what is too much and why don't the people that count speak up?

Care4all said:
The Union owns United Airlines? It is not a Public Company? I know I am missing something here, cuz I am totally lost! hahahaha! please fill me in....
Click to expand...
They bought majority stockholder shares and control the company. Man, you really did miss a lot of business news...

It is the reason that they overpay their pilots, mechanics, etc. when compared to competitor airlines.
 
before you all get twisted off, on something I said, relax.

I said that I thought it was United Airlines. It could have been US Airways, or Continental. I don't exactly remember. It was from fullpolitics.com more than a year ago.
 
Cypress said:
before you all get twisted off, on something I said, relax.

I said that I thought it was United Airlines. It could have been US Airways, or Continental. I don't exactly remember. It was from fullpolitics.com more than a year ago.
Click to expand...
Twisted off? Okay. I must have sounded "angry" or something...
 
Damocles said:
Twisted off? Okay. I must have sounded "angry" or something...
Click to expand...

Not at all.

I'm saying your talking about something totally different that I was. I probably made a mistake in guessing it was United Airlines.

A quick google shows that I was wrong. It must have been another airline.

United Airlines hasn't been union-owned since 2001, when it went bankrupt. You're talking about the employee ownership plan in the 1990s.

I was talking about an airline-union issue that happened like a year or two ago.
 
Cypress said:
Not at all.

I'm saying your talking about something totally different that I was. I probably made a mistake in guessing it was United Airlines.

A quick google shows that I was wrong. It must have been another airline.

United Airlines hasn't been union-owned since 2001, when it went bankrupt. You're talking about the employee ownership plan in the 1990s.

I was talking about an airline-union issue that happened like a year or two ago.
Click to expand...
Ahh... That happens all the time. Stockholders (most of the US now with 401Ks) do not often vote their shares. CEOs often end up promoting those they want because the stockholders do not educate themselves and vote against such largesse.
 
but most people don't know that or even exactly which stocks they own in their 401K.
They usually just pick from a few options, High risk, conservative, bonds, etc...
 
uscitizen said:
but most people don't know that or even exactly which stocks they own in their 401K.
They usually just pick from a few options, High risk, conservative, bonds, etc...
Click to expand...
They receive prospectives constantly, as well as voting packages. Rather than educate themselves then vote their stock they just throw them away.
 
Hmm , strange I never got one from Prudential or my other one either.
but what you are saying is probably what the corps are counting on. Sort of like mail in rebates.
 
Damocles said:
They receive prospectives constantly, as well as voting packages. Rather than educate themselves then vote their stock they just throw them away.
Click to expand...


I think you are mistaken on this. When you place funds into your 401(k) most of it is into a fund. The fund is the owner of the individual stocks and the manager of the fund votes on the shares it owns. You do however get to vote for the manager of the fund.

Immie
 
If you are purchasing only funds then yes, you vote for the fund manager. If your 401K has only funds then you are in a poor 401K.

Anyway, you still get the prospective, you still get to vote. Most do not excercise this because they fear to educate themselves.
 
Damocles said:
If you are purchasing only funds then yes, you vote for the fund manager. If your 401K has only funds then you are in a poor 401K.

Anyway, you still get the prospective, you still get to vote. Most do not excercise this because they fear to educate themselves.
Click to expand...

This is very true Damo, and the Board members and CEO'S count on it! [B] If you don't think they do....let me know... ;) because I certainly believe that they have TAKEN ADVANTAGE of this precise situation....

and most that is invested in the stock market by middle america IS NOT in individual stocks but in funds...no? I thought I had read that somewhere?

care
 
Grind said:
there should be no limit. Quit your whinning care.
Click to expand...
so you don't think the shareholders, for their own benefit, should put a stop to this practice?

you really expect the shareholders to put up with their profits being just given away each year, $400 million a shot?

well, i disagree with you....it is stealing profits from the shareholder when it is something like $370 million a year as the pay for just ONE CEO imo...
and the stock holders must become more informed instead of their ostrich heads in the ground!
 
Care4all said:
so you don't think the shareholders, for their own benefit, should put a stop to this practice?

you really expect the shareholders to put up with their profits being just given away each year, $400 million a shot?

well, i disagree with you....it is stealing profits from the shareholder when it is something like $370 million a year as the pay for just ONE CEO imo...
and the stock holders must become more informed instead of their ostrich heads in the ground!
Click to expand...

Care,

The Board of Director's negotiate with each of the officer's and determine the salaries that will be paid. The Board of Director's is elected by, guess who... that's right, the shareholders. If the shareholders are unhappy with the CEO (a member of that board) or any officer then their steps to remedy this problem is to get a shareholder's meeting or wait for the next scheduled meeting and vote his/her butt off the Board.

That is how it works. You want your CEO canned, buy a controlling interest in the company or garner enough support among the other shareholders and send him/her packing.

Immie
 
Immanuel said:
Care,

The Board of Director's negotiate with each of the officer's and determine the salaries that will be paid. The Board of Director's is elected by, guess who... that's right, the shareholders. If the shareholders are unhappy with the CEO (a member of that board) or any officer then their steps to remedy this problem is to get a shareholder's meeting or wait for the next scheduled meeting and vote his/her butt off the Board.

That is how it works. You want your CEO canned, buy a controlling interest in the company or garner enough support among the other shareholders and send him/her packing.

Immie
Click to expand...

i am very aware of how it all works immanuel, maybe you missed me saying that?

the board in cahoots with the ceo, get their blown out of proportion salary packages....

the issue is the stockholder not paying attention to this kind of abuse with their profits, or boardmembers for that matter.... this costs them money....and the board/ceo alliances of scratching eachother's backs continues because he/she knows the average shareholder is not paying attention thus the ability to rip them off..... oh, yeah, it is the shareholder's fault in many people's eyes like yours for certain....but to me, it is the ceo's lack of ethics that is failing a system that relies mostly on self regulation and ethics.
 
Last edited:
Care4all said:
i am very aware of how it all works immanuel, maybe you missed me saying that?

the board in cahoots with the ceo, get their blown out of proportion salary packages....

the issue is the stockholder not paying attention to this kind of abuse with their profits, or boardmembers for that matter.... this costs them money....and the board/ceo alliances of scratching eachother's backs continues knows the average shareholder is not paying attention thus the ability to rip them off..... oh, yeah, it is the shareholder's fault in many people's eyes like yours for certain....but to me, it is the ceo's lack of ethics that is failing a system that relies mostly on self regulation and ethics.
Click to expand...

Sound familiar?

George W. Bush = CEO

Dick Cheney = COO

and you can just keep going down the line.

The same thing happens in American politics and within the corporate system.

Maybe you think we should go to a different system? A dictatorship?

Immie
 
Immanuel said:
Care,

The Board of Director's negotiate with each of the officer's and determine the salaries that will be paid. The Board of Director's is elected by, guess who... that's right, the shareholders. If the shareholders are unhappy with the CEO (a member of that board) or any officer then their steps to remedy this problem is to get a shareholder's meeting or wait for the next scheduled meeting and vote his/her butt off the Board.

That is how it works. You want your CEO canned, buy a controlling interest in the company or garner enough support among the other shareholders and send him/her packing.

Immie
Click to expand...
Would you agree that it's fair to say there is little incentive for stockholders to care about the long term viability and "health" of a company if they are focused primarily on trading and near term profit?
 
OrnotBitwise said:
Would you agree that it's fair to say there is little incentive for stockholders to care about the long term viability and "health" of a company if they are focused primarily on trading and near term profit?
Click to expand...

Yes, which is why you have the complaceny of the vast majority of corporate stockholders.

Does that change anything at all? If the Board isn't producing then either the shareholders will boot them out or the stock will drop and eventually the board members will loose their jobs. There is an incentive for the Board Members to make sure that a corporation produces and continues to produce.

Immie
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top