More

Citigroup CEO Receives $3.7 Million Bonus

First Posted: 01/20/12 10:32 AM ET Updated: 01/20/12 10:32 AM ET

Citigroup

Businessweek:

Jan. 20 (Bloomberg) -- Citigroup Inc., the third-biggest U.S. bank by assets, awarded Chief Executive Officer Vikram Pandit about $3.7 million in stock as the firm reported a 6.4 percent increase in full-year profit.

Read the whole story: Businessweek

FOLLOW HUFFPOST BUSINESS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Money newsletter!
Filed by Maxwell Strachan  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 6
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
nothingchanges
too soon old, too late smart
12:29 PM on 01/21/2012
In 2007 Citigroup stock was selling for $550 a share.
Now it's just under $30.00

When executives are given millions of dollars in bonuses for that kind of performance, why work?

I think we've gone beyond "It's not what you know, it's who you know"

I think we're at the point of "It's not what you know, it's not who you know, it's what you know ABOUT who you know".

That's about the only justification I can see for this type of madness.....................
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
munki
Global to Local now Local to Global
02:01 AM on 01/21/2012
CANNOT BELIEVE it...

Guess American GREED never change... what is the accomplishment?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
builderman55
Featherless Biped
11:42 AM on 01/20/2012
Sick, sick, sick... Corporate CEO's are living proof that there is a parallel Universe where all of our natural laws are reversed. Up is down, black is white, failure is success. I am only shocked that more people are not shocked...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Carl Caroli
Give peace a chance
11:34 AM on 01/20/2012
And I'll bet he's voting for mittens.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mhh310351
Roosevelt Democrat
11:10 AM on 01/20/2012
BANKS TO BIG TO FAIL are not the same as banks 20 years ago. They are more giant investment firms. They make risky investment also like lending money to foreign governments.

And we the American citizens are expose to this risk. And their executives make huge profits.

Is this fair? Should we allow this. And because it's our federally insured money and they are to big to fail what are we to do?

There is a solution remove Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) protection from banks to big to fail. Maintain Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) for banks that will abide by the original terms of the Glass Steagall Act. Those Banks that want a minimum of Government regulation let them but I know where I'll put my money.

This concept of no regulations but with federal guarantee is just dumb!

The Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994 (IBBEA) swept away all state barriers to interstate banking. This was the first step of making banks to big to fail.

The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), also referred to as the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999, repealed part of Glass-Steagall, tearing down the walls between banking, insurance and investments.

The Glass-Steagall Act was passed in direct response to the Great Depression and helped to stabilize and rebuild the nation's economy.

Read more: The History of Bank Deregulation | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/about_5413083_history-bank-deregulation.html#ixzz1jzYzC5ya
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Cindy Russell444
11:07 AM on 01/20/2012
What? Only 3.7 million? He should be throwing a temper tantrum by now.