|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Hello M.,
try looking at circa 1980 forward under Welsch's leadership. that's
how businesses are supposed to be run and that's how real shareholder
value is rendered. what's more, look deeper and you'll see all the
mediocre companies whose whiz bang executives couldn't even succeed in
the loangest economic growth era since ww2. there are hundred's of
them and I'd guess their exec's made out better than JW on a value
creation basis.
Best regards,
Jim Johnson mailto:jejohn@xxxxxxxxxxx
--
Monday, September 23, 2002, 12:50:28 PM, you wrote:
MS> the economy was on "auto pilot" during the 1990s......
MS> gorillas could have run the company.
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: BobsKC [mailto:bobskc@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
>> Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 12:19 PM
>> To: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: Re: [RT] GE and Welch
>>
>>
>> At 09:32 AM 9/23/2002 -0500, you wrote:
>>
>> >Frankly, with a 2800% increase in share value it would
>> >seem to me he earned a very "perky" retirement.
>> >
>> >Clyde
>>
>> I agree completely. Whatever that package was costing GE, it was the
>> tiniest token of what he did for the company. Getting shareholder
>> approval for a perk package isn't a reasonable solution either
>> ... no more
>> so that expecting government to come to the voters to decide
>> where to place
>> a stop sign.
>>
>> Bob
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>> >Clyde Lee Chairman/CEO (Home of SwingMachine)
>> >SYTECH Corporation email:clydelee@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >7910 Westglen, Suite 105 Office: (713) 783-9540
>> >Houston, TX 77063 Fax: (713) 783-1092
>> >Details at: www.theswingmachine.com
>> >- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>> >
>> >----- Original Message -----
>> >From: "Daniel Goncharoff" <thegonch@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> >To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 9:26 AM
>> >Subject: Re: [RT] GE and Welch
>> >
>> >
>> > > I call a contract that means my assets are used to pay someone
>> > > indefinitely for not providing any work on my behalf abridging my
>> > > property rights.
>> > >
>> > > You may also want to consider that just because there is a signed
>> > > contract, it doesn't make a transaction legal.
>> > >
>> > > Regards
>> > > DanG
>> > >
>> > > Jim Johnson wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > Hello Daniel,
>> > > >
>> > > > Then you shouldn't own shares in a company whose
>> bylaws/policies don't
>> > > > stipulate that all executive comp plans be put to a
>> shareholder vote.
>> > > > That is rare to nonexistent. You need to understand how the process
>> > > > works. You elected the board and gave them the latitude to
>> make these
>> > > > decisions for you. If you don't like that arrangement you can: sell
>> > > > your shares, use options, start your own conglomerate, agitate for
>> > > > board/comp policy reform etc. But the inference I make is that you
>> > > > would prefer to abridge rights of property ownership.
>> > > >
>> > > > Best regards,
>> > > > Jim Johnson mailto:jejohn@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > > Sunday, September 22, 2002, 7:21:37 AM, you wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > DG> As a shareholder of GE, I don't remember agreeing to
>> this package of
>> > > > DG> retirement perks. In fact, I only found out about it
>> because of his
>> > > > DG> divorce case. I certainly would have voted against it,
>> as I don't
>> > > > DG> believe in post-retirement benefits of this kind
>> (apartments, jets,
>> > > > DG> etc.) There should be a bonus at departure, partly cash, partly
>> >stock
>> > > > DG> with a long-term vesting period, fully disclosed to the
>> >shareholders.
>> > > > DG> Then we would have the ability to make a free choice.
>> > > >
>> > > > DG> Regards
>> > > > DG> DanG
>> > > >
>> > > > DG> Jim Johnson wrote:
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> Hello BobsKC,
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> you can't hold teachers accountable--they're unionized
>> AND they have
>> > > > >> tenure. what's that all about?
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> about money--PAC money mainly. the largest contributors
>> to Democrats
>> > > > >> are unions, teachers associations and trial lawyers.
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> the liberal philosophy continues to eat away at our way of life.
>> >even
>> > > > >> last night on the WSJ editorial board roundtable--when
>> asked about
>> > > > >> Welsh's retirements perks, not one of those presumably
>> free market
>> > > > >> conservative writers observed that what he got was given to him
>> > > > >> freely. Even they seemed to be tacitly buying into the
>> implication
>> > > > >> that somebody (government I assume) should get involved
>> in this. the
>> > > > >> title of van Hayek's book is chilling--The Road to Serfdom.
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> Best regards,
>> > > > >> Jim Johnson mailto:jejohn@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> --
>> > > > >> Saturday, September 21, 2002, 10:29:59 PM, you wrote:
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> B> Unions. I watched the UAW refuse to give back a dime
>> to Cat when
>> >things
>> > > > >> B> got tough in the early 80's even in the face of warnings they
>> >would move
>> > > > >> B> their Iowa plants. Well, they moved them. To
>> France! My company
>> >provided
>> > > > >> B> two way radio and closed circuit tv services to those
>> plants and
>> >it was a
>> > > > >> B> tough loss for us.
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> B> There was a time for labor unions. That time was 80
>> years ago.
>> >Most of
>> > > > >> B> the money they pull in goes to organized crime and they have
>> >caused
>> > > > >> B> manufacturing to depart wholesale. Besides, I am
>> suspicious of
>> >anyone who
>> > > > >> B> wants to work at a job where they tell you how much
>> you can make.
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> B> So, greed has driven out the manufacturing jobs. Our
>> education
>> >system has
>> > > > >> B> lowered the bar for the few until the majority are getting a
>> >second rate
>> > > > >> B> education and can not compete in the world market place.
>> >Education is not
>> > > > >> B> the same as corporate earnings. You can't just lower the
>> >estimates. I
>> > > > >> B> worry a lot about our youth .. kids coming out of high school
>> >today are
>> > > > >> B> less informed that kids coming out of 8th grade 30 years ago.
>> >The damn
>> > > > >> B> bar better get put back up where it belongs and teachers held
>> >accountable
>> > > > >> B> and tested.
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> B> Bob
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> B> At 05:57 PM 9/21/2002 -0700, you wrote:
>> > > > >> >>Did the US have a choice in its conversion? It was
>> convert or die.
>> >The
>> > > > >> >>manufacturing went elsewhere because they could do it
>> just as good
>> >and a lot
>> > > > >> >>cheaper. The only other alternative we had was to become
>> >isolationists again
>> > > > >> >>and ban imports. Our agriculture is going the same
>> way right now.
>> >Garlic
>> > > > >> >>is coming in from China at 1/2 the price it can be
>> produced for in
>> >the US.
>> > > > >> >>The same with oranges, grapefruit and other citrus
>> from Australia
>> >and South
>> > > > >> >>America. Are the grain markets in the same shape? Brazil,
>> >Australia, and
>> > > > >> >>other countries are producing product for less. How long can a
>> >subsidy
>> > > > >> >>last? Where is our vaunted fishing fleet. Are there
>> any American
>> >flag
>> > > > >> >>vessels left afloat, outside of the Navy and coast
>> guard. Do we
>> >produce
>> > > > >> >>shoes or clothing any more? We still have a thriving wine
>> >industry.
>> > > > >> >>
>> > > > >> >>I have a question. Who does the service industry
>> service? We have
>> >banks
>> > > > >> >>that lend money to foreign countries that don't repay
>> the loans.
>> >We have
>> > > > >> >>computer companies that import all of the parts they
>> assemble here.
>> >So we
>> > > > >> >>did save those high paying assembly line jobs. The fast food
>> >restaurants
>> > > > >> >>are expanding overseas instead of in the US so those
>> high paying
>> >service
>> > > > >> >>jobs at Wendy's and McD aren't going to shrink the unemployment
>> >rolls. The
>> > > > >> >>banks can now lose money in insurance, brokerage and other non
>> >banking
>> > > > >> >>endeavors. Even the federal government is sending our
>> armaments
>> >for
>> > > > >> >>production overseas.
>> > > > >> >>
>> > > > >> >>Were is the talent coming from to operate the high
>> tech companies?
>> >That
>> > > > >> >>talent is coming from oversees. We can't even produce an
>> >intelligent work
>> > > > >> >>force. There is one ever expanding area of the
>> economy. Tattoo
>> >parlors and
>> > > > >> >>body piercing salons are popping up all over. Now
>> there is a real
>> >future
>> > > > >> >>for your kids. Am I missing something here? Ira
>> > > > >> >>
>> > > > >> >>----- Original Message -----
>> > > > >> >>From: "Earl Adamy" <eadamy@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> > > > >> >>To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > > > >> >>Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2002 4:54 PM
>> > > > >> >>Subject: Re: [RT] Service vs Manufacturing economy
>> > > > >> >>
>> > > > >> >>
>> > > > >> >> > Gary, do you have a URL for that article, sure would like to
>> >read the
>> > > > >> >>whole
>> > > > >> >> > thing?
>> > > > >> >> >
>> > > > >> >> > I have long believed that true economic strength is
>> built upon a
>> >strong
>> > > > >> >>and
>> > > > >> >> > resilient manufacturing base. I have also been
>> saying for many
>> >years that
>> > > > >> >> > the US would suffer deeply in the next
>> recession/depression for
>> >having
>> > > > >> >> > converted to a service based economy.
>> > > > >> >> >
>> > > > >> >> > Earl
>> > > > >> >> >
>> > > > >> >> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > > > >> >> > From: "Gary Funck" <gary@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > > > >> >> > To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > > > >> >> > Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2002 3:23 PM
>> > > > >> >> > Subject: RE: [RT] 10 year note near 40 year highs ?
>> > > > >> >> >
>> > > > >> >> >
>> > > > >> >> > >
>> > > > >> >> > >
>> > > > >> >> > > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > > >> >> > > > From: Daniel Goncharoff [mailto:thegonch@xxxxxxxxxx]
>> > > > >> >> > > > Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2002 9:37 AM
>> > > > >> >> > > > To: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > > > >> >> > > > Subject: Re: [RT] 10 year note near 40 year highs ?
>> > > > >> >> > > >
>> > > > >> >> > > >
>> > > > >> >> > > > I think there are two sides to this point. Isn't a
>> >service-based
>> > > > >> >>economy
>> > > > >> >> > > > more flexible than one based on large
>> factories? It may mean
>> >that
>> > > > >> >> > > > changes come more easily, and that new industries can
>> >develop using
>> > > > >> >>the
>> > > > >> >> > > > excess information-based labor from weaker sectors.
>> > > > >> >> > > >
>> > > > >> >> > > > In this respect, telecoms will be a good
>> real-life example.
>> >It will be
>> > > > >> >> > > > interesting to see what happens to all the
>> people getting
>> >laid off by
>> > > > >> >> > > > the telecoms firms that won't be growing for
>> several years.
>> >If they
>> > > > >> >>end
>> > > > >> >> > > > up having no place to go, that would indicate
>> your believe
>> >is
>> > > > >> >>validated.
>> > > > >> >> > > > If they find new jobs in a similar field, I think the
>> >economic hit
>> > > > >> >>will
>> > > > >> >> > > > not be very big at all.
>> > > > >> >> > > >
>> > > > >> >> > >
>> > > > >> >> > > In this week's Business Week, there's a rather disturbing
>> >article that
>> > > > >> >> > refutes
>> > > > >> >> > > the theory that a service based economy should be more
>> >resilient.
>> > > > >> >>Excerpts
>> > > > >> >> > > below:
>> > > > >> >> > >
>> > > > >> >> > > SEPTEMBER 30, 2002
>> > > > >> >> > >
>> > > > >> >> > > NEWS: ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY
>> > > > >> >> > >
>> > > > >> >> > > The Educated Unemployed
>> > > > >> >> > > The jobless rate for managers and professionals
>> is likely to
>> >rise
>> > > > >> >> > >
>> > > > >> >> > > [...]
>> > > > >> >> > > Here's why joblessness is likely to rise: Across
>> the board,
>> >companies
>> > > > >> >>are
>> > > > >> >> > > facing an unholy trio of low profits, weak
>> demand, and falling
>> > > > >> >> > prices--with no
>> > > > >> >> > > relief in sight. Revenues for the companies in
>> the Standard &
>> >Poor's
>> > > > >> >> > 500-stock
>> > > > >> >> > > index are down 2% over the past year, adding to
>> the pressure
>> >on
>> > > > >> >>businesses
>> > > > >> >> > to
>> > > > >> >> > > cut costs by cutting workforces. At the same time,
>> >productivity is
>> > > > >> >>soaring
>> > > > >> >> > at a
>> > > > >> >> > > rapid clip--a 6% gain over last year at nonfinancial
>> >corporations.
>> > > > >> >>That's
>> > > > >> >> > > allowing businesses to meet flat demand with
>> fewer workers.
>> > > > >> >> > >
>> > > > >> >> > > Even more distressing, some of the sectors where the job
>> >market has
>> > > > >> >>stayed
>> > > > >> >> > > relatively strong--including health, education,
>> finance, and
>> >retailing,
>> > > > >> >> > which
>> > > > >> >> > > together make up about 40% of the total
>> workforce--are showing
>> >signs of
>> > > > >> >> > > cracking. And the already grim labor picture in
>> the airline,
>> >energy,
>> > > > >> >> > > technology, telecom, and media sectors--some 7% of the
>> >workforce--keeps
>> > > > >> >> > > deteriorating.
>> > > > >> >> > > [...]
>> > > > >> >> > > This is the dark side of the productivity boom. During the
>> >second half
>> > > > >> >>of
>> > > > >> >> > the
>> > > > >> >> > > 1990s, output per worker rose, but soaring demand and
>> >revenues, driven
>> > > > >> >>in
>> > > > >> >> > part
>> > > > >> >> > > by the technology and telecom boom, helped boost
>> hiring and
>> >push down
>> > > > >> >>the
>> > > > >> >> > > unemployment rate below 4%. Wages and bonuses
>> soared, and it
>> >seemed like
>> > > > >> >>a
>> > > > >> >> > > golden age for workers.
>> > > > >> >> > >
>> > > > >> >> > > But rising productivity without rising demand is
>> a recipe for
>> > > > >> >>disappearing
>> > > > >> >> > > jobs. If companies can't raise prices, the only
>> way they can
>> >boost
>> > > > >> >>profits
>> > > > >> >> > is
>> > > > >> >> > > to cut workers--and higher productivity makes
>> that possible.
>> > > > >> >> > > [...]
>> > > > >> >> > >
>> > > > >> >> > >
>> > > > >> >> > >
>> > > > >> >> > >
>> > > > >> >> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>> > > > >> >> > > realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > > > >> >> > >
>> > > > >> >> > >
>> > > > >> >> > >
>> > > > >> >> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>> > > > >> >>http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>> > > > >> >> > >
>> > > > >> >> > >
>> > > > >> >> > >
>> > > > >> >> >
>> > > > >> >> >
>> > > > >> >> >
>> > > > >> >> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>> > > > >> >> > realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > > > >> >> >
>> > > > >> >> >
>> > > > >> >> >
>> > > > >> >> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>> >http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>> > > > >> >> >
>> > > > >> >> >
>> > > > >> >>
>> > > > >> >>
>> > > > >> >>
>> > > > >> >>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>> > > > >> >>realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > > > >> >>
>> > > > >> >>
>> > > > >> >>
>> > > > >> >>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>> >http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> B> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>> > > > >> B> realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> B> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>> >http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>> > > > >> realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>> >http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>> > > >
>> > > > DG> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>> > > > DG> realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > DG> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>> >http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>> > > > realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>> >http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>> > > realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
MS> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>>realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>>
>>
>>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
MS> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
MS> realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
MS> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
MS> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
MS> realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
MS> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Plan to Sell a Home?
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J2SnNA/y.lEAA/ySSFAA/zMEolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|