Mountains of cash
10-25-2011 | 07:16 AM
#41
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,866
Likes: 0
But, "we will never go back to 2000 pay rates" -- Smisek
OCTOBER 20, 2011, 12:50 PM ET
The Empty Homes of the Super Rich
Earlier this year, Larry Ellison added to his vast stable of homes when he bought Porcupine Creek – the 250-acre estate near Palm Springs with its own 19-hole golf course. He paid $43 million. And yet, according to people who work there, he visits only occasionally and uses it mainly for corporate entertainment and charity events.
How is it possible that someone can buy a $43 million house and not live there?
The question is even more intriguing when you consider the Ambani family in India. According to articles in the Financial Times and the New York Times, Mukesh Ambani – India’s richest man – still hasn’t moved into his 27-story palace.
The family hosts parties there and shows movies in its private theater. But they continue to sleep at their nearby 14-story apartment tower.year.
But wouldn’t NOT living in the house be the ultimate show of extravagance?
The real reason may become apparent in time. For now, however, the fact remains that the super-rich often own homes they rarely visit – let alone live in. And that doesn’t just go for vacation homes in Palm Springs.
Billionaire hedge-funder Phil Falcone had two homes on the Upper East Side of Manhattan. The now-divorced Frank and Jamie McCourt had four homes near Los Angeles — two in Holmby Hills and two in Malibu.
Why do they do it? That’s as much an answer for psychologists and economists and realtors. The main reason is probably simple: because they can.
Why do you think the rich buy homes they don’t live in and rarely visit?
OCTOBER 20, 2011, 12:50 PM ET
The Empty Homes of the Super Rich
Earlier this year, Larry Ellison added to his vast stable of homes when he bought Porcupine Creek – the 250-acre estate near Palm Springs with its own 19-hole golf course. He paid $43 million. And yet, according to people who work there, he visits only occasionally and uses it mainly for corporate entertainment and charity events.
How is it possible that someone can buy a $43 million house and not live there?
The question is even more intriguing when you consider the Ambani family in India. According to articles in the Financial Times and the New York Times, Mukesh Ambani – India’s richest man – still hasn’t moved into his 27-story palace.
The family hosts parties there and shows movies in its private theater. But they continue to sleep at their nearby 14-story apartment tower.year.
But wouldn’t NOT living in the house be the ultimate show of extravagance?
The real reason may become apparent in time. For now, however, the fact remains that the super-rich often own homes they rarely visit – let alone live in. And that doesn’t just go for vacation homes in Palm Springs.
Billionaire hedge-funder Phil Falcone had two homes on the Upper East Side of Manhattan. The now-divorced Frank and Jamie McCourt had four homes near Los Angeles — two in Holmby Hills and two in Malibu.
Why do they do it? That’s as much an answer for psychologists and economists and realtors. The main reason is probably simple: because they can.
Why do you think the rich buy homes they don’t live in and rarely visit?
10-25-2011 | 07:44 AM
#42
APC co-founder
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,853
Likes: 0
From: B777
10-25-2011 | 08:09 AM
#43
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,866
Likes: 0
This resolve may finally come on Valentine's Day when CAL pilots are the only employee group between both airlines not getting checks. When a UAL pilot gets a $20,000 check and the CAL pilots gets their monthly $50 on time check and OSC with 12 days off in Feb, even the 58% might get a clue.
10-25-2011 | 04:34 PM
#45
APC co-founder
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,853
Likes: 0
From: B777
I've never heard of a UAL pilot coming anywhere near $20K in profit sharing, but if that's the number that's going to **** off the masses into actually taking action, than it's a good one! As you know, with the company it's NEVER about what's fair (and this is a good example), it's always about what you can negotiate.
10-25-2011 | 05:03 PM
#46
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,130
Likes: 0
From: B737 CAPT IAH
I've never heard of a UAL pilot coming anywhere near $20K in profit sharing, but if that's the number that's going to **** off the masses into actually taking action, than it's a good one! As you know, with the company it's NEVER about what's fair (and this is a good example), it's always about what you can negotiate.
In my opinion, any profit sharing plan that would generate that 20k means you're not being compensated properly to begin with and subsidized the profit.
Now, unless something changed since I left UAL, I don't see a 20k check in anyone's future......
Get your compensation upfront I say.
Lee
10-25-2011 | 05:21 PM
#47
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,866
Likes: 0
I've never heard of a UAL pilot coming anywhere near $20K in profit sharing, but if that's the number that's going to **** off the masses into actually taking action, than it's a good one! As you know, with the company it's NEVER about what's fair (and this is a good example), it's always about what you can negotiate.
10-25-2011 | 07:19 PM
#48
APC co-founder
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,853
Likes: 0
From: B777
Couldn't agree more, the ESOP is over, now I just work here. The problem with variable compensation (aside from being variable), is that the threshold for receiving a bonus is a moving target set by (you guessed it) management. The operation could perfom flawlessly with employees going over and above everything in their job description and you could still get Sigma Six'd out of your bonus.
Management has way to many tools in their accounting toolbox to affect earnings (new debt, retiring old debt, etc, etc.) to assume that variable compensation will be a serious contributor to W2 earnings.
I'd much rather have industry leading solid scope, pay rates, and work rules. Variable compensation is an illusion, let 'em keep the cash to pay for a solid contract.
I just work here.
Management has way to many tools in their accounting toolbox to affect earnings (new debt, retiring old debt, etc, etc.) to assume that variable compensation will be a serious contributor to W2 earnings.
I'd much rather have industry leading solid scope, pay rates, and work rules. Variable compensation is an illusion, let 'em keep the cash to pay for a solid contract.
I just work here.
10-25-2011 | 07:29 PM
#49
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,866
Likes: 0
Couldn't agree more, the ESOP is over, now I just work here. The problem with variable compensation (aside from being variable), is that the threshold for receiving a bonus is a moving target set by (you guessed it) management. The operation could perfom flawlessly with employees going over and above everything in their job description and you could still get Sigma Six'd out of your bonus.
Management has way to many tools in their accounting toolbox to affect earnings (new debt, retiring old debt, etc, etc.) to assume that variable compensation will be a serious contributor to W2 earnings.
I'd much rather have industry leading solid scope, pay rates, and work rules. Variable compensation is an illusion, let 'em keep the cash to pay for a solid contract.
I just work here.
Management has way to many tools in their accounting toolbox to affect earnings (new debt, retiring old debt, etc, etc.) to assume that variable compensation will be a serious contributor to W2 earnings.
I'd much rather have industry leading solid scope, pay rates, and work rules. Variable compensation is an illusion, let 'em keep the cash to pay for a solid contract.
I just work here.
10-26-2011 | 05:42 AM
#50
Line Holder
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 15
From: 737 CAPT
The company calculates the individual profit sharing amounts as if all the employees are eligible (below a certain management level) and then backs out/withholds the money for any group "not eligible" to receive it. In other words, the CAL pilots' "share" is not awarded to other groups just because less people are in the pool. It just goes back into company coffers.
Pilots subsidizing the operation again.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
