AIG Sets Pay, Bonus Target for New CEO Willumstad

July 21, 2008

  • July 21, 2008 at 10:57 am
    matt says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    In other news, Willumstad was praised on securing over $100,000,000 in advance severance benefits from AIG. The two entities have already finalized severance discussions, and severance of $112,245,047 will be granted as soon as AIG’s stock price drops by at least 25%. The shareholders and board of directors praised the ease of severance discussions and looks forward to amicably parting ways with Willumstad once he has sufficient time to further erode the company’s wealth.

    (it is monday morning so I will add the unecessary ‘this is a joke’)

  • July 21, 2008 at 12:40 pm
    Scott says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Thank you Matt! Prefect!

  • July 21, 2008 at 12:55 pm
    Anonymous says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    What do stockholders and employees get as bonus’s for holding aig stock hoping for a comeback?

  • July 21, 2008 at 1:01 am
    lastbat says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Ah, but does he get a better package if he manages to erode shareholder value by 50% or more, or does his contract end when he hits the magical 25% mark? These are important things to discuss before finalizing such a package. But it is good to know they got that out of the way ahead of time. (all sarcasm intended)

    On a serious note – how can a bonus be a bonus if there is a minimum amount to be paid? So he earns at least half his bonus just for staying alive? If it’s a bonus it should only pay if he meets the performance measures to get it. This is part of what’s wrong with executive compensation packages now and why we have so many stories of executives completely failing yet being paid millions to do so.

  • July 21, 2008 at 2:12 am
    AZInsMan says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    If any of you had held such a position, you would not argue with the compensation. He is paid a minimal salary with respects to his peers at companies with less revenue. I would NOT take the job for $1 million without guaranteed other pay as well. His counterparts at SMALLER insurance companies are paid more. Look at other industries and companies with revenues anywhere near AIG and tell me he is screwing shareholders. He is NOT. I am unsure if he is the correct man for the job. That is the board’s job. But, they would not get me to live in NY or take that job for less than $3 million salary or guaranteed.

  • July 21, 2008 at 2:33 am
    Stop whining says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Many CEO’s are well educated, talented individuals who have proven themselves. Why is it okay for professional athletes to make this kind of money for slamming a basketball, making a touchdown, hitting homeruns, etc…yet not for a CEO? If these individuals were not paid well, they would go where they would be compensated for their results. Just remember, our Nation’s CEO only makes $400,000 a year! We live in a great country.

  • July 21, 2008 at 2:39 am
    lastbat says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I’m not whining at all. $1M salary is pretty much a bargain for AIG. What I take issue with is a guaranteed bonus. The whole purpose of a bonus is to reward performance. If he’s worth $5M/year then pay him $5M/year, but don’t try to disguise salary as a bonus. Bonuses should be kept for what they are for – rewards.

    On a side note I do take issue with professional athletes earning such outrageous salaries, but I know it’s not going to change so I just don’t watch sports. No big loss since I’ve never been into sports anyway.

  • July 21, 2008 at 2:40 am
    Mongoose says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Is there anyone that does not agree that Warren Buffet is one of the most talented CEO’s managing a multi-company fund which when totalled meets or excedes AIG’s value?

    His annual salary is under 250,000 per year. Hummmmm.

  • July 21, 2008 at 2:41 am
    jo626 says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Mr W and all the other bonus-huggers had better buy a calender
    Nothing is forever, and Mr W will NOT have a long honeymoon if he doesn’t doo the job and get the price of the stock up..soon !

  • July 21, 2008 at 4:02 am
    JT says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Buffet makes $100k per year, and has for over 20 years.

  • July 21, 2008 at 4:14 am
    Nobody Important says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    And he is the richest man in the world, how? What is his source of income? I actually don’t know.

  • July 21, 2008 at 4:21 am
    lastbat says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Buffett makes his money on his investments. His salary is so small because he wants people to have faith in his ability to invest.

    Another CEO to admire is the CEO of Costco – Jim Sinegal. His contract is renegotiated every year, he makes low six figures and his contract is one page long. He has no golden parachute and the same benefits plan as his employees. He figures the board should have to review his performance every year and if he’s not doing the job he needs to go.

    While I personally admire CEOs that tie their fortunes to their ability to make the company work, and refuse to draw salaries that make people blink, I am all for paying people what they are worth. Buffett and Sinegal should be paid millions – they choose not to be – but they should be.

  • July 22, 2008 at 10:10 am
    gerald lee says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    YOU RAISE PREMIUMS, AGENTS TAKE THE BLUNT OF CUSTOMERS COMPLAING. FIXED INCOME & S.S. PEOPLE CANNOT PAY THERE PREMIUMS SO CEOs CAN GET THERE BONUSES. GIVE THE CUSTOMER A BREAK FOR ONCE. EAT OR NO INSURANCE. WHAT WOULD YOU DO?

  • July 22, 2008 at 11:49 am
    Nobody Important says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    A product costs what it costs. Basic economics. Why should any business produce a product for no profit? If you can’t afford it, don’t have it. Sounds harsh, but home or auto ownership is not a basic constitutional right. This isn’t meant to be harsh, just realistic.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*