About Tom Evslin

Video Profile of Tom Evslin

Follow Tom Evslin on Twitter


Add to Technorati Favorites!
Powered by TypePad
Member since 01/2005


« Bailout equals Bankruptcy | Main | Just Say No »

Capping Executive Salaries in the Bailout

Update: I was wrong to try to hedge the bailout with conditions. We should just say "no". see http://blog.tomevslin.com/2008/09/just-say-no.html

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson believes that his ex-colleagues on Wall Street would let their companies and the economy go belly-up if their compensation is reduced. Here he is quoted in The Wall Street Journal:

"Mr. Paulson is resisting efforts to limit the pay of executives whose firms participate in the program and plans to fight it "hard," according to a person familiar with the matter. He fears that provision would render the program moot, since many firms might choose not to participate."

This is very helpful because it tells us that Paulson will NOT limit executive pay if granted the hugh powers proposed in the administration draft of the bailout bill. That makes it essential that such limits ARE written into the law. It also makes me doubt whether his judgment is good enough for anywhere near such broad powers.

It is a good thing, of course, if strong companies do NOT participate in the bailout; they don't need the help and the cost to taxpayers is reduced. So that's not a problem.

If the weak firms are really going to go bankrupt, their executives will get neither their salaries nor their outsized pensions; so certainly they'll take the bailout even with salary caps. In case they won't, regulators will be able, in most cases, to force their dismissal as will the pension funds and other big shareholders – or even little shareholders who can sue. Henry, what are you thinking?

Some commenters on yesterday's post have said that we don't want the best and brightest to leave the firms that need help. That's more rational than Paulson's argument but doesn't convince me. We DO want the leaders who got the firms into the mess to go. We don't leave losing managers in charge of sports teams and they shouldn't be allowed to stay in charge of companies either. They'd be gone in bankruptcy and they ought to be gone in bailout.

Could we get good new leaders for these firms for "only" a million dollars/year? That's the most important question. The answer is "yes, of course". There are many less jobs for bankers than there were a year ago – not altogether a bad thing. Where are the bankers who want higher compensation going to go? Are they going to become rock stars or athletes? The strong banks have also had layoffs; they don't need many more high-priced executives. For the confident and ambitious, the resume opportunity in saving moribund enterprises will be priceless. For those whose life styles can't be supported at this level, too bad.

In fact the bailed-out banks will do better without the drain of excessive executive compensation. That may even put pressure on their stronger competitors to reduce their overpayments. But maybe that's wishful thinking.

The most important favor Paulson has done us with this position is to make it clear that a blank check bailout will be worse than no bailout at all – it'll turn into an executive relief bill. I appreciate him being so frank; he coulda said he'd study executive compensation later.

Just in case we don't have a bailout, Jeff Jarvis has suggested some other uses for $700 billion here.

Comments on yesterday's post were particularly lively thanks to Fred Wilson's courtesy; he quoted part of the post BUT asked his readers to do their commenting over here on Fractals of Change.


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Capping Executive Salaries in the Bailout:


Analyst Salary

I think saying no to the bailouts is the correct path. By telling yes we may get lots of benefits but only for a short period.

Ashwell prince

Tom Evslin


You're perfectly right. We need to just say "NO". See today's post http://blog.tomevslin.com/2008/09/just-say-no.html


Forget the stipulations. If you don't agree with the bailout, please go to:
http://sanders.senate.gov/comments/ and http://leahy.senate.gov/contact.cfm to tell our senators to vote no to it, in any way, shape, or form. The only way America is going to wake up, is with a shake up.
If you do agree with it, tell them that you do. Democracy is great, isn't it.

Rick S

Then there is the other point of view from those of us who did
manage our money correctly, didn't end up in the subprime mess:

Why should we be forced to bail out Wall St. The difference
here, I think, is that the CEOs & their boards were directly involved
in creating the mess and who, therefore, should share in the pain
of cleaning it up. I think it sends exactly the wrong message
to the public, i.e. the people possible on the hook for footing the
bill, to allow executive management (at the affected institutions) to
walk away with 7 or 8 digit pay packages. Doesn't play in Peoria, as
they say. I'm a bit conflicted on Paulson also - while he seems the
genuine article, qualified, it's hard to digest, OTOH, a man who is
worth $500M+, spent 30+ years on the Street, arguing *for* those poor
executives to keep their pay packages. He would have been better off
just keeping quiet on that one.


Outside of pacifying those who object (usually on emotional grounds) to executive pay levels, I'm not sure I can see what good capping salaries would do. I suppose it might make people feel better, but it's really a drop in the bucket, and there will surely be unintended consequences to such an action. What if a new CEO comes in, does a bang up turn-around job, making billions for his shareholders. Should his salary be capped? Heck, what if the *old* CEO does a bang-up job at fixing things. These guys already made their money despite their failures and we're not getting it back. It's a sunk cost. Why punish success now? Two wrongs don't make a right.

Post a comment

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In.

Now on Kindle!

hackoff.com: An historic murder mystery set in the Internet bubble and rubble

CEO Tom Evslin's insider account of the Internet bubble and its aftermath. "This novel is a surveillance video of the seeds of the current economic collapse."

The Interpreter's Tale

Hacker Dom Montain is in Barcelona in Evslin's Kindle-edition long short story. Why? and why are the pickpockets stealing mobile phones?

Need A Kindle?

Kindle: Amazon's Wireless Reading Device

Not quite as good as a real book IMHO but a lot lighter than a trip worth of books. Also better than a cell phone for mobile web access - and that's free!

Recent Reads - Click title to order from Amazon


  • adlinks
  • adsense