Comments on: Citi finally sells Phibro http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/10/09/citi-finally-sells-phibro/ A slice of lime in the soda Sun, 26 Oct 2014 19:05:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: Stuart Levine http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/10/09/citi-finally-sells-phibro/comment-page-1/#comment-7802 Mon, 12 Oct 2009 03:22:50 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/10/09/citi-finally-sells-phibro/#comment-7802 Felix–I’ve yet to see anyone comment on the obvious: Citi’s promise to pay one employee $100M was under attack. Citi now believes that it has avoided the attack by pawning off the employee’s division to Phibro which, presumably, pay the employee the bonus. But, of course, we have to assume that the economic burden of the $100M bonus falls on Citi via a reduction in the sale price. Thus, Citi has avoided oversight on this issue by Feinberg.

Have I missed something?

]]>
By: Andy http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/10/09/citi-finally-sells-phibro/comment-page-1/#comment-7751 Fri, 09 Oct 2009 14:04:59 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/10/09/citi-finally-sells-phibro/#comment-7751 Felix,
Your conclusion may be unchanged, but your metric is a questionable. I don’t think it makes sense to evaluate a person’s salary based on the segment’s (after-salary) income. Much better, I think, to say that there was $471 million available to Citi and Hall, combined, after all other Phibro expenses were accounted for. Of that, 21% went to Hall, while 79% went to Citi. Is that a good split? I have no idea. But I think it’s a better way to frame the question.

]]>