Originally Posted by Alan Shore

Good question. At least it gives our reps more issues to consider as they determine our ultimate path. For example, will we come out ahead if we retain or increase our share of "at risk" compensation, e.g., profit sharing, or would we be better off taking some risk off the table by cashing more in?

Before anyone accuses me of having an agenda of any sort, recall that I have advocated on these boards for an increase in "at risk" compensation, under the assumption that we'll do better in good times than we would with less "at risk," albeit not so well in bad. I don't know that I've changed my mind, but when smarter people than I put out various points of analysis, I do consider them.