Engage and learn about markets and trading online
Johann Rupert seems to have asked the right question - with a little swipe at the fund managers - but ignoring the glasshouse of REI and its management charges- precarious stuff this? I also liked the
(at last) candid admission about poor advice regarding MEI!
.. SO the question is on what basis should management be rewarded - unlike Naspers for doing more than breathing regarding tencent.
Realistically the horizon for reward might not extend beyond three years - would you reward SASOL managment for the US plant delivery....Something tells me you wonldn't - can't remember how long that has been on the go...
How about a modest base and then portion of actual profits (small slice) with some held back to be paid over next 3 years?
It a great Q, everybody moans about management being paid too much, but nobody really has a better answer ?
I like the three legged pot you have placed this on. The bigger the reward for short term linked perforamnce the greater the chance tha "JOHN" who is coming o the end of his working career will place all his efforts
on the short term... cos he won't be there in four years....
Voting at AGM's I almost always vote against motions to approve remuneration policies and directors remuneration but, my little voice is lost in a huge wilderness. Almost always these motions are carried in excess of 99%. Why arent the big shareholders qurying these issues? How can a director hold 6 or 7 seats in various companies and still have the time to provide sufficient informed input/query/investigate etc. Witness SNH, where were the directors? So much for a high quality well paid board?