Sphenodontia talks like an executive. If you want to preserve shareholder values and company growth, you don’t give yourself a raise while the company is unprofitable, but furthermore, giving it to just himself while the rest of the employees are given nothing.

Listen no one said the layoffs were personal or anything. They did save the company tons of money. What we’re saying is after laying folks off, for financial reasons, you probably shouldnt be giving yourself a raise. Put that money to good use, leave it in the bank so your numbers look even 0.0001% better.

You want to add value to the shareholders? Don’t waste money on raises.. no one deserves them. I like how you contradict yourself. “They’re run
for the benefit of the shareholders” well for the benefit of the share holders they should probably use that money to add to the work force or give more deserving folks at aruba a raise! thereby increasing the stock price and helping the share holders. Giving the execs who have squandered this company away raises does not help the share holders. So you’re wrong.

Dominic recently sent out an “employee satisfaction survey” .. I know plenty of people will be filling it out very honestly.

Dom and Keerti at the guilty ones here, they have to go to work every day knowing that everyone in the company knows that after all this drama, the layoffs, the financial woes, he gave himself a raise (or at least accepted it). They are disgraceful men and do not deserve respect from their employees. I know plenty of folks that deserved a raise more than they did. It’s an outrage.

If I were them I’d keep an eye on my car and tires in the parking lot… someone’s gonna key their cars or slash their tires.

Also: Sales up “only” 8% in /2009/? Of course 2008 was a better year for
sales growth. Hello. A duck with a newspaper could tell you that.

I don’t know if the raise is justified as a way to build shareholder value,
but the reasons cited above with the implicit tone of “behold the inujustice”
are pathetic.

The best case made is that of a “profitless company”. It’s true. ARUN hasn’t
posted a (GAAP) profit. But they’re not terribly far away from such profits, either.
Notably, stock-based expenses are keeping them back – the business itself
is intermittently profitable, even if owning an ever-diluting share of it isn’t yet.

Furthermore, they haven’t been at it all that long (the IPO isn’t even 2 years
gone, is it?) and their future profits may be more valuable because they were
willing to take a loss right now. Presumably this is why people will pay
circa $7.5/share for it anyway: they’re willing to think for the long term
instead of just the next 90 days.

I wish you another job in a company where the employees will be considered as the best capital of the busyness, the only one susceptible to bring sustainable growth and prosperity.

Lou

This is the “laissez-faire” of the “pure capitalism” (see Wikipedia), that has become so indecent!
Why were the banks protected by TARP so eager to reimburse the loans? Not for the good of the people, just to get rid of the limitations on the CEOs salaries.

And sooner or later, this will bring the fall of the American Empire.

This does not surprise me. I hear Keerti needed the raise to support his coke habit. Also his trips to high end womens clothing stores have not waned, gotta hit the gay clubs in san francisco in style he always says!