Because our system is corrupt. This is why we need regulations. There are clearly not adequate regulations on CEO compensation to prevent fraud, thus inadvertently encouraging fraud.
I did a term paper case study on the B 737 Max, and it wasn't just some minor slip up. There were systemic failures in decision making from the top down. It's a situation where compromise after compromise had to be deliberately made before this was even possible. It was really shocking diving into it. Well... not that shocking, but you know what I mean. Also, with the success of engineers, I'm optimistic! lol. Did 6+ years as a GIS technician and electrical engineering and now I'm wrapping up school for a degree in logistics management.
Another reason why many of the Executives who come from consulting firms end up tanking businesses is mindset. If you lookup the types of questions that new consultants are asked during job interviews at management consulting firms, they way they want you to dissect the case problems tend to be clinical, narrow in scope, and a reflection of what s taught in Business Administration classes. The level of rigidity in problem solving prioritizes the old school ways of conducting business rather than a more dynamic, modernized approach to business development and problem solving. In other words, management consultants tend to stick to industry approved methods (the same methods that have been proven to lead to failure literally thousands of times over by now). So you end up with nepotism reinforcing failed practices and practical, unconventional methods are usually shunned or ignored.
Executives, firms, businesses, mindsets, etc. are fictional. If youre forced to behave in ways lied about with the fiction of/that includes job interviews..?
Did you work for a firm or just interview? Makes sense an interview for new grad would be modeled after what they learned in school. They want to see that you can take direction.
@@TimeQuxxn firms are fictional. Are you asking if someone was kept as a slave and [marketed] as part of a firm/forced to behave in ways [marketed] as interviewing at a firm?
A bricklayer applies for a new job. During the interview, he asks: "If I build the wall so crooked that the whole house collapses, how many million dollars in compensation will I get?" Answer: "Ahh, you're a former manager!"
The only reason why your joke doesn't work is that an interview in construction looks like this: - when can you start? - now - ok see you tomorrow at 6 I'll text you the address
@@jimmy13morrison not true at all. Have you ever laid brick in your life? It requires a high level of skill & they won’t hire you without experience unless you are hired for nepotism in which case you won’t be interviewed anyways..
@baileymaloney1961 no im a carpenter and every interview i got looks like what i stated. Your credentials are looked at on your first day if you don't know what your doing and it doesn't look like you'll pick it up you're fired before your first break
Failing upwards is easier they higher you go. I seen a new ceo brought in to a previous company to work with, get investors hyped about a new target market and product. Do ZERO market research to actually check if those new clients want, need, or are suitable for this. Almost a year later the new head of sales resigned after 3 months, we never sold anything because the clients would make £100 a year extra which is way less than their time invested in meetings. The CEO is now a CEO at abother company. The Yes man executives also moved on to another senior position. This was my first graduate company and it made me realise how fucked the business world is and there is no integrity there.
@@perfectallycromulent like in the video there are many good CEOs in stable companies for long time. Remember Pareto principle. A few people do most the work
@@lime148 the problems outlined in this video describe a corrupt, decadent, and nepotistic elite business class. They do serve a role, that is organizing labor. Both elites and workers can be corrupt and decadent, they both are crucial to the functioning of society, and they should hold themselves to high standards and work together to achieve the best results.
This entire video can basically sum up by a long time belief that I've had, which is that America and big business will constantly yammer and strut around about capitalism...until they actually have to do capitalism. I'll still never forget how much US automotive companies were constantly putting down people with social problems saying that businesses should just fail or succeed as the market dictates and then in 2008 absolutely begged to the government for socialist handouts to avoid them from collapsing. That is truly the year that the entire American bubble concept of "good" capitalism died.
For you, at least. Regrettably, many others still haven't caught on. >.o Which is bewildering, how long have people been saying "They don't make them like they used to," and complain about irreparable products designed with an eye fixed squarely on planned obsolescence, yet not connect the dots? But you keep people busy, in a crisis or at risk thereof, and neither the media, nor society overall, seem keen to pause and reflect. We sure seem to go well out of our way to avoid it. x.x
It's actually insane how ardently they defend capitalism when literally none of them want to play by the rules they claim to defend. They would literally bring back slavery to save a few dollars.
And I just saw a video that the NFL is the most socialist sports league in the world but also the most rich. We really need to rethink capitalism or the bottom 99% will suffer even more
I was just talking about this with my little brothers who's just entering the workforce, I said become a manager as soon as you can and you're a part of the management class, you can go anywhere as a manager even if you dont know the industry, people assume managers could manage anywhere, you succeed in one place you get offered sign on bonuses to go elsewhere, if it doesnt work out? They dont care and you move on.
May not be great advice since I'm reading more articles lately about how tech companies aren't seeing the value of managers and instead opt for project managers and tech leads to guide their teams. May be a matter of time before this flows outward since companies are pretty unoriginal and copy each others's safe ideas.
@@bunk95 naw, best managers treat thoee under their care as people, funny enough, it gives you the edge. Work isnt slavery, its merely selling your time for money, value yourself and value others. 1. Better to have 50 people singing your praises, your numbers will go up as well or higher than grinding your people to dust and having nothing but numbers and knives at your back. 2. Value your time, value other peoples time and everyone should aspire to move up, there's always someone there to take the low level employees place, a good manager will have former employees recommending people work there just because it was a great experience.
@@j.reinholme project management is a great skill, one you can get with a course, tech lead naturally follows, but if you are outside of tech, being a manager gives you the experience, the title and lends more weight to a project management designation. Flexibility and capability is the name of the game.
True, but beware, there is a level of management that is the sacrificial lamb level. The managers just above those on the floor are essential to the company. You will never be fired if you are decent. Good management here makes a huge difference. The managers just above this are generally throw-away. They are not critical and are mainly slaves to their boss. They are glorified compilers, compiling data for spreadsheets and power points presentations so their boss looks good during meetings with big muckitimucks. The compilers can easily be chopped if the balance sheet doesn't look good and they can also be the fall guy if their boss screws something up. You go the management route, you have to go through the second level management, but you have to get to the third as quickly as possible. Once in the third level you are part of the club and then just don't be an idiot and always go with the Company Narrative even if everything is burning around you.
Its like the middle ages again A captured king taken on the field of a military disaster can expect a mansion for a prison with servants and silk sheets
There's one difference: a fired CEO just goes to another company. A king getting removed from his post had a high chance of also getting his head removed. And even if not, they rarely got embraced by someone else with open arms.
Here me out... if the CEO gets paid so much because it is such a hard job, how can we reasonably assume a CEO can be the head of SIX companies? Like, there's absolutely no way a CEO is truly doing valuable work when splitting their attention between 6 companies.
@@Mobius_Pizza oh, I'm confusing absolutely nothing. You're telling me that the impact Musk, a human person with a monkey brain, can hold down the role of CEO at 6 highly valued companies and producing the same impact that, say... 6 CEOs, one at each company, could? There is no universe in which he alone can have that much measurable impact to reasonably believe he alone brings more value, splitting his time 6 ways, than just hiring another person who is equally as qualified. Btw, and unrelated, janitors are far more useful than CEOs.
At this point, Elon Musk is a brand that gullible investors fawn over. I bet if he stepped down as CEO for Tesla would lose hundreds of billions in market value so in that sense he provides a lot of value to these companies.
@@tomseiple3280 At this point, Musk probably knows more about manufacturing than anyone alive on the planet. And not just manufacturing. He said it himself, and who can question such a brilliant man with a phone book-sized list of great ideas, achievements and predictions he did?!
@tomseiple3280 don't think musk is a good example all the companies he ran he created from the ground up. This video is referring to people who get put in charge of companies not people who built them..
there is this misconception that medieval rulers ruled by "bloodright" that was made up at the end of the middle ages to retroactively justify their 500 years rule, the truth is that they were just private citizens who monopolized all economic activity in their area of influence over time (cause when you are big and powerful, it is pretty easy to eat all the other small fish in the pond over the passing of generations.) so worse, they are thew OLD nobility coming back, maybe not now, but 150 years from now CEO will be a hereditary title (again with the fun facts, duke was not an hereditary title for like a long time, this was ORIGINALLY also sold to people as a form of meritocracy, but nepotism finds a way)
This is fairly accurate. The old nobility got to their rank through warfare. They could muster an army based on their experience and personality. If a commoner said "follow me to the Holy Land" they would be laughed at. Everyone can be envious and despise the nobility for their unearned rank, and it can seem undeserved when they end up being horrible warriors and strategists, but fact remains that no one is following non-nobility into battle and no one is hiring non-CEOs to run their company either.
No. Not since the definition of ‘nobility’ includes some aspect of morality and ethics, obligation to do right conferred by your position of privilege, etc.
The power imbalance in corporate America's hierarchical structure is indeed alarming. As you pointed out, the experience paradox and the golden parachute phenomenon worsen this issue. Corporate ethics and accountability need an urgent overhaul to ensure fair practices and justice for all stakeholders.
yes, those CEO should work at their company Call Center first, learn some common sense first. getting used as a company whipping boy. because nowadays we got a lot of Tone Deaf and Brain dead Announcement took by those CEO that causing an all out Outrage. they think that their own insider joke will makes everyone laugh, but no, it offend everyone even more, it shows how detached and tone deaf those people can be
@@jensenraylight8011that's very good idea. I work in customer support (tech company). The company's CEO and CTO used to respond to clients in support tickets when the company was much smaller (I actually found quite a few messages and tickets from both of them). I can very honestly say the company I work for has an awesome CEO and CTO; they are the founders as well. The company is not small anymore but that positive spirit still lives on.
Requires a massive system overhaul that can really hurt a lot of folks, not saying we shouldn’t but be careful with what you wish, some certain groups wished somewhat similar things in the 20th century and welp
This actually just happened in my company recently. An executive in one of our business units was held responsible for $47 million dollars of losses in one quarter. He was fired.... Then hired as CFO for another firm in our industry.
The German government under Merkel had the exponential McKinsey problem, too. They started with a few McKinsey consultants who then consulted to hire more McKinsey consultants.
Good choice, i work for a pretty huge corporation today in my region of the world, but the business culture is very good, almost like the one in a good small to medium one and a large part of that is a very high ratio of internal promotions to external hires up to and including the CEO that began as a regular sales floor guy.
I worked in a company like that. The ones who were incompetent and wanted control over their more competent work-buddies got the promotions. Obviously, because that's how it works everywhere. How the culture has changed such that you get praised for blaming others for your problems and chastised for doing actual work. Restricting promotion to 'from within' poisons the corporate culture.
The Boing CEO may not have been directly in charge of the department of building the MAX planes but his position definitely influenced the reason why the planes were defective and deadly. Under his direction they were incentivizing profits over safety, cutting corners in order to compete with Airbus to produce these planes, rushing the process and giving workers crazy deadlines without support. The workers who spoke up were often ignored, may of the long timers left because they knew this was destined for disaster. The main issue with Boing is the took a heavily complicated engineering company and turned it over the essential hedge fund managers that care about nothing more then profits and stock options.
A person with no insight into the actual process of baking the bread but just trying to pull levers to increase performance indicators, then they get surprised when unseen variables suddenly become a problem when they pushed the bakery to the limit
Mary Barra has been running GM into the ground for years and getting record compensation every year for it. She finally announced yesterday GM would build hybrids again instead of going 100% on EVs and the stock jumped almost 10% - biggest gain since shes been CEO, and all because she backtracked on her main strategy.
It's confusing why she hasn't been sacked. She's such an obviously incompetent CEO. GM is performing horribly and has been since she took the reigns. For whatever reason, the shareholder/board standards for her are rock bottom.
@@sdm6054 Well part of it is definitely the 10.5 billion stock buyback she did to bribe the board by raising the stock price immediately after her disastrous UAW deal. Because, y'know, that's a responsible use of a line of credit the company secured in case the strike went on for a longer time.
As a car and driving enthusiast, it's actually baffling to see companies go electric only when hybrids or perhaps hydrogen fuel cells are much easier to adapt current infrastructure to... and offer better long-term product differentiation. I am also an engineering student and it makes me cringe to hear people talk about EVs being the future because they just aren't. Not with the current battery technology and the needs of the average driver. Can't imagine EVs will ever get cheaper and buying used for EVs is a huge gamble because of battery degradation.
@@MidnightGreen4649 man hydrogen is way worse lol. You need entirely new gas station infrastructure that's much harder to build than either current gas stations or EV chargers due to the pressurized nature of the fuel. Synthetic or biofuels that are carbon neutral/negative are definitely the way to go. They're viable and use existing infrastructure. Other than that though I agree with you
If anyone's looking for a ceo, I have absolutely no experience in anything above entry level jobs, but I can guarantee a profit for the first year no matter what the business is.
@@DrDreDay1724dont forget the minimum 500 million dollars or something like that required to ensure you aren't instantly devoured or suffocated by the already established companies in whatever industry
The more I see of modern capitalism - the more convinced I become that the system only works if companies are allowed to fail. The current system of bailouts, low interest rates, money-printing, lobbying and massive government intervention in the economy: entrenches corruption and incompetence.
Once you're a business owner of a small company or medium sized at best, you are definetely "allowed" to fail. I think this holds true for most businesses except those that are too big to fail. But I agree with you, if big banks, automotives etc. really had only one live as every one else, they'd for sure approach things differently.
The government should limit and go against compagnies, not with it. Public compagnies should never be government backed. Public compagnies just lobbies their way into corrupting the government. . And tax payers pays for bailout ounce a compagny gets too greeedy and fucks up.
Capitalism inherently results in certain companies gaining favors from the government. It starts with simple things, like how not every company is able to leverage the most out of the ability to subsidize their infrastructure costs onto the people at large(transportation especially), and over time, as the government relies more and more on private firms to distribute essential services and keep the economy afloat, the largest of these firms naturally gain political influence which they use to transform the economy to favor themselves more, until they are so installed they cannot easily be removed without harming the society at large. Despite its mythology, capitalism's history has never demonstrated a capability of truly 'free' markets - The winners have always been defined by those most able to externalize costs through government policy and subsidy. This naturally results in 'too-big-to-fail' companies who can hold the entire nation at gunpoint should they be at risk.
"CEO's know that they can eventually be blamed for a scandal they didn't have direct control over", I disagree, shit rolls down hill. If the Boeing CEO was known for getting projects off the drawing board and into the sky, it's entirely possible that his push to get new aircraft launched was a prime factor in QC being overlooked and those black boxes being buggy. Either way, the CEO runs the company, they have ultimate ownership and decision making power over everything that occurs in that company. If a ship sinks, the captain is responsible, in one way or another.
By all I've heard, Boeing in particular had a drastic internal shift away from QC and good engineering and towards cost cutting and maximizing profits after the McDonnell Douglas merger, which I believe also included much of the upper leadership of McDonnell Douglas (including the CEO) taking over those positions in Boeing, so yes, the Boeing example is probably the best example of a CEO being quite directly responsible for a scandal that may not appear to be his fault at a glance.
That's the shareholders. The people at the very top that decide what a company does are the shareholders. The CEO is basically nothing but a figurehead that says what the shareholders want to hear and does what they want done.
I twitched when you said "experience obsession"... but that's exactly what's happening to me right now. I'm trying to get back into my old profession and either never get so much as a rejection or get asked straight up "Do you have 3-5 years experience running a specific brand of a specific machine and are you willing to work overtime for minimum wage?" Dude, wtf. You're not going to find that guy and if you do then he won't work for what you're offering. I have demonstrated years experience of learning dozens of machines from many different perspectives, from operator to engineering and process improvement. Now I'm getting ghosted for glorified button pushing. What the actual fuck is happening!? Also, why are there so many managers? I interviewed at one place that gave a nice tour. Their office was almost as big as production. They had multiple "departments" with their own "managers" despite only like 10 people being on the production floor and half of those machines were empty! AND they had an HR department. What do these people do all day!?
That's why I'm a soldier. No matter who comes in, as long as you treat yourself and everyone else with utmost integrity and dedication, they'll take you on and train you.
Just lie about having the experience. Managers lie all the time to potential employees about their future responsibilities, progressions and salary increases. It is only fair to lie back as well
with all that experience why do you not own any of those machines and own a company doing that???? when you are young that's why you get a job, by your 30's you are expected to quit and start up a competing business doing some niche you discovered.
IMO it starts at the mid level of management. I've seen 2 examples of managers breaking rules line employees would be fired for. After a certain rank being a sycophant mattered more than a work ethic.
People fixate on execs but this problem reaches pretty far down the corporate ladder. At some point I realized that awareness surrounding even a low level manager's competency is widespread. The problem is that for one reason or another everyone believes their hands are tied. It often comes down to something as mundane as nobody wanting to stir the pot, but often it's tied to stuff like interpersonal relationships. Even empathy is a factor, triggered by the perception that job loss would hit these people harder than a low level worker. Plus, at the end of the day, everyone just assumes that the replacement wouldn't necessarily be any better. I'm not justifying any of this, because I think it's ridiculous, but it needs pointing out that this is usually less conspiratorial than people are apt to believe. Personally, I believe this problem stifles social and economic mobility for those who deserve to climb the ladder. Not that I think it's a zero sum game, but I don't think there's anything wrong with those higher up dropping a few rungs if they screw up. They shouldn't be sheltered.
Society also has this attitude of "if a youngling fails, big deal, they have their whole life to make it up once again" that biases their response to a senior getting let go.
It is because success as an executive is about relationships. Not about talent or driving value for the company. Those are only useful to the extent that it helps you with your relationships
While I do dislike that the method chosen for a good CEO is ...shareholder returns (Regularly firing your staff will increase returns, but you eventually run out of staff) If so far we learn, that CEOs dont even do their Job well for the shareholders, wouldnt it make more sense to either change the CEO job, remove it altogether or automate it. CEOs are really expensive, when you compare it to staff that work on the product itself.
@@TheNikoNikthey were smart enough to do it. Mafia's strategy was to bribe people to ignore the rules. It never dawned on them to change the rules so government protected what they did at taxpayer expense.
In other words: 1. "Bad experience is better than NO experience" (they often don't want to *promote* someone to CEO) 2. Anyone who has CEO experience but isn't currently a CEO is likely either retired or was booted from a prior company. The former are less likely to want to become a CEO again.
The incoming CEO in my job has worked his way up through the company. He makes mistakes but he's humble so I have great confidence in him. I'd much rather that than someone who doesn't know anyone or anything about the company.
When investing, I look on outside hires for executive positions with a lot of suspicion. I always guessed it was because a board member wanted to get his crony in and this video helps confirm that for me. Why would you NOT just promote those who've been with the company and know it's business for decades? Oh because it would cause a cascade of lower vacancies? Sounds lazy. Nothing worth doing is going to be easy.
My wife is the executive assistant for the CEO of a large national company. Through that relation I’ve gotten to know this man on a personal level quite well. It’s confirmed my existing belief that top level success is almost entirely based on “experience”, connections, and recruitment savvy. The guy is honestly nice as can be, but he’s also kind of an idiot. If you didn’t know any better you could mistake him for any other shmuck you’d bump into at your local bar. He’s basically just job hopped from position to position before landing where he’s currently at.
If you want to fix the way CEOs run business you simply make the law that if they bankrupt the company, then the C suite employees of that company at that time, or who can be legally tied to the downfall even after they leave, should be stripped of everything they own. No bonuses, no stocks, take everything. Maybe then when they know everything they have is on the line they might not drive these companies into the ground because they actually have skin in the game. Ill chuck in all the board of directors and vice this and that levels as well.
Problem is anyone competent would too be scared to risk accepting such a dangerous contract. Anything could happen, the company could fail because some new technical innovation elsewhere makes their business model redundant etc. The only people to accept a CEO position in that situation would be a blithering idiot who doesn't understand the CEO is actually the 'fall guy' position.
I worked in a Fortune 100 company in logistics and supply chain dept. The new manager of that department didn't know what it was a LCL shipment and was criticizing why the lead time was so long for this type of shipment. Notice that we started using this type of shipping to save on shipping costs and it was their instruction to save cost as priority, not because we liked it. I told him either you save money or either you save time; you can't expect paying way less and hope for a fast and better service 😂... Is like wanting a Mercedez and paying for a Kia. I am not even graduated in this field and understood the basics. How a f ing manager of said department don't know the basics... This type of guys are the ones that end up being promoted. At the end, I just left. They kept asking for KPIs that contradicted themselves. If you improved some KPIs, they affected others since they had an inverse correlation. So, no matter what you did, you would end up in a bad position.
Why does the one who makes the decision get better treatment than those who don't? That's why unionizing was pretty much always effective in getting better conditions because with a union you can just easily collectively stop working and put pressure on management
In the netherlands we've had the same guy as prime minister for like 15 years, he and his predecessor ruined everything we know and love. People genuinely hate him with a burning passion. His next job? Head of NATO defence force. Talk about bodyguards! I have a feeling he heard about what happened to Mr. Shinzo Abe..
@@alicianieto2822 The art of compromise and dirty, under-the-table deals, that's how. Rutte (the guy OP is talking about) was good at identifying personal interests of politicians of all kinds and making sure they can be fulfilled, which guaranteed that the Dutch super-fragmented political landscape (needing 5-6 parties, often not from ideologically-adjacent stances, to form the Government) will keep Rutte in power.
@@alicianieto2822 He definitely, much like berlusconi, has loyal followers mostly of the home and business owning kind. Very good at never solving anything but presenting himself as the only solution to anything. "Let's sell all our national infrastructure to private industry, I'll be rich and elite for life, the country will come to a standstill and everything will get more expensive but there will be 500 new jobs!" *companies hire Ivy League expats from overseas not locals* *rich expats overpay and ruin what is left of the housing market* *VVD-voting home owners see their house prices increasing* *normal everyday people no longer able to gain equity* "everybody wins!"
Jesus christ. You guys have a Trudeau/Biden backed clown that's been running the clown show since 2010. This is exactly what happens without term limits. Elite only like to hire themselves, even if their incompetent while at it. Its simply how the world works.
Dead serious when thinking that the first jobs that should be replaced by AIs are the CEOs: they are ultraexpensive, they tend to repeat the same formulas to maximize profit, and its not like they are famous for their human empathy.
An investor told me that he'd rather put money in a company where its manager experienced failure than in a company run by a new CEO with a squeaky clean record. The main reason: experience with a managerial hardship, which means a higher probability of solving a severe problem within the company.
No golden parachutes for all the employees laid off due to c-suite poor decisions. And layoffs to boost the stock price rather than increasing actual productivity or innovate something useful
I have a PhD in biochemistry and 22 years experience and failed to find a new job after being laid off 8 months ago. If experience mattered in my case this would have never happened to me.
@@MisterTutor2010 That's shitty, but I wonder how many companies just don't even give an interview because they assume that someone with a PhD and 22 years experience will be really expensive.
If you're that well educated, nobody would blame you for lying on a job resume. Especially since these corporate robber barrons lie to us via the media 24/7. Lie to them and then screw them over. See how they like it!
@@MisterTutor2010at that level of experience you should be leaning towards managing in the STEM field surely if you expand beyond biochemistry you would be able to find a position.
antimonopoly regulations enforcement are not efficient to provide protection against creation of monstrous corporations and conglomerates at expense of small businesses. Less companies, less CEO candidates with experience as CEOs with higher packages.
CEO: Hey if I get fired can you give me 3 months notice and a 60 million bonus Corporate: No problem, how about another 60 million in stocks as well. Employee: If I get fired can you let me know a week or so ahead of time so I can get something lined up? Corporate: You'd better start cleaning out your desk right now, today is your last day.
The best CEO will be one who founded the company. He will often care on a deeper level than just money, plus he has build the success of the company himself.
Experience matters way less than everyone thinks for a simple reason: every working place is different. Not only your tasks could be different but even smaller details like, how many breaks you have, your coworkers' or boss' schedules, the location of the company and such could render whole years of experience meaningless. What matters the most is your WILLINGNESS TO LEARN
Youre the only business channel I watch because you are genuinely intelligent and understand things from a very analytical standpoint. Some business dumbassess think that they know everything about money because they got lucky selling their meme coins.
I personally know a company executive who has trashed a DOD contractor locally in mere years by blowing up their main money making machine by running it incorrectly and illegally abusing covid payment protection program loans, and now he is golden parachuting into an even larger company after costing our local economy hundreds of jobs and hurting our whole city. This shit is disgusting.
The role of "CEO" and "C-suite executive" should never have become a specific type of career or job to the point where people can say they're a CEO looking for another job as a CEO. It should have always remained as merely a position within a company to fill.
Well deserved for those that took business management and administration lessons. I've been literally rejected from my current competitor that wasted 8+ years on useless college lessons and I am being very generous calling him a valid competitor by taking in consideration his low personal income/cash flow.
All engineers know that the World would be a better place if run by engineers - but hey, it's about the journey - and that means making life hard for the 99%
I think having everything run by people from any single field is a bad idea, no matter what it is. The best stuff happens when you bring together people from diverse backgrounds. But no, instead we have everyone in business being there because they've done an MBA, all learning the same ideas from a single narrow view of the world. And you can add politicians to that as well, with so many of them studying the same subjects and then become career politicians. But yeah, the general issue is having people in charge of companies who are just experts in 'business' rather than experts in the actual thing the business does. That's why you have someone getting fired from a media company and the next month they're being hired by a pharmaceutical company or an energy company.
@@joepiekltrue to some extent. I work in Oil and Gas in Canada where 90% of CEO’s have Engineering degrees but eventually they turn into your average CEO and have forgotten everything about how to do the job and are just all about profit. Once you hit that level they are just recycled and move from company to company.
@@babajid I don't think that's true. It's more about how easy it is to have certain conversations. I work in education, and it's much easier to have those conversations with managers who were once teachers than it is to have it with people who have been parachuted in from another industry. I wouldn't trust our regional manager to come in a teach my classes, but I know I can discuss academic issues with her.
I'm an engineer and I've been put through hell for months because the engineers in management two levels above me were too socially awkward to talk to each other. So I do not necessarily agree with that. I'd rather work for an engineer than a marketing goon any day though.
@@allorfh2495 It's basically an American tech bro who has a remote job and travels to -poorer- other countries in order to take advantage of the lower COL.
Because the main task of a CEO is to be the scapegoat. In most fuck ups they have no idea what actually happened and it was a genuine mistake in middle management. But those guys actually know how to do their job, so you need a public representative that can take the blame in order to cool emotions and keep the brand name clean.
I’m working as a Specialist and I’m getting lots of job offers on LinkedIn offering me the exact same position at another firms. I never received an upgraded title offer to join a different company. Also at my current workplace; they literally hired two managers that I’m supposed to be supporting in what we do, even though I have 5 years of experience as a specialist in the exact thing and they have 0 experience, just that they came from external and already held managerial titles at previous workplaces. I even have MBA degree but that doesn’t seem to count. How do I ever get to a higher level?
Present yourself as you're of a higher level, recruiters don't really have a way to check and if you have as much experience as you claim to have, you could easily pass as a level up. The quickest way up the corporate ladder is by jumping from a job to job, lending the one-title-higher in seniority than the previous.
I'd argue that someone with 1-2 years experience in any job does not perform worse than someone with 10+ years. Most jobs can be learned in under a year. From experience in leadership roles character and passion is always a better indicator of performance than experience
Your first point is just not true - any STEM related job, you never stop getting better at it until you physically can't do it. For leadership, character and passion may count, but judging character before taking someone on is very difficult.
I disagree, especially for knowledge work. There’s so many problems that you run into so infrequently that it takes many years to see the forest through the trees
@@ZodiacDating You might get better at your job with time but I've seen kids out of university perform way better than more experienced collegues. I work in the environmental conservation field
Outside of unskilled labor and basic service industry jobs your claim is patently untrue. All too often I've seen the problems caused by inexperience. So roughly speaking I'd say five years to start getting a handle on things and a decade to be proficient. And that assumes quality experience because in the wrong workplace you'll either languish or pick up some very bad habits.
Holy shit, there was a policy at Boeing to not put safety complaints in writing! To say "the CEO was fired for something, he didn't had any controll over" is just wrong.
I had a manager who is now a VP at the place and he was genuinely a nice guy, but a massive idiot. He was so dead set on certain things despite them just being bad ideas. Failed upwards for sure
@HowMoneyWorks love your videos but I want to know how you do these edits? Is it just premier and after effects and a shit ton of tedium and time? If your news letter shares some of your tips and tricks on your editing style, I'd sign up for it!
Would this not create a failing system? Ive seen it time and time again with gaming companies. A CEO that destroyed one game went on to become CEO of another and made exactly the same mistakes and destroyed that next game.
4:31 It's a stretch to call billion dollar CEOs "workers". They stay afloat through the massive wealth they have accumulated, so they belong to the owning class. This division is one of the most fundamental ones in our society, don't dilute it any further.
The prediction of a 32% business failure rate in 2024 suggests a challenging landscape ahead. Factors contributing to this potential "business apocalypse" should be carefully analyzed, including economic trends, industry shifts, and the impact of global events. Adaptability and strategic planning will be crucial for companies navigating these uncertain times.
Thank you for this tip. It was easy to find your coach. Did my due diligence on her before scheduling a phone call with her. She seems proficient considering her resume.
That’s Lorem Ipsum - meaningless text used as a placeholder, usually in typography and design - for example, to understand how a certain amount of text would look on paper or on the website. Here - used to create a more realistic impression of a newspaper, since most video viewers would just read the large title before the scene changes.
Elon Musk just got a 2018 Tesla $55 billion compensation voided by the Democrat appointed Delaware judge!😂 The judge had a problem with Musk running 6 companies simultaneously too! She was the same judge that force Musk to buy Twitter too!😮 Please, she thought the compensation amount was too much!😬
Its the fraternity method like college. The 5 firms that the video mention about is all about connections but these connections are nearly impossible to get unless you have social development in C-suite.
I reckon we should start hiring from middle managers. If they have the skill to be a middle manager, they have the skill to be an executive. There are a lot more of them, which means we can pay them less.
I like how the previous founders and ceo of Twitter forced Elon Musk to buy at a high price, just to criticize him on the way he handles the company once they had the cash from the buyout.
I've heard about this. CEOs usually don't last too long. As you get promoted you might find a really big problem that probably has preceded your predecessor or was created by him. If you're the chief of a department when you find this problem, it can affect that department. If you're the chief executive officer....it can affect the whole company. When you're a chief of the department you can try to keep it from getting worse until you get promoted again or you can transfer, if you're the CEO....you need to keep it from getting worse or destroying the company until you retire. There's less room for escape when you're the chief executive officer. This is one of the reasons why CEOs don't last too long and why they negotiate fantastic severance deals. The other issue is that after being fired from a big company.....there's a big chance that your career is over so that's your nest egg for retirement. New jobs as CEO at another company might not pay as much so you have to be careful. Regarding Musk, he got himself in a bad spot. The thing is, like you've said, Musk already claims to develop AI outside of Tesla. This might actually make the decision to oust Musk for Tesla easier. It is worth reminding that Musk's stunts at Twitter got PRECISELY the people or the type of people he needed for AI to quit or just fired them. Now with xAI, I really wonder who is working for him and under what conditions. Those guys probably barely have to raise a finger a month and get paid and they probably got Musk to pay them a nonrefundable some in advance. Basically, if he fires them, he loses that money. Worth mentioning that Tesla hasn't seen any improvements when it comes to self driving in years and DOJO, the supercomputer that was supposed to help refine FSD, doesn't work. The robotics thing is in infancy at best. Without Musk, Tesla might actually have a decent chance of NOT going bankrupt. Worth mentioning that Musk asked to have 2 classes of share, like Google or Facebook, but that's not going to happen because it would require to make some fundamental changes that would be difficult to do. This is not Musk's first clash with other Tesla shareholders. In fact recently he lost his $50 billion compensation package.
There's a practical reason too: if a company destroys a former CEO, they are signaling the market that they don't forgot mistakes and people with the skills and mindset to become CEO will not apply for the job. I worked in a company that had 8 acting CEOs in a year. The reason is the company was privately owned and the owner was sanguineous. Any smart person in the market started to avoid working in strategic positions in the company because they knew it would be risky and possibly damaging to their carriers, prestige, images, etc.
This is why average people who have no chance in hell of being rich need to stop idolizing these guys, and especially stop pulling up the "job creator" rhetoric. It's abundantly clear there is no "family" at the workplace, and labor is an expensive annoyance these guys would love to get rid of. People need to stop being "temporarily embarrassed millionaires", living in delusion that they'll be rich one day, even the guys who started businesses and might be doing decently locally...you more than likely won't be Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos one day, so stop trying to equate yourself as one of them. We also need to push to stop measuring our economy based on Wall Street. Start measuring general quality of life and get the hard truth on how society is doing.
Check out Opera Browser here: opr.as/Opera-browser-HowMoneyWorks
best browser!
Because our system is corrupt. This is why we need regulations. There are clearly not adequate regulations on CEO compensation to prevent fraud, thus inadvertently encouraging fraud.
I did a term paper case study on the B 737 Max, and it wasn't just some minor slip up. There were systemic failures in decision making from the top down. It's a situation where compromise after compromise had to be deliberately made before this was even possible. It was really shocking diving into it. Well... not that shocking, but you know what I mean.
Also, with the success of engineers, I'm optimistic! lol. Did 6+ years as a GIS technician and electrical engineering and now I'm wrapping up school for a degree in logistics management.
Firefox
Isn't opera kind of scammy nowadays? It used to be great before turning into "chrome with moneylending scams"
Another reason why many of the Executives who come from consulting firms end up tanking businesses is mindset. If you lookup the types of questions that new consultants are asked during job interviews at management consulting firms, they way they want you to dissect the case problems tend to be clinical, narrow in scope, and a reflection of what s taught in Business Administration classes. The level of rigidity in problem solving prioritizes the old school ways of conducting business rather than a more dynamic, modernized approach to business development and problem solving. In other words, management consultants tend to stick to industry approved methods (the same methods that have been proven to lead to failure literally thousands of times over by now). So you end up with nepotism reinforcing failed practices and practical, unconventional methods are usually shunned or ignored.
Executives, firms, businesses, mindsets, etc. are fictional.
If youre forced to behave in ways lied about with the fiction of/that includes job interviews..?
Preach
Did you work for a firm or just interview? Makes sense an interview for new grad would be modeled after what they learned in school. They want to see that you can take direction.
@@TimeQuxxn firms are fictional. Are you asking if someone was kept as a slave and [marketed] as part of a firm/forced to behave in ways [marketed] as interviewing at a firm?
Gibberish.
A bricklayer applies for a new job. During the interview, he asks: "If I build the wall so crooked that the whole house collapses, how many million dollars in compensation will I get?"
Answer: "Ahh, you're a former manager!"
Terrific comment 😂
The only reason why your joke doesn't work is that an interview in construction looks like this:
- when can you start?
- now
- ok see you tomorrow at 6 I'll text you the address
@@jimmy13morrison not true at all. Have you ever laid brick in your life? It requires a high level of skill & they won’t hire you without experience unless you are hired for nepotism in which case you won’t be interviewed anyways..
@baileymaloney1961 no im a carpenter and every interview i got looks like what i stated. Your credentials are looked at on your first day if you don't know what your doing and it doesn't look like you'll pick it up you're fired before your first break
@@baileymaloney1961 I think he talks about more informal bricklaying
Failing upwards is easier they higher you go. I seen a new ceo brought in to a previous company to work with, get investors hyped about a new target market and product.
Do ZERO market research to actually check if those new clients want, need, or are suitable for this.
Almost a year later the new head of sales resigned after 3 months, we never sold anything because the clients would make £100 a year extra which is way less than their time invested in meetings. The CEO is now a CEO at abother company. The Yes man executives also moved on to another senior position.
This was my first graduate company and it made me realise how fucked the business world is and there is no integrity there.
A slave marketed as an investor can be hyped to be waste?
weird how the economy keeps working then. maybe your'e overestimaiting the dysfunction based on a bad personal experience.
@@perfectallycromulent like in the video there are many good CEOs in stable companies for long time. Remember Pareto principle. A few people do most the work
@@perfectallycromulent You're so, so close. The economy keeps going because the WORKERS who do all of the actual WORK keep WORKING.
@@lime148 the problems outlined in this video describe a corrupt, decadent, and nepotistic elite business class. They do serve a role, that is organizing labor. Both elites and workers can be corrupt and decadent, they both are crucial to the functioning of society, and they should hold themselves to high standards and work together to achieve the best results.
This entire video can basically sum up by a long time belief that I've had, which is that America and big business will constantly yammer and strut around about capitalism...until they actually have to do capitalism.
I'll still never forget how much US automotive companies were constantly putting down people with social problems saying that businesses should just fail or succeed as the market dictates and then in 2008 absolutely begged to the government for socialist handouts to avoid them from collapsing. That is truly the year that the entire American bubble concept of "good" capitalism died.
Capitalism died when Obama was elected it’s been corporate socialism ever since
For you, at least. Regrettably, many others still haven't caught on. >.o Which is bewildering, how long have people been saying "They don't make them like they used to," and complain about irreparable products designed with an eye fixed squarely on planned obsolescence, yet not connect the dots?
But you keep people busy, in a crisis or at risk thereof, and neither the media, nor society overall, seem keen to pause and reflect. We sure seem to go well out of our way to avoid it. x.x
Golden parachutes and safety nets for me, rugged individualism and social darwinism for thee.
It's actually insane how ardently they defend capitalism when literally none of them want to play by the rules they claim to defend.
They would literally bring back slavery to save a few dollars.
And I just saw a video that the NFL is the most socialist sports league in the world but also the most rich. We really need to rethink capitalism or the bottom 99% will suffer even more
I was just talking about this with my little brothers who's just entering the workforce, I said become a manager as soon as you can and you're a part of the management class, you can go anywhere as a manager even if you dont know the industry, people assume managers could manage anywhere, you succeed in one place you get offered sign on bonuses to go elsewhere, if it doesnt work out? They dont care and you move on.
Be kept as a slave thats lied about as manager?
You didnt tell him how to harm others so human slaves wont continue to be made and kept?
May not be great advice since I'm reading more articles lately about how tech companies aren't seeing the value of managers and instead opt for project managers and tech leads to guide their teams. May be a matter of time before this flows outward since companies are pretty unoriginal and copy each others's safe ideas.
@@bunk95 naw, best managers treat thoee under their care as people, funny enough, it gives you the edge. Work isnt slavery, its merely selling your time for money, value yourself and value others. 1. Better to have 50 people singing your praises, your numbers will go up as well or higher than grinding your people to dust and having nothing but numbers and knives at your back. 2. Value your time, value other peoples time and everyone should aspire to move up, there's always someone there to take the low level employees place, a good manager will have former employees recommending people work there just because it was a great experience.
@@j.reinholme project management is a great skill, one you can get with a course, tech lead naturally follows, but if you are outside of tech, being a manager gives you the experience, the title and lends more weight to a project management designation. Flexibility and capability is the name of the game.
True, but beware, there is a level of management that is the sacrificial lamb level. The managers just above those on the floor are essential to the company. You will never be fired if you are decent. Good management here makes a huge difference. The managers just above this are generally throw-away. They are not critical and are mainly slaves to their boss. They are glorified compilers, compiling data for spreadsheets and power points presentations so their boss looks good during meetings with big muckitimucks.
The compilers can easily be chopped if the balance sheet doesn't look good and they can also be the fall guy if their boss screws something up.
You go the management route, you have to go through the second level management, but you have to get to the third as quickly as possible. Once in the third level you are part of the club and then just don't be an idiot and always go with the Company Narrative even if everything is burning around you.
Its like the middle ages again
A captured king taken on the field of a military disaster can expect a mansion for a prison with servants and silk sheets
Reminds me of Napoleon's exile island
Yeah ransomed - not cheap - but goes home leaving all his men dead on the field and that was just the lucky ones. Nothing much has changed.
well that is what this is. modern chiefdom. your boss is your chief
Unless If you're against the mongols...
There's one difference: a fired CEO just goes to another company. A king getting removed from his post had a high chance of also getting his head removed. And even if not, they rarely got embraced by someone else with open arms.
Here me out... if the CEO gets paid so much because it is such a hard job, how can we reasonably assume a CEO can be the head of SIX companies? Like, there's absolutely no way a CEO is truly doing valuable work when splitting their attention between 6 companies.
Sadly you confuse hard work effort with impact. Otherwise janitors doing 12 hour shifts will earn as much as CEOs.
@@Mobius_Pizza oh, I'm confusing absolutely nothing. You're telling me that the impact Musk, a human person with a monkey brain, can hold down the role of CEO at 6 highly valued companies and producing the same impact that, say... 6 CEOs, one at each company, could? There is no universe in which he alone can have that much measurable impact to reasonably believe he alone brings more value, splitting his time 6 ways, than just hiring another person who is equally as qualified.
Btw, and unrelated, janitors are far more useful than CEOs.
At this point, Elon Musk is a brand that gullible investors fawn over. I bet if he stepped down as CEO for Tesla would lose hundreds of billions in market value so in that sense he provides a lot of value to these companies.
@@tomseiple3280 At this point, Musk probably knows more about manufacturing than anyone alive on the planet. And not just manufacturing. He said it himself, and who can question such a brilliant man with a phone book-sized list of great ideas, achievements and predictions he did?!
@tomseiple3280 don't think musk is a good example all the companies he ran he created from the ground up.
This video is referring to people who get put in charge of companies not people who built them..
CEOS are the new nobility.
And will continue to be until heads start rolling.
there is this misconception that medieval rulers ruled by "bloodright" that was made up at the end of the middle ages to retroactively justify their 500 years rule, the truth is that they were just private citizens who monopolized all economic activity in their area of influence over time (cause when you are big and powerful, it is pretty easy to eat all the other small fish in the pond over the passing of generations.)
so worse, they are thew OLD nobility coming back, maybe not now, but 150 years from now CEO will be a hereditary title (again with the fun facts, duke was not an hereditary title for like a long time, this was ORIGINALLY also sold to people as a form of meritocracy, but nepotism finds a way)
This is fairly accurate. The old nobility got to their rank through warfare. They could muster an army based on their experience and personality. If a commoner said "follow me to the Holy Land" they would be laughed at. Everyone can be envious and despise the nobility for their unearned rank, and it can seem undeserved when they end up being horrible warriors and strategists, but fact remains that no one is following non-nobility into battle and no one is hiring non-CEOs to run their company either.
No. Not since the definition of ‘nobility’ includes some aspect of morality and ethics, obligation to do right conferred by your position of privilege, etc.
The power imbalance in corporate America's hierarchical structure is indeed alarming. As you pointed out, the experience paradox and the golden parachute phenomenon worsen this issue. Corporate ethics and accountability need an urgent overhaul to ensure fair practices and justice for all stakeholders.
yes, those CEO should work at their company Call Center first, learn some common sense first.
getting used as a company whipping boy.
because nowadays we got a lot of Tone Deaf and Brain dead Announcement
took by those CEO that causing an all out Outrage.
they think that their own insider joke will makes everyone laugh, but no,
it offend everyone even more, it shows how detached and tone deaf those people can be
@@jensenraylight8011that's very good idea. I work in customer support (tech company). The company's CEO and CTO used to respond to clients in support tickets when the company was much smaller (I actually found quite a few messages and tickets from both of them). I can very honestly say the company I work for has an awesome CEO and CTO; they are the founders as well. The company is not small anymore but that positive spirit still lives on.
Will never happen considering they run the show and pay off politicians lol.
This looks like it was written by my boy chatGPT 😂
Requires a massive system overhaul that can really hurt a lot of folks, not saying we shouldn’t but be careful with what you wish, some certain groups wished somewhat similar things in the 20th century and welp
Remember kids: “It’s a big club, and you ain’t in it.”
Ah yes .... The George Carlin quote
George Carlin RIP
Rip Carlin
Capitalism, amirite?
“You’re not in that club, you own it!”
This actually just happened in my company recently. An executive in one of our business units was held responsible for $47 million dollars of losses in one quarter. He was fired.... Then hired as CFO for another firm in our industry.
One guy here was made CTO at my company I worked at, he was fired and was made CEO at another company within the industry.
The German government under Merkel had the exponential McKinsey problem, too. They started with a few McKinsey consultants who then consulted to hire more McKinsey consultants.
Governments are fictional. Those marketed as part of government make slaves marketed as consultants?
That's what happen in government jobs when it's also hard to fire someone.
Merkel was enough of a disaster by herself. We have her policies in large part to thank for the current Ukraine situation.
the amount of money spend there, it would have been cheaper to do it inhouse from zero, and that talent would be funded for quite a while.
@@IFRYRCE Yes, another country’s decisions are the fault of that uninvolved one. Makes sense.
This is why our company aims to promote 80% within and 20% external. Almost never for higher positions as we don't want to drastically change culture.
Good choice, i work for a pretty huge corporation today in my region of the world, but the business culture is very good, almost like the one in a good small to medium one and a large part of that is a very high ratio of internal promotions to external hires up to and including the CEO that began as a regular sales floor guy.
Companies are fictional.
Out of curiosity, do you have to pay to be allowed to shop at the company you work for?
If you never promote people within to higher positions, then I hate to tell you this, but you're hiring externally.
I worked in a company like that. The ones who were incompetent and wanted control over their more competent work-buddies got the promotions. Obviously, because that's how it works everywhere. How the culture has changed such that you get praised for blaming others for your problems and chastised for doing actual work. Restricting promotion to 'from within' poisons the corporate culture.
The Boing CEO may not have been directly in charge of the department of building the MAX planes but his position definitely influenced the reason why the planes were defective and deadly.
Under his direction they were incentivizing profits over safety, cutting corners in order to compete with Airbus to produce these planes, rushing the process and giving workers crazy deadlines without support. The workers who spoke up were often ignored, may of the long timers left because they knew this was destined for disaster.
The main issue with Boing is the took a heavily complicated engineering company and turned it over the essential hedge fund managers that care about nothing more then profits and stock options.
A person with no insight into the actual process of baking the bread but just trying to pull levers to increase performance indicators, then they get surprised when unseen variables suddenly become a problem when they pushed the bakery to the limit
@@ayoCC "Why are we wasting so much time baking the bread? Just double the temperature so it bakes twice as fast"
Yeah dunno what HMW was on about when he said he wasn't directly involved in it. I'm like "bruh."
Exactly, a CEO should be accountable for all that happens under his/her command... Especially in the case of cutting corners.
@@Kolmirin a justworld, that CEO would be behind prison bars!
Mary Barra has been running GM into the ground for years and getting record compensation every year for it.
She finally announced yesterday GM would build hybrids again instead of going 100% on EVs and the stock jumped almost 10% - biggest gain since shes been CEO, and all because she backtracked on her main strategy.
It's confusing why she hasn't been sacked. She's such an obviously incompetent CEO. GM is performing horribly and has been since she took the reigns.
For whatever reason, the shareholder/board standards for her are rock bottom.
@@sdm6054 Well part of it is definitely the 10.5 billion stock buyback she did to bribe the board by raising the stock price immediately after her disastrous UAW deal.
Because, y'know, that's a responsible use of a line of credit the company secured in case the strike went on for a longer time.
@@sdm6054is she jewish?
As a car and driving enthusiast, it's actually baffling to see companies go electric only when hybrids or perhaps hydrogen fuel cells are much easier to adapt current infrastructure to... and offer better long-term product differentiation.
I am also an engineering student and it makes me cringe to hear people talk about EVs being the future because they just aren't. Not with the current battery technology and the needs of the average driver. Can't imagine EVs will ever get cheaper and buying used for EVs is a huge gamble because of battery degradation.
@@MidnightGreen4649 man hydrogen is way worse lol. You need entirely new gas station infrastructure that's much harder to build than either current gas stations or EV chargers due to the pressurized nature of the fuel.
Synthetic or biofuels that are carbon neutral/negative are definitely the way to go. They're viable and use existing infrastructure.
Other than that though I agree with you
If anyone's looking for a ceo, I have absolutely no experience in anything above entry level jobs, but I can guarantee a profit for the first year no matter what the business is.
Sounds like a good resume. I’ll have my people contact your people…. Now I just need to get some people… and a company
@@DrDreDay1724dont forget the minimum 500 million dollars or something like that required to ensure you aren't instantly devoured or suffocated by the already established companies in whatever industry
@@DrDreDay1724 Hey, I'm a person
The more I see of modern capitalism - the more convinced I become that the system only works if companies are allowed to fail. The current system of bailouts, low interest rates, money-printing, lobbying and massive government intervention in the economy: entrenches corruption and incompetence.
Once you're a business owner of a small company or medium sized at best, you are definetely "allowed" to fail. I think this holds true for most businesses except those that are too big to fail. But I agree with you, if big banks, automotives etc. really had only one live as every one else, they'd for sure approach things differently.
The government should limit and go against compagnies, not with it.
Public compagnies should never be government backed.
Public compagnies just lobbies their way into corrupting the government. .
And tax payers pays for bailout ounce a compagny gets too greeedy and fucks up.
Capitalism inherently results in certain companies gaining favors from the government. It starts with simple things, like how not every company is able to leverage the most out of the ability to subsidize their infrastructure costs onto the people at large(transportation especially), and over time, as the government relies more and more on private firms to distribute essential services and keep the economy afloat, the largest of these firms naturally gain political influence which they use to transform the economy to favor themselves more, until they are so installed they cannot easily be removed without harming the society at large. Despite its mythology, capitalism's history has never demonstrated a capability of truly 'free' markets - The winners have always been defined by those most able to externalize costs through government policy and subsidy. This naturally results in 'too-big-to-fail' companies who can hold the entire nation at gunpoint should they be at risk.
@@alphajackal6648 good elaboration of the too-big-to-fail mechanism
yes. bankruptcy is essentially a capitalist institution anyway, and is useful in clearing market risk.
1:53 "If you have been working as a welder..."
Shows random guy *soldering*
It's AI generated - we should have got the clip from An Officer and a Gentleman.
Ironically it actually supports the statement that he made at that point. He has no experience there and did poorly because of it
We should have got a clip from Flashdance!
Don't expect white collar guys to know the difference.
Low temperature welding.
Meanwhile employees are laid off with a Golden Kick in the ass.
"Golden", you say? If only...
@@ofAwxen golden for the kicker, they get a bonus for that too
At least the laid off employee doesn't get a Golden Shower.
"CEO's know that they can eventually be blamed for a scandal they didn't have direct control over", I disagree, shit rolls down hill. If the Boeing CEO was known for getting projects off the drawing board and into the sky, it's entirely possible that his push to get new aircraft launched was a prime factor in QC being overlooked and those black boxes being buggy. Either way, the CEO runs the company, they have ultimate ownership and decision making power over everything that occurs in that company. If a ship sinks, the captain is responsible, in one way or another.
Exactly
By all I've heard, Boeing in particular had a drastic internal shift away from QC and good engineering and towards cost cutting and maximizing profits after the McDonnell Douglas merger, which I believe also included much of the upper leadership of McDonnell Douglas (including the CEO) taking over those positions in Boeing, so yes, the Boeing example is probably the best example of a CEO being quite directly responsible for a scandal that may not appear to be his fault at a glance.
The trick is to go for companies where change need time to happen and change positions / companies faster than the long term side effects can show up.
The QC engineer isn't the one pushing things to be rushed.
That's the shareholders.
The people at the very top that decide what a company does are the shareholders.
The CEO is basically nothing but a figurehead that says what the shareholders want to hear and does what they want done.
I observed this immediately after getting my first job in IT... Problems aren't meant to be solved..they're meant to be created
reminds me of the Matthew McConaughey's speak from wolf on wall street.
I twitched when you said "experience obsession"... but that's exactly what's happening to me right now. I'm trying to get back into my old profession and either never get so much as a rejection or get asked straight up "Do you have 3-5 years experience running a specific brand of a specific machine and are you willing to work overtime for minimum wage?"
Dude, wtf. You're not going to find that guy and if you do then he won't work for what you're offering. I have demonstrated years experience of learning dozens of machines from many different perspectives, from operator to engineering and process improvement. Now I'm getting ghosted for glorified button pushing. What the actual fuck is happening!?
Also, why are there so many managers? I interviewed at one place that gave a nice tour. Their office was almost as big as production. They had multiple "departments" with their own "managers" despite only like 10 people being on the production floor and half of those machines were empty! AND they had an HR department. What do these people do all day!?
Mostly parasites.
Don’t waste your time applying. Start your own thing.
That's why I'm a soldier. No matter who comes in, as long as you treat yourself and everyone else with utmost integrity and dedication, they'll take you on and train you.
Just lie about having the experience. Managers lie all the time to potential employees about their future responsibilities, progressions and salary increases. It is only fair to lie back as well
with all that experience why do you not own any of those machines and own a company doing that???? when you are young that's why you get a job, by your 30's you are expected to quit and start up a competing business doing some niche you discovered.
It warms the dark cockles of my heart that Iger’s one of your examples in the thumbnail.
IMO it starts at the mid level of management. I've seen 2 examples of managers breaking rules line employees would be fired for. After a certain rank being a sycophant mattered more than a work ethic.
People fixate on execs but this problem reaches pretty far down the corporate ladder. At some point I realized that awareness surrounding even a low level manager's competency is widespread. The problem is that for one reason or another everyone believes their hands are tied. It often comes down to something as mundane as nobody wanting to stir the pot, but often it's tied to stuff like interpersonal relationships. Even empathy is a factor, triggered by the perception that job loss would hit these people harder than a low level worker. Plus, at the end of the day, everyone just assumes that the replacement wouldn't necessarily be any better.
I'm not justifying any of this, because I think it's ridiculous, but it needs pointing out that this is usually less conspiratorial than people are apt to believe. Personally, I believe this problem stifles social and economic mobility for those who deserve to climb the ladder. Not that I think it's a zero sum game, but I don't think there's anything wrong with those higher up dropping a few rungs if they screw up. They shouldn't be sheltered.
Explains why so many CEOs are great and saying lots of stuff whilst simultaneously saying nothing of value at all...
Professionañ yappers
Politician
politicians and CEOs probably shared the same school XD
Midwits basically.
low interest rates along with the government bailing out companies that should failed years ago, results in this.
Society also has this attitude of "if a youngling fails, big deal, they have their whole life to make it up once again" that biases their response to a senior getting let go.
No CEO ever started as intern are the founders or some indicated rich dude with an mba who think is a genius
It is because success as an executive is about relationships. Not about talent or driving value for the company. Those are only useful to the extent that it helps you with your relationships
While I do dislike that the method chosen for a good CEO is ...shareholder returns (Regularly firing your staff will increase returns, but you eventually run out of staff)
If so far we learn, that CEOs dont even do their Job well for the shareholders, wouldnt it make more sense to either change the CEO job, remove it altogether or automate it. CEOs are really expensive, when you compare it to staff that work on the product itself.
Not to mention the AI would be cheaper, and probably do a better job.
@@SkySong6161some companies are actually replacing ceos with ai
Trickle down economics. Once the money is all at the top, it trickles up against gravity
Turns out that money is like mass. The highest entropy state is all of it in one place.
That’s just how mafia works
even better than mafia since it is all legal.
@@the0ne809looool
@@the0ne809 because they had enough money to make it legal
@@TheNikoNikthey were smart enough to do it. Mafia's strategy was to bribe people to ignore the rules. It never dawned on them to change the rules so government protected what they did at taxpayer expense.
@@TheNikoNik correct. stock buybacks should be banned again.
In other words:
1. "Bad experience is better than NO experience" (they often don't want to *promote* someone to CEO)
2. Anyone who has CEO experience but isn't currently a CEO is likely either retired or was booted from a prior company. The former are less likely to want to become a CEO again.
You see where the problems lies
The incoming CEO in my job has worked his way up through the company. He makes mistakes but he's humble so I have great confidence in him. I'd much rather that than someone who doesn't know anyone or anything about the company.
When investing, I look on outside hires for executive positions with a lot of suspicion. I always guessed it was because a board member wanted to get his crony in and this video helps confirm that for me. Why would you NOT just promote those who've been with the company and know it's business for decades? Oh because it would cause a cascade of lower vacancies? Sounds lazy. Nothing worth doing is going to be easy.
My wife is the executive assistant for the CEO of a large national company. Through that relation I’ve gotten to know this man on a personal level quite well. It’s confirmed my existing belief that top level success is almost entirely based on “experience”, connections, and recruitment savvy. The guy is honestly nice as can be, but he’s also kind of an idiot. If you didn’t know any better you could mistake him for any other shmuck you’d bump into at your local bar. He’s basically just job hopped from position to position before landing where he’s currently at.
If you want to fix the way CEOs run business you simply make the law that if they bankrupt the company, then the C suite employees of that company at that time, or who can be legally tied to the downfall even after they leave, should be stripped of everything they own. No bonuses, no stocks, take everything. Maybe then when they know everything they have is on the line they might not drive these companies into the ground because they actually have skin in the game. Ill chuck in all the board of directors and vice this and that levels as well.
Problem is anyone competent would too be scared to risk accepting such a dangerous contract. Anything could happen, the company could fail because some new technical innovation elsewhere makes their business model redundant etc. The only people to accept a CEO position in that situation would be a blithering idiot who doesn't understand the CEO is actually the 'fall guy' position.
They won't agree to start work without a golden parachute agreement upfront. So it's either u hire them at their own terms or you stay without a CEO
I worked in a Fortune 100 company in logistics and supply chain dept. The new manager of that department didn't know what it was a LCL shipment and was criticizing why the lead time was so long for this type of shipment. Notice that we started using this type of shipping to save on shipping costs and it was their instruction to save cost as priority, not because we liked it. I told him either you save money or either you save time; you can't expect paying way less and hope for a fast and better service 😂... Is like wanting a Mercedez and paying for a Kia.
I am not even graduated in this field and understood the basics. How a f ing manager of said department don't know the basics... This type of guys are the ones that end up being promoted. At the end, I just left. They kept asking for KPIs that contradicted themselves. If you improved some KPIs, they affected others since they had an inverse correlation. So, no matter what you did, you would end up in a bad position.
Why do ceos get things like pensions when their average employees don’t.
Why does the one who makes the decision get better treatment than those who don't? That's why unionizing was pretty much always effective in getting better conditions because with a union you can just easily collectively stop working and put pressure on management
Ceos and employees are fictional. Are you commenting on slaves [marketed] with that fiction?
They negotiate it as a part of their compensation. You are 100% free to negotiate about your compensation as well.
Because CEOs are hard to hire whereas the average employee is not.
Same reason why the king in feudal societies never starves to death.
In the netherlands we've had the same guy as prime minister for like 15 years, he and his predecessor ruined everything we know and love.
People genuinely hate him with a burning passion.
His next job? Head of NATO defence force. Talk about bodyguards!
I have a feeling he heard about what happened to Mr. Shinzo Abe..
The description reminds me to Berlusconni. How did he stay in power so long if nobody liked him?
@@alicianieto2822 The art of compromise and dirty, under-the-table deals, that's how. Rutte (the guy OP is talking about) was good at identifying personal interests of politicians of all kinds and making sure they can be fulfilled, which guaranteed that the Dutch super-fragmented political landscape (needing 5-6 parties, often not from ideologically-adjacent stances, to form the Government) will keep Rutte in power.
@@alicianieto2822 He definitely, much like berlusconi, has loyal followers mostly of the home and business owning kind. Very good at never solving anything but presenting himself as the only solution to anything.
"Let's sell all our national infrastructure to private industry, I'll be rich and elite for life, the country will come to a standstill and everything will get more expensive but there will be 500 new jobs!"
*companies hire Ivy League expats from overseas not locals*
*rich expats overpay and ruin what is left of the housing market*
*VVD-voting home owners see their house prices increasing*
*normal everyday people no longer able to gain equity*
"everybody wins!"
Some one threw a grenade a kishida as well even the reserved japanese are tires
Jesus christ. You guys have a Trudeau/Biden backed clown that's been running the clown show since 2010.
This is exactly what happens without term limits.
Elite only like to hire themselves, even if their incompetent while at it.
Its simply how the world works.
I've always loved how execs preach about accountability for everyone but themselves.
And our grandparents wonder why we have no company loyalty. 7.1% that’s why
Now it only goes one way, it's all take, no give for companies.
Corollary: Credit goes up, blame goes down.
@@Lonovavir that’s why we bounce from company to company. It’s the only way to get a raise or move up!!
research shows you can be as much as 50% better off financially in the long run by jumping companies every few years now.
"Fake it till you make it", should be on everyone's resume.
Used to be an IT guy. None of these CEOs could operate a computer but all of them wanted to tell me how to do my job.
I’m trying to get out of IT.
Dead serious when thinking that the first jobs that should be replaced by AIs are the CEOs: they are ultraexpensive, they tend to repeat the same formulas to maximize profit, and its not like they are famous for their human empathy.
An investor told me that he'd rather put money in a company where its manager experienced failure than in a company run by a new CEO with a squeaky clean record. The main reason: experience with a managerial hardship, which means a higher probability of solving a severe problem within the company.
No golden parachutes for all the employees laid off due to c-suite poor decisions. And layoffs to boost the stock price rather than increasing actual productivity or innovate something useful
I have a PhD in biochemistry and 22 years experience and failed to find a new job after being laid off 8 months ago. If experience mattered in my case this would have never happened to me.
Ah no, you're forgetting, for us normal types, experience is just a sign that you're more expensive.
@@joepiekl I've been willing to endlessly compromise on how expensive I am and I'm no better off.
I'm being punished for being laid off.
@@MisterTutor2010 That's shitty, but I wonder how many companies just don't even give an interview because they assume that someone with a PhD and 22 years experience will be really expensive.
If you're that well educated, nobody would blame you for lying on a job resume. Especially since these corporate robber barrons lie to us via the media 24/7.
Lie to them and then screw them over. See how they like it!
@@MisterTutor2010at that level of experience you should be leaning towards managing in the STEM field surely if you expand beyond biochemistry you would be able to find a position.
antimonopoly regulations enforcement are not efficient to provide protection against creation of monstrous corporations and conglomerates at expense of small businesses. Less companies, less CEO candidates with experience as CEOs with higher packages.
11:47 I like the idea that Musk leaving the company triggers some sort of self-destruct sequence like killing the final boss in a Metroid game
He is holding the investors at ransom 😂😂😂
CEO: Hey if I get fired can you give me 3 months notice and a 60 million bonus
Corporate: No problem, how about another 60 million in stocks as well.
Employee: If I get fired can you let me know a week or so ahead of time so I can get something lined up?
Corporate: You'd better start cleaning out your desk right now, today is your last day.
the intro is fucking hilarious.
My editor really outdid himself on this one :)
@@HowMoneyWorks Tell him that he needs a raise, ASAP lmao.
@@DungNgo-zi8jgbut just tell him, don’t actually give him one or something 😂
@@Mpdarkguy Of course, that's
@HowMoneyWorks :))) You get to smell and see the green color, but wont be able to touch it.
The best CEO will be one who founded the company. He will often care on a deeper level than just money, plus he has build the success of the company himself.
True. But the problem is that investors may want a professional CEO for the job and they will vote in that favour
I've seen this firsthand
Experience matters way less than everyone thinks for a simple reason: every working place is different. Not only your tasks could be different but even smaller details like, how many breaks you have, your coworkers' or boss' schedules, the location of the company and such could render whole years of experience meaningless. What matters the most is your WILLINGNESS TO LEARN
Youre the only business channel I watch because you are genuinely intelligent and understand things from a very analytical standpoint. Some business dumbassess think that they know everything about money because they got lucky selling their meme coins.
I personally know a company executive who has trashed a DOD contractor locally in mere years by blowing up their main money making machine by running it incorrectly and illegally abusing covid payment protection program loans, and now he is golden parachuting into an even larger company after costing our local economy hundreds of jobs and hurting our whole city. This shit is disgusting.
CEOs fail their way to the top because promotions are about politics, not achievement in the workplace.
I want to read the article you wrote about failing upwards. How can I find it?
The role of "CEO" and "C-suite executive" should never have become a specific type of career or job to the point where people can say they're a CEO looking for another job as a CEO. It should have always remained as merely a position within a company to fill.
Well deserved for those that took business management and administration lessons. I've been literally rejected from my current competitor that wasted 8+ years on useless college lessons and I am being very generous calling him a valid competitor by taking in consideration his low personal income/cash flow.
Elon Musk is like a real life Homelander taking Vought lmao
The intro is a masterpiece
All engineers know that the World would be a better place if run by engineers - but hey, it's about the journey - and that means making life hard for the 99%
I think having everything run by people from any single field is a bad idea, no matter what it is. The best stuff happens when you bring together people from diverse backgrounds. But no, instead we have everyone in business being there because they've done an MBA, all learning the same ideas from a single narrow view of the world. And you can add politicians to that as well, with so many of them studying the same subjects and then become career politicians. But yeah, the general issue is having people in charge of companies who are just experts in 'business' rather than experts in the actual thing the business does. That's why you have someone getting fired from a media company and the next month they're being hired by a pharmaceutical company or an energy company.
@@joepiekltrue to some extent. I work in Oil and Gas in Canada where 90% of CEO’s have Engineering degrees but eventually they turn into your average CEO and have forgotten everything about how to do the job and are just all about profit. Once you hit that level they are just recycled and move from company to company.
@@babajid I don't think that's true. It's more about how easy it is to have certain conversations. I work in education, and it's much easier to have those conversations with managers who were once teachers than it is to have it with people who have been parachuted in from another industry. I wouldn't trust our regional manager to come in a teach my classes, but I know I can discuss academic issues with her.
I'm an engineer and I've been put through hell for months because the engineers in management two levels above me were too socially awkward to talk to each other. So I do not necessarily agree with that. I'd rather work for an engineer than a marketing goon any day though.
we have a major problem . we are introverts
You have an incredible internet business man. Keep building, you inspire me a lot.
Either you or your editors are from Venezuela haha. That segue into La Vida Boheme was *veeeery* specific haha. Gotcha. Kudos!
"CEO Fired After Employee Holds Salmon Suspiciously" is so funny lmaoo.
Would be great to see a video of digital nomads. Hype vs reality, how are they taxed? what roles lend themselves to it? Etc.
I second this.
I dont even know what a digital nomad is so i too support this video idea.
@@allorfh2495 It's basically an American tech bro who has a remote job and travels to -poorer- other countries in order to take advantage of the lower COL.
What can you tell me about the Opera browser? Any videos about the subject matter?
Because the main task of a CEO is to be the scapegoat. In most fuck ups they have no idea what actually happened and it was a genuine mistake in middle management. But those guys actually know how to do their job, so you need a public representative that can take the blame in order to cool emotions and keep the brand name clean.
Like a country or university President.
I’m working as a Specialist and I’m getting lots of job offers on LinkedIn offering me the exact same position at another firms. I never received an upgraded title offer to join a different company. Also at my current workplace; they literally hired two managers that I’m supposed to be supporting in what we do, even though I have 5 years of experience as a specialist in the exact thing and they have 0 experience, just that they came from external and already held managerial titles at previous workplaces. I even have MBA degree but that doesn’t seem to count. How do I ever get to a higher level?
Sometimes adking rightaway to the people contacying you works. " hey, I am willing to go if you make me a manager"
Present yourself as you're of a higher level, recruiters don't really have a way to check and if you have as much experience as you claim to have, you could easily pass as a level up. The quickest way up the corporate ladder is by jumping from a job to job, lending the one-title-higher in seniority than the previous.
12:28 Ok, this ending caught me off guard, but if that list works for real, that's a new way to democratize the power of dark corporate arts 😳
I like the way you threw in an uncensored wtf at the end. It was a nice touch
I'd argue that someone with 1-2 years experience in any job does not perform worse than someone with 10+ years. Most jobs can be learned in under a year. From experience in leadership roles character and passion is always a better indicator of performance than experience
Your first point is just not true - any STEM related job, you never stop getting better at it until you physically can't do it. For leadership, character and passion may count, but judging character before taking someone on is very difficult.
I disagree, especially for knowledge work. There’s so many problems that you run into so infrequently that it takes many years to see the forest through the trees
If we’re talking about flipping burgers, sure
@@ZodiacDating You might get better at your job with time but I've seen kids out of university perform way better than more experienced collegues. I work in the environmental conservation field
Outside of unskilled labor and basic service industry jobs your claim is patently untrue. All too often I've seen the problems caused by inexperience. So roughly speaking I'd say five years to start getting a handle on things and a decade to be proficient. And that assumes quality experience because in the wrong workplace you'll either languish or pick up some very bad habits.
Holy shit, there was a policy at Boeing to not put safety complaints in writing!
To say "the CEO was fired for something, he didn't had any controll over" is just wrong.
I had a manager who is now a VP at the place and he was genuinely a nice guy, but a massive idiot. He was so dead set on certain things despite them just being bad ideas. Failed upwards for sure
@HowMoneyWorks love your videos but I want to know how you do these edits? Is it just premier and after effects and a shit ton of tedium and time? If your news letter shares some of your tips and tricks on your editing style, I'd sign up for it!
Would this not create a failing system? Ive seen it time and time again with gaming companies. A CEO that destroyed one game went on to become CEO of another and made exactly the same mistakes and destroyed that next game.
4:31 It's a stretch to call billion dollar CEOs "workers". They stay afloat through the massive wealth they have accumulated, so they belong to the owning class. This division is one of the most fundamental ones in our society, don't dilute it any further.
The prediction of a 32% business failure rate in 2024 suggests a challenging landscape ahead. Factors contributing to this potential "business apocalypse" should be carefully analyzed, including economic trends, industry shifts, and the impact of global events. Adaptability and strategic planning will be crucial for companies navigating these uncertain times.
That's fascinating. How can I contact your Asset-coach as my portfolio is dwindling?
Thank you for this tip. It was easy to find your coach. Did my due diligence on her before scheduling a phone call with her. She seems proficient considering her resume.
Litteral chatgpt ass response.
So does this topic relates only to companies on the stock market?
You almost got it at 6:45
The executives comes from consultancy firms where the goal is short term looting and the bonuses and stock buy backs are just part of that same goal.
These bloated CEOs should be held accountable for messing up companies. L
Really good video. Interesting concept and clear explanations with real life examples on top.
Phil Spencer of Xbox, first person to came to my mind with this 😂😂
Phil Spencer is a significant improvement compared to Don Mattrick before him.
So, what did the latin words mean? Printed on the newspaper at the beginning to fill the subject narrative/description columns?
That’s Lorem Ipsum - meaningless text used as a placeholder, usually in typography and design - for example, to understand how a certain amount of text would look on paper or on the website.
Here - used to create a more realistic impression of a newspaper, since most video viewers would just read the large title before the scene changes.
Interested in seeing how Vince McMahon fairs after his recent allegations
i worked at a country club and was amazed just how simple minded (and incredibly cheap) many chief officers of fortune 100 companies were
Elon Musk just got a 2018 Tesla $55 billion compensation voided by the Democrat appointed Delaware judge!😂 The judge had a problem with Musk running 6 companies simultaneously too! She was the same judge that force Musk to buy Twitter too!😮 Please, she thought the compensation amount was too much!😬
Its the fraternity method like college. The 5 firms that the video mention about is all about connections but these connections are nearly impossible to get unless you have social development in C-suite.
"If you call failure experience." - Thanos
Same goes for head coaches of pro sports teams. Experience is everything, actual results a mere afterthought.
We really do overvalue experience. You can definitely go 10 years at a job and be terrible at it or not learn a damned thing.
I reckon we should start hiring from middle managers. If they have the skill to be a middle manager, they have the skill to be an executive. There are a lot more of them, which means we can pay them less.
I like how the previous founders and ceo of Twitter forced Elon Musk to buy at a high price, just to criticize him on the way he handles the company once they had the cash from the buyout.
I've heard about this. CEOs usually don't last too long. As you get promoted you might find a really big problem that probably has preceded your predecessor or was created by him. If you're the chief of a department when you find this problem, it can affect that department. If you're the chief executive officer....it can affect the whole company. When you're a chief of the department you can try to keep it from getting worse until you get promoted again or you can transfer, if you're the CEO....you need to keep it from getting worse or destroying the company until you retire. There's less room for escape when you're the chief executive officer. This is one of the reasons why CEOs don't last too long and why they negotiate fantastic severance deals. The other issue is that after being fired from a big company.....there's a big chance that your career is over so that's your nest egg for retirement. New jobs as CEO at another company might not pay as much so you have to be careful.
Regarding Musk, he got himself in a bad spot. The thing is, like you've said, Musk already claims to develop AI outside of Tesla. This might actually make the decision to oust Musk for Tesla easier. It is worth reminding that Musk's stunts at Twitter got PRECISELY the people or the type of people he needed for AI to quit or just fired them. Now with xAI, I really wonder who is working for him and under what conditions. Those guys probably barely have to raise a finger a month and get paid and they probably got Musk to pay them a nonrefundable some in advance. Basically, if he fires them, he loses that money. Worth mentioning that Tesla hasn't seen any improvements when it comes to self driving in years and DOJO, the supercomputer that was supposed to help refine FSD, doesn't work. The robotics thing is in infancy at best. Without Musk, Tesla might actually have a decent chance of NOT going bankrupt. Worth mentioning that Musk asked to have 2 classes of share, like Google or Facebook, but that's not going to happen because it would require to make some fundamental changes that would be difficult to do. This is not Musk's first clash with other Tesla shareholders. In fact recently he lost his $50 billion compensation package.
Clearly Musk is trying to cash out before the ship sinks
There's a practical reason too: if a company destroys a former CEO, they are signaling the market that they don't forgot mistakes and people with the skills and mindset to become CEO will not apply for the job. I worked in a company that had 8 acting CEOs in a year. The reason is the company was privately owned and the owner was sanguineous. Any smart person in the market started to avoid working in strategic positions in the company because they knew it would be risky and possibly damaging to their carriers, prestige, images, etc.
This is why average people who have no chance in hell of being rich need to stop idolizing these guys, and especially stop pulling up the "job creator" rhetoric. It's abundantly clear there is no "family" at the workplace, and labor is an expensive annoyance these guys would love to get rid of.
People need to stop being "temporarily embarrassed millionaires", living in delusion that they'll be rich one day, even the guys who started businesses and might be doing decently locally...you more than likely won't be Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos one day, so stop trying to equate yourself as one of them.
We also need to push to stop measuring our economy based on Wall Street. Start measuring general quality of life and get the hard truth on how society is doing.
It's much easier to measure DJIA than to measure 'quality of life' or 'how society is doing'...
great vid, fam. would love content like this in regards of corporate america
Ah, I should put Fluent in Dothraki.
Amazing tutorial, quick, easy and great!
Haven't watched it yet but I'm pretty sure it's because of exactly 3 reasons. :D