Article
I particularly like the point about wesfarmers being one of the most prudently and well managed extremely profitable companies that used to pay significantly below other more prestigeous companies of similar size. But now that they recently financed a massive aquisition of Coles, a huge Aussie retailer, almost completely by debt, executive pay has balooned despite poor shareholder perfomance measures.
It seems risk taking is associated with pay, the pay should only occur if returns seem cemented in for shareholders for at least a couple of years I think. Otherwise, execs are just going to take more risks aren't they?
I particularly like the point about wesfarmers being one of the most prudently and well managed extremely profitable companies that used to pay significantly below other more prestigeous companies of similar size. But now that they recently financed a massive aquisition of Coles, a huge Aussie retailer, almost completely by debt, executive pay has balooned despite poor shareholder perfomance measures.
It seems risk taking is associated with pay, the pay should only occur if returns seem cemented in for shareholders for at least a couple of years I think. Otherwise, execs are just going to take more risks aren't they?
Comment