"shakedown" is probably NOT the correct characterization....and I RETRACT IT, however, knowing a bit about Boards, I know how EASY it is for the relationships to take precedent over logic. And, having worked in high tech, I understand the concept of future stock benefits, however, in this case I think the Board had a fiduciary responsibility to it's "shareholders" which it is now being forced to acknowledge. AND, there are hundreds of other Boards who should also be doing the same....I think Grasso is a fall guy for LOTS of others...I guess we shall see. And, NO, I'm no expert.
the Board had a fiduciary responsibility to it's "shareholders" which it is now being forced to acknowledge. I agree completely. Except that duty has been exercised. What is under-reported or misreported is the fact that the huge sum of $140M is not pay: it is pay plus return on investment.
It is much like reporting on a guy that puts $1,000 a year into an IRA that, at the age of $70 he received a pay of $200,000. He's put in $30,000 an the rest is appreciation of assets.
The same is with Grasso. If you look at his pay, it's not out of line with other CEOs. And his performance is much better than most, nothing short of spectacular.
The true, unreported cost is the lesson that any young person in America has learned today: be a victim, don't work hard and do not try to be suceessful. The guy rose from a clerk. We used to celbrate such stories in this country.
Grasso was merely thrown to the dogs --- the general public that has internalized the socialist outlook. That's all that happened. The public wanted blood and got it.