It is a shame that a few CEO's (quite a few actually) ruin the image of all others. There are a lot of CEO's that took risk, founded companies and built them up. These CEO's not only took huge risks but very often "bet the farm" in terms of investing in their own startups. These CEO's hire the most people in the world as most companies (90%) have 500 or less employees. These CEO's should be able to reap the fruits of their labor.
The problem is CEO's who get hired to run large companies that drive them to the ground, they never felt the pressure of starting from scratch and they get compensated through the roof even when their respective companies loose billions - that's wrong. This coupled with a very corrupt political system is the root of the evil.
We cannot survive without entrepreneurs and we certainly need a system that motivates them. That said, stockholders control the BOD and the BOD controls the CEO. In my house I sweep the stairs from the top while these guys sweep the stairs in the middle and at the bottom so the dirt stays on top and eventually gets dragged down again.
If you run a company to the ground and there's no private equity available then do not come and take money out of my pocket (tax-payer pocket), if my company fails I will not ask for a bailout from the public at large. If the GM stock tumbles that means there are more sellers than buyers, why should I then be forced to buy this stock by the folks on the hill?
We need a serious cleanup that inspires entrepreneurs while still keeps government at a minimum and taxes low - now our taxes are being used to bail out failed companies.
To Lee Iaccoca: yes, change the coach/quarterback when your team is losing, what in the world makes you think they can turn it around after having failed so miserably.
Friday, December 12, 2008
Friday, December 5, 2008
The Detroit Solution - give the cars away
Traditionally run companies such as GM, Ford and Chrysler need to "think outside the box" to survive in the future. A lesson can be learned from the internet where for example newspapers deliver the content for free to the "subscriber" but making the revenue up in banner ads.
The Detroit Solution:
Step 1: Let people lease cars priced at $30,000 or less for $0.00 per month for 3 years.
Revenue ideas: a. Wrap the cars in advertising from 3rd parties be it national brands or local advertisers. b. All cars should have GPS installed and then sell auto-ads to retailers so that the ad is displayed on the nav system and heard over the speakers when you approach a participating (and paying) retailer. For example: as you approach McDonald's an ad for McD is displayed on the Nav system and over the speakers you hear: 2nd right up ahead, get your $2.50 happy meal. I'm sure there are many other revenue avenues but all we need to make is about $400.00 per month for a $30K car.
Step 2: After 3 years the car comes back to the manufacturer who now leases it out as used for 3 new years at $0.00 and includes gas for the 3 years for 10K miles per year. The revenue stream will come from the same sources as those for the brand new cars.
Think people would lease cars for $0.00 per month? Think that would clear the lots? Think the dealers can be set up to do the wrapping etc? Think you could have local advertisers BID on ads each month (and of course the advertisers pay the wrapping cost to the dealer that does the work)?
Too simple? I think not. The companies that will survive in the uncertain economic times will be the companies that think way outside the box and if customers get products for free I believe they will all "sell" AND people will accept the ads/GPS.
Now, as these cars blow out the doors and Detroit turns into advertising-driven revenue companies they can use this to make BETTER cars.
Why should we bail out the non-inventive? Why can't these very highly paid executives think outside the box?
I am willing to bet that the first company to put such a plan into action will sell all inventory almost overnight!
Comments always welcome.
The Detroit Solution:
Step 1: Let people lease cars priced at $30,000 or less for $0.00 per month for 3 years.
Revenue ideas: a. Wrap the cars in advertising from 3rd parties be it national brands or local advertisers. b. All cars should have GPS installed and then sell auto-ads to retailers so that the ad is displayed on the nav system and heard over the speakers when you approach a participating (and paying) retailer. For example: as you approach McDonald's an ad for McD is displayed on the Nav system and over the speakers you hear: 2nd right up ahead, get your $2.50 happy meal. I'm sure there are many other revenue avenues but all we need to make is about $400.00 per month for a $30K car.
Step 2: After 3 years the car comes back to the manufacturer who now leases it out as used for 3 new years at $0.00 and includes gas for the 3 years for 10K miles per year. The revenue stream will come from the same sources as those for the brand new cars.
Think people would lease cars for $0.00 per month? Think that would clear the lots? Think the dealers can be set up to do the wrapping etc? Think you could have local advertisers BID on ads each month (and of course the advertisers pay the wrapping cost to the dealer that does the work)?
Too simple? I think not. The companies that will survive in the uncertain economic times will be the companies that think way outside the box and if customers get products for free I believe they will all "sell" AND people will accept the ads/GPS.
Now, as these cars blow out the doors and Detroit turns into advertising-driven revenue companies they can use this to make BETTER cars.
Why should we bail out the non-inventive? Why can't these very highly paid executives think outside the box?
I am willing to bet that the first company to put such a plan into action will sell all inventory almost overnight!
Comments always welcome.
Thursday, November 20, 2008
The mistakes are so obvious
I guess we learned nothing from Japan.
We just bailed out a few car manufacturers who make cars people will not buy and who pay their assembly-line workers $160K per year plus health plus pension plus plus plus. Jeez, they pay almost $3K more than Toyota per car and that's Toyota's build in the US. Top that off with the fact that Toyota makes cars people want.
Somebody got the ripple effect of bankruptcy all wrong. If a supplier goes away there's no effect on demand - the remaining suppliers will see increased business and hire more people and need more facilities.
The free market system rewards the companies that make products we will all buy with regards to quality and price - pretty darn simple.
we just spent $25b to fuel the same corporate jets, pay the people even when thry are NOT working (making SUV's that get 5 miles to the gallon), maintain pension plans etc etc.
See what you get when your administration is 95% attorney's and 5% Business graduates.
The good news - we can't go below zero.
Get out your tents and fishing poles and get ready for survival of the fittest.
or
REAL CHANGE:
no shorting allowed
remove all taxes
install a federal VAT of 5%
cut the fat off the government waste
get out of Iraq
build nuclear power plants and start drilling
I know, makes too much sense
nuff said
REH/keeping on warppin'
We just bailed out a few car manufacturers who make cars people will not buy and who pay their assembly-line workers $160K per year plus health plus pension plus plus plus. Jeez, they pay almost $3K more than Toyota per car and that's Toyota's build in the US. Top that off with the fact that Toyota makes cars people want.
Somebody got the ripple effect of bankruptcy all wrong. If a supplier goes away there's no effect on demand - the remaining suppliers will see increased business and hire more people and need more facilities.
The free market system rewards the companies that make products we will all buy with regards to quality and price - pretty darn simple.
we just spent $25b to fuel the same corporate jets, pay the people even when thry are NOT working (making SUV's that get 5 miles to the gallon), maintain pension plans etc etc.
See what you get when your administration is 95% attorney's and 5% Business graduates.
The good news - we can't go below zero.
Get out your tents and fishing poles and get ready for survival of the fittest.
or
REAL CHANGE:
no shorting allowed
remove all taxes
install a federal VAT of 5%
cut the fat off the government waste
get out of Iraq
build nuclear power plants and start drilling
I know, makes too much sense
nuff said
REH/keeping on warppin'
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
Make a stockmarket recovery
To resurrect the stock market just disallow shorting of stocks. Guess what, if you believe the stock will go down just don't buy it.
Thursday, November 13, 2008
A possible solution that would heat up the economy
There's about 100 million taxpayers in the US. Let them all get a Government issued Debit Card with a balance of $100,000. If my math is correct this would total up to $10,000,000,000,000 or 10 Trillion dollars. This amount will not be much LESS than the planned (and not planned) bailout package.
No bailout's of anyone, period - let the markets figure this out, the market being the people who now have the US Debit Card. Some will spend wildly, some will invest, some will pay off debt but boy will the economy get going. I can't think of a more DEMOCRATIC way to straighten this ship.
President Obama will need to cut wasteful government spending in a big way. I also think that he should create the Department of Business, a department that will focus on making money for us, the taxpayers. How can the government make money? Like anyone else, create products that has a market. Take all the people in jail, why can't they create software, manufacture products (talk about cheap labor) etc? There's a lot of smart people in jail who can figure this out and there's plenty of hard labor potential.
The government also owns a lot of potential advertising space from their emails going out to the walls of their buildings - this space has value.
The more successful the combination of cutting spending and creating new revenue sources the more taxes can be reduced and eventually be eliminated - what a capitalistic and novel idea :-)
I know, it all sounds to simple but I will argue that so are the very best ideas.
nuff said
No bailout's of anyone, period - let the markets figure this out, the market being the people who now have the US Debit Card. Some will spend wildly, some will invest, some will pay off debt but boy will the economy get going. I can't think of a more DEMOCRATIC way to straighten this ship.
President Obama will need to cut wasteful government spending in a big way. I also think that he should create the Department of Business, a department that will focus on making money for us, the taxpayers. How can the government make money? Like anyone else, create products that has a market. Take all the people in jail, why can't they create software, manufacture products (talk about cheap labor) etc? There's a lot of smart people in jail who can figure this out and there's plenty of hard labor potential.
The government also owns a lot of potential advertising space from their emails going out to the walls of their buildings - this space has value.
The more successful the combination of cutting spending and creating new revenue sources the more taxes can be reduced and eventually be eliminated - what a capitalistic and novel idea :-)
I know, it all sounds to simple but I will argue that so are the very best ideas.
nuff said
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Political Restaurants - which to pick?
On Political street there are two large restaurants,s; The Republicano & Demo's.
Demo's:
As we walk in they ask us for our payslips, weird. We get seated and the waiter brings us menus but the prices for the items are not the same?? Each meny has our individual salary printed on top saying that all prices are based upon each patrons salary. I make $120K a year and my friend makes $60K. I order a steak for $50.00 and my friend orders the same steak but his is only $25.00 - what's up with that? All the waiters have union buttons on and 3 of them are on strike. The restaurant is pretty laid back and people are dressed leisurely. After getting the bill we leave a tip each of 20% of the bill and the waiter explains that they all pool their tips and divide it out equally to all the employees, even those that are not working or on strike so everybody is "equal".
The place was full of charm and we spotted quite a number of famous people. The Maitre D was extremely charismatic and well spoken, we really liked the guy. We asked him what would happen if the restaurant had a profit and decided to share this with the employees and he said that they would distribute most of the profit to the ones that were not working and those who slacked off and had a lower pay. We thought this was odd but he explained that the ones that worked really hard already made good money so why should they share any of the profits?
The Republicano:
Funny, but they have the same procedure when it comes to asking for payslips and then giving us customized priced menus. I still don't understand why I should pay more for having gone to college, worked hard and climbed upwards in my company. This restaurant is a little different, easy to tell from the emblem at the door which pictures two guns laying in a cross on top of a Bible. People seem to be a little more conservatively dressed as are the surroundings and many are wearing gun belts, some even have semi-automatics. Just about everybody has a Bible with them. We ask the waiter how the tips work and he says they all keep their individual tips and people who are not working does not get any portion of it. Then we asked what would happen if there was any profit-sharing and the Maitre D, an older gentleman that looked x-Navy, said that they would distribute it evenly amongst all employees based upon their contributions. This meant that whoever had contributed the most would get a higher percentage of the profits. This kinda made sense to us; the more you put in the more you get back.
Conclusion:
None of the Restaurants really appealed to all our desires. My friend liked the concept of getting a larger percentage of the profits even though he had contributed a lot less but I didn't think that was fair. My friend also liked that his food was cheaper than mine even though it was the same food; I sure didn't think that made any sense - next will be that I pay more for everything I buy since I have more money, not very motivational.
I didn't like the guns and bibles - I think that's something that can stay at home and not be flaunted.
I really have no clue which Restaurant to go to next, maybe I should start my own where everybody pays the same for the same goods, where hard work is rewarded, where everyone would be welcome, where talking among different tables are encouraged and where guns and bibles are forbidden? Sure sounds like an uphill battle as I all my attorney friends on the Hill will see this as too simple a concept - what will the poeple that normally handle all the paperwork of the other systems do now?
Demo's:
As we walk in they ask us for our payslips, weird. We get seated and the waiter brings us menus but the prices for the items are not the same?? Each meny has our individual salary printed on top saying that all prices are based upon each patrons salary. I make $120K a year and my friend makes $60K. I order a steak for $50.00 and my friend orders the same steak but his is only $25.00 - what's up with that? All the waiters have union buttons on and 3 of them are on strike. The restaurant is pretty laid back and people are dressed leisurely. After getting the bill we leave a tip each of 20% of the bill and the waiter explains that they all pool their tips and divide it out equally to all the employees, even those that are not working or on strike so everybody is "equal".
The place was full of charm and we spotted quite a number of famous people. The Maitre D was extremely charismatic and well spoken, we really liked the guy. We asked him what would happen if the restaurant had a profit and decided to share this with the employees and he said that they would distribute most of the profit to the ones that were not working and those who slacked off and had a lower pay. We thought this was odd but he explained that the ones that worked really hard already made good money so why should they share any of the profits?
The Republicano:
Funny, but they have the same procedure when it comes to asking for payslips and then giving us customized priced menus. I still don't understand why I should pay more for having gone to college, worked hard and climbed upwards in my company. This restaurant is a little different, easy to tell from the emblem at the door which pictures two guns laying in a cross on top of a Bible. People seem to be a little more conservatively dressed as are the surroundings and many are wearing gun belts, some even have semi-automatics. Just about everybody has a Bible with them. We ask the waiter how the tips work and he says they all keep their individual tips and people who are not working does not get any portion of it. Then we asked what would happen if there was any profit-sharing and the Maitre D, an older gentleman that looked x-Navy, said that they would distribute it evenly amongst all employees based upon their contributions. This meant that whoever had contributed the most would get a higher percentage of the profits. This kinda made sense to us; the more you put in the more you get back.
Conclusion:
None of the Restaurants really appealed to all our desires. My friend liked the concept of getting a larger percentage of the profits even though he had contributed a lot less but I didn't think that was fair. My friend also liked that his food was cheaper than mine even though it was the same food; I sure didn't think that made any sense - next will be that I pay more for everything I buy since I have more money, not very motivational.
I didn't like the guns and bibles - I think that's something that can stay at home and not be flaunted.
I really have no clue which Restaurant to go to next, maybe I should start my own where everybody pays the same for the same goods, where hard work is rewarded, where everyone would be welcome, where talking among different tables are encouraged and where guns and bibles are forbidden? Sure sounds like an uphill battle as I all my attorney friends on the Hill will see this as too simple a concept - what will the poeple that normally handle all the paperwork of the other systems do now?
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Vote?
This is not easy, what's a voter to do?
Can't really trust any politician.
My dilemma:
I think taxes are unconstitutional, "the land of the free" should not have taxes at all and not be in the very top of tax rates worldwide. Get rid of the word "tax" and rather have a "fee" on consumption - the more you buy the more you put into the common pot to help with infrastructure etc.
Lobbying is legal corruption, don't like it. Pay people on the hill more so they're not tempted
I don't need a semi-automatic weapon
Women should decide the abortion issue to a large extent
Less government and more private enterprise BUT if the private business fails let it fail
If an individual succeeds in building a business and make good money, let him/her keep it
Any tax-breaks should be dished out proportionally based on taxes paid, i.e. someone who pays more taxes will get more back - only seems fair. Case-in-point: If I go to dinner with someone with more money than me we still split the tab - we consumed the same amount so that's only fair.
Drill for oil off shore - look to Norway as an example of a very clean country with off shore drilling. Build nuclear power plants and explore any other alternative energy source that makes fiscal sense.
The North Pole is not melting and humans have minuscule effect on the climate - when did Hollywood become our leading scientists?
Separate religion and politics/state - the alternative is war it seems.
Stop pissing off the rest of the world - we owe them more money than you can imagine.
Keep your enemies close, talk to them to find out what they're all about.
Who to vote for? Really no clue - Obama's got charisma and can move the masses like Kennedy did but I don't like taxes and more government. McCain's a war hero but do we need a warrior? Palin does not come across as ready to lead this very large and diverse nation.
I have no clue...........maybe Ron Paul is closest to my thinking...where's Ross?
Can't really trust any politician.
My dilemma:
I think taxes are unconstitutional, "the land of the free" should not have taxes at all and not be in the very top of tax rates worldwide. Get rid of the word "tax" and rather have a "fee" on consumption - the more you buy the more you put into the common pot to help with infrastructure etc.
Lobbying is legal corruption, don't like it. Pay people on the hill more so they're not tempted
I don't need a semi-automatic weapon
Women should decide the abortion issue to a large extent
Less government and more private enterprise BUT if the private business fails let it fail
If an individual succeeds in building a business and make good money, let him/her keep it
Any tax-breaks should be dished out proportionally based on taxes paid, i.e. someone who pays more taxes will get more back - only seems fair. Case-in-point: If I go to dinner with someone with more money than me we still split the tab - we consumed the same amount so that's only fair.
Drill for oil off shore - look to Norway as an example of a very clean country with off shore drilling. Build nuclear power plants and explore any other alternative energy source that makes fiscal sense.
The North Pole is not melting and humans have minuscule effect on the climate - when did Hollywood become our leading scientists?
Separate religion and politics/state - the alternative is war it seems.
Stop pissing off the rest of the world - we owe them more money than you can imagine.
Keep your enemies close, talk to them to find out what they're all about.
Who to vote for? Really no clue - Obama's got charisma and can move the masses like Kennedy did but I don't like taxes and more government. McCain's a war hero but do we need a warrior? Palin does not come across as ready to lead this very large and diverse nation.
I have no clue...........maybe Ron Paul is closest to my thinking...where's Ross?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
