Winning Brands Corporation (WNBD)

[ActivClient]

DirtyDave...People do not really care HOW MUCH the CEO gets paid...I think your missing the point....They, as do I, as should you, care about how much money the company brings in yearly compared to how much comes out. The CEO's pay is one of the main things brought to light because it can be slimmed down very easily...People keep mentioning the fact that 5% of CEO's get paid much much more...but what they are failing to include is the fact that those CEO's run companies worth millions upon millions and can afford to pay themselves a lot more. For a company who has not once produced ONE profitable year in 5-6 years, how can you agree the CEO deserves 120K? And from the sound of it, you seem like you'd back him if he dared to increase it from there....

120k is indeed cheap for the majority of CEO's, I agree....but it is expensive when you break it down further than simply "time on the job"...Your hourly breakdown is frightening IMO...If the CEO truly works 365 days a year and 16 hours a day, you should not be praising him for the productivity of this company. If your telling me he can't get in more than 5000 stores in 5 years working 5840 hours per year for 5 years (29200 hours) then your breakdown isn't a good thing like you make it out to be, it only helps prove that his productivity could use some revamping. Anyone can stay at their job a few extra hours a day, sit behind their desk, and call it "overtime"...The only thing is, he is the CEO, so if he lives in his office, there is no one higher to tell him, stop wasting your shareholders money. For example, I use to work at a supermarket in Wilmington, Delaware prior to joining the service. When it got really slow in the store and their were no more customers, my boss, even though I had 2-3 more hours left on my work schedule, would send me home. The reasons companies do this is obvious. Why pay a employee to sit there? At the time to me it looked like they were being a-holes and didn't want to give me all my hours...but it's clear to me now that all companies do this to in the long run save millions of dollars yearly...

Eric's productivity with the amount of hours he works should be the main concern to ALL shareholders...not just me...16 hours a day for 365 days? Plus the fact that he has a team of employees who works probably just as long? I'm not saying we should have 10 NA's at this point...what i'm saying is, We should be seeing a linear line of progress right now if they claim to work THAT hard. Winning accounts and losing them and winning accounts and product sitting on shelves should not be happening 5-6 years down the road IMO...Some consistency would do us wonders...and a NA will not magically give us that...

My breakdown months ago should be a better example for you on why we are where we are with the current PPS....You cannot pay your employee's salary with dilution forever...and it has been showing for over a year and a half now...

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=56964026

We could get an NA next week and his pay may no longer be a concern to anyone...not because he deserves it or doesn't...works 16 hours a day or doesn't...it is because his company may then be in the position to tolerate that expense...

Nothing negative about my post...this is pure opinion and realistic views on the everyday trials and tribulations on what happens when CEO's want their cake but haven't produced the goods...(yet)