jpd80 Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 (edited) LINK Oct. 29 (Bloomberg) -- Allan Mulally's hall-of-fame performance as chief executive officer of Ford Motor Co. no doubt gets as much notice at Boeing Corp's headquarters in Chicago as it does at Ford's Dearborn, Michigan, home. Ford hired Mulally in 2006, a year after he was passed over for the top job at Boeing. Instead, the aircraft and defense company hired James McNerney then CEO at 3M Co. Today, Mulally's Ford is screeching ahead without resorting to government bailouts and bankruptcy proceedings as did rivals General Motors Corp and Chrysler Group LLC. Ford this week reported record third-quarter profit of $1.7 billion -- the old high was in 1997 -- and its share of the U.S. light vehicle market was 15.1 percent, up from 13 percent two years before. Boeing meantime is best known for its inability to get its 787 Dreamliner off the ground. Boeing last year wrote off $3.5 billion in costs related to the 787 and to the also-late 747-8 jumbo jet. McNerney says the 787 will be delivered in the first quarter of 2011, almost three years past due. See Boeing thought Mulally was a lifer and wouldn't leave, they had a hold over him with company stock that he would lose if he left. They didn't count on Ford compensating him for the loss. LINK from 2006 The Ford pay package for Mulally comes on top of the $7.4 million that aerospace company Boeing had previously reported paying him for his eight months running that company's commercial aircraft unit before he made the move to Ford at the beginning of September. Mulally's pay package at Ford included a $7.5 million hiring bonus, as well as $11 million that Ford described as an offset for forfeited performance and stock option awards at Boeing. In addition he received $55,469 for relocation costs and temporary housing. His base salary was $666,667, which works out to annual pay of about $2 million. He also received restricted stock grants, which the company valued at $920,404, as well as 3 million stock options valued at $7.8 million. The stock options are not yet exercisable, and they have an exercise price of $8.28, or about 4 percent above current prices. The company had disclosed in a footnote buried on page 228 of an earlier filing with SEC that Mulally saw the value of his stock bonuses increase to $6 million from the originally agreed upon $5 million "after reviewing the company's 2006 performance results and Mr. Mulally's leadership role in progressing his key priorities." I wonder how Boeing feels now..... Edited November 1, 2010 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goinbroke2 Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 Doncha just love the capitalist system where hard work and performance is recognized? :happy feet: "he makes to much money, that's too much for any one person, one person cannot be worth that much" Or my favorite, "how much money is enough" I just hope nobody comes along with deeper pockets, although he does have ford roots. Not sure if it would keep him or not, but it can't hurt. Obviously, this was exactly what ford needed at the time and still needs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 Doncha just love the capitalist system where hard work and performance is recognized? :happy feet: "he makes to much money, that's too much for any one person, one person cannot be worth that much" Or my favorite, "how much money is enough" I just hope nobody comes along with deeper pockets, although he does have ford roots. Not sure if it would keep him or not, but it can't hurt. Obviously, this was exactly what ford needed at the time and still needs. The problem is Mulally gets lumped in with all of the other CEOs who fail and run their companies into the ground or out of business and walk away with golden parachutes. They're obviously not worth their compensation. However, you have to look at the market of available, qualified CEOs and see what that market is paying right now. You either pay for talent at the going rate or lose them to the competition or other industry. How many CEOs do you think could have pulled off what Mulally did? I'm guessing I can count them on two hands and most of them aren't available. Anytime someone makes the argument they someone else makes too much money, I tell them that's what the <insert low paying job> worker thinks about their salary. Would they like to give some of it back? That usually shuts them up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 The problem is Mulally gets lumped in with all of the other CEOs who fail and run their companies into the ground or out of business and walk away with golden parachutes. They're obviously not worth their compensation. However, you have to look at the market of available, qualified CEOs and see what that market is paying right now. You either pay for talent at the going rate or lose them to the competition or other industry. How many CEOs do you think could have pulled off what Mulally did? I'm guessing I can count them on two hands and most of them aren't available. Anytime someone makes the argument they someone else makes too much money, I tell them that's what the <insert low paying job> worker thinks about their salary. Would they like to give some of it back? That usually shuts them up. Pffft! There are many people on this board that could do what Mulally did! They just weren't fortunate enough to have Ford ring them up and offer them the job! </sarcasm> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted November 1, 2010 Author Share Posted November 1, 2010 My point on the OP was that whilst at Boeing, he was being paid the equivalent o $10 million/year and had close to $11 million in stock that was conditional on him staying there until retirement. After 30 years with Boeing, he was passed over for the CEO -a position he probably deserved. I'm glad he was allowed to shine at Ford, lead a team who already had good plans, financing and the support of the owners. While he did not single handedly turn around Ford, he was the glue that made it happen and I suspect, took the plans and changes much further than Ford had originally imagined creating One Ford Globally and gaining global efficiencies thought impossible as little as four years ago.. A good CEO makes it look easy, to most people all he does is walk around smiling and being positive about Ford. The don't see all the behind the scenes stuff that starts at 5.30 am each day and continues well into the evening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzcat Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 Mulally's name gets mentioned quite often on aviation / airliner message boards. Most people now agree that Boeing made a big mistake to let him go. He would have made absolutely certain that 787 delivery was on time the way he whipped Ford in shape and delivered a new Taurus in less than 3 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted November 1, 2010 Author Share Posted November 1, 2010 I remember when Mulally first started at Ford, the people who now heap excessive praise on hs efforts were amongst those dismissing his worth in leading an auto company. Irrespective of any reforms or plans at Ford, Mulally brought a clear discipline, corporate governance and clarity of purpose. Without that culture, no turnaround plan would have been successful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2005GTP Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 just remember, $20 million a movie is never considered too much money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.