Yahoo!'s Carol Bartz Named 'Most Overpaid' CEO

[JMcEntegart]

That's a lot of dough for one woman!

Yahoo!'s Carol Bartz Named 'Most Overpaid' CEO : Read more

 

[applegetsmelaid]

I'm sure she has many "talents" to offer to justify such a hefty compensation. She keeps her stakeholders happy

 

[eddieroolz]

Last time I checked, Yahoo! was quickly losing relevance. So being paid $39million for a company that's losing its meaning - yeah, I agree. She's overpaid.

 

[Simple11]

Anything over 250k a year is over paid. Well, at least the next few generations of her family are well covered.

 

[f-14]

wow. no wonder where all of yahoo's development money goes. small wonder why they can't keep up to google.
what does she do to 'earn' such a chunk of change?

 

[Guest]

"That's a lot of dough for one woman!"

For women there is no such thing.

 

[duk3]

In other news, Carol Bartz was named "Most Clueless CEO"

 

[2real]

damn that's a high priced hooker

 

[ruffopurititiwang]

She must have gotten a big raise when she owned Mike Arrington.

 

[vant]

What? No greedy Apple bashing?

Unlike TH comments section.

 

[alyoshka]

Bartz.......... the overpaid brat???
Or like he most overpaid brat is a bartz....
sounds like Homer....

 

[alyoshka]

^^
oops typo... "the" instead of "he"

 

[LORD_ORION]

Yahoo could give everyone working there $3000 with that salary.

Using that $3000 as incentive would probably improve company performance much more then knowing such an idiot is killing the company while taking home more than a fair share of money too.

 

[sliem]

"Steve Jobs and his $1 salary as the lowest-paid CEO"

what, only $1 a year?

 

[falchard]

When was it a bad thing to try and make more money then you are worth?

 

[gm0n3y]

[citation][nom]sliem[/nom]"Steve Jobs and his $1 salary as the lowest-paid CEO"what, only $1 a year?[/citation]
Yes, he only has $1 in compensation a year. Of course owning a large percentage of Apple's stock means that he's doing pretty well for himself. Its actually a smart idea. What's the point in taking $30 million a year when you're making $5+ billion a year on your stock. Taking $1 instead more than pays for itself in the increased faith that gives to stock holders, employees, and customers, all of which makes the stock go up more than enough to compensate Jobs.

I hate Jobs as much as most people around here, but he is a smart guy.

 

[robochump]

Jobs is worth the money. Carol not so much. This is simply more on-going corporate way of making the rich richer and keeping the wealth among the few. Only other time the majority of wealth being concentrated to the fewest in history was in 1929 and I believe most of you know what happened after. Prepare for it!

 

[ithurtswhenipee]

[citation][nom]robochump[/nom]Jobs is worth the money. Carol not so much. This is simply more on-going corporate way of making the rich richer and keeping the wealth among the few. Only other time the majority of wealth being concentrated to the fewest in history was in 1929 and I believe most of you know what happened after. Prepare for it![/citation]
Nobody is worth that much money. Think about how many corporations that have to file for bankruptcy or lay off hordes of bottom rung employees every year. If the top execs took just a 10% pay cut that would alleviate much of that financial burden. And the execs would still be making much more than they can spend or what they are worth.

 

[slofat1]

unreal. This company net income was 418MM in 2008, that like paying this old bag 1/8 of the entire companies net, unreal.

 

[slofat1]

take a look at yahoo's stock price movement after the market closed, its up 13%, that means someone wants to buy it, likely to cut this gal and get some savings going.