Abigail Disney vs Bob Iger

[Sandeep1]

It's so easy to give other people's money away.

Well the money is being given away regardless. The question is who gets it.

 

[Scifidiner]

Well the money is being given away regardless. The question is who gets it.

So if you get a bonus at work, is it given to you or did you earn it?

 

[Sandeep1]

So if you get a bonus at work, is it given to you or did you earn it?

I worked at trading firms where the bonus pool was evenly distributed among the entire team of traders. Even if Trader A made $1,000,000 and Trader B made $20,000, they would receive the same bonus. It encouraged team work and cooperation, rather than focusing on the individual.

So I'm not really the right person to ask.

 

[Scifidiner]

I worked at trading firms where the bonus pool was evenly distributed among the entire team of traders. Even if Trader A made $1,000,000 and Trader B made $20,000, they would receive the same bonus. It encouraged team work and cooperation, rather than focusing on the individual.

So I'm not really the right person to ask.

That is really interesting, did it work?

 

[Sandeep1]

That is really interesting, did it work?

Yes and no, really depended on each individual person. The risk is that the groups would lose their really top performing traders. Because a head hunter would come calling and offer them a certain package that was much more lucrative. Some traders would take it, others wouldn't. In the world of trading, some years are better than others. Some like the security of knowing they will still get paid even with a down year in performance. Others think very highly of themselves and will jump ship as soon as they get a better package.

 

[ChrisFL]

What I find funny is seeing someone who is worth a half-billion dollars and does not get up to go to work every day, criticizing someone who gets up and goes to work every day to earn his money.

She's stated repeatedly that she isn't worth nearly that much, FWIW

 

[DisneyOma]

They are both right - they're just right about different things.

Iger is doing what he's supposed to, and doing it exceedingly well, in accordance with the rules, standards and other expectations that prevail in our society.

I see Abigail Disney as using her position as a member of the family of the founder to bring attention to an issue, but her focus on Iger and on The Disney Company, alone, doesn't hold water. Abigail Disney is highlighting a very valid problem with western capitalism, overall. However, it is literally unreasonable to expect The Disney Company to be different from the expectations of our society, different from its competitors, and different from all the other big companies in our society.

She's discussing a company based on her family heritage - that holds a lot of water. Hopefully it will overflow and drown a bunch of greedy capitalists making money off of other people's labor.

Maybe she is, maybe she isn't. She's right if she can prove that increasing the pay of the bottom 10% of Disney employees would increase profits and therefore drive Disney's share price even higher. If she does a study like that, and presents it to the board, then that's worth a discussion.

Screw shareholders. Screw increasing profits that way.

I disagree.

The "bottom 10%" of the employee pool is not directly charged with increasing profits and share price - Iger is. If she were to prove that paying them more increased profits, then should could make the case that they are worth more and should directly benefit in that way. But, if she can NOT directly prove a correlation, then what? Pay them less?

Until and unless merit increases and bonuses are part of any individual's specific role and are directly tied to the company's revenue and/or share price (with a legitimate way to measure their contribution to either/both), then there should never be payment of bonuses or increases for those reasons. THIS is the problem for CEO's of today... There is absolutely no specific way to measure how their leadership contributed to those things other than "well, it happened while they were at the helm."

Screw share price.

It's so easy to give other people's money away.

It's so easy to make money using other people's labor.

I worked at trading firms where the bonus pool was evenly distributed among the entire team of traders. Even if Trader A made $1,000,000 and Trader B made $20,000, they would receive the same bonus. It encouraged team work and cooperation, rather than focusing on the individual.

So I'm not really the right person to ask.

Screw traders. Making money gambling with other people's money.

 

[Sand Wedge]

With Abigail.

 

[NYDisGuy]

I disagree.

The "bottom 10%" of the employee pool is not directly charged with increasing profits and share price - Iger is. If she were to prove that paying them more increased profits, then should could make the case that they are worth more and should directly benefit in that way. But, if she can NOT directly prove a correlation, then what? Pay them less?

This is a ridiculous statement. The people being screwed here are customer facing, of course there's a correlation to their job performance and profitability. Any retail establishment worth their salt empower every employee to make appropriate decisions that have a positive impact on profitability, whether that be sales decisions or operational cutbacks. Otherwise why hire them at all if they don't add value to the organization?

 

[Sandeep1]

She's discussing a company based on her family heritage - that holds a lot of water. Hopefully it will overflow and drown a bunch of greedy capitalists making money off of other people's labor.



Screw shareholders. Screw increasing profits that way.



Screw share price.



It's so easy to make money using other people's labor.



Screw traders. Making money gambling with other people's money.

Lol

 

[mummabear]

So from a quick Google, CMs working as Horseshoe-ers were earning $2.82 in 1955 that is the equivalent on $26.75 today. And CMs are only earning $15 "soon"

So yeah I think Abigail has a point that this isn't what her Grandad or Great Uncle would have wanted is right.

I think to say act like the CEO is the only one making the company profitable are way off base, we all know the difference between a great and crappy CM in the parks. And CMs bei g paid living wages are more likely to do a good job.

 

[Scifidiner]

She's discussing a company based on her family heritage - that holds a lot of water. Hopefully it will overflow and drown a bunch of greedy capitalists making money off of other people's labor.



Screw shareholders. Screw increasing profits that way.



Screw share price.



It's so easy to make money using other people's labor.



Screw traders. Making money gambling with other people's money.

So I'm guessing you don't own a business...

 

[china mom]

It won't hurt my feelings if someone corrects my math but according to the article, the top six executives combined made $62 million in bonuses and the lower ten percent of employees consisted of 200,000 people.

If the top six employees give if half of their 62 million bonuses and give the money directly to the bottom employees, they wold each receive $155.

This is a non story to me.

Team Iger

 

[JaxDad]

It won't hurt my feelings if someone corrects my math but according to the article, the top six executives combined made $62 million in bonuses and the lower ten percent of employees consisted of 200,000 people.

If the top six employees give if half of their 62 million bonuses and give the money directly to the bottom employees, they wold each receive $155.

This is a non story to me.

Team Iger

What if you threw in the profits from the Avengers movie?

 

[china mom]

What if you threw in the profits from the Avengers movie?

Thais not how that works. The profits from the movie go back into the company profits. shareholders etc. Abigail Disney was just talking about CEO bonuses.

 

[Baduist]

I think people don’t understand how important that one person (Iger) is, and how crucial he is in the direct employment of 200,000 people, as well as hundreds of thousands of people who work in other companies who exist solely or almost solely due to Disney IP.

Disney is not invincible - as big as it is - it can die. Iger kept her *growing*.

It’s not about how much the bottom 10% earn, it’s about 200,000 having jobs at all, and probably anywhere between 200,000 to 800,000 others as well.

I think Disney is the very embodiment of the American capitalist dream in the best way possible:

a company that is extremely profitable due to putting values above money, and creates unparalleled value in every aspect.

At the end it all comes down to wehther you believe in the American way imho - if you think there should be any kind of limit on a man’s income, then... what can I say?

Personally I want whoever’s at the top of the Disney company to always be the richest person in the world.

Team Iger all the way.

 

[Kellykins1218]

Nope. Not going to listen to someone who's rich because of the the family she was born into, is worth $500 million, and is complaining about how much somebody is actually earning. She gives a lot to charity, but she's still disgustingly rich. She's a hypocrite.

 

[Anchored]

It won't hurt my feelings if someone corrects my math but according to the article, the top six executives combined made $62 million in bonuses and the lower ten percent of employees consisted of 200,000 people.

If the top six employees give if half of their 62 million bonuses and give the money directly to the bottom employees, they wold each receive $155.

This is a non story to me.

Team Iger

That's just bonuses. Iger made 12million in bonuses. PLUS 65 million in stock options. Based on ratios, we can assume that means $325 million in stock options were also GIVEN AWAY to top execs. Not earned. Given away.

$62m bonuses + $325m stock options = $387,000,000 = $1,935 per person or about $1/hr raise. For people making $15/hr that IS a lot AND a story to me.
That's $161/month. That's electric for a 2 br apartment. OR That's all of your car gas and lunches OR that's your cable and cell phone

That $1/hr for 200,000 people WHO ARE RESPONSIBLE DAY IN AND OUT FOR THE OPERATION OF YOUR BUSINESS actually means a lot to people who need it.

Team Abigail

 

[FlightlessDuck]

Maybe she is, maybe she isn't. She's right if she can prove that increasing the pay of the bottom 10% of Disney employees would increase profits and therefore drive Disney's share price even higher. If she does a study like that, and presents it to the board, then that's worth a discussion.

Companies should have a larger responsibility than making money for investors.

 

[AlohaNow]

Team Edward!