<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Public vs. Private</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.creativeclass.com/creative_class/2008/09/28/public-vs-private/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.creativeclass.com/creative_class/2008/09/28/public-vs-private/</link>
	<description>The source on how we live, work and play</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 02:30:15 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Wendy Waters</title>
		<link>http://www.creativeclass.com/creative_class/2008/09/28/public-vs-private/comment-page-1/#comment-6024</link>
		<dc:creator>Wendy Waters</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Sep 2008 03:06:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.creativeclass.com/creative_class/?p=3688#comment-6024</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m not an economist either, but here is my $0.02.  Changing the compensation structure for executives is essential -- for existing companies being traded and for companies planning IPOs.

  Currently, execs of publicly traded companies tend to have a vested interest in showing profits or revenues right now, potentially at the expense of creating a stronger business in the future. 

With many dot com IPOs, execs tried to make the company look spectacular over the short term, with little concern for the long term.  Their plan was to pump the stock, and sell their owns shares.

Compensation generally needs to be tied to the long term performance of a company.  If the executives couldn&#039;t trade their own options for 10 years, it would change their approach, IMO. 

Perhaps performance bonuses at existing companies should only payable several years into the future when a performance can truly be evaluated.

The USA and world is in a financial mess now because not enough people were thinking about the big picture -- both at work and at home (the negative savings rate and high consumer spending of the past few years is a sure sign few people are thinking long term).

Oh...and I agree with you, there are some good lessons to be learned from google.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m not an economist either, but here is my $0.02.  Changing the compensation structure for executives is essential &#8212; for existing companies being traded and for companies planning IPOs.</p>
<p>  Currently, execs of publicly traded companies tend to have a vested interest in showing profits or revenues right now, potentially at the expense of creating a stronger business in the future. </p>
<p>With many dot com IPOs, execs tried to make the company look spectacular over the short term, with little concern for the long term.  Their plan was to pump the stock, and sell their owns shares.</p>
<p>Compensation generally needs to be tied to the long term performance of a company.  If the executives couldn&#8217;t trade their own options for 10 years, it would change their approach, IMO. </p>
<p>Perhaps performance bonuses at existing companies should only payable several years into the future when a performance can truly be evaluated.</p>
<p>The USA and world is in a financial mess now because not enough people were thinking about the big picture &#8212; both at work and at home (the negative savings rate and high consumer spending of the past few years is a sure sign few people are thinking long term).</p>
<p>Oh&#8230;and I agree with you, there are some good lessons to be learned from google.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
