Top Stocks blog home page

Goldman shareholders fight bonuses

Shareholders forgot who tripled the value of the stock

Posted by 247 wallst on Friday, November 20, 2009 7:05 AM

Some large Goldman Sachs (GS) shareholders would like to see the firm’s profits in their pockets and not the bank accounts of the Goldman partners.

 

The Wall Street Journal reports that many institutions that hold Goldman shares are upset that the firm’s profit will be down this year even though the investment bank will post record sales.


A great deal of this drop is because Goldman issued 100 million shares to improve its balance sheet. Cutting compensation would rebuild earnings-per-share figures, which should help drive up the value of the stock.

 

The flaw in the shareholders’ argument is simple. Big pay packages are, in Goldman’s case, based on remarkable performances. Goldman’s key partners have created results that have pushed the company’s stock from a price of $52 a year ago to $173. Morgan Stanley (MS) shares have performed about as well, but the stocks in other major banks have lagged well behind the better than three-fold improvement in Goldman’s share price.

 

Congress and the Administration assumed that they can rein in pay packages on Wall Street, and that performance at firms like Goldman will not be affected.


Now, Goldman shareholders are making a similar assumption.


Programs to cut pay packages will certainly drive some of the best financial talent to private equity firms and hedge funds. The question is how large the exodus will be.

 

Goldman’s shareholders may win their fight with management over pay packages. They may also lose in the long run if a number of the company’s best people leave.

 

Top Stocks writer Douglas A. McIntyre is an editor at 24/7 Wall St.

 

Related articles:

 

Goldman among the 500 largest companies

 

Watch financial TV

 

Biotech stock news

Join the discussion!
Sort by:
1 - 14 of 14
Friday, November 20, 2009 5:43:46 PM
Obviously from this article, that is distorted in every way, Mr. McIntyre is nothing but a lobbyist for wall street firms, posing as a non-biased journalist...Quit insulting the public's intelligence with this crap!
#2
Friday, November 20, 2009 12:30:35 PM
Partners? This isn't a partnership - it's a publicly traded company. They're supposed to work for the shareholders.
Friday, November 20, 2009 11:57:42 AM
CAN SOMEONE EXPLAIN TO ME HOW GOLDMAN GOT  100% PAYOUT FROM AIG? WHO SET THAT UP? WAS IT AN EX GOLDMAN EXEC?  I TELL YOU 1 THING MY CONGRESS PERSON BETTER GET OFF HIS AS S AND GET ME SOME ANSWERS OR SHE WILL BE IN THE UNEMPLOYMENT LINE
Friday, November 20, 2009 11:26:09 AM

The Rock stars can just retire and make room for the 10.5% unemployed if they dont like the pay structure.

 

You know I always wonder what their definition of talent is ...the ability and to kiss ??? Dont recall that class in college. 

Friday, November 20, 2009 11:20:12 AM

This company is run by expensive idiots that are well connected politically but lack any real investment knowledge.  They were bailed out by the US government when they received payments from AIG (12 Billion from US Government).  No one in the entire company was aware the company that insured their poor idiot investments was also going out of business.   How could anyone give money to an investment organization that was really Bankrupt because of poor business decisions but survived due to Government intervention?  Only the rich who want status and the weak minded would have this business invest their money.  They obviously know nothing of risk management which at an INVESTMENT FIRM should be the number 1 priority for their clients.  If you made money on the stock price because you knew the Hank Paulson (A former Goldman EXEC) was going to bail them out congrats, but worrying where these "Smart Executives" will go is laughable.  If you use Goldman you are not buying a well run business institution but a politically connected organization that tries to invest money like any other shmuck and charges you way too much but provides political cover. 

 

Do not let the business media which is another set of idiots convince you that these people deserve this money because they are so smart.  The business media is well aware if the compensation is changed and the executives receive less money and those executives become millionaires and Billionaires some people they are friends with (The Execs) and their own salaries would also have to come into question. Business journalists have such a bias because they have a dog in this fight.  Do you pay the reporter that does an interview with the President of the United States the same amount of money as the reporter who interviews a local politician?  Of course not, the reporter that does the Presidential interview will be making millions while the local reporter is just making a living.  When they make these statements they are protecting themselves.  Stockholders should demand the reduction in Executive Salaries without any fear.  The Hedge fund industry that suffered just as much if not more in the last downturn will offer very few jobs so let them go.

Friday, November 20, 2009 11:18:20 AM
This argument that the bonuses will prevent all those talented guys from running to another company is ridiculous.  Exactly where are they going to run to?  Goldman Sachs guys do not get their big bonuses, so they run to AIG to replace the guys who left there because they did not get big bonuses?  Its like a game of musical chairs in which there are always enough chairs for everyone.  Once the "pay Czar" nuts up and pulls a few chairs out of the game the survivors will be content to sit still and take the pay that they truly earn.
Friday, November 20, 2009 11:17:48 AM
Well if their all that talented how did they get in trouble in the first place ?Lame Lame Lame playing with other peoples money and makeing themselfs look good at the same time.Most of them should be put in Jail but that would just be giveing them another free ride at the cost of the taxpayer.Devil
Friday, November 20, 2009 11:06:50 AM
Programs to cut pay packages will certainly drive some of the best financial talent to private equity firms and hedge funds. The question is how large the exodus will be.

 

#1 Everyone dies, and then who replaces these so called unreplacables?

 

#2 Just how many jobs worldwide overpay to these extremes? I bet not enough to cover the many, many intelligent MBA's worldwide!

 

#3 When a stockwise or even a rookie trader looks at a product to buy, HOW does he anticipate the bleed off of funds as a Wall Street Somali pirate plunders those profits?

 

# 4 No privately owned businesses dole out profits to the employees leaving nothing for the inevitable rainy day, as was done before "too big to fail" bailouts?

Friday, November 20, 2009 10:52:23 AM

the author has ended his stint at being a reporter and now joined the countless knuckleheads that have an opinion.

lets review

fact goldman sachs was about to fall of the cliff, had to run to daddy (gov't) to get help, now claims they are all geniuses and should get big bonuses.

bravo shareholders , stock prices do not reflect real performance yet , as to great talent, plenty more on the street right now that would accept alot less and do a better job. 

all those slick mba's seemed to ignore real economics. demand for employees is low, supply is high, guess what you are a thin commodity.

go back to work, make some real profits and then we will see if you deserve your jobs!!!!

Friday, November 20, 2009 10:46:47 AM
I think it is funny that Goldman Sachs is claiming that their "talent" made all this money for the company.  In reality, Goldman would not exist if not for the American taxpayer.  Yes, they paid back THEIR TARP money.  However, they will never pay back the money they received from AIG.  Goldman received 100% of the value of their Credit Default Swaps from AIG.  Basically, the American taxpayer bailed out Goldman via the AIG bailout.  Without the AIG money, Goldman would no longer exist.   So much for "talent" making the money.
Friday, November 20, 2009 10:07:48 AM
It's quite apparent that the author, Mr. McIntyre, is doing God's (i.e. Blankfein's) work.  I really enjoyed the "remarkable performances" comment.  Mr. McIntyre is either extremely dull-witted or fully aware of the tripe he is attempting to foist on the reader.  In either case, his opinions regarding Goldman Sachs' pay policies are clearly and utterly useless.
#12
Friday, November 20, 2009 10:00:51 AM

"The flaw in the shareholders’ argument is simple. Big pay packages are, in Goldman’s case, based on remarkable performances. Goldman’s key partners have created results that have pushed the company’s stock from a price of $52 a year ago to $173"

 

Right, and before that in October of 2007, the share price was $240/share.  So, I guess the flaw in Doug McIntyre's argument is simple

Friday, November 20, 2009 9:36:09 AM

No person should be paid by a private company more than the leader of the country is paid. Period.  All this talk about talent loss and company survival is ridiculous. It was these so called talented people who couldn't read the writing on the wall and got us into this mess in the first place.

 My tenth grader saw this mess coming from watching the market in his social sciences and economics classes and warned me to get out. Thank fully I listened and didn't lose much. Now these same "talented" people are back to business as usual.

 I can't wait for the stockholders to show up at the doors with pitchforks and torches to get rid of these madmen who are playing with their life savings like they didn't have a care in the world.

Friday, November 20, 2009 9:26:12 AM
Goldman’s shareholders may win their fight with management over pay packages. They may also lose in the long run if a number of the company’s best people leave.
Where are they going?  I'm tired of that statement, its mainly used to justify excessive pay.
1 - 14 of 14
To add a comment, pleasesign in
Fund data provided by Morningstar, Inc. © 2009. All rights reserved.
StockScouter data provided by Gradient Analytics, Inc.
Quotes supplied by Interactive Data.
MSN Money's editorial goal is to provide a forum for personal finance and investment ideas. Our articles, columns, message board posts and other features should not be construed as investment advice, nor does their appearance imply an endorsement by Microsoft of any specific security or trading strategy. An investor's best course of action must be based on individual circumstances.

MSN Money Video

Search for videos about a specific company.

Top Gainers
Symbol%Change
SHZ+33.32%
ACLI+24.81%
NBG+24.56%
Top Losers
SymbolChange
TRID-17.13%
CONN-17.04%
TMRK-16.30%
View all lists and trends