[DeTomaso] Very little Pantera content

[RFogle1 at aol.com]

It strikes me that the much of what happens in this country is very much  
like this list.  A fair number of folks are having what I thought was a  
fairly interesting discussion, no name calling, no political affiliations,  just 
a down and dirty seat of the pants appraisal on what's going on, rendered  
by folks from all over the country, who already share a common  
interest/passion/obsession.  A vocal minority complains that this is not  the forum for 
that discussion.  We being respectful and well bred,  (ok, maybe not me), 
immediately clam up.  It happens over and over  again.  I for one was enjoying 
reading the discussion.  Many of the  changes to the economy and government 
over the past 30 years or so are hostile  to wealth creation and therefore 
Pantera ownership.  Yes, a owning a  Pantera is a luxury item.  Ron 
(downtrodden & Panteraless in  Akron)
 
Ronald M. Fogle

President
Cuyahoga Valley Management, Inc.
PO Box  102
Cuyahoga Falls, OH 44222
330-592-5189 phone
216-581-6494 fax  

 
In a message dated 11/20/2009 4:17:17 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
JJD1010 at aol.com writes:

A couple  of thoughts:


>>>"And why are the "rich" always vilified?  How  many of us would not like 
to 
make millions of dollars, or  get million dollar  bonuses? Would you turn 
them down if offered?  Seems to be sour grapes to  me."

***There have  been  interesting psychology studies about people's 
perception that  they  could in fact end up "rich" enough so that these 
sorts of tax 
and  bonus  issues would be relevant to them. Result are similar to studies 
 
about inner city  youth who practice basketball at the expense of  their 
school 
studies in the hope  they will be able to play in the  NBA and make big 
money. You take it from  there. It's the "rational  marketplace" at work.

***Regarding those big  bonuses in the  financial industry, they get them, 
not necessarily because of  supply  and demand, but because their customers 
are afraid to shop around  for  good prices. In an IPO, for example, the 
small 
fraternity of  investment  bankers tell you that you need a big, name brand 
firm to  bring  your company to market because it helps sell the stock 
issue  
and they  are the only ones who are prepared to deal with any   
contingencies 
that may arise, almost implying that they bring more   value to your stock 
issue than you do.  They then set the fees high  relative to  the amount of 
work and risk involved and justify it by  telling you that the  fees are 
relatively small compared to the value  of YOUR stock offering  and, 
therefore, it 
would be fiscally  imprudent for YOU not to pay them  and risk having YOUR 
stock  offering go bad. By playing the cost vs risk vs  reward scare 
tactic,  
they get those high fees that pay for those big   bonuses.

***On another note relative to those big bonuses, most of the  companies  
I've ever been exposed to set bonus pools partly on how  well the company 
does. 
In bad years, the bonus pool is small. That way all  the employees are 
dependent  on each other to do good and management  is accountable. I guess 
that 
doesn't  apply to the financial  industry. You get your bonus no matter 
what 
so why would  you care if  management was screwing up the company. You've 
been paid to keep   quiet and not question them.


>>>"This is NOT government  for the people and by  the people!"

***Well, interestingly   enough, voter turnout for the 2008 election was 
the 
highest in at least  40  years and the "people" voted for Obama - 53% of 
them. Same thing  for  Congressional races. 


>>>"I don't think we'll  see any convictions.  Everyone  is claiming 
ignorance.   Sort of like the Assistant Kommandant of Auschwitz  who 
claimed he  
didn't know people were being killed there.  Only in this  case  no one 
cares 
enough to pursue it."

***Goldman Sachs was hailed as  one of the smart companies that  avoided 
most of the mortgage-backed  securities meltdown. The Chairman of  Goldman 
Sachs 
admitted his  company was dumping mortgage backed securities it  had 
purchased for  their own account at the same they were packaging and  
selling  
mortgages to other unsuspecting firms and people. They knew but that   
didn't stop 
them from making big fees syndicating new  paper.





Jeff ( can we move on?   )
6559



_______________________________________________

Detomaso  Forum Managed by POCA

Archive Search Engine Now Available at  http://www.realbig.com/detomaso/

DeTomaso mailing  list
DeTomaso at list.realbig.com
http://list.realbig.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso