HP3000-L Archives

April 2005, Week 4

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Michael Baier <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Michael Baier <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 27 Apr 2005 17:40:39 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (38 lines)
http://biz.yahoo.com/special/ceo05_article1.html

The Best and Worst Bosses                 Scott DeCarlo        Forbes.com

Some chief executives really earn their pay. Some don't. Some are so bad
they should be paying the shareholders.

Investors should wish they had more executives like Robert K. Cole working
for them. Since taking his New Century Financial, a real estate investment
trust, public in 1997, he has delivered a 25% compound annual return to
shareholders. For this he gets a paycheck that has averaged $1.6 million a
year over the past six years.
At the other end of the spectrum: Peter Cartwright of Calpine, a firm that
develops and runs gas-fired power plants. This is not a profitable venture
at the moment, and the average annual return to shareholders over the past
six years has been -7%. For this unelectrifying performance Cartwright has
pocketed an average annual $13 million.

Our annual scorecard of the best and worst chief executives starts with the
500 largest U.S. companies as measured by a composite of sales, profits,
assets and market value. Among these are 189 companies whose bosses have
been in place for at least six years. These bosses are scored for how well
their performance stacks up against their pay. You can't compare
performance to pay for a single year: Both numbers are far too volatile to
yield a meaningful ratio.

In our analysis, "pay" consists of salary, bonus, exercised options and
vested stock grants. This approach finesses the tricky business of
evaluating stock options that may or may not ever vest, much less wind up
in the money. The grading uses four factors. One is the company's stock
performance (including dividends) relative to that of its industry peers
over six years. Two others are annualized stock performance during the
leader's tenure and performance relative to the S&P 500 during that time.
The last factor is total compensation over the past six years.

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

ATOM RSS1 RSS2