Skip to main content

Vikram Pandit To Get The Heave-Ho?

We don't want to type it, let alone think it, but it's possible Vikula won't be around long enough to enjoy his new $10 million office (though, really, now that it's been stripped of a Zen Garden, is it really worth sticking around for? Probably not). The Financial Timesreports that senior officials at the FDIC have been talking Pandito replacements, in the event the bank needs more cash-money. Apparently successors include new CFO Ned Kelly, old CFO Gary Crittenden, and an unnamed new board member.

"It is unthinkable that Vikram could stay on if Citi requires more federal funds," said a person familiar with the matter. "It is prudent to be thinking about different scenarios."
The FDIC is only one of the regulators that has a say on whether Mr Pandit steps down if the government bails out Citi for the fourth time in six months following completion of a "stress test" of its health.
Any decision on Citi's leadership will be led by the Treasury, which is about to take a 36 per cent stake in the company and will sanction further capital injections.
The Federal Reserve and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, which regulate national banks, will also have to bless top management changes.


Vikram Pandit Is Committed To Getting Paid

If you didn't know Chief Executive Officer Vikram Pandit, you might think he enjoyed not being compensated for the work he does at Citigroup because for quite some time, he wasn't. And although the "I will only get paid $1/year until Citi turns a profit" exercise was fun for a while, he was pretty happy when the old jalopy started making money again, in part because it meant he could receive a paycheck. Then last April, his shareholders rejected the bank's executive pay plan, claiming the Big C "lets Chief Executive Officer Vikram Pandit collect millions of dollars in rewards too easily." And while it's possible that Citi shareholders are just a bunch of pricks who chose to overlook the fact that Uncle Vikula didn't collect squat for several years and once had an entire article written about the fact that lieutenants attributed a "new bounce in his step" to him daydreaming "the day when he is going to earn more than a $1 a year,” maybe they just assume that he doesn't care about getting paid either way? Anyway, here's Vickles, reminding anyone who forgot about the sacrifices he made and setting the record straight: “The board has this process with them, they’re going through it, and they are committed, as I am, to making sure that they resolve this,” Pandit said. “I want to get paid what the board thinks is right for me, for the job that I’ve done and for the incentives that they think I ought to have.” Pandit told lawmakers in 2009 that he would take a $1 annual salary until he restored the bank to profitability. Citigroup made a $21.7 billion profit for 2011 and 2010 combined, compared with a $29.3 billion loss for the two preceding years. “When the company was losing money, I stepped up and said I’ll take a dollar a year and I did, exactly for that reason, exactly the right thing to do,” Pandit said. For those having trouble separating the nice guy/don't want to offend anyone statement from what he's actually trying to say, a rough translation of the above would be: get me paid, bitch! Citigroup Will Resolve CEO Pay By End Of Year, Pandit Says [Bloomberg]