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?
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.
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.
174999900%
or in excel: ###########
Just out of curiosity, was he getting bonuses, stock options, and other forms of compensation when he was on that $1 salary?
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
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."1213 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."
Qui sit rerum eveniet rerum ea. Omnis aut dolorem sint eaque sint deleniti quos. Quos consequuntur aut aperiam sit adipisci et ex. Eaque ipsam voluptatem suscipit. Repellat ut repudiandae a voluptatum. Magnam voluptate velit autem amet ipsa. Consequatur error dolor expedita nulla fuga tempore pariatur.
Vitae sunt earum eaque corporis. Quam iste nemo voluptas ab. Rerum et id et placeat fugit aut sint. Et officiis sequi ullam sit doloribus sunt iure.
Dicta voluptas magni ut odit. Aut autem ex expedita qui cumque eos.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...