Huge Industry News....

Status
Not open for further replies.
c502cid

c502cid

Joined
Jan 17, 2003
Messages
2,259
Location
9200' Colorado
Just got an email blast from Automotive News. This is a big coup for Chrysler.


Jim Press leaves Toyota to join Chrysler

Jim Press, Toyota Motor Corp.'s top executive in the United States, today was named a vice chairman and president of Chrysler LLC.

In his new job, Press has the same title as Tom LaSorda. Chrysler said LaSorda will be responsible for manufacturing and suppliers, while Press will be responsible for sales and marketing. Both will report to Chrysler CEO Bob Nardelli.

Press worked for Toyota for 37 years.

Toyota today said it named Shigeru Hayakawa to replace Press as president of Toyota North America. MORE TO COME
 
After 37 years it's hard to imagine why he would move to Chrysler. Because Toyota is doing so well now, maybe he felt his career was no longer a challenge. Turning Chrysler around definitely will be a challenge!
 
Quote:

After 37 years it's hard to imagine why he would move to Chrysler. Because Toyota is doing so well now, maybe he felt his career was no longer a challenge. Turning Chrysler around definitely will be a challenge!

Click to expand...


$$$$$$$$$
bop.gif
 
You beat me to it. I too was going to say that it must be the obscene amounts of money that American companies pay their execs. We know that japanese execs don't get as much.
 
Quote:

You beat me to it. I too was going to say that it must be the obscene amounts of money that American companies pay their execs. We know that japanese execs don't get as much.

Click to expand...


I'm sure he was doing JUST fine salary-wise at Toyota. Why did Mulally leave Boeing for Ford? Both are American companies. I *DO* believe ALL CEO's leave for money on some level, but I'm willing to bet taking on a new challenge was the big contributor to the move. Toyota can only do so well in the US, right?

I always thought Cerberus was going to make a *NEW* car company in the pattern of Toyota. They bought up part of GMAC, the remnants of Delphi and Chrysler as a skeleton of a car company (part supplier, manufacturer and financier). Now they're getting the "organs" in this Toyota exec and other talent they've hired (well, except Bob Nardelli
smile.gif
). Wouldn't it be interesting to have Toyota and Chrysler be the cars to have today intead of Toyota and Honda?
 
Quote:

We know this??? How?

Click to expand...


i had heard that there is a law in Japan that the top paid person will make no more than 7 or 10x the salary of the lowest paid person.

Not sure if this is true, but if so, it sure would be a delta from how we do it here!

JMH
 
Quote:

Quote:

We know this??? How?

Click to expand...


i had heard that there is a law in Japan that the top paid person will make no more than 7 or 10x the salary of the lowest paid person.

Not sure if this is true, but if so, it sure would be a delta from how we do it here!

JMH

Click to expand...


It would definitely break the US mold in how salaries are determined. I find the ratio method totally defensible. I see no reason to pay big bonuses for a bad year. Big bonuses for "pulling it off" in putting a defective product to market ..worrying about the warranty costs on a different balance sheet.

There's plenty of talent that can do just as good (or not so good) for less money.
 
Gary,
You make your statements as if you have the answer, when in fact the data on CEO pay as well as the methodology used to determine whether particular pay levels are justified on productivity and talent scarcity grounds is far from settled among researchers. Not only that, there is tremendous variation across industries so general statements are usually as credible as say, claiming that oil X will increase mpg in all engines by 5mpg while cutting wear by 200%......all with no data.

I'm not claiming I know the answers here, but I certainly won't throw out opinions as if they are the truth when I don't know the answer.

Here is a link which provides some contemporary viewpoints about the difficulties of research in this area:

CEO pay
 
I'm an XOM shareholder. Not much, but I get all the proxy/vote material. At one point, a sizable block of shareholders wanted to tie the CEO compensation package to two elements. One half of the package would be based on the 10 year moving average of the company. The other half on the last years performance. Pretty simple and self correcting. The board of directors' recommendation was to reject the notion, saying that compensation didn't fall into that two dimensional format and they wanted latitude in attracting the best and the brightest and to reward what they saw fit to reward.

Naturally ..long term and short term performance were totally removed from this desired latitude.

I hope that you've had the observational awareness that every corporation rewards a leader when business is good. I also hope that you've had the observational awareness that when business is bad or downtrending, that it is "market conditions" that caused the bad news. The person at the helm isn't responsible ..and still gets rewarded for staying off the wolves of the hardship. Effectively, losing less.

I don't see why anyone should be given a bonus for a bad year. As a shareholder, I get a dividend based on profits. Less profits, lower dividend. Why should I pay more for lower performance?? Any reason I should pat some underachiever on the back and say thanks? Does anyone get a raise in a bad year ...or rather..does EVERYONE get a bonus in a bad year? Why not? The clown at the wheel got one
dunno.gif
 
Gary, not that I disagree with your basic premise because I don't. However, the "talent" that is tied to a corporation greatly effects stockholder share value. You think the value of XOM wouldn't go way down with the announcemnet that they promoted the regional sales manager to CEO because he is talented? All these moves by Chrysler are tied to one thing, increasing the value of the stock by hiring big guns so the new owners can spin the company and make big $$$. The salary of the new hires is small when you look at what the owners are looking at, and that is a much bigger picture.
 
Sorry, I'm just tainted by seeing even increasing bonuses and salaries that appear to have nothing to do with either market conditions or market share. There's a point where the enterprise just doesn't justify the heavy weights for damage control.

Just like we like give credit to a president for the state of the economy ..and if we voted for him ..release him from blame for the downturn ..so do the boards of directors in regard to corporate performance.

Have you ever taken a gander at the disclosed conflicts of interest of any corporation's BOD? You need several pages to list the corporations that XOM's board sit on. What you end up with is various "clans" (of a sort) ..just handing each other's boyz the big bucks regardless of the state of affairs. The golden fleece club.

Just call me naive and say "you're just catching on??" in my stupidity. This is surely old news to many of you.
 
Gary,
I'm not arguing the merits of pay for performance. I support pay for performance like you do (reward the good, punish the bad).

My post solely addressed your post about how some arbitrary ratio of top pay/lowest pay is in your words "totally defensible." If somebody can explain how these arbitrary ratios are "totally defensible" (and I require more than anecdotal stories), I'm all ears.
 
A laborer has a given ratio of productivity to costs
A supervisor has a given ratio of productivity to costs
A manager has a given ratio of productivity to costs
Any executive has a given ratio of productivity to costs

I'll entertain the rationale that allows some to separate themselves from the integrated entity.

This is the ambitious hard core absolute tenet of merit. The more you do, the more you're worth. Very simple. As it applies to the grand wizard ..so does it apply to the lowly laborer. We have this thrown in our faces every stinking day in our rhetorical cliches. I don't see the CEO being exempt from the integrated operation.

Hey, pal! You did such a great job of getting others to do more for absolutely nothing ..no incentives ..no increase in costs ..that we want to leave the suckers in the dark and give you a big chunk of it. Sure, they were all part of the grand operation. They carried out your directives ..not like they couldn't fail at it. Sure they did a stellar job of jumping through the hoops that you place before them. Oh ..and those two retards ..you know ..the ones that actually managed to pull the rabbits out of a hat that allowed you to pull this off? Well, just don't let them know that we always count on at least two of them to wipe up the administrative mess that we construct to make things look good. Congrats on a job well done!
 
All any Japanese company did in the USA was to hit the reset button and eliminate the UAW. They took 20 year olds from the surrounding area and had states compete for plant placement. They didn't hire 40-50 somethings and carry their predecessors' pension liabilities in dense, tax laden urban industrial environments. Otherwise, what do they do different than any other American company? Jobs for life?? Not likely.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Jackson_Slugger
NASA Tasks Lockheed to Design Nuclear Space Propulsion
Replies
6
Views
1K
Cujet
J
Weapon Shield Is Back!
2 3
Replies
52
Views
16K
SullyCortez
Jackson_Slugger
Exxon, Total Poised to Win Stakes in Giant Qatar Gas Project
Replies
5
Views
938
PimTac
wemay
JD POWER 2020 3yr Dependability ranking. The industry's improving
2 3 4
Replies
68
Views
6K
gregk24
wemay
  • Locked
China may ease electric car quotas, delay emission rules help auto industry
Replies
3
Views
1K
M56959
Back
Top