[hgomersall]

Ok, but when you look at the forecast, and see an expected loss of 90 million, maybe the CEO should say, perhaps if I was paid 90 million less then we will be in profit, and I would still have enough money to retire in excessive luxury.

[giantg2]

Clearly there's a group of people of people who are selfish and think so highly of themselves that this sort of logic will never make sense to them. Any company or executive that says they care about the workers, customers, or cause and is making 8+ figures is lying whether they realize it or not. I realize some people will make the argument that the comp needs to be so high to attract top talent. But there's a pool of talented people who would do it for less. Plenty of non-profits or mission-driven companies have lower paided executives.

[roenxi]

Doesn't sound like the CEOs problem; he isn't there to make personal sacrifices to make the company profitable and I don't think anyone would pretend he is. If anyone should be making that observation it is whoever signs off on his compensation.

Although the compensation package won't cash so the situation isn't quite that simple.

[pjc50]

It's baffling how shareholders are so tolerant of a CEO looting the company for substantial fractions of its total value annually. But it's very widespread.

[pbhjpbhj]

Aren't most shareholders there to attempt to loot the company? Capitalism is surely about aligning and exploiting greed, like a confidence trick?

[giantg2]

It can only be viewed as a sacrifice if you believe he legitimately deserves that much money. That money could be used to increase employee comp instead of shareholder value. That's a lot of money for running an unprofitable business. I wish I was so delusional that I thought I deserved 100s of millions for running an unprofitable company.