One CEO Who Gets It

February 6, 2009 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (29)

The jury’s still out on whether there’s a modest CEO in the land. But there’s at least one very clever CEO: Reed Hastings of Netflix.

In a New York Times op-ed,  Hastings argues that President Obama’s proposal to limit certain CEO pay is “a terrible idea.” Most CEOs probably agree. But instead of the usual bromides about how CEOs are geniuses who deserve every penny they earn, Hastings proposes an alternative: Tax anybody who earns over $1 million – which includes most Fortune 500 CEOs – at 50 percent. Including him.

You can already hear them moaning at the country club. Here’s how Hastings answers the well-endowed doubters: “Some will tell you that would reduce the incentive to earn but I don’t see that as likely. Besides, half of a giant compensation package is still pretty huge, and most of our motivation is the sheer challenge of the job anyway.”

[See 15 companies that might not survive 2009.]

I don’t know if Hastings is right – or what office he’s running for. But I do know that taking this public stance is an imaginative and shrewd business move. Netflix’s customer base may include a few upper-crusters who rush to their keyboards to close their accounts. But Hastings’s online video-rental company caters mostly to ordinary middle-class Americans. Hastings is a media darling who has been featured in dozens of articles, and it’s easy to see why: His populist preaching hits the right tone, for the right audience, at the right time.

Hastings knows something that a lot of CEOs – especially those on Wall Street – still haven’t figured out: These days, it’s more important than ever to form an emotional bond with your customer. That was true before Wall Street cratered, because the Internet has enhanced accountability and knocked down barriers between the people at the top of the food chain and the people at the bottom. It’s even more true now, as titans like Citigroup and General Motors and Bernie Madoff topple and the little guy gets revenge. Or at least a hearing.

[See how Wall Street continues to doom itself.]

The Wall Street fatcats probably thought they were communing with their customers – out at the Hamptons and down in St. Barts. They need to take a broader view and cater to the riffraff every now and then. It’s good for business.

Tags:
Netflix

Reader Comments Read all comments (29)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

Where as I certainly agree with the CEO of Netflix, and his idea for taxing himself as well as other executives 50%, I have to say it's a little offensive to refer to "catering to the RIFFRAFF" now and then as good business!! Translation, the middle classs, or those who aren't CEO's earning a million a year MUST be riffraff!!! Only proving once again, how superior they THINK they are because they have money. How revolting. Vocalizing or even writing such nonsense for an article only proves the old saying "you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear"!! CEO's and the USN writers need to get off their high horse. You may have more money, but are certainly lacking in class!! Enjoy your golf game, while the rest of us are working.

Carri of CO 3:42PM March 12, 2009

Everyone's talking about CEOs and their salaries, and who deserves it, who doesn't, etc. One thing to keep in mind - Netflix is a very profitable company, and Reed Hastings has overseen the efforts of "the board" to make a company profitable. Whether or not he started his company from scratch, he actually puts his time and energy into this organization that has made a great product available and affordable to much more of the population than other CEOs have ever even considered doing before. Hastings may not be Mother Theresa, but he has made a one-time contribution to society that will forever change how everyone in this country obtains their favorite movies, which has made many people happy, and at the same time is making a profit. He deserves the money he's making from his hard work, and if he's making a public announcement that our Goverment should take half of his salary, it's his choice to make.

Reed Hastings worked hard for what he has, and as this is happening, I see so many Americans sit on unemployment or other means of wage compensation when all they do is sit around all day or night making no contribution to society. While others actually look for work, these people are the ones who have the "entitlement" mindset and attitude. These people are the ones who do nothing, but want everything. I personally work three jobs (one full-time and two part-time) to earn what I have in life. I also make charitable contributions of monetary means as well as my own time and skills to help others. In the meantime, I find it very difficult to be able to buy a house, let alone afford one, as I can only afford to rent at the current time, yet I continue to educate myself to move up and do bigger and better things. Helping others only means something of voluntary, and if forced, becomes socialism. Why should people like me who bust our rumps to advance in life be forced by our Goverment or any other conformity to give our hard-earned money to deadbeats who don't want to work and/or take out loans that they know they cannot afford? Darwin was right when he wrote of his theory of evolution. I agree that the strong should survive (those that choose to overcome), and those who are week (these days, lazy) should fall behind and rot away. Anybody can make something great of themselves and charitably help others. They just need to put some effort into their actions.

I'm not Republican, just a very conservative individual who belives that America is deteriorating because many people in this once great country think they are entitled to everything great, yet they don't want to work for it. Great things don't grow on trees. Everyone must work hard for what they have, and educate themselves to grow.

Spoind of MI 1:07PM February 24, 2009

At one time bonus money was awarded as appreciation for jobs performed very well, actually in excess of the norm. Now it appears as if it is merely an entitlement (which we all condemn as negative) for something unknown - it certainly is not for a job well done or even the norm or taxpayers would not be handling the rescue tasks of these folks; it cannot be for extraordinary intelligence or skill as it doesn't seem like they ever put it to any use. Corporate bankruptcies continue escalating at an alarming rate. A few years ago, under the former administration, when consumer bankruptcies were escalating, congress stepped in and slammed the brakes on that train because credit card companies professed that abuse of the system was rampant - those same companies and banks standing behind the credit companies were awarded then - not for working with troubled consumers but for working with favored lobby groups...and then the credit card companies returned to the same practices which allowed and encouraged consumers to follow the same path to overspending. Now, consumers and the nation are left with the remains of corporate bankruptcies.

Now, everyone is excited and focused about corporate compensation - for inspiration - why don't these giants look across the ocean to Japan Air Lines - a lesson that should be adapted to US companies. Any company receiving federal dollars of any kind - including bankruptcy relief must be required to start cost cutting measures at the top - if blue collar jobs are being eliminated then white collar jobs will need to be eliminated or whit3e collar workers placed in blue collar positions at blue collar pay levels to pick up the slack; if blue collar wages are being reduced that can only happen if first white collar executives have taken similar or greater cuts in compensation. For too long, we, as a society, have placed huge value on the top and little value on the bottom. We need to look at the job and the performance of that job to determine its value - not completely on the degree required to get the job. It would seem that the best gourmet meal would be much more expensive if the dishwasher wasn't doing his job and the executive chef had to perform all the tasks in the kitchen...so in this circumstance the lowest paid person is in reality the most critical. Could this be so in others? So, how would you like your eggs benedict which will be served on our finest paper plate?

mellie of TX 10:35AM February 24, 2009

Rick Newman

Rick Newman

The global economy is mysterious, even scary. Chief Business Correspondent Rick Newman connects the dots. In addition to his writing for U.S. News, Rick is the co-author of two books: Firefight: Inside the Battle to Save the Pentagon on 9/11, and Bury Us Upside Down: The Misty Pilots and the Secret Battle for the Ho Chi Minh Trail.


Read Rick's latest blog entries here.

advertisement

advertisement