Author Topic: Malcolm Gauld's 2004 compensation on IRS Form 990: $238,276  (Read 8008 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ursus

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8989
  • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
Malcolm Gauld's 2004 compensation on IRS Form 990: $238,276
« Reply #30 on: June 20, 2007, 11:09:00 AM »
Quote from: ""Guest""
Quote from: ""Ursus""
Cool Hand Luke?

Very good, Ursus. A recognizable brand of humor, or sarcasm, as the case may be?


More a rare flash of illumination.  My sense of humor is usually pretty pedantic, if not retarded.   :rofl:    I do so very much admire the more incisive wits on this board, ha!!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
-------------- -------------- --------------

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164659
  • Karma: +3/-3
    • View Profile
Malcolm Gauld's 2004 compensation on IRS Form 990: $238,276
« Reply #31 on: June 20, 2007, 11:36:00 AM »
Quote from: ""Ursus""
Quote from: ""Guest""
Quote from: ""Ursus""
Cool Hand Luke?

Very good, Ursus. A recognizable brand of humor, or sarcasm, as the case may be?

More a rare flash of illumination.  My sense of humor is usually pretty pedantic, if not retarded.   :rofl:    I do so very much admire the more incisive wits on this board, ha!!


You were given a pedantic sense of humor to console the rest of us for the great superiority you have over us in other respects. Now, if we're so smart, what are we doing here?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164659
  • Karma: +3/-3
    • View Profile
Malcolm Gauld's 2004 compensation on IRS Form 990: $238,276
« Reply #32 on: June 20, 2007, 11:45:10 AM »
Quote from: ""Guest""
Biggest Snow Job expenses (2005): $166,000 + $299,000 + $83,000 + 73,000 + Laura Hurd's salary + Paul Hurd's salary = a cool million.



    It is hard to reconcile the evidence of money grubbing with the stated nobility of purpose.  The fund raising tactics and the suggested starting donation levels were one of the things that turned my thinking about Hyde around.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Ursus

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8989
  • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
Malcolm Gauld's 2004 compensation on IRS Form 990: $238,276
« Reply #33 on: June 20, 2007, 11:52:55 AM »
Quote from: ""Guest""
Quote from: ""Guest""
Biggest Snow Job expenses (2005): $166,000 + $299,000 + $83,000 + 73,000 + Laura Hurd's salary + Paul Hurd's salary = a cool million.


    It is hard to reconcile the evidence of money grubbing with the stated nobility of purpose.  The fund raising tactics and the suggested starting donation levels were one of the things that turned my thinking about Hyde around.


"the suggested starting donation levels" -- are there specifics of such a thing on record?  What I mean is, do they actually spell it out in terms of dollar amount or percentage of income, etc.?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
-------------- -------------- --------------

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164659
  • Karma: +3/-3
    • View Profile
Malcolm Gauld's 2004 compensation on IRS Form 990: $238,276
« Reply #34 on: June 20, 2007, 12:29:20 PM »
Quote from: ""Ursus""
Quote from: ""Guest""
Quote from: ""Guest""
Biggest Snow Job expenses (2005): $166,000 + $299,000 + $83,000 + 73,000 + Laura Hurd's salary + Paul Hurd's salary = a cool million.


    It is hard to reconcile the evidence of money grubbing with the stated nobility of purpose.  The fund raising tactics and the suggested starting donation levels were one of the things that turned my thinking about Hyde around.

"the suggested starting donation levels" -- are there specifics of such a thing on record?  What I mean is, do they actually spell it out in terms of dollar amount or percentage of income, etc.?


  They called and pitched me a number. "Would you consider a gift of one thousand dollars?"   "Yes,"  I said.   "Very briefly before I say 'no'"  Joe once told me, "You're supposed to have money. You went to Hyde."  That was in response to my offering a lack on fund as the reasons for not sending my kids to Hyde.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164659
  • Karma: +3/-3
    • View Profile
Malcolm Gauld's 2004 compensation on IRS Form 990: $238,276
« Reply #35 on: June 20, 2007, 01:07:52 PM »
Quote from: ""Guest""
Quote from: ""Ursus""
Quote from: ""Guest""
Quote from: ""Guest""
Biggest Snow Job expenses (2005): $166,000 + $299,000 + $83,000 + 73,000 + Laura Hurd's salary + Paul Hurd's salary = a cool million.


    It is hard to reconcile the evidence of money grubbing with the stated nobility of purpose.  The fund raising tactics and the suggested starting donation levels were one of the things that turned my thinking about Hyde around.

"the suggested starting donation levels" -- are there specifics of such a thing on record?  What I mean is, do they actually spell it out in terms of dollar amount or percentage of income, etc.?

  They called and pitched me a number. "Would you consider a gift of one thousand dollars?"   "Yes,"  I said.   "Very briefly before I say 'no'"  Joe once told me, "You're supposed to have money. You went to Hyde."  That was in response to my offering a lack on fund as the reasons for not sending my kids to Hyde.


There are two ways to interpret Joe's words. One is that character education, at bottom, is a more effective way of preparing boys and girls for the rat race. My two college-dropout cousins are incredibly successful multi-millionaires. Makes you wonder about the value of a college education, but, more importantly, makes you see that success is a function of character. And by "character" I mean precisely the sort of competitive, non-risk-averse variety that Hyde seeks to inculcate in its students. Hyde is very caught up in equating self-worth with financial well-being. Who better than Joe embodies the ethos of succeeding on the strength of character and at the expense of intelligence? In Hyde's exorbitant tuition and money obsession there is no hypocrisy. Making a buck is what Hyde is all about.            

The other interpretation is that Joe said what he did with tongue in cheek.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Surfer Mouse

  • Posts: 27
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
'Reckoning' begins for prophet of doom
« Reply #36 on: July 29, 2007, 12:15:53 AM »
'Reckoning' begins for prophet of doom
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ ... y/Business

DEREK DeCLOET
July 28, 2007
For investors, this has been one rude interruption to a glorious summer. In the space of five days, the Dow was trashed, the FTSE fell, the Nasdaq went into a nosedive, and the TSX had its worst week since September, 2001. From Mexico City to Dublin to Bucharest to Sydney, it was nasty.
In a tiny office in midtown Manhattan, Nandu Narayanan (pronounced nar-EYE-uh-nan) ate it up. He loved it and had one of the best weeks of his career as an investor. He's been waiting for this. Did you see that Blackstone Group, the new cover boys for excess and greed in the private-equity age, has plunged 21 per cent since it completed its initial public offering, oh, about two hours ago? That the vultures at Cerberus Capital can't sell bonds to finance their big Chrysler deal? That Wall Street bankers are waking up at 3 a.m. in a cold sweat, having just dreamed of subprime loans? "The reckoning has started," he says.
Mr. Narayanan, who runs a shop called Trident Investment Management, might be the most unusual investor you've never heard of. He could have been a scientist, a famous economist, or a CEO. (His older sister, Indra K. Nooyi, is the chairman and top executive at PepsiCo and arguably the most powerful woman in Corporate America.) He graduated summa cum laude from Yale, studied under Paul Krugman at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and acquired an MBA and a PhD in finance and economics from that institution. "He is the single smartest guy I've ever met in my life," says CI Financial's Bill Holland, which you could dismiss as fund-company marketing spin, except he's put $10-million of his own dough in Mr. Narayanan's hedge fund.
Instead of rocket science, he chose a different vocation: prophet of financial doom. Mr. Narayanan makes Eric Sprott look like a cheerful optimist. The credit squeeze that has put a deep-freeze on leveraged buyouts in July and forced this little stock market correction - this is just the beginning, he says. "I would say we're probably in the second or third inning." The best-case scenario? A replay of the summer of '98, when the Dow lost about 20 per cent in a month-and-a-half. The worst? "More like the Great Depression of this century."

If it gets really ugly, blame Wall Street and its obsession with inventing ever more complicated financial products. Mr. Narayanan is something of an expert on this. His first job out of Yale was for Smith Barney, working on earlier versions of mortgage-backed securities - mortgages that are packaged together and resold to investors.
Now, the big lenders and brokerage firms repackage almost everything this way - not just plain-vanilla mortgages but credit card debt, corporate loans, leveraged buyout debt, home loans to deadbeats who can barely fog a mirror, let alone make their payments on time. Slap 'em together, put a shiny wrapper on them, mix-and-match, give them a new name, doesn't matter what you do. Just sell them and get them off the bank's books, fast. That's the new Wall Street.
It worked, for a while. But the web of collateralized debt obligations (CDO) and mortgage-backed securities and credit default swaps and other esoterica is undermined by a fatal flaw, Mr. Narayanan reckons: "You've broken that critical link that tied the borrower to the banker." Someone lends you money to buy a house knows you and can estimate the value of the property. But a bank or a hedge fund that buys a CDO that's made up of other CDOs that are backed by subprime loans made against homes in California that have dropped 15-per-cent in value - well, how the hell can they really know what that piece of paper is worth?
"All of these credit instruments and these fancy things that Wall Street has provided these people have really been predicated on one thing, which is that markets are orderly and everything is fine," Mr. Narayanan says. And when they aren't? Then you can't sell them because there are no buyers. Ben Bernanke, the U.S. Fed chairman, estimated last week that losses on subprime loans may turn out to be $100-billion (U.S.). Mr. Narayanan's view of things is less tidy: When a real credit crunch hits - and we have not seen it yet - some banks and hedge funds won't even be able to figure out for months what their losses are on high-risk debt.
So they'll be paralyzed. And then? Lending activity dries up overnight, which leads to a U.S. recession, which brings on a global recession. "This could potentially make Long-Term Capital [whose collapse helped fuel the '98 crisis] look like some kind of walk in the park," Mr. Narayanan says.
You could easily dismiss the guy as too apocalyptic, and perhaps you'd be right. On the other hand, while your portfolio was getting savaged, his fund, which is short-selling "everything we can get our hands on" related to the U.S. lending industry, went up 10 per cent this week. If there's any truth to his doomsday predictions, this will prove to be a great time to buy gold and government bonds. And to build a bunker in your backyard.

 ::soapbox::
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164659
  • Karma: +3/-3
    • View Profile
Re: Malcolm Gauld's 2004 compensation on IRS Form 990: $238,276
« Reply #37 on: September 27, 2009, 10:01:34 PM »
Any one have more recent Guidestar information? Since theyre selling the Crows Nest............
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164659
  • Karma: +3/-3
    • View Profile
Re: Malcolm Gauld's 2004 compensation on IRS Form 990: $238,276
« Reply #38 on: September 28, 2009, 09:52:55 AM »
I would be surprised if Hyde was in trouble.  Joe and crew have some backers with very deep pockets.  It is a good thing that they are selling the Crows Nest. It is a nice piece of local architecture and Hyde does not seem to adept at Physical Plant issues, at least in older buildings.  Mal is only making one tenth what the director of MoMA makes and is doing the right thing by playing hoops and staying out of the way of this lovely and intelligent wife. http://philanthropy.com/stats/salary/
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Ursus

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8989
  • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Malcolm Gauld's 2004 compensation on IRS Form 990: $238,276
« Reply #39 on: September 28, 2009, 10:58:29 PM »
Quote from: "nko"
Any one have more recent Guidestar information? Since theyre selling the Crows Nest............
Thread mentioning the selling of the Crow's Nest:

    bath campus financial trouble
    viewtopic.php?f=43&t=28739[/list]
    « Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
    -------------- -------------- --------------

    Offline Ursus

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 8989
    • Karma: +2/-0
      • View Profile
    Re: Malcolm Gauld's 2004 compensation on IRS Form 990: $238,276
    « Reply #40 on: September 28, 2009, 11:00:20 PM »
    Quote from: "H.L. Mannakin"
    I would be surprised if Hyde was in trouble.  Joe and crew have some backers with very deep pockets.  It is a good thing that they are selling the Crows Nest. It is a nice piece of local architecture and Hyde does not seem to adept at Physical Plant issues, at least in older buildings.  Mal is only making one tenth what the director of MoMA makes and is doing the right thing by playing hoops and staying out of the way of this lovely and intelligent wife. http://philanthropy.com/stats/salary/
    :roflmao: Are you in any way suggesting that Hyde's "campus improvements" qualify for consideration as "modern art?"
    « Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
    -------------- -------------- --------------

    Offline Violet

    • Posts: 9
    • Karma: +0/-0
      • View Profile
    Re: Malcolm Gauld's 2004 compensation on IRS Form 990: $238,276
    « Reply #41 on: October 14, 2009, 02:33:35 PM »
    If you read this IRS form carefully, it not only shows how much money Malcolm is making, but Laurie Hurd, Ken and Claire Grant, Lavoe Davis and other "top officers".
    When taking into account the economic climate, and their annual Fair Share campaign, how much are these people contributing to the school, considering that Malcolm, Ken and Claire have PRACTICALLY NO PERSONAL EXPENSES!!!! They should be giving A LOT back.
    I find this information offensive, especially when that money directly effects student programs or lack thereof.
    How about Joe, Malcolm, Laura, Ken, Claire, Don and Gigi pay their own bills for one year as a fair share contribution and let's see how much money the school can save just not having to pay the family's personal expenses. And that doesn't take into account what they don't pay under the non-profit tax exempt status they conveniently use for their houses and cars.

    Make no mistake, this is a family business, not an educational institution, and certainly not a non-profit one at that.

    Where is the integrity they so love to preach about?
    « Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

    Offline Ursus

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 8989
    • Karma: +2/-0
      • View Profile
    Re: Malcolm Gauld's 2004 compensation on IRS Form 990: $238,276
    « Reply #42 on: October 14, 2009, 05:37:50 PM »
    Quote from: "Violet"
    If you read this IRS form carefully, it not only shows how much money Malcolm is making, but Laurie Hurd, Ken and Claire Grant, Lavoe Davis and other "top officers".
    When taking into account the economic climate, and their annual Fair Share campaign, how much are these people contributing to the school, considering that Malcolm, Ken and Claire have PRACTICALLY NO PERSONAL EXPENSES!!!! They should be giving A LOT back.
    I find this information offensive, especially when that money directly effects student programs or lack thereof.
    How about Joe, Malcolm, Laura, Ken, Claire, Don and Gigi pay their own bills for one year as a fair share contribution and let's see how much money the school can save just not having to pay the family's personal expenses. And that doesn't take into account what they don't pay under the non-profit tax exempt status they conveniently use for their houses and cars.

    Make no mistake, this is a family business, not an educational institution, and certainly not a non-profit one at that.

    Where is the integrity they so love to preach about?
    Make that extended family "business."  :D   ...And don't forget the charter school revenues, i.e., the probable fees changing hands due to use of "intellectual property" or whatever ya want to call it in this case, the slots for assured employment for Hyde loyalists to make sure that the charters stay duly "Hyde-ified" (their words), the workshops on the "Hyde Process" or "Biggest Job" (see ALSO) that they conduct for the alleged benefit of specific marked communities, the book sales, the coffee mugs, the refrigerator magnets...
    « Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
    -------------- -------------- --------------