Intel Exec Pat Gelsinger Leaves for EMC

Status
Not open for further replies.

FlayerSlayer

Distinguished
Jan 21, 2009
181
0
18,680
0
I think the point is more that an Intel exec is leaving for EMC, rather than who he actually is. But I'm afraid I don't really have any strong feelings for this.
 

endif

Distinguished
May 19, 2009
62
0
18,630
0
EMC sucks. Dell's Equallogic is a much better SAN. Hopefully he will make some improvements over there.
 
G

Guest

Guest
While other people work twice as hard as him,with less then a tenth of his wage!
 

hellwig

Distinguished
May 29, 2008
1,743
0
19,860
26
Moves like this will only strengthen Wall Street's argument that excessive and unconditional executive bonuses are necessary to keep top executive talent. Obviously Intel couldn't offer up enough incentive to keep this man. However, I also heard the regional head-honcho in Rio Rancho, NM has a cube on the main floor with other average employees, so I don't think Intel is too big on perks to begin with.
 
G

Guest

Guest
I'm dismayed that one of our best engineering-focused managers is leaving so that Intel can continue to be run by sales and marketing folks and that an accountant is taking over the manufacturing. You can't save your way to success, and you can't market your way to success if the products aren't there.
 

ailgatrat

Distinguished
Feb 14, 2007
179
0
18,680
0
[citation][nom]7amood[/nom]how much do you think his salary was as a 10-years Intel executive??i wonder/hope it was worth his 10 years of service.[/citation]

I think the article said 30 years. Kind of sucks that Intel decided that 30 years of dedication weren't worth keeping around. But then, he now has the chance to run things, "his way". That sounds like a much better reason to move on to me.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Hellwig: Stop being such a fascist. The year Reagan took office, the average CEO salary was 40x the average employee salary at the same company, now it's about 500x the average employee salary. It's not "necessary", the general population is just being looted.

Case in point: The banks were bailed out between Bush/Obama with about $200,000 per taxpayer. Now, they're still in deep shit, and so are the taxpayers. Since the majority of taxpayers DON'T ACTUALLY OWE $200,O00, had it just been given directly to us, we could've payed off all of our personal debt, and went out and bought a brand new American car, and otherwise stimulated the fuck out of the economy, but the fascists and their supporters(like Hellwig) feel that's wrong. Idiots.
 

idisarmu

Distinguished
Mar 23, 2008
511
0
18,980
0
[citation][nom]truth_genius_[/nom]Hellwig: Stop being such a fascist. The year Reagan took office, the average CEO salary was 40x the average employee salary at the same company, now it's about 500x the average employee salary. It's not "necessary", the general population is just being looted.Case in point: The banks were bailed out between Bush/Obama with about $200,000 per taxpayer. Now, they're still in deep shit, and so are the taxpayers. Since the majority of taxpayers DON'T ACTUALLY OWE $200,O00, had it just been given directly to us, we could've payed off all of our personal debt, and went out and bought a brand new American car, and otherwise stimulated the fuck out of the economy, but the fascists and their supporters(like Hellwig) feel that's wrong. Idiots.[/citation]

So you are saying that Americans on average owe less than 200k and that the bank wasted >50k per taxpayer- leaving the taxpayers and banks still in deep sh1t? I don't buy that argument for some reason.

I don't know if you were against or for high CEO salaries, but it makes perfect sense to me to have high CEO salaries. Many CEOs gave up their entire lives in order to advance in the company. They may be rich... but they probably neglected their family and friends and thus don't have very good relations with them- that wouldn't be fun to deal with I'm guessing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS