Pandit Gets Big Raise

I give Citi a lot of crap for, well, let's face it, obvious reasons. But I also have to give credit where credit is due. The company recently completed a

and posted their first year of profit since the crisis. And the government sold the last of their stake in December, so Citi is now operating on their own (sort of). So it makes sense that Vikram Pandit should no longer be the lowest paid CEO in America, right?

Evidently the Citi board thought so, because on Friday they approved a raise for Pandit from the $1 per year he's been making since accepting TARP assistance (that's right, kiddies, a buck a year) to his new salary of $1.75 million per year. Anyone care to figure out the percentage increase on that raise?

"The worst is over for Citigroup -- certainly there was a point in which people thought it would have to be broken up," said Richard Lipstein, a managing director at Boyden Global Executive Search, which consults for financial companies.

"The days of the $1-a-year Wall Street CEO are over," he said.

Well, that's a relief.

Meanwhile, it was also announced that fellow turnaround artist John Thain would be receiving a one-time $5.5 million stock grant from CIT on top of his $500,000 annual salary. While it's not the $10 million he wanted from BofA after the Merrill buyout, neither is it chicken feed.

Maybe things are getting back to normal after all. What do you guys think?

Comments (9)

Jan 25, 2011 - 5:51am
derivstrading, what's your opinion? Comment below:

This coming on the back off the 2 mil the Lloyds CEO got this year.

Personally, with exec compensation I am always left wondering how much value did they truly add? I remember reading the Wages of Wins, where they found that Iverson in his MVP season was actually like the 50th most productive player in terms of value added, and it leaves me wondering how their results apply to C level execs.

Jan 25, 2011 - 1:38pm
down on the upside, what's your opinion? Comment below:
derivstrading:
This coming on the back off the 2 mil the Lloyds CEO got this year.

Personally, with exec compensation I am always left wondering how much value did they truly add? I remember reading the Wages of Wins, where they found that Iverson in his MVP season was actually like the 50th most productive player in terms of value added, and it leaves me wondering how their results apply to C level execs.

try being responsible for ensuring that 260,000 people are all working towards a goal of taking every dollar invested and making it a 1.05 every year and then talk. there is certainly exggerated executive compensation in the marketplace and instances of worthless executives getting amazing golden parachutes, but the reality is it takes a certain kind of person to manage that many people and make the business a success. And those people dont come cheap. Whether its in the field or in the office.

Jan 25, 2011 - 3:00pm
econ, what's your opinion? Comment below:
derivstrading:
This coming on the back off the 2 mil the Lloyds CEO got this year.

Personally, with exec compensation I am always left wondering how much value did they truly add? I remember reading the Wages of Wins, where they found that Iverson in his MVP season was actually like the 50th most productive player in terms of value added, and it leaves me wondering how their results apply to C level execs.

I'm highly skeptical of the ability of people to actually measure value added in the NBA (or any industry, for that matter). Even if that Iverson stat is right, we should differentiate between value added and revenue added (i.e., seats filled). For example, comparing Tim Duncan and AI in their respective primes, I'm sure we can all agree that Tim Duncan was the better overall/team player, and did a better job helping his team win games. But, that's not necessarily the same thing as bringing in revenues and turning profits. AI is a much more interesting player to watch, sells more TV spots, jerseys, etc. I suspect players salaries in the NBA (and every other sport ) is more a function of how much money they make their organization, as opposed to how much they help the team win, which are not always the same thing.

  • 3
Jan 25, 2011 - 9:16am
econ, what's your opinion? Comment below:

Just out of curiosity, was he getting bonuses, stock options, and other forms of compensation when he was on that $1 salary?

Jan 25, 2011 - 9:56am
GOB, what's your opinion? Comment below:

Not sure about stock comp but I know prior to becoming CEO his company was bought out an he personally netted over $100 m or something along those lines.

I believe he deserves the raise. He did his job and was rewarded. Now it's time for him to add value to his shareholders

Best Response
Jan 25, 2011 - 11:08am
therapist1, what's your opinion? Comment below:

Copying directly from wiki:

"While CEO of Citigroup in 2007, Vikram S. Pandit earned an annualized compensation of $3,164,320, which included a base salary of $250,000, stocks granted of $2,914,320, and options granted of $0.9 In 2008, he earned a total compensation of $38,237,437, which included a base salary of $958,333, stocks granted of $28,830,000, and options granted of $8,432,911. But after adjusting for Citigroup's sunken share price, the package was worth just a few million dollars. 10 Vikram did receive $165 million for his low performing hedge fund which was purchased by Citi in 2007. 11 The fund has since been shuttered. [edit] 2009

On February 11, 2009, Pandit testified to Congress that he had declared to his board of directors, "my salary should be $1 per year with no bonus until we return to profitability."12[13] He also struck an apologetic tone for letting the bank consider completing the purchase of a private jet plane after receiving some $45 billion in bailout money. His total 2009 compensation was $128,751, with a base salary of $125,001 and other compensation of $3,750.14 After working for two years for just USD 1 a year, he will now receive USD 1.75 million."

Jan 25, 2011 - 11:52am
mperit01, what's your opinion? Comment below:

Rem quia sed aut enim quibusdam. Minima ab soluta qui aut nisi aut. Explicabo aut est ipsum molestias dignissimos in velit.

Consequuntur sit rerum ut eligendi sunt. Ut vel et sed modi asperiores quidem. Omnis ex ut et autem reiciendis quae deserunt cum. Numquam iure tenetur voluptatem rerum omnis ab. Voluptatem est aut ut quos quia maiores accusantium recusandae.

Consequatur eligendi quia natus ut deleniti sunt atque et. Magnam ut magnam laudantium corrupti odit modi consectetur. Voluptatum quia dolor sint officiis sed quia sit. Qui rem reiciendis id amet odio labore veniam. Ab provident dolor velit consequatur.

Aliquid quis officiis architecto amet iste qui officiis. Aliquam ut quia repudiandae sit nam et.

Start Discussion

Career Advancement Opportunities

November 2022 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company (▲08) 99.6%
  • Lincoln International (= =) 99.3%
  • Financial Technology Partners (+ +) 98.9%
  • Evercore (▽01) 98.5%
  • Bank of America Merrill Lynch (▲01) 98.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

November 2022 Investment Banking

  • PJT Partners (= =) 99.6%
  • Evercore (▲02) 99.3%
  • Greenhill (▲06) 98.9%
  • Canaccord Genuity (▲15) 98.5%
  • William Blair (= =) 98.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

November 2022 Investment Banking

  • PwC Corporate Finance (▲14) 99.6%
  • Lincoln International (▲03) 99.3%
  • Jefferies & Company (▲04) 98.9%
  • William Blair (▽02) 98.5%
  • Evercore (▽01) 98.2%

Total Avg Compensation

November 2022 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (10) $613
  • Vice President (38) $392
  • Associates (218) $256
  • 2nd Year Analyst (138) $163
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (19) $160
  • 1st Year Analyst (463) $153
  • Intern/Summer Associate (88) $151
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (334) $92