- 82 - not shown that any comparable executives, outside an acquisition context, received similar increases in their compensation over this period. 3. Analysis of Comparables As noted previously, the two experts’ use of compensation of purportedly comparable executives disclosed in SEC proxy filings to test the reasonableness of the Retained Executives’ compensation was a principal basis for their conclusions and, of Ms. Meyer’s various “external” analyses, the only one we have not rejected. However, the approach used by Ms. Meyer raises two threshold methodological issues that must be resolved. a. Relevant Period for Reasonable Compensation Comparison In developing her comparables analysis, Ms. Meyer generally considered compensation data for the aggregate period of 1992 through 1995 in her opening report; in her rebuttal report she considered data for 1992 only. Mr. Rosenbloom generally considered such data for 1992 only. Ms. Meyer’s use of 4-year aggregate figures in her analysis presents a threshold methodological issue. Ms. Meyer and petitioner, on brief, take the position that the reasonableness of the Retained Executives’ compensation under the 1991 Employment Agreements (as amended) should be assessed on the basis of the total compensation paid to the Retained Executives over the approximately 4-year periodPage: Previous 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011