they shouldn't be payed such a ridiculous amount.

TheDemSocialist said:

None of them listed are worth that much

Click to expand...

How much then?

waas said:

They don't hold up the company, thus they shouldn't be payed such a ridiculous amount.

Click to expand...

No CEO single-handedly "holds up" the company. What do you define as ridiculous vs. not ridiculous when it comes to heading some of the world's largest companies?

CEO's are paid just like sports players.

A business sees their worth, and will pay them just a little more than what another company would. See...this is what happens when you're not a union Borg. If you don't like what you're paid, you have the freedom to go peddle your wares somewhere else.

If SuperWidgets LLC doesn't want to pay Joe Blow $400,000 but BetterWidgets LLC is willing to pay that, then Joe Blow gets to go work for BetterWidgets. If SuperWidgets doesn't like it, then they need to pay Joe Blow an amount that would make him stay. See...they don't just want any CEO. They specifically want Joe Blow. That makes him a commodity. That makes his value rise.

See...you bottom feeders can't comprehend that, because you'll likely never be in a situation where your personal worth is valued that high. So go be jealous elsewhere, or find a way to make yourself more profitable without knocking others down. It makes you look weak in character.

RabidAlpaca said:

LOL, we're docking your pay, but the good news is, you're getting this "Achievement medal" we bought at hobby lobby.

Click to expand...

Well it is maybe not as crazy as it sounds. Take for exampel what would you choose from this example? Either earning 400 000 dollar a year and have a rewarding job and me admired by people both outside and inside the company. Or earning 2 million a year having a really terrible job and be despised by people both inside and outside the company. That it can of course can take some creativity to come up with alternative priviligies then money and of course they should still be a diffrent between low and high income. But then you come up to fantasy sums its more about the influence and status when happines from the things you can buy for the money.

Bergslagstroll said:

Well it is maybe not as crazy as it sounds. Take for exampel what would you choose from this example? Either earning 400 000 dollar a year and have a rewarding job and me admired by people both outside and inside the company. Or earning 2 million a year having a really terrible job and be despised by people both inside and outside the company. That it can of course can take some creativity to come up with alternative priviligies then money and of course they should still be a diffrent between low and high income. But then you come up to fantasy sums its more about the influence and status when happines from the things you can buy for the money.

Click to expand...

That's not a correct analogy though, because a medal doesn't change how your employees think of you, or how much you like your job. The employees will like you if you do right by them and lead the company into success. If you make their work environment an enjoyable one. You'll enjoy it based on your own personal standards.

Neomalthusian said:

Which of these business leaders are (or were) worth what they earn(ed) annually?

Explain.

Click to expand...

Whatever the board of directors is willing to pay them is what they are worth. There is no metaphysical standard out there for what fair pay is, and that includes stuff like relative value.

blaxshep said:

Having worked in the F-500 for most of my life I can tell you that the CEO is the most worthless and easily replaced person in the company. The premise is that they make all the big decisions but the reality is when ever a big decision is to be made an external consulting company is almost always hired. I can hire a bum that lives under the bridge and pay him minimum wage to operate a telephone that calls someone else to make the big decisions. Furthermore when they do make the big decision and it fails they are given millions to go away. They are a complete waste of money.

Click to expand...

Hey, what if we did an experiment. Get Apple to offer the CEO job for $90,000 a year with no bonus, and see what happens. You think the board will go for that?

By the way, a friend of mine was one of these turn around specialists. They take over the CEO position of companies that are in trouble and get them back to viability. Mostly it involves lots of cuts and spinoffs. When the dirty work is done he leaves. I can guarantee you that he made a big difference everywhere he went. These jobs would come up every now and then, but most of the time he just played golf. My bit of anecdotal stuff for what it's worth.

Neomalthusian said:

No CEO single-handedly "holds up" the company. What do you define as ridiculous vs. not ridiculous when it comes to heading some of the world's largest companies?

Click to expand...

It depends upon the specific industry.

waas said:

It depends upon the specific industry.

Click to expand...

The examples in the poll point to some specific industries. All we know so far is that you disapprove, so if you can't elaborate and specify, it makes your objections seem arbitrary and personal.

Voltaire X said:

If the shareholders think a CEO is overpaid they can change that. What exactly are you proposing? For Barack Obama to decide what each CEO should make?

Click to expand...

If you think a CEO is overpaid, quit buying the products from that company. You won't stop their massive pay but it least you won't be contributing to it.

Every CEO is worth whatever the shareholders think they should be paid, no more and no less. I don't get why this is even a question.