West Brom BS AGM

finneyb

Just got my voting papers thro.

Ordinary resolution 3 'To approve the Director's Remuneration Report for the Year ended 2010.'

Chief Ex total remuneration for 2010 £660,000 !!!!!!!

I'll be voting against that one, just another *ankers with the snout in the trough.

Essex123

Well the West Brom did "only" lose £17m in the last financial year, compared to £39m the year before.

Imagine what might happen to exec pay if they somehow manage to make a profit!!

steady__eddie

I see that they are using the Saddlers ground again in preference to the Hawthorns. They obviously have to cut back somewhere in order to pay the staff.
It's a pity that they have to hold it during the afternoon when attendance may be limited due to employment commitments.

edda

My forms arrived today. I noticed that the Chief Exec's total renumeration went up from £228k to £660k (but he did come from Portman - not a society I ever thought much of).

Is it worth going to an AGM - often considered it but never thought it worth my while? I see that if you want to ask a question, they prefer to know what it is beforehand. What are the chances of being able to get your question tabled?

steady__eddie

I have posed the occasional question in the past and have always been given the opportunity to speak, indeed it is always possible to submit the supplimentary poser after the Chairman has supplied his prepared response which did not quite come up to my expectations.
It only usually becomes difficult to question the board if the meeting has been going on for say two and a half to three hours and the call of the free range biscuits and liquid refreshments are becoming apparent. This state manifests itself by constant fidgeting and low mumbling.
If a members nerves or oratorical skills are not up to scratch for such an austere occasion, a steward will ask your question on your behalf.
I am keen to congratulate the Board on only spending £1,068,600 in golden parachutes in respect of the three directors who resigned during the period.

steady__eddie

p.s.

Forget to say in my last reply that Mr. Sharpes salary of £228k was for the period from 13/10/08 to 31/03/09 (a tad over five and a half months) whereas the figure of £660k is for the period 01/04/09 to 31/03/10 (12 months).

I really must try and get the hang of this editing busines.

Ifts

I got my voting papers through today, ended up voting online. The Society will donate 20p for every online vote to Macmillan Cancer Support.

fullstop

Ifts wrote: »

I got my voting papers through today, ended up voting online. The Society will donate 20p for every online vote to Macmillan Cancer Support.

Same amount as Nationwide is contributing to Macmillan.

Abstained on every vote except Directors remunation which I voted against. Won't make the slightest difference, but only too willing to help Macmillan from personal experience.

Too_smart_to_be_an_IFA

I'm rather tempted to pop along to the Nationwide one. Anyone here definitely going?

Hungerdunger

Can someone explain how it is that the Prime Minister gets a salary of around £197k (of which both Brown and Cameron decided to forego a substantial chunk), while this man gets a remuneration more than three times that, and appears to have made no gesture to reduce it until the West Brom's financial position improves?

flossy_splodge

Hungerdunger wrote: »

Can someone explain how it is that the Prime Minister gets a salary of around £197k (of which both Brown and Cameron decided to forego a substantial chunk), while this man gets a remuneration more than three times that, and appears to have made no gesture to reduce it until the West Brom's financial position improves?

I Think it's an interesting amalgam of greed and look after number one.