AxiomOfChoice
AxiomOfChoice
Joined: Sep 12, 2012
  • Threads: 32
  • Posts: 5761
July 31st, 2014 at 6:16:41 PM permalink
Quote: RaleighCraps

Yes, I did read the article. But let's look at the facts.

While I don't know what the executives are currently being paid, I would hazard a guess they are getting a very decent salary now, and have been, while they mismanaged Revel into the toilet. And now they deserve a $1.75M bonus if they manage to extract an unnamed amount for the sale of Revel? If they had done what they were being paid to do, there would be no need for a sale. And why should they get more money, when the creditors are going to take it up the yazz once again from a Revel bankruptcy.



Yes, they should, if doing so will increase the amount that the company is sold for, because this is what helps the creditors the most.

Quote:

How many of the employees who are making jack shit now are going to get a bonus from the sale?



What do employees have to do with this? This is all about recovering as much money as possible for the creditors. That's what happens when a company goes into bankruptcy. It's the judge's job to ensure that that happens, and it sounds like that's exactly what has happened here.

Quote:

I will say it again. It is downright THEFT.



From who? The creditors who get more money as a result of this?
Lemieux66
Lemieux66
Joined: Feb 16, 2014
  • Threads: 24
  • Posts: 1226
July 31st, 2014 at 7:11:52 PM permalink
Sodawaters viewpoint is how things should be. AOC stance is how things are today.
10 eyes for an eye. 10 teeth for a tooth. 10 bucks for a buck?! Hit the bad guys where it hurts the most: the face and the wallet.
onenickelmiracle
onenickelmiracle
Joined: Jan 26, 2012
  • Threads: 212
  • Posts: 8277
July 31st, 2014 at 7:58:34 PM permalink
In Japan, they wouldn't need a bonus, they would just kill themselves. Depending on the details, sounds like these bonuses might jeopardize the sale altogether if the price blinds them from accepting a reasonable offer they won't be paid on to receive. These kinds of things you can't do anything about beyond tying long term goals of the company with compensation together. Say if you're the ceo, you take risks which fail miserably in 4 years, you would be personally be harmed because you haven't yet received the money. Won't happen in our system, but it would be better for long term investors. Arbitrarily, I would defer their bonuses 7 years and make them unable to be used as any kind of collateral. Otherwise, I think it's fair to give their families a bonus if they can reach the target on the Boardwalk jumping from the ball on the roof. It has to be a bullseye or it's a fail.
I am a robot.
beachbumbabs
Administrator
beachbumbabs
Joined: May 21, 2013
  • Threads: 99
  • Posts: 14232
July 31st, 2014 at 8:08:12 PM permalink
Quote: RaleighCraps

Yes, I did read the article. But let's look at the facts.

While I don't know what the executives are currently being paid, I would hazard a guess they are getting a very decent salary now, and have been, while they mismanaged Revel into the toilet. And now they deserve a $1.75M bonus if they manage to extract an unnamed amount for the sale of Revel? If they had done what they were being paid to do, there would be no need for a sale. And why should they get more money, when the creditors are going to take it up the yazz once again from a Revel bankruptcy.

How many of the employees who are making jack shit now are going to get a bonus from the sale?

I will say it again. It is downright THEFT.


+100
If the House lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game.
AxiomOfChoice
AxiomOfChoice
Joined: Sep 12, 2012
  • Threads: 32
  • Posts: 5761
July 31st, 2014 at 8:19:31 PM permalink
Quote: onenickelmiracle

In Japan, they wouldn't need a bonus, they would just kill themselves. Depending on the details, sounds like these bonuses might jeopardize the sale altogether if the price blinds them from accepting a reasonable offer they won't be paid on to receive. These kinds of things you can't do anything about beyond tying long term goals of the company with compensation together. Say if you're the ceo, you take risks which fail miserably in 4 years, you would be personally be harmed because you haven't yet received the money. Won't happen in our system, but it would be better for long term investors. Arbitrarily, I would defer their bonuses 7 years and make them unable to be used as any kind of collateral. Otherwise, I think it's fair to give their families a bonus if they can reach the target on the Boardwalk jumping from the ball on the roof. It has to be a bullseye or it's a fail.



In the end, it's up to the judge. It is his job to approve the things that will get the most money for the creditors.

The judge, who has all the facts, has decided that this is the best course of action for the creditors. The people reading this article, who don't have the facts, have decided that they are in a better position than the judge to determine the best course of action.

Gee, I wonder who I will trust on this one? I think I'll go with the judge over the peanut gallery here...
onenickelmiracle
onenickelmiracle
Joined: Jan 26, 2012
  • Threads: 212
  • Posts: 8277
July 31st, 2014 at 8:31:43 PM permalink
Quote: AxiomOfChoice

In the end, it's up to the judge. It is his job to approve the things that will get the most money for the creditors.

The judge, who has all the facts, has decided that this is the best course of action for the creditors. The people reading this article, who don't have the facts, have decided that they are in a better position than the judge to determine the best course of action.

Gee, I wonder who I will trust on this one? I think I'll go with the judge over the peanut gallery here...

Aw Shucks. I didn't know a judge was involved. If a judge decided based on all the facts, then it must be the right decision.
I am a robot.
AxiomOfChoice
AxiomOfChoice
Joined: Sep 12, 2012
  • Threads: 32
  • Posts: 5761
July 31st, 2014 at 9:10:26 PM permalink
Quote: onenickelmiracle

Aw Shucks. I didn't know a judge was involved. If a judge decided based on all the facts, then it must be the right decision.



Well, certainly more likely to be right than the decision made by people who don't know any of the facts and appear not to even understand the purpose of the court.

I never got an answer to my question -- theft from whom, exactly? Theft generally requires that someone is stolen from. Who is being stolen from?
onenickelmiracle
onenickelmiracle
Joined: Jan 26, 2012
  • Threads: 212
  • Posts: 8277
July 31st, 2014 at 9:17:06 PM permalink
Quote: AxiomOfChoice

Well, certainly more likely to be right than the decision made by people who don't know any of the facts and appear not to even understand the purpose of the court.

I never got an answer to my question -- theft from whom, exactly? Theft generally requires that someone is stolen from. Who is being stolen from?

I'm not involved with that discussion. I assume they mean some sort of extortion or hostage taking of the company. I did notice your arguments justifying their pay sounds like a minimum wage raise argument though which amuses me because I would guess you would flip your opinions to not justify it.
I am a robot.
AxiomOfChoice
AxiomOfChoice
Joined: Sep 12, 2012
  • Threads: 32
  • Posts: 5761
July 31st, 2014 at 10:39:32 PM permalink
Quote: onenickelmiracle

I'm not involved with that discussion. I assume they mean some sort of extortion or hostage taking of the company. I did notice your arguments justifying their pay sounds like a minimum wage raise argument though which amuses me because I would guess you would flip your opinions to not justify it.



I don't see any similarity. How are they similar?

This is simply a question of the company wanting to pay someone to do a job (namely, sell off the assets to get creditors as much money as possible). It needed to be approved by a judge, to ensure that they actually are acting in the best interests of creditors, and it was. I don't see the problem.
Tanko
Tanko
Joined: Apr 22, 2013
  • Threads: 0
  • Posts: 1065
August 1st, 2014 at 1:23:22 AM permalink
Quote: RaleighCraps

How many of the employees who are making jack shit now are going to get a bonus from the sale?

I will say it again. It is downright THEFT.





'Forget it, Jake. It's New Jersey.'

  • Jump to: