"eps accretive" is the key term.
Printable View
If they deliver strong earnings growth I have no objection to senior executives being paid well. I am reminded at this time of the very interesting approach towards diversity and one particular culture...you need to pay millions to come up with brilliant strategies like that so he's an absolute "bargain" at $2.8m :rolleyes:
Proof of ‘Troughing’ from the Annual Report
CEO remuneration as a multiple of staff remuneration
The CEO’s salary as a multiple of the staff average is 10.11 times (FY18: 10.5 times), and his total remuneration as a multiple of the staff average is 19.77 times (FY18: 19 times
No wonder he thanks staff for all their hard work and greatness at the ASM ...greedy bugger
The board, which includes Greg Tomlinson who owns 58,392,997 HGH shares would not employ a "Stupid bastard."
Actually - you might be right related to HGH, but I don't think I would generalize your statement - LOL.
I could think about a number of boards with huge personal holdings who (in hindsight) employed either greedy or stupid (or potentially just incompetent) hmm - subjects. Couldn't you?
To be honest - I have never seen a statistical analysis providing evidence that boards with large holdings acting less greedy or stupid. Do you?
But anyway - lesser risk to employ - say "undesirable" board members - does not mean it does not happen. And we all know that it actually does.
The way corporate excesses are heading and the outrageous salaries management get together with the power corporates have over the world we are probably heading for a revolution of sorts one day soon.
Pity movements like ‘Occupy Wall Street’ faded away but they will re-emerge - the world is getting sick and tired of excesses and corporatocracy