LOGO: Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines. A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman. Winner 2013 Webby Awards for Best Political Website
May 22, 2013

 Choose a size
Text Size

Trending:     chris hedges     economy     elizabeth warren     politics     robert scheer
Most Read

Rise Up or Die

Hell on Earth for Greeks

Another Memorial Day in This Endless War

Bizarre, Apparently Jihadist Slaying in London (Video)

A Call to Action

Most Comments
Most Emailed

Reports
 * NEW! * The Path of Hubris and War
 * NEW! * Glaciers Are Melting Slowly but Surely

Ear to the Ground

A/V Booth

Arts & Culture
 * NEW! * A Call to Action
Act of Congress
Daily Rituals

Digs

Truthdig Bazaar more items

 
Reports

The Rise and Fall of Stan O’Neal

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Oct 30, 2007

By Eugene Robinson

WASHINGTON—The real story on Wall Street isn’t that E. Stanley O’Neal, whose grandfather was born a slave, is being shoved out of the top job at Merrill Lynch, the gargantuan investment bank. More important is the fact that ... well, Tom Wolfe said it best in “The Bonfire of the Vanities,” his romp through the world of hubris and high finance, with this description of the novel’s protagonist:

    “On Wall Street he and a few others—how many?—three hundred, four hundred, five hundred?—had become precisely that ... Masters of the Universe.”

    Actually, O’Neal rose to such heights that the number of his professional peers was nowhere near 300—more like three or four. That a black man who picked cotton as a child in Alabama could have spent the past five years as an Uber-Master of the Universe, running one of the world’s leading financial institutions, is more significant than his downfall.

    Granted, the downfall has been pretty spectacular. Merrill Lynch had to disclose last week that the company took a loss of $8.4 billion in the subprime mortgage meltdown—much greater than the damage suffered by other huge investment firms such as Goldman Sachs.

    Merrill’s board of directors—most of whose members were chosen by O’Neal—has to share responsibility for that debacle; it’s not as if the board was unaware of how O’Neal was investing the firm’s money. Apparently, though, there was one thing that O’Neal failed to tell the board: that he had approached the CEO of Wachovia Corp. about a possible merger of the two companies.

Advertisement

    That’s not the sort of thing you want your board to hear through the grapevine.

    On Monday, O’Neal was reportedly negotiating the terms of his departure. If you’re worried that he’ll be destitute, dry your eyes. O’Neal has been one of the best-paid executives on Wall Street—he took home around $48 million last year—and The New York Times reports that he may get a severance package of at least $159 million.

    That’s crazy money, and people don’t get crazy money unless they’re worth it. What I find striking about O’Neal’s story is that it so thoroughly demolishes the racist assumption that some people will make: that the job was somehow handed to him because of some feel-good commitment to diversity.

    Puh-leeze. Diversity is about leveling the playing field, opening doors and giving people a chance. By all accounts, O’Neal rose to the top the old-fashioned way—fighting, scraping, biting, scratching.

    He was hired as CEO in 2002 to shake up what was seen as a complacent, slow-moving corporate culture. He did just that, cutting nearly 24,000 jobs, eliminating corporate perks and taking the company—once known as “Mother Merrill” for its comfortable ambience and its settled predictability—into riskier and more lucrative arenas. Such as the subprime mortgage market.

    O’Neal produced huge profits for the firm; last year, net income was a record $7.5 billion. On the job, at least, he made no attempt to be a nice guy. The Wall Street Journal reports that O’Neal would rake his executives over the coals if quarterly earnings reports showed that rival Goldman Sachs was outperforming Merrill in some area. Now that O’Neal is on his way out, of course, people who worked for him are saying things to reporters—he was aloof, he was brusque, he didn’t tolerate strong-willed subordinates—that they wouldn’t have said to his face.

    It’s the classic high-flying modern Wall Street story—you claw your way to the top, make a lot of money for your stockholders, make a lot of money for yourself, hold on as long as you can. O’Neal lasted five years in the top job at Merrill, which is about the average tenure of an American CEO. 

    What’s really significant is that there is a Stan O’Neal. And a Dick Parsons, the African-American CEO of Time Warner, rumored to be on his way out, too, after a long and profitable run. And a Ken Chenault, the African-American CEO of American Express, who is staying put, far as I know. And a Bob Johnson, the founder of Black Entertainment Television, widely acknowledged as the first African-American billionaire.

    Just two or three generations removed from slavery, they rose to control big chunks of the American economy. They attained Master of the Universe status by being smarter and tougher than their peers—and now a much bigger cohort of black corporate executives is coming up behind them. It just goes to show what happens when you open a door.

    Eugene Robinson’s e-mail address is eugenerobinson(at)washpost.com.

    © 2007, Washington Post Writers Group


New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By ocjim, November 1, 2007 at 8:57 am Link to this comment

Eugene, I usually agree with you but not here. Millions of us knew that subprime loans were ill-advised from the beginning. Millions of us knew that de-regulation and laxity were wrong. Millions of us knew that businesses have not been held accountable and thus feel entitled to be bailed out. I don’t care if your black, white, or purple, you do not deserve millions of dollars for occupying a position of ruthless power which mainly involves using your power and influence to make money deals with the board of directors and exploiting your work force. If your company loses billions and you leave with millions that in itself is patently wrong, apart from the typical obscenity of one man or woman grossly profiting out of the hide of thousands of workers and managers under you.

Report this

By Ross Taylor, October 31, 2007 at 11:55 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Dear Mr. Robinson:

I have been reading your columns for years now, and most often am in agreement with you.

But one statement today is patently erroneous:

“O’Neal has been one of the best-paid executives on Wall Street—he took home around $48 million last year—and The New York Times reports that he may get a severance package of at least $159 million.

That’s crazy money, and people don’t get crazy money unless they’re worth it.”

No, Mr. Robinson, they’re not worth it. Corporate executive pay has been increasingly in the realm of the absurd, starting with Reagan’s administration.

In 1980, the average CEO made about 35 times the income of the average worker. Now that number is reported as anywhere from 300 times to 1000 times as much.

It has resulted from boards being increasingly in the debt of the CEO, and lax oversight. The pay levels are certainly not required to get top talent. IN Japan CEOs of similarly large corporations make only a fraction of what the CEOs here are paid.

So no one is worth that kind of money, though it shows a certain racial equality to see a black man get the same size “golden parachutes” so freely passed out to whites.

Report this

By thomas billis, October 30, 2007 at 3:40 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I understand what you mean by they must” be worth crazy money”.In other words to that company in this world.You must admit that moving around money is not as great a benefit to society as say Jonas Salk.The bitch I have is in this world where we have so screwed up our priorities that moving around money has a larger priority than societal needs.I do not mean that the head of a multi billion dollar company should not be compensated fairly but we are moving away from producing anything to finances and history has shown this to be fatal for societies.Mr Robinson I believe on Truth Dig you are singing to the choir that any race of people given a fair chance in America will succeed and help the society as a whole move forward.

Report this

By P. T., October 30, 2007 at 3:05 pm Link to this comment

Stan O’Neal was foolish.  The real estate market was way overvalued.  There were a number of indicators.  One is that real estate prices historically have risen at about the general inflation rate.  Another is that prices were rising much faster than rents.

Report this

By mdruss42, October 30, 2007 at 9:28 am Link to this comment

“crazy money, and people don’t get crazy money unless they’re worth it.”

No wonder this country is such a mess. You, and lots of others, believe that one man is “worth” $50,000,000, because he is ruthless enough to not care that other people are going to have much less so he can have more than hundreds of people need for a lifetime.

Report this

By mary, October 30, 2007 at 7:47 am Link to this comment

Ridiculous, insane money for ridiculous people!  When the average tenure of the CEO is only five years, do we really think they give a rats ass what happens to these companies, their investors, or their employees.  Old companies that used to be pretty good employers are a thing of the past. Wonder how long before Merrill gets shut down permanently….....

Report this
Newsletter

sign up to get updates


 
 
 
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
© 2013 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.