And not sure his stance now, but I can even give him a pass because 2 years ago there was a whole lot of different assumption than today. But the problem with moon is he is always 1 to 2 years behind the trend. so by the time he convinces himself, that target has moved.
I think with the proper modifier this is ok. Multi year guys “who contribute significantly”seems fine.
Agreed. Paying someone more just because they’re here longer doesn’t matter if they can’t produce meaningfully. If someone develops and improves throughout their career here, as one would think should be the case, then of course they should get paid more commensurate to the production they bring. Otherwise, we are spending our money very poorly which has been my stance. $2 million in the A10 should get you a heck of a lot more than 11th. I think our staff is just completely mismanaging how the money is being distributed and rather than acknowledging that, would rather claim we’re being materially outspent. Good luck convincing donors to give more.