Do they deserve bonuses?

 

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/banking_and_finance/article5679822.ece

Makes you sick doesn't it!!

sick b4st4rds!

depends on what their contracts say really..some have automatic bonuses others are linked to performance....bankers or not i'd be pretty p1ssed off if someone said oh because of this years downturn you cant have your bonus earned from last year...also its poor to describe them as bonuses some are really sales based commissions...i.e you bring in £500m worth of business you get paid your % as to how badly the work performs later is of no consequence....imagine the laugh if cars sales were paid commissions based on how relaible the cars perform

Omg this country is so ret*rded at times

Utterly disgusting!!

This is life...The rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

Good on them, they are in the positions we all want to be in.

 

I have people in my company that get bonuses of over £5,000,000 every year. They earn it that same as everyone else.

 

If these kind of jobs with huge moneys didn't exist neither would the economy. People would not have the enthusiasm to push further and harder to climb the ladder.

So they have had to make decitions that went bad for some companies, what are they ment to do? Keep throwing money into a hole you just cant fill? Or cut it off before you blead to death. Unpopular decitions but the right ones in terms of business.

 

No idea what the fuss is from you lot?

Good on them, they are in the positions we all want to be in.

 

I have people in my company that get bonuses of over £5,000,000 every year. They earn it that same as everyone else.

 

If these kind of jobs with huge moneys didn't exist neither would the economy. People would not have the enthusiasm to push further and harder to climb the ladder.

So they have had to make decitions that went bad for some companies, what are they ment to do? Keep throwing money into a hole you just cant fill? Or cut it off before you blead to death. Unpopular decitions but the right ones in terms of business.

 

No idea what the fuss is from you lot?

 

 

When can I start?

Barclays is not a "not for profit" organisation. The corporate arm took a decision (along with others it appears from the article) to call in their loans and they succeeded from a chain which must have been in trouble. They don't take a decision like this lightly as they only make money from lending. They recouped all their money which for their shareholders is a good result.

 

 

Picture it this way, you lend somebody €5k (which you actually borrowed yourself) to buy a €7k van on the condition that you have security over the vehicle and this is your only security. This guy goes and keeps working using the van to deliver shopping to his customers and it is critical to his business. However his business isn't going well and he doesn't honour his commitments to you of repaying your loan. You are faced with either letting this continue on and watch the value of your security shrink with losses looking likely or say "**** it", I want the van now, to cover the loan. The guy goes out of business, with three people losing their jobs, but you get your money back. You know you are going to be able to buy your kids a new pair of shoes because you can cover the original loan you took out. Same principle with Barclays, only on a different scale.

 

It wasn't this sort of decision that nearly collapsed the global banking system or economies, but rather reckless lending in scenario's where it would have been clearly obvious that the lenders would have difficulty in getting their money back.

 

If I was a shareholder, I would have absolutely no problem in these guys getting paid their bonuses for that type of decision. Might not have been the best decision politically for others such as the UK government, but the best decision financially for Barclays and their stakeholders.

Chayden.

 

DUCK!!!! Telling unpopular truths doesn't go down well here! lol

 

I've got my own corner of the forum to hide in 90% of the time just for this lol

Chayden.

 

DUCK!!!! Telling unpopular truths doesn't go down well here! lol

 

I've got my own corner of the forum to hide in 90% of the time just for this lol

 

I'm waiting for it....... the laptop is starting to shake and tremble, it feels it coming.:rofl::rofl:

 

All joking aside "blind terror" and anger can be dangerous and I appreciate people who are currently finding it difficult (like myself I might ad) to make ends meet, hurt to see others earn a £1m per annum for making politically unpalatable decisions which would have been protrayed solely from one angle in the media. However balance is always required.

I'm waiting for it....... the laptop is starting to shake and tremble, it feels it coming.:rofl::rofl:

 

All joking aside "blind terror" and anger can be dangerous and I appreciate people who are currently finding it difficult (like myself I might ad) to make ends meet, hurt to see others earn a £1m per annum for making politically unpalatable decisions which would have been protrayed solely from one angle in the media. However balance is always required.

 

I have no problems with what you say mate. At the end of the day its business and yes they should be congratulated on making hard not popular decisions. I just find it painful (and admitteldy this does not apply to Barclays directly) that we are in a recession caused by very very poor decision making by "bankers" and everyone suffers becuase of this but "bankers" are being paid massive bonuses. Sadly when news like this comes out its often difficult to not tar them all with the same brush. Just would be nice to see the industry eat some humble pie on behalf of the rest of us.

I just find it painful (and admitteldy this does not apply to Barclays directly) that we are in a recession caused by very very poor decision making by "bankers"

 

As do I and its very painful. The subprime catasrophy in the US kicked the whole thing off. If you want a laugh at the absolute craziness of the situation have a look at the following factually based presentation from John Fortune and John Bird. Its probably a year old or more at this stage but just gives the pretext to the whole downfall :

 

 

My sister in laws fiancee works for an American Investment Bank and he used to see these types of transactions happening and also said that the fund names used were accurate.

 

Over here the government is going to cap the bonuses paid to the top executives in the banking sector considering some of the skullduggery that is being uncovered.

Edited February 7, 200916 yr by chayden

My point wasn't the scuttling of Woolworths, it was the irresponsible behaviour on the part of the Corporate arm in lending such huge sums in the first place. You know this was a mistake on their part, so I fail to see any justifiable defence here?

..also its poor to describe them as bonuses some are really sales based commissions...i.e you bring in £500m worth of business you get paid your %, as to how badly the work performs later is of no consequence....

 

Exactly the problem!!

 

This resulted in massive "sub-prime" lending that should never have been allowed.

These went 'bad' which nearly broke the banks.

The banks then had to be bailed out by the tax-payers.

 

Do you really think they deserve their bonuses?!