Another Six Flags down...
According to Wikipedia
Off toptic, but any sentence that starts this way can safely be ignored. There's some good stuff in there, but there's some really wrong stuff, too.
If you're going to be picky about definitions of words, use a real source.
Remember the movie "Wall Street"?
But, is that really such a bad thing? I'm tremendously jealous of CEOs and such for their filthy rich ways ... but you know what that jealousy manifests itself as? Hard work, being opportunistic, and making it my goal to not be jealous of those folks, but to BE one of those folks. And yes, I would LOVE to have the type of life Snyder has ... I would get such a high off of people wanting me 24/7 and having 30 hours of work to do in a 24 hour day, etc. etc. ... you know, all the stuff that makes a CEO a CEO and not just some mid-level manager who plays more golf than does work.
I mean seriously, why do we think that these guys do nothing more than play golf? Because it really is hard to understand that golf games aren't really golf games, they're meetings. And they get press and reported on because they're visible, and they're sexy, and they get the "villagers" like us talking. Who would care if you saw a report about how Joe CEO spent 29 hours straight in his office crunching numbers so that the next big improvement at his company comes off without a hitch?
Making little sense once again, this is Brett, signing off to head to poker (a true legitimate pursuit of financial success ... or at least a Bud Light t-shirt ;))
I remember a myth/story/rumor about Japanese managers making no more than 10X what the lowest-paid workers under them earned.
Can you IMAGINE Lee Iacocca being limited to 200K/year? ROFL!
Ya know how Disney makes such an effort to hide/remove the mfr. labels from ALL of their rides. "I'd like to thank everyone who helped me get where I am, but I did it alone". THAT is a crock...you (generic you, no one is being *singled out*) didn't get there alone, there were a LOT of people who worked hard and sacrificed, including friends, family, and co-workers, in order for those guys to get and keep those jobs.
We have a rule in State government, the more you make, the less time you spend working....it's not a LAW or anything, but generally, a good guideliine for how things work. I find it NEAR-IMPOSSIBLE to believe it's THAT much different in the private sector.
*** Edited 4/13/2006 11:03:05 PM UTC by rollergator***
rollergator said:Remember the movie "Wall Street"?
Heh, greed is good, right?
That's the thing about the word "greed," though. Along with "price gouging" people seem to toss these words around alot. Looking at greed alone, though:
"An excessive desire to acquire or possess more than what one needs or deserves, especially with respect to material wealth"
So that's a pretty big thing. Is Shapiro greedy? You know, he really could be. But just because he is amassing large amounts of wealth (probably more than he's worth) it doesn't automatically make him greedy, I would use the word "succesful," or maybe so no one get's their panties in a twist, financially successful. Its the desire to amass more than your worth that makes you greedy, not the act itself.
(Example, say my great aunt I never knew existed drops dead and bequeaths me a million bucks. I have suddenly procured more wealth than I am worth, but that doesn't make me greedy, it just makes me lucky.) *** Edited 4/13/2006 11:07:07 PM UTC by matt.***
We have a rule in State government, the more you make, the less time you spend working....
Aww, Gator, my man, you're KILLING me here. Now I know you know better.
I have no quams about what a personal owned business owner pays himself.
I do have quams about public owned ceo's paying themselves high dollars and driving a company into the ground. It should be something that is percentage based. I would love to hear the logic of paying umpteen million dollars a year for a CEO that is driving a company into the ground. I really don't understand how some CEO's and executives keep their jobs so long. If I performed so piss poorly on my job I guarantee I would be fired instantly.
Yet, in the same token, A CEO that consistantly produces results deserves the big pay check. If he can handle the dinner plate then he deserves the desert.
The thing is a lot of times college education just doesn't teach common sense. My old man is always telling me about management screw ups in the factory. The best one was when a Dana supervisor cost the company 300 grand because he wouldn't take the advice of a worker.
Its how the cookie crumbles. I'll save my judgement until I see how the parks do these next few years.
robert mosley said:
Do you think they should call it 'Sinking Flags' instead of 'Six Flags'?
You're not funny.
PsychoMonkey61 said:
ceo's paying themselves high dollars and driving a company into the ground. It should be something that is percentage based. I would love to hear the logic of paying umpteen million dollars a year for a CEO that is driving a company into the ground. I really don't understand how some CEO's and executives keep their jobs so long. If I performed so piss poorly on my job I guarantee I would be fired instantly.Yet, in the same token, A CEO that consistantly produces results deserves the big pay check. If he can handle the dinner plate then he deserves the desert.
Hmmm. Did anybody else think of Michael Eisner & Board / Disney after reading that? That's exactly what happened with Disney prior to Eisner's resignation. Fat green multi-million dollar bonuses for the big heads up at Disney management while the company's revenue was sagging and stock price was taking a nosedive.
*** Edited 4/14/2006 12:41:07 AM UTC by kRaXLeRidAh***
And no matter how you want to pretty it up with businesspseek and poor pitiful cries of how hard poor Mr. Syder works, there is still no way he is worth $10 million. Yeah, maybe he got lucky but it's luck at the expense of every schmuck who mindlessly forks over that $15 parking fee and pays 4 times what that greasy hamburger is worth, all for the opportunity to spend the day inside a giant commercial for Corn Nuts.
There's nothing special about him and that goes for any grossly overpaid administrator or executive. It sends the message that this ONE person carries the entire company and the rest of the employees be damned. Everybody else is expendable. I'm not even blaming poor Mr. Synder. I'm blaming a culture that continues to breed this sort of thing. But don't take my word for it:
"Exorbitant bonuses, options and other incentives, written into total compensation packages, convey a sense of entitlement, perpetuating the notion that a single individual can make the critical difference to a company's success. This notion ignores the strategic value of a firm's asset mix: human and intellectual capital." Source.
Are CEOs in such demand and do they possess such a rare set of skills that there only a handful of people in the world qualified to handle the job? It's just completely amazing to me that *anybody* can find this sort of thing acceptable. And it will only get worse. The wages of the minions will continue to fall and the wages of the poor overworked golf playing (oops, I meant stuck in business meetings) executives will continue to rise.
I'm waiting for the day when a company has to cut costs and looks to the most obvious solution: slashing the CEOs pay, instead of cutting the workforce and making the remaining employees do the work of 3 for the price of 1.
Yes, I do put my money where my mouth is because business may be amoral, but for me, it is absolutely a moral issue. But somehow the country is more obsessed about what two consenting adults do in their bedroom then what goes on in the boardrooms.
Kraven the Raven said:
If I am at a Six Flags this summer and see Snyder greeting guests at the gate, washing tables, and picking up Pepsi Oasis cups from the walkways, then I will know that he is in it for the guests, not just the $$$$$$$.
Well at SFKK already this season, our new GM, handpicked by Shapiro, *does* greet guests at the gate. He also takes time out every day to tour the park and talk to Guests and employees alike. And you know, if our GM, or Snyder for that matter, saw a Coca-Cola cup on the ground, I'd bet a weeks paycheck that he would pick it up. I also know that Snyder and Shapiro tour the parks, Shapiro was at SFKK just last week. But back to your original statement, Snyder IMO, is in it for the money, but he has to be in it for the Guests as well. And besides, don't most people work for the money anyway?
OK, now let's guess what Danny boy spent the other 6.6 million on that he wants 6.4 back. I'd say give it to him in Free parking at Six Flags and Papa John's pizza coupons. What the hell, throw in a few Sunkist oranges (the OFFICIAL fruit of Six Flags).
The way I see it, Shapiro earns his money this year if come October, SF is totally out of debt and is 5,000,001 dollars in the black. Anything less and he's a failure. You get the pay up front, you better provide the results.
Majortom says that CEOs have it so bad because they're the ones the stock holders get mad at if things go badly. Yeah, some of them are treatly so badly with those severance packages worth tens of millions.
I'll agree, there's nothing wrong with capitalism, but there's plenty wrong with unbridled capitalism. I'm surrounded by the results of it every day.
millrace said:
And no matter how you want to pretty it up with businesspseek and poor pitiful cries of how hard poor Mr. Syder works, there is still no way he is worth $10 million. Yeah, maybe he got lucky but it's luck at the expense of every schmuck who mindlessly forks over that $15 parking fee and pays 4 times what that greasy hamburger is worth, all for the opportunity to spend the day inside a giant commercial for Corn Nuts.
Turns out you're right. He's worth WAY more than that:
"In college Snyder started a charter travel service and by the age of 19 had earned his first million. He later launched direct-marketing firm Snyder Communications, which approached $1 billion in sales in the 1990s. Then, in 1999, he took on $495 million of debt to pay $750 million to buy the team (and the stadium) of his childhood fantasy, selling his marketing firm a year later for $2.3 billion. Today he has a net worth of $500 million." Source
Wow, what a horrible guy. He started his own business and with a combination of luck and smarts was a millionaire by 19, used that to piggyback onto a new even more successful venture, then used that further sucess to pursue other business opportunities of personal interest. You're right - he should rot in hell...
...no wait, that's the definition of the American Dream.
(check out the cool sidebar in that article while you're at it - neat insight on how he runs the 'skins and for the simple snapshot it is, looks a lot like how these guys are approaching SF - higher than average prices, higher than average attendance, tons of revenue on advertising/sponsorship, parking/concessions and luxury upgrades to the experience)
There's nothing special about him and that goes for any grossly overpaid administrator or executive. It sends the message that this ONE person carries the entire company and the rest of the employees be damned.
Sure, any one of us could've done that. That's why we're all millionaires and currently worth half a billion dollars...oh, wait... just checked my bank statement... nevermind.
Are CEOs in such demand and do they possess such a rare set of skills that there only a handful of people in the world qualified to handle the job?
I dunno. Given his track record as a business mind, I'd say he's certianly one in a million.
It's just completely amazing to me that *anybody* can find this sort of thing acceptable.
I find it completely amazing that anyone can fault someone for being successful.
Yes, I do put my money where my mouth is because business may be amoral, but for me, it is absolutely a moral issue.
Because it is nothing but immoral to do well. Anyone who has achieved success and any amount of comfort in life clearly did it at the expense of the little guy, giggling heartily as their bones break under the weight of his overflowing pockets.
I mean hard work, smart choices, an eye for business sense and a little luck would have nothing to do with it. What the hell was I thinking?
And just to end on an amusement park related note:
Knoebels is another (more successful example) where there is free admission, free parking, reasonably priced food, and free entertainment. Anyway, the price of "free" drinks and "free" parking may be built into the admission charge of those parks that offer them but it's still a heck of a deal to pay under $30 for admission, parking, and drinks when Six Flags wants me to pay $15 to park, $60 for admission, and $4 for a bottle of water...
The funny thing is both parks seem to be doing just fine under those conditions so far but if you reversed them Knoebels would be empty and Six Flags would be something stupid like two billion dollars in debt. ;)
I gues my point is that Knoebels, Conneaut and parks of that ilk would be out of business in roughly 4 hours if they charged those kinds of prices. It's not that they don't want to, it's that they can't.
RatherGoodBear said:
Of course it's many of the familiar voices making the same old comments they've done on so many other threads discussing money. YAWN!
Right? How many times are these guys going to whine about being kept down by the evil, corrupt man before we get it through their heads that this is not true.
EDIT - Oops, just re-read that post. I'm not sure that's exactly what you meant. ;)
*** Edited 4/14/2006 5:37:48 AM UTC by Lord Gonchar***
If you have no retort, just say so. It's cool. But don't start the conversation and they cry 'boring' when it gets good.
I'll admit I love the 'debate threads' that barely skirt the edge of amusement park topics. Come on, you do too, RGB. Admit it...just a little...just a wittle witty bit...just an eensy weensy.
It's fun and it beats the hell out of "What's your favorite coaster?" threads. Somehow this feels like a higher level of conversation than, "I like CP, do you? Kewl!"
I am reminded of Macbeth. . . . uneasy is the head that wears the crown. And like LG says, we perhaps couldnt survive an hour in this man's shoes.
Anyhow, everything is relative. I am sure some people would say that engineers don't deserve a starting salary of 70-80k a year. But stick through 4 years (5-6 years for some) of all nighters, hair loss only to graduate and start the whole process all over. I'd say they are underpaid. . . (no bias here ;-))
*** Edited 4/14/2006 6:17:51 AM UTC by Antuan***
Oh and by the way, I am going to go to the mall this weekend and buy at least $10,000 worth of clothes, shoes, make-up, maybe a manicure and pedicure, maybe a massage, OHH and some expensive shampoo, conditioner, and body wash. I deserve it because I am a good Mommy.
_____
Why does every conversation on here get so complicated? Everyone here is an "expert" on something. Everyone wants to show off how knowledgeable they are to a point that our conversations go backwards and get dumbed down and cluttered. We don't look at concerns and situations in simple terms anymore because we want to show everyone how intelligent we are.
All of you "experts" believe what you want, but I say CEO's should not be treated like gods or royality. Who cares if they have a lot of responsibilities? So does a lot of regular people.
dexter said:
Everyone wants to show off how knowledgeable they are to a point that our conversations go backwards and get dumbed down and cluttered.
The clutter comes from people like yourself, who, instead of taking direct quotes that you disagree with and disputing them, make generalizations about "everyone" which are only based on perception, not on what other people have really contributed to the thread.
Otherwise, if you don't like the tone or direction of the thread, you could always chose to either not participate, or not read it at all.
Funny how this all seems to come back to a matter personal choice again and again and again.
You must be logged in to post
