Reply to: New look at City bonuses

[AtW]

The shareholders allow it to happen, don't they?

That's because shareholders are big pension funds etc, and they don't want to do anything active about these things, and the reason they invest is because BARC is in FTSE 100.

When I get some free time (after SKA's imminent success), I'll buy 1 share of BARC and give 'em hell on their next AGM.

HTH

[d000hg]

The shareholders allow it to happen, don't they?

[AtW]

Company directors/share-holders (not sure which) decide how to manage dividends... some companies decide to do big dividends, others decide on none at all.

Shareholders are ultimate owners of the company, when directors decide it's a good idea to spend most of profits on staff bonuses leaving shareholders bugger all then there is no point in such a company as it appears to exist to make directors/employees rich.

It's not like they are taking 10% of profits in bonuses, ffs - how can it even be called profit if such a vast some goes into cost based of employees? It's NOT a profit - only what's left and paid as dividend (or retained in company) is, and in this case it's not much.

[d000hg]

Eh? OWNERS of the company decide what the company does - paying dividend or not, when staff is helping themselves get enriched at the expense of owners getting bugger all dividend that can't possibly be right.

Company directors/share-holders (not sure which) decide how to manage dividends... some companies decide to do big dividends, others decide on none at all.

[Random]

Yes, and this duty includes ensuring that the company does not spend all its profits on cost of staff that can leave any time.

WHS would be good to check recent investment banking profit numbers..

[AtW]

directors have a fiduciary duty to shareholders.

Yes, and this duty includes ensuring that the company does not spend all its profits on cost of staff that can leave any time.

[AtW]

I'm wondering if he has an ulterior motive. Perhaps he's been spekulating on the banks and is disappointed by the yield.

That's a dirty spekulation on my perfectly crystal motives!!!

[Bunk]

You'rrrre not from around 'ere, are yerrrr?
If you were from these 'ere parrrts, you'd know that AtW is our resident economics village crrrretin.
Eeeee comes from forrreign parrrrts, eee duz where they don't understand capitalism, like.

Yet he's advocating a more capitalist way of doing things. Paying the workers more of the profits sounds like the sort of thing he would approve of, so I'm wondering if he has an ulterior motive. Perhaps he's been spekulating on the banks and is disappointed by the yield.

[Random]

haha

[sasguru]

directors have a fiduciary duty to shareholders. They do not pay bonuses to stitch up shareholders, they pay them because if they do not they will lose talent and profit to competitors. Traders are entrepreneurs who will take their business with them if they leave. If you do not pay them a competitive bonus they WILL leave. Then the last thing you should be worrying about is your 1p per quarter dividend and be more focussed on the devaluation of your equity holding.

You'rrrre not from around 'ere, are yerrrr?
If you were from these 'ere parrrts, you'd know that AtW is our resident economics village crrrretin.
Eeeee comes from forrreign parrrrts, eee duz where they don't understand capitalism, like.

[Random]

directors have a fiduciary duty to shareholders. They do not pay bonuses to stitch up shareholders, they pay them because if they do not they will lose talent and profit to competitors. Traders are entrepreneurs who will take their business with them if they leave. If you do not pay them a competitive bonus they WILL leave. Then the last thing you should be worrying about is your 1p per quarter dividend and be more focussed on the devaluation of your equity holding.

[doodab]

Yes, 5% that's massive

I was getting 5%+ on my savings account in "good times" (before QE and negative interest rates) ffs - why take extra risk with those shares then?

Yes but RBS were yielding 16% then.

What do you get on your savings account now?

[AtW]

You're not entitled to dividends at all...

Eh? OWNERS of the company decide what the company does - paying dividend or not, when staff is helping themselves get enriched at the expense of owners getting bugger all dividend that can't possibly be right.

[d000hg]

AtW how much work do you do for your dividend? You're not entitled to dividends at all... some shares pay none. Maybe banks can lose all their expensive, good, staff and pay 5X more dividend... but shares might fall 50% in value. Would you prefer that? It's up to company owners what to do with money. You don't like how a company is run... simples, don't invest in it.

[AtW]

Secondly, they won't be paying much of a dividend because they are stockpiling cash and deleveraging.

They are not stockpiling cash, they are using it to pay themselves large bonuses and leave shareholders with pathetic dividend.

Apple is a technology company and they (technology companies) have potential for share growth the Barclays will never have.