| StockFetcher Forums · General Discussion · Around the Market | << 1 2 3 4 5 >>Post Follow-up |
| johnpaulca 12,036 posts msg #94113 - Ignore johnpaulca |
6/21/2010 10:28:07 AM News For Thought Oil industry insider: U.S. energy system is "broken." Expect long lines and blackouts. According to Dallas Morning News: 'John Hofmeister, the former Shell executive who made this prediction at a World Affairs Council breakfast on Friday, said he's the optimist. Some of his energy industry friends expect worse, he said. "Within a decade I predict the energy abyss looks like brownouts, blackouts and gas lines," Hofmeister said. "Our federal government, when it comes to energy and the environment, is dysfunctional, it's broken, and it's unfixable in its current form."' According to the report: 'Hofmeister, the former chief executive of Shell Oil Co., is promoting his new book, Why We Hate the Oil Companies. He also has created a nonprofit group called Citizens for Affordable Energy. The Houston resident has a solution to the country's energy problems. He wants the U.S. government to get out of the energy business. He would shift oversight of energy and the environment to an independent agency, similar to the Federal Reserve.' "Pain Pills" get blamed for rising numbers of E.R. visits, raising health care costs. According to Health.U.S.News.com: "Prescription painkiller abuse is mounting, according to a new report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Hospital emergency rooms are treating more than twice the number of cases they did a few years ago, researchers found. One of the most abused pain medicines, OxyContin, led to about 105,000 ER visits in 2008, up 152 percent from visits in 2004, HealthDay reports. Experts are concerned about the trend and its impact on public health." China exchange rate adjustment has fine print. According to The Wall Street Journal: 'China pledged over the weekend to make its exchange rate more flexible, but quickly damped the idea that the move would trigger a dramatic revaluation of the yuan by saying it would make the adjustment "gradually."' According to the report: 'The decision by the world's third-largest economy follows heavy pressure by the U.S. and other members of the Group of 20 major economies. It could eventually boost the spending power of China's own consumers, easing the strains with other nations caused by its long reliance on cheap exports. That would be an important milestone on the path to a rebalancing of the global economy, which in the last few years has strained under a massive trade and capital imbalance between the U.S. and its major trading partners." Spain: Housing is experiencing a forced fire sale. According to The Wall Street Journal: " Spain has one of the world's most-troubled housing markets, yet some buyers are suddenly able to get mortgages with 100% financing, and developers are building new homes on empty lots despite a huge glut." The Journal reports that the reason behind the unconventional behavior is that " Spain's banks took possession of a large inventory of homes, buildings and land two years ago, forgiving the debt in hopes of heading off defaults. The plan was to resell the properties when the market bounced back and evade the worst impact of the looming housing crisis. But Spain's housing market has only gotten worse, and now the bill is coming due as the banks labor under the weight of an estimated 59.7 billion ($73.8 billion) in real-estate assets on their books. Under pressure to make further markdowns on the assets by their main regulator, the Bank of Spain, many banks are now scrambling to unload the properties as quickly as possible." Source: Dr. Joe Duarte's Market I.Q. |
| johnpaulca 12,036 posts msg #94129 - Ignore johnpaulca |
6/21/2010 1:45:45 PM Highlights from an interview by Meredith Whitney currently on CNBC: •A double dip in housing is a certainty •State economies are plunging, and are $200 billion underwater, will lead to 2 million in state-level layoffs leading to a low-end impact; raising taxes at state level will impact the top-end •Retail sales have been stronger only due to consumers not paying mortgages, retail sales have already topped as is •Q2 bank results will finally catch up with accelerated mortgage foreclosures; charge-offs and delinquencies in credit cards are better due to mortgage non-payment cash flow going to other obligations, and this will soon top as well •Structural employment issues in the US won't get better any time soon |
| johnpaulca 12,036 posts msg #94159 - Ignore johnpaulca |
6/22/2010 10:36:52 AM Summary: big reversal day may signal correction or consolidation for the very short term. Consumer Staples absolute price fell below its rising 200-day SMA on 6/18/10 and remains neutral. Health Care Stock Sector (XLV) absolute price reversed to the downside on 6/21/10 and remains technically bearish because price is below both SMAs and the 50 is below the 200 SMA. Emerging Markets Stocks ETF (EEM) Relative Strength Ratio (EEM/SPY) and absolute price both rose above 50- and 200-day SMAs on 6/21/10 and so turned neutral. Foreign Stocks ETF (EFA) Relative Strength Ratio (EFA/SPY) rose above its 50-day SMA on 6/21/10 and so turned neutral. NASDAQ Composite/S&P 500 Relative Strength Ratio fell below its 50-day SMA on 6/21/10, turning neutral again. Absolute price of the NASDAQ is between its 50- and 200-day SMAs and remains neutral. Crude Oil futures price rose further above 4-week highs on 6/21/10 but reversed to close slightly lower, which might signal upside exhaustion for the very short term. Longer term, Oil’s Ascending Triangle bottom still allows an objective above 80. Gold futures price moved up to a new all-time high 1266.5 on 6/21/10 before reversing to the downside and ending with a sizable loss of 24.5. Such a reversal might signal upside exhaustion for the very short term. The main trend remains bullish, however. The U.S. dollar nearest futures contract price fell further below 5-week lows on 6/21/10 but reversed to close higher, which might signal downside exhaustion for the very short term. Intermediate term, however, the USD chart “needs work” in order to end the downtrend. S&P 500 Composite (SPX) found resistance on 6/21/10 near 1130.29, which is the Gann 50.0% retracement of 2010 range. Short term, consolidation or correction of recent gains now seems possible. SPX closed above its 200-day SMA on 6/15/10 and has closed above it every day since. The recent Double Bottom near 1040 allows an upside projection above 1160. On 5/25/10 and again on 6/18/10, SPX reached down into deeply oversold territory and previous support, testing and holding the year 2010 extreme intraday low around 1040. I expected an oversold rally, but not without normal corrections and consolidations. Source: Traderplanet |
| johnpaulca 12,036 posts msg #94393 - Ignore johnpaulca |
6/28/2010 1:31:32 PM The Flow of the Markets by Van K. Tharp, Ph.D. Imagine yourself flowing down a river, only you don't know that you are. You do, however, notice that when you move in one direction, with the flow of the river, you move rapidly. When you move in another direction, against the river, you move slowly or not at all. In fact, when you go in that direction, you seem to put out a lot more effort just to stay in place. Your life becomes a struggle. It just seems to push you in another direction. Feeling miserable, you fight against it. But it doesn't help. You still seem to move only in one direction—with the flow of the river. Most people prefer to struggle against the river. They try everything they can think of to go upstream. All solutions like this—going against the flow—have the same result: frustration. If you were in the river, what could you do to make your life easier? One solution would be to get out of the river. But that would be giving up. There is only one easy solution—to acknowledge or accept that the problem has nothing to do with the river. The river just is. And it moves downstream and nothing you do can change that. When you realize that the problem stems from you, then the solution becomes obvious - just relax and flow with the river. Buy High, Sell Low? One of the oldest adages in market psychology is "Don't be afraid to buy high and sell low." Let's analyze what that means. If the market price is high, then the market is moving up. Those who are afraid to buy because the market is too high are fighting the flow of the river. It is possible the river may change direction, but you cannot predict if it will by determining how long it has been flowing in a particular direction. It may continue in the same direction for an unspecified length of time. Then again, if the market price is down, it also indicates the direction of the flow of the river. Those who are afraid to sell, once again, are fighting the flow. Whether you go with the flow of the market or struggle against it, the market will continue to flow, taking you with it one way or another. Why do traders resist the flow of the markets? They do so because they play psychological games with the market. The most common game involves not being willing to give up what you perceive to be control, the need to be right, although you have no control over the market flow. When you are struggling with the market, the struggle becomes all consuming. You don't realize that you are struggling with the market. Instead, you find yourself always looking for some solution to overcome the struggle. The struggle obscures the obvious solution: Letting go. For example, suppose you have a tendency to be in a perpetual market bear, always expecting the market to go down. For you, every little turn in the market is evidence that the market is turning. As a result, you always go short and consequently, take a beating. You repeat the process, over and over, until the market actually turns down. With each transaction the struggle against the flow of the market intensifies for you. Even worse is the trader who refuses to accept the inevitability of eventual loss. The market moves against each position the trader takes, but he refuses to go with the flow and refuses to accept the loss, no matter how small. It is an affront to the trader's ego. As a result, he refuses to accept it and the loss becomes larger. The bigger loss is even harder to take and the trader again refuses to accept it. The struggle continues until the loss becomes so overwhelmingly large that the trader has no choice but to take the loss. The solution to the problem of resisting market flow is to realize that the problem has nothing to do with the market. The problem stems from you, the trader. The market is not going against you personally. The market is simply moving. Whether you go with the flow of the market or struggle against it, the market will continue to flow, taking you with it one way or another. Market flow is bigger than any individual trader. The question is whether you realize how you are creating your struggle against the market. When you push against the market, the market seems to push back. But the market is not the problem. The trader's struggle with the market is the problem. |
| miketranz 956 posts msg #94397 - Ignore miketranz |
6/28/2010 4:28:13 PM Good advice,go with the flow.The only thing these market gurus can't tell you is,where that flow is..... |
| johnpaulca 12,036 posts msg #94417 - Ignore johnpaulca |
6/29/2010 10:43:12 AM Finally someone in the Lame Stream media has written a good article on government financing, which should from here on be called Ponzi Financing. The full article can be found in The Economist here...http://www.economist.com/node/16397110 MAN is born free but is everywhere in debt. In the rich world, getting hold of your first credit card is a rite of passage far more important for your daily life than casting your first vote. Buying your first home normally requires taking on a debt several times the size of your annual income. And even if you shun the temptation of borrowing to indulge yourself, you are still saddled with your portion of the national debt. Like alcohol, a debt boom tends to induce euphoria. Traders and investors saw the asset-price rises it brought with it as proof of their brilliance; central banks and governments thought that rising markets and higher tax revenues attested to the soundness of their policies. The answer to all problems seemed to be more debt. Depressed? Use your credit card for a shopping spree “because you’re worth it”. Want to get rich quick? Work for a private-equity or hedge-fund firm, using borrowed money to enhance returns. Looking for faster growth for your company? Borrow money and make an acquisition. Debt increased at every level, from consumers to companies to banks to whole countries. The effect varied from country to country, but a survey by the McKinsey Global Institute found that average total debt (private and public sector combined) in ten mature economies rose from 200% of GDP in 1995 to 300% in 2008 (see chart 1 for a breakdown by country). There were even more startling rises in Iceland and Ireland, where debt-to-GDP ratios reached 1,200% and 700% respectively. The burdens proved too much for those two countries, plunging them into financial crisis. Such turmoil is a sign that debt is not the instant solution it was made out to be. The market cheer that greeted the EU package for Greece lasted just one day before the doubts resurfaced. From early 2007 onwards there were signs that economies were reaching the limit of their ability to absorb more borrowing. The growth-boosting potential of debt seemed to peter out. According to Leigh Skene of Lombard Street Research, each additional dollar of debt was associated with less and less growth (see chart 2). Stopping the debt supercycle Rising government debt is a Ponzi scheme that requires an ever-growing population to assume the burden—unless some deus ex machina, such as a technological breakthrough, can boost growth. As Roland Nash, head of research at Renaissance Capital, an investment bank, puts it: “Can the West, with its regulated industry, uncompetitive labour and large government, afford its borrowing-funded living standards and increasingly expensive public sectors?” During the credit boom of the early 1990s and 2000s the conventional view was that it did not matter. Not only were asset prices rising even faster than debt but the use of derivatives was spreading risk across the system and, in particular, away from the banks, which had capital ratios well above the regulatory minimum. The problem with debt, though, is the need to repay it. Another reason why debt matters is to do with the role of banks in the economy. By their nature, banks borrow short (from depositors or the wholesale markets) and lend long. The business depends on confidence; no bank can survive if its depositors (or its wholesale lenders) all want their money back at once. If banks struggle to meet their own debts, they have no choice but to reduce their lending. If this happens on a large scale, as it did in the 1930s, the ripple effect for the economy as a whole can be devastating. If the Western world faces an era of austerity as debts are paid down, how will that affect day-to-day life? Clearly a society built on consumption will have to pay more attention to saving. The idea that using borrowed money to buy assets is the smart road to riches might lose currency, changing attitudes to home ownership as well as to parts of the finance sector such as private equity. This special report will argue that, for the developed world, the debt-financed model has reached its limit. Most of the options for dealing with the debt overhang are unpalatable. As has already been seen in Greece and Ireland, each government will have to find its own way of reducing the burden. The battle between borrowers and creditors may be the defining struggle of the next generation. How long can the politicians pretend that debt doesn't matter? How long will you allow it? |
| johnpaulca 12,036 posts msg #94554 - Ignore johnpaulca |
7/5/2010 9:59:51 AM Remember This There are little tidbits of wisdom that I have picked up over my years as a trader; here is a list of some things that all traders should take to heart: Don't apply logic to the stock market So often I see people make decisions in the market on what makes sense to them. It makes sense to buy stocks when the company insiders are buying. It makes sense to buy stocks that are making positive announcements. It makes sense to listen to what the President has to say about the company's prospects. However, all that matters is what the market thinks of the company and whether the buyers are more motivated than the sellers. So often, the market does things that do not make any sense until we later learn of what motivated the market to do what it did. Remember, the market is forward looking, most times, what makes sense is judged on what has happened in the past. Never average down on a losing position Buying more of a bad thing is not much different than continually betting on a losing horse. Winners win for a reason, and until your stock starts to show that it is a winner, don't add more to a bad situation. If you like a company whose stock is losing you money, sell it. You can always buy it back later when the market starts to like it again. Successful investing is not about being right, it is about making money Most good traders are usually wrong. They will lose small amounts often and make big amounts occasionally. What matters is how much they make over a large number of trades. Don't try to always be right, simply work to make money. Resist doing what feels comfortable We have a tendency to look for the market to prove our decision is a correct one before we make our move. The problem is that this often means we are too late to capitalize on the opportunity. We have to move before the crowd, and that often feels like a dangerous thing to do. Anyone can get lucky in the short term, only good traders succeed in the long term Don't confuse making money in the stock market with knowing what you are doing. It is easy to get lucky on a stock or on a sector and enjoy gains that give credence to your analysis method. However, short term winners often give back all of their gains because they fail to recognize their success as luck. Be patient with your winners, not with your losers The natural tendency is to sell your winners too early and hold on to your losers, hoping for a turnaround. A simple, but not easy, thing to do is reverse this tendency. When the market proves you right, wait to sell on a signal that indicates the stock is likely to go lower. When the market proves you are wrong, let the trade go and take the loss. Publicly available information is priced in to the stock, don't rely on it to make decisions Once information, no matter how good, is made public, it loses its usefulness to you. Public information is priced in to the stock by the market of investors. Information only has value to you if the market has not priced it in. Make sure your trading strategy has an edge A trading strategy is only worth trading if it can be shown that it consistently makes money. Establish your trading rules and test them over a variety of market conditions so you know that it is effective. Time spent testing a strategy to prove it is a money maker can save you a lot of money in the market. People lie, markets don't I have learned the hard way to never trust what people say, their actions say much more. Learn to read the market and understand it's message. No matter how much insight a person may have, recognize that they have a bias based on their own emotional attachment to money. It is easier to trade with the trend than against it Understand the mood of the market and trade with it. Don't chase euphoria, but seek to buy stocks that are in the control of the buyers. Don't sell on fear, but seek to sell stocks that are under seller control. Source: Stockscores |
| johnpaulca 12,036 posts msg #94572 - Ignore johnpaulca |
7/6/2010 9:13:29 AM Who Pays Bad Debts 07/02/10 London, England – A front-page photo in Tuesday’sFinancial Times shows lightning striking near the Parthenon. Zeus must be reading the paper. Greece is supposed to cut its public spending by an amount equal to 10% of its GDP. Even so, its public debt is expected to rise to nearly 150% of GDP by 2016 – or three times the level of Argentina when it defaulted in 2001. It should be obvious that the Greeks owe too much. But so does almost everyone. Every kind of debt is so heroic it poses an affront to nature and a challenge to the gods. Much of it is unpayable. Private debt. Public debt. Short term. Long term. US. England. Europe. All kinds of debt in all kinds of places. In America’s private sector, for example, debt exploded 6 times faster than GDP since 1950. And today, the whole world staggers under debt, with more than $3.50 of debt for every dollar of GDP. Today’s global economic problem is breathtakingly obvious: too much debt. The solution is obvious too; debt that cannot be repaid must be destroyed – by defaults, foreclosures, bankruptcies, write-downs, and restructurings. Nouriel Roubini, writing in The Financial Times this week, is on the right track. Greece cannot bear the weight of all its debt, he says. Since it will default sooner or later, better to restructure the debt now…reducing it to a level the Greeks can actually pay. Fair enough. Creditors would take their losses in an orderly way. When the debtor cannot pay, the creditor should take the loss. But practically the entire burden of modern economics over the last 3 years has been a scammy effort to shift the losses to someone else. To bring the readers fully into the picture, the great debt build-up began with Reagan in the White House and Thatcher at #10. Reagan added to deficits. Thatcher cut them. On the west side of the Atlantic, economists called on Reagan to stop spending. On the east side, 346 economists implored Maggie Thatcher to spend more. Reagan’s young budget director, David Stockman, resigned in protest when the Republicans wouldn’t bring deficits under control. Meanwhile, Maggie Thatcher was told that her austerity policies would “deepen the depression, erode the industrial base and threaten social stability.” She should do a U-turn immediately, said the august economists. “This lady’s not for turning,” she replied. It didn’t seem to matter what anyone thought or did. Markets do what they want. Back then, interest rates were coming down. The US 10-year Treasury yield fell from 15% in 1980 down to under 3% today. In that tender, delightful world, debt was no problem for anyone. Even if you wanted to default, the banks wouldn’t let you. They offered to refinance your debt at a lower rate. Both Britain and America grew; their debts grew too. Private sector debt peaked out in 2007. Households and corporations have been de-leveraging ever since. But as the private sector taketh away, the public sector giveth more debt. And again, markets are doing what they want. Interest rates are already at the lowest levels in a generation. This time, economies cannot cut rates and grow their way out of debt. Instead, someone will have to pay. Who? The world’s economists have no better idea what is happening in the 21st century than they had in the 20th. They neither saw the crisis coming, nor knew what to do when it arrived. Their panicky ‘rescue’ attempts wasted $10 trillion. They claimed they had put the world on the road to ‘recovery’ and claimed victory over the credit cycle. They might just as well have claimed to have conquered sin or exterminated cockroaches. Neither governments nor their economic advisors can make bad debt disappear. They know that as well as we do. All their sweating and grunting has another purpose – to decide who gets stuck holding the bag. Taxpayers, for example. That is the general drift of the Germano-Anglo-Canadian proposal. ‘Austerity,’ as they call it, means higher taxes, fewer services, and bailouts of the financial sector. The big banks won’t pay for their mistakes. The public will. Martin Wolf and Paul Krugman are wrong about many things, but they’re probably right about the side effects of this bitter medicine; it will probably deepen and prolong the slump. It will cause a ‘third depression,’ says Krugman. On the other hand, Krugman, Wolf and the other neo-Keynesians have a bad proposal of their own. “…governments are obsessing about inflation when the real threat is deflation, preaching the need for belt-tightening when the real problem is inadequate spending,” writes Krugman. If too little spending were the real problem, it would invite the most agreeable fix since sex therapy. Every government would lend a hand. Alas, the real problem is the opposite. It is the consequence of too much spending – debt. More government spending means more debt. Who will pay it? Taxpayers? Consumers? Savers? Investors? Lenders? The young? The old? Nobody knows for sure. But everybody is surely going to find out. Bill Bonner for The Daily Reckoning |
| johnpaulca 12,036 posts msg #94579 - Ignore johnpaulca |
7/6/2010 10:29:10 AM Abell, Koppel Discuss Their Profitable Short-term Trading Methods No short-term trading system is perfect. However, having and using a system is critical for short-term trading success, say Howard Abell and Bob Koppel. “A successful short-term trading system must be profitable, consistent, and personal--conforming to the unique psychological and methodological needs of the individual,” they said.Abell is chief operating officer for Innergame Division and author of “The Day Trader’s Advantage” and “The Insider’s Edge.” Koppel has authored “The Intuitive Trader” and is president of Innergame Division, which is a professional and institutional brokerage and trader execution services division of Rand Financial--a Chicago-based futures commission merchant with clearing representation worldwide.Innergame Division is also associated with the MooreResearchCenter, based in Eugene, Ore. Steve Moore is the proprietor. Together, they have created the Innergame Partners/Moore Research, Inc. (IPMR) Trading Approach. The trading method has the following tenets: • Patience Is Your EdgeThe edge of the floor trader is buying the bid and selling the offer. This is an unreasonable expectation for off-the-floor day- and swing-traders. However, there are other ways to maintain an edge. Patience and preparation serve to create an edge that helps build and conserve equity. Knowing what you expect the market to do and waiting patiently for the market to come to you-in other words, to meet your expectations--gives you that edge. • Good Daytraders and Swing Trades Result from High Percentage of “Set-ups” Each day must be viewed in a larger context, which might be one day to two weeks of market action. Understanding how markets “set up” to make predictable moves and anticipating these moves through the set-up is a valuable key to success. • Anticipating Market Opportunities In most instances, waiting for the market to demonstrate what appears to be a trading opportunity will result in entering too late for maximum profits. • Predetermined Buy and Sell Areas Must Be ExecutedFor those traders who have difficulty “pulling the trigger,” putting resting orders in the market will get you into or out of the trade. • Trade One Set-Up per Market Day Overtrading comes from indecision and anxiety. By setting your sights on one good set-up in a market, you avoid trading your emotions. • Ignore the Noise, Follow the Signal Much of what a market does during the day can be considered noise--that is, market action without meaning. Hanging on every tick can be a wearisome and misleading chore. You must eliminate your reactions to the noise and follow the essential signals. • Take “Fast-Market” or Climax Condition Profits In day- or swing-trading it is a good idea to exit a profitable trade if the market climaxes on heavy tick volume or “fast-market” conditions. It is a high probability that the high or low of the day is being made at this time. If the market hits your resting entry orders under these conditions, expect immediate profits or be alert for another wave in the same direction. • Abandon Dull or Non-Performing Markets If you find yourself in a market that is very dull--look elsewhere. Time is scarce and watching a dull market drains energy.Koppel and Abell made their presentation to traders attending the Technical Analysis Group (TAG XVIII) meeting in New Orleans late last week. The meeting was sponsored by Dow Jones Telerate. |
| johnpaulca 12,036 posts msg #94612 - Ignore johnpaulca |
7/7/2010 9:51:21 AM How Many Workers Can You Hire for the Price of One CEO? By DOUGLAS MCINTYRE Not all CEOs are as generous as Apple's (AAPL) Steve Jobs. The company's founder makes a mere $1 a year, while a starting sales associate at one of his Apple stores makes more than $31,200. But Jobs is an anomaly. Even though the gap between executive and entry-level worker pay has shrunk ever so slightly in the past couple of years, it's still not unusual for the CEO of a large public company to earn more per day than some of his employees earn over the course of an entire year. Interestingly, some industries have much larger pay gaps than others. In technology, pharmaceuticals and manufacturing, the differences between worker and CEO salaries tend to be smaller, thanks to higher worker pay. In retail and other consumer-facing industries (where employees work directly with consumers to sell a good or provide a service), the gap tends to be bigger, due in part to the low pay of entry-level workers. We looked at more than a dozen companies where the difference between what the CEO makes and what an entry-level worker makes is unusually large. We obtained the CEO total compensation figures (which include cash, bonuses, stock options and any other perks -- like say a corporate jet), from the most recent proxy statements. Employee salary figures, many of them based on hourly wages, came from the companies, as well as from interviews we conducted with unions and workers themselves. One CEO stands out on the list. Jamie Dimon, the CEO of JPMorgan (JPM), made "only" $1.3 million largely because of pressure on Wall Street CEOs to keep management compensation low in response to the financial crisis and government bailout. What may be forgotten is that Dimon made over $35 million in 2008 as the global credit system was falling apart along with the JPMorgan stock price. Don't feel so bad for Jobs, either. He's incredibly wealthy thanks to his Apple stock holdings. To get a sense of how the CEO of a company you regularly do business with pays his or her employees compared to themselves, we've broken it down for you below: CVS Caremark (CVS) Thomas M. Ryan: $30.4 million (2009 Compensation) Starting Cashier: $8/hour, $20,800/year One CEO = 1,461 entry-level employees AT&T (T) Randall Stephenson: $29.2 million (2009 Compensation) Starting Sales Associate: $10/hour, $26,000/year One CEO = 1,123 entry-level employees The Walt Disney Co. (DIS) Robert Iger: $29 million (2009 Compensation) Disneyland Hotel Housekeeper: $10/hour, $26,000/year One CEO = 1,115 entry-level employees McDonald's (MCD) James A. Skinner: $17.6 million (2009 Compensation) Starting Cashier: $7.25/hour, $18,850/year One CEO = 933 entry-level employees Target (TGT) Gregg W. Steinhafel: $16.1 million (2009 Compensation) Starting Cashier: $8.50/hour, $22,100/year One CEO = 728 entry-level employees Cablevision (CVC) Founder and Chairman Charles F. Dolan: $15 million (2009 Compensation) James L. Dolan: $17 million (2009 Compensation) Customer Service Representative: $13/hour, $33,800/year One CEO = 505 entry-level employees Starbucks (SBUX) Founder Howard Schultz: $9.9 million (2009 Compensation) Entry-level Barista: $9/hour, $23,400/year One CEO = 423 entry-level employees Wal-Mart Stores (WMT) Michael T. Duke: $8.5 million (2009 Compensation) Starting Sales Associate: $9.75/hour, $25,350/year One CEO = 335 entry-level employees Nike (NKE) Mark G. Parker: $7.3 million (2009 Compensation) Starting Sales Associate, NYC Store: $9/hour, $23,400/year One CEO = 311 entry-level employees Time Warner Cable (TWC) Glenn A. Britt $15.9 million (2009 Compensation) Cable Installer: $20/hour, $52,000/year One CEO = 305 employees AMR (American Airlines, Inc.) (AMR) Gerard J. Arpey: $5.6 million (2009 Compensation) Entry-level Flight Attendant, flying minimum domestic hours: $20.24/hour, $21,252/year One CEO = 263 entry-level employees FedEx (FDX) Founder Frederick W. Smith: $8.48 million (2009 compensation) Handler: $13/hour, $33,800/year One CEO = 251 entry-level employees Costco (COST) James D. Sinegal: $2.3 million (2009 Compensation) Starting Sales Associate: $11/hour, $28,600/year One CEO = 115 entry-level employees JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) James Dimon: $1.3 million (2009 Compensation) Bank teller: $12/hour, $31,200/year One CEO = 41 entry-level employees |
| StockFetcher Forums · General Discussion · Around the Market | << 1 2 3 4 5 >>Post Follow-up |
Copyright 2022 - Vestyl Software L.L.C.•Terms of Service | License | Questions or comments? Contact Us
EOD Data sources: DDFPlus & CSI Data
Quotes delayed during active market hours. Delay times are at least 15 mins for NASDAQ, 20 mins for NYSE and Amex. Delayed intraday data provided by DDFPlus