Bonuses for bailed out companies Options

[dauss]

So, I'm trying to think of an example that would be close to the situation that AIG is facing to get a gauge on this particular situation.

Let's pretend that Brinker International Restaurants(Chili's, Maggiano's, On the Border, and Romano's Macaroni Grill) got a bailout with your tax dollars because they're in financial trouble. So, let's also pretend that one of their concepts was the main cause for all their profit loss, On the Border in this hypothetical case. So, On the Border has such massive losses that it causes Brinker to have to report a loss for the fiscal year.

Now, let's just say that you work for Chili's and don't really have any connection to On the Border because that's a different division. You've been doing your job and Chili's, Romano's, and Maggiano's not only made budget, but actually had profit for the last year. Should you get bonus, along with the guys from Romano's and Maggiano's?

[impala454]

Except that paying you $10 million isn't part of a contract for a business the government is trying to keep afloat.

You are dead on on why people are ticked, and was exactly the point I made in the other thread. Because people are "living large". It's all about perspective, and you and everyone else who's ticked fails to see it in perspective. You just see the word "millions" and "executives" and draw your own conclusions based on your decidedly non-millions non-executive lifestyle. All you see is someone doing better than you and you feel that knocking them down to your level is the only solution.

The bottom line is, you have no idea how this business is run, you have no idea who the people receiving the bonuses are, and you have no idea about their job performance, or what their contracts entitle them to. So bitching about it is stupid.

Lastly, understand the concept of how business people work. Many work similar to waiters. They have a base salary, and then receive a "bonus" based on their performance. No doubt that, even with the bonuses, these people are probably only receiving a fraction of what they might normally make in a year. Part of keeping the company afloat is keeping employees working there. Obviously the ones that met their marks well enough to receive their bonuses are the ones you want to keep. You think hacking all these people's pay and having them leave the company is what will turn it around??

[FORSAKENR320]

The bottom line is, you have no idea how this business is run, you have no idea who the people receiving the bonuses are, and you have no idea about their job performance, or what their contracts entitle them to. So bitching about it is stupid.

so lets all take the impala example and ignore it. since apparently we don't understand.... we shouldn't question things we don't understand...

and your little speech about keeping people in the business... you think that the banking industry won't survive without these people? on the whole they are FAILURES. their bad decisions is what caused their own money problems. they leave, and they will be replaced.

they took the wrong gamble. what you're saying is alot like me going to vegas, losing a couple $1000 and then expecting the casino to give me the money back so that i can try to gamble again and hopefully win this time.


you're a god damn moron. no wonder NASA hasn't come up with anything useful lately when they hire people like you.

my advise:: tell your boss that you wanna be the next dumb-fuck chimp they send into outer space