Bill Daglish - I'd call it conditioned response
Let's say you hire someone to clean your house and they do a great job of cleaning, but some of your liquor disappears. Still, it wasn't much and it was worth it. You hire them again and the same thing happens. You hire them again and when they notice that the bar is running low, they ask you for the keys to the wine cellar. Saying no is not a knee jerk reaction. Saying yes is enabling a jerk to knee you.
I appreciate all the DD you put out on IDCC, and in fact your old website gave me a great head start and pointed me towards what I needed to do my own DD and led me to invest in IDCC. However, I have to respectfully disagree on this.
You call it a knee jerk reaction. That indicates we are all against any options for anyone at any time. I think that is a gross misreading of most of the opponents of this proposal. We are saying enough is enough and this is too much. Take what you earned when you've earned it, not all you can get as soon as you can get it.
I am not saying management has not done good work. They've added engineers while others in the industry have downsized. They kept the balance sheet strong and avoided debt. They never over hyped the company or made wild predictions. Doing a good job deserves a good pay check, which would include an option package. I believe managements compensation is already far beyond fair. A disproportionate share of options goes to the management team, putting them ahead of the productive employees. The options transfer equity from outside shareholders to management far beyond the value they've added to the company. Again I ask, is there anyone who thinks anyone in management will walk away if they don't get any increase in their compensation, and if they did it that IDCC would be materially worse off?
