Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Record Profit Nets Jiang $308,000 Versus Dimon’s $23 Million Pay
Aug. 22 (Bloomberg) -- JPMorgan Chase & Co. pays Jamie Dimon $1.21 million for every $1 billion of profit at the biggest U.S. bank. Industrial & Commercial Bank of China Ltd., the world’s most profitable, gives its top executive $9,400.
That pay-to-performance gap is set to widen this year. The state-controlled Chinese lender, led by Chairman Jiang Jianqing, may post second-quarter net income of $9.63 billion on Aug. 30, while Bank of China Ltd. will probably report $5.44 billion tomorrow, according to analysts’ estimates. New York-based JPMorgan last month reported a 9 percent decline to $4.96 billion following its trading loss in London.
Pay hasn’t kept pace with earnings in China, where government-appointed bankers have escaped the ire directed at overseas rivals for losing money on complex derivatives, money laundering or rigging rates. Still, the banks’ shares remain weighed down by concern that slowing economic growth will trigger defaults by developers and local governments.
“Chinese banks are risk averse due to culture, a different executive compensation structure” and the profitability of their lending operations, said Himanshu Shah, chief investment officer of Shah Capital Management in Raleigh, North Carolina. However, the banks are changing and will “resemble their Western counterparts to a great extent over the next five years.” ..............(more)
The complete piece is at: http://www.sfgate.com/business/bloomberg/article/Record-Profit-Nets-Jiang-308-000-Versus-3804565.php#ixzz24DwvKj3Y
1 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
But the free market folks on the U.S. domiciled compensation committees keep telling us that they absolutely must pay executives 100s of millions or they won't be able to find qualified candidates. What gives? 
And why does the free market, "We can always find someone willing to do that same job for $1.00/hr less" down-ward, wage pressure, only apply to those whose compensation is calculated by the hour?