Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

carcassgrinder (21.15)

SERIOUSLY!?!?!!...for real...

Recs

14

October 29, 2009 – Comments (9) | RELATED TICKERS: RET , ARD , S

OK....I demand to know what species these "Wall Street profeesinals" are... 

 

Wall Street professionals indicated three main reasons for expecting increased payouts this year: a third said it was primarily because of very low bonuses last year, a quarter attributed it to their personal performance and a quarter said it was due to their firm's overall performance.

"The fundamental issue that seems to still be lost in the furor is that bonuses are not payments on top of great salaries," added Benson. "For many Wall Street professionals, bonuses are the majority of their total compensation and should be viewed more akin to a sales commission."

 

AHhaaha...ahhaaaa. HHAHAA...hahha....ehem.......

AHAAAHAAHHAHAHHAHAAHHAAAA.....OMG...ahaaAHAahhaAHHAa... 

 

 

9 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On October 29, 2009 at 4:06 PM, KamranatUCLA (30.13) wrote:

We should round them up and send them to jail. They desreve to be in prison more than Madoff.

Report this comment
#2) On October 29, 2009 at 4:09 PM, carcassgrinder (21.15) wrote:

funny.....I think X% of them forgot to mention the raging flood of freshly printed money pouring in from DC.  They forgot to mention that their bonuses are simply well crafted extortions.

Report this comment
#3) On October 29, 2009 at 4:13 PM, leohaas (99.28) wrote:

Bonuses are typically tied to performance. Performance is measure relative to a goal. Goals are set high in good times, and low in bad times. This year's goals were set at the end of last year, when everyone was screaming that the next Great Depression was coming. Now its only the permabears that keep on screaming (for being wrong, for losing their shirts shorting, I don't know why).

Anyway, since the new Great Depression did not materialize, everyone on Wall Street had an easy time beating their goals by a mile. Consequently, bonuses are humongous.

Report this comment
#4) On October 29, 2009 at 4:17 PM, carcassgrinder (21.15) wrote:

leohas.....where's the punchline?

Report this comment
#5) On October 29, 2009 at 4:25 PM, nottheSEC (72.43) wrote:

LMAO good one and rec Carcass. Leo has you are right that bonus benchmarrks were set low. Carcass you are right they dont need NO STINKIN BONUSES. Getting bonuses off federal borrowed money is like getting a rent loan off your Mom and buying beer. Only this is worse its like buying more beer and not paying her back at least $20. It ain't right, it jus ain't right.  

Report this comment
#6) On October 29, 2009 at 4:27 PM, davejh23 (33.19) wrote:

Goals should be set high in good times and higher in bad times.  Any company that only exists today because of government bailouts should not be handing out millions or billions in bonuses...whether that money was paid back or not.  As for AIG, all employees should be on a gov't pay scale...CEO shouldn't make more than Obama, and no other employee should earn even half that.

Report this comment
#7) On October 29, 2009 at 4:36 PM, carcassgrinder (21.15) wrote:

Leohaas...

    Not to harp, but.... 

Bonuses are typically tied to performance...as in performance that would put a company and shareholders at risk?  Or is that the performance of creative accounting to mislead investors?  Or is it the performance of insider trading and pumping?  Or perhaps the peformance of the super processors that are skimming from the top?  Or maybe the hard earned performance of borrowing at 0% and realizing an instant guaranteed spread?

Performance is measure relative to a goal....You mean goal like the longterm health of a company?  Or do you mean goal like not putting your customers at great risk?  Or perhaps the goal of not making frivolous plays with other peoples money?  What exactly is the goal of Wall Street professionals?

Trust me....I understand the advanced and complex theory behind a bonus.  Your arguement reeks of complicity.

 

 

Report this comment
#8) On October 29, 2009 at 4:47 PM, ocsurf (62.81) wrote:

Report this comment
#9) On October 30, 2009 at 12:04 PM, maxnik0215 (84.17) wrote:

so they should have pay us back for their negative performance last year. Like all the government money they got should be divided and taken out of their bank accounts.....

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners