On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 3:31 PM, Leroy Stav <[address removed]> wrote:
yea... but movies don't cost 300 bucks a pop in the US and only 1 buck in... say... Nigeria.
They do if you know where to look :)
But seriously: part of the reason why Tom Cruise earns what he earns is due to supply and demand (i.e. his salary per picture is a direct consequence of his ability to put butts in seats), and part of it is because of his backend participation in the movies he makes (through his production company, etc.) As for the CEO of Merck or any other pharma company and what they earn, a large part of their income is from stock options and whatnot. Does either man (Mr. Cruise or Mr. Gilmartin) deserve to earn more in a month than most teachers, policemen, firefighters, etc. earn in several lifetimes? That is yet another question.
Success is a lousy teacher. It seduces smart people into thinking they can't lose. -- Bill Gates