Anti Fat Cat Bank CEOs? Let's go! & teach them a lesson!

Extant

Francis63 wrote: »

You sound so pompous! You know exactly what I'm talking about and I'm not going to waste my time writing you an essay!

No, I don't know what you're talking about. That's why I'm asking.

I'd like YOU to explain to ME why bank bosses are rewarding themselves (cash OR OTHER incentives) for failure, thank you!

And I'd like you to explain to me why the vast majority of them shouldn't have bonuses. I could understand if you mentioned RBS Group or HBOS specifically, since those are both in somewhat serious trouble, especially with RBS Group announcing an annual loss.

Barclays, however, has not announced an annual loss. At our last report, we'd made profit. Same for HSBC. That said, we realize the market is not perfect at this point, and we're taking measures to get through the storm. We're not paying any dividends and we're not rewarding our senior executives for this year.

We're not failing, and we're still not rewarding our senior executives. However, let's think logically about companies that are rewarding their people with incentives, even in times of trouble. These are the people who are going to undo the damage from the bad times, and they need to be kept in place. Despite what you may think, it's not easy to replace an executive. The last thing any business needs in times of trouble is everyone jumping ship.

storminbalder

BarclaysManager wrote: »

Salvation? I'm sorry, I didn't realize I was in church.

I'm asking you to substantiate a claim you made. If you can't do that, don't make the claims, simple enough.

What claim? I'm confused.

Extant

Francis63 wrote: »

Because I want to do something about it and changing bank accounts is a start. It doesn't follow that those who pay themselves the biggest bonus have the best customer service or the best rates. In fact it's more likely that the opposite is true. It's the share price they care about, NOT the customers.

The same does apply to other industries, banks are just my starting point and pretty topical.

We live in a free market system. We have free competition. If you don't like one company's stance, go to another. Easy.

You're never going to change the bonus system, though. Outlaw bonuses and basic salaries will just go up. Businesses need to be able to spend money on these things to attract the top performers, and grow their business.

Funnily enough, many of us (banks, I mean) have a responsibility to do well as the majority of our investors are pension funds and personal investment groups.

PROLIANT

Ok, lets take our blinkers off for a wee while, what about other large companies like Wal-Mart, Sainsbury’s, Tesco and many more that we could cover, what about their "fat cat bonus"? They too have senior executives who make allot of money, they wouldn't be in that position if they were not good at their job, all the people at the bottom of the food chain like you and I will always complain when somebody has got more than we have...human nature, we will always try to find and excuse no matter who that person/company is of degrading them or dissing them because they have more than what we have got. Can't really see the issue here, could somebody please elaborate?

Francis63

BarclaysManager wrote: »

If you don't like one company's stance, go to another. Easy.

You're never going to change the bonus system, though.

Exactly my point (the first sentence above). Barclays are NOT the worst offender by far, I agree. Yes, they still made a (small) profit but have not performed well.

YET... Bob Diamond, head of investment banking, received pay and shares worth over 21 million pounds last year, just down on 2006 but putting him among Europe's highest-paid bankers.

THAT is silly money.

Extant

Francis63 wrote: »

Exactly my point (the first sentence above). Barclays are NOT the worst offender by far I agree. Yes they still made a (small) profit but have not performed well.

YET... Bob Diamond, head of investment banking, received pay and shares worth over 21 million pounds last year, just down on 2006 but putting him among Europe's highest-paid bankers.

THAT is silly money.

He's also President of Barclays plc.

It's silly money - in your opinion. In our opinion, his skills and talent set are worth that amount.

When he joined, BZW (the predecessor to Barclays Capital) had recently been broken up, and our investment banking and wealth divisions were in a terrible state. He has had phenomenal success since taking over these areas of the business and has helped to drive up their profits and the profits of the group.

This success is worth that amount of money to us, and it's worth that to a lot of other people, too. We need to pay him that to keep him with us, because he is a valuable asset. It's not as though we're the only ones who would offer him such money.

ahai1

Yes it maybe in all industries but the banking sector is unique where people who had no idea what they were doing were earning bonuses. They have done a good job of wrecking the financial sector.

You are not comparing like with like.

Biggles wrote: »

Why pick on banks? The bonus culture runs right through all industries - and that's not just in the UK but all over the world.

So, are you going to check the boss's salary before choosing which supermarket to shop at? Or which utility company? Why do you care?

If 'the boss' gives you a good deal (good rate of interest, good supermarket prices, good gas/electricity prices etc), then he's worth the extra they pay him in my book. It's my bottom line that counts, not his.

Extant

Francis63 wrote: »

Exactly my point (the first sentence above). Barclays are NOT the worst offender by far, I agree. Yes, they still made a (small) profit but have not performed well.

I actually this, first read. A small profit?

I congratulate you on living a life so successful that you can declare 2.75 billion profit "small" - and that's at INTERIM results.

PROLIANT

I think consumers play an equal part in wrecking the financial sector by claiming back charges which were fair from the point of view that they managed their accounts very badly, this in turn impacts on the banks and finance houses.

Extant

ahai1 wrote: »

Yes it maybe in all industries but the banking sector is unique where people who had no idea what they were doing were earning bonuses. They have done a good job of wrecking the financial sector.

You are not comparing like with like.

Actually, most of "them" knew exactly what they were doing.

If anything, you should be whinging about over paid civil servants who were negligent and short sighted in regulating the industry.

Go scream at a lackluster FSA and the out-dated dinosaur that is the SEC, not banks who pay people for generating profit.