Absolutely correct Verus. This translates to the production of dividend income for Mr. Hanselman even though he may not produce sufficent corporate income to improve equity share values, or even improve earnings at all. It's a bit exhausting to continually hear that the higher Fed rate is the reason for depressed USBAN earnings. CEO's are paid for solutions to uncommon economic and competitive conditions, not for information why improvements cannot be accomplished.
What are the names of the Board members? About 1,000 shareholders should talk to them individually, or better, larger shareholders should combine to elect a Board that acts like a Board interested in creating shareholder value.
Hanselman has been around UBAN since the mid to late eighties and unfortunately, has never been held accountable for the dismal performance of UBAN. I agree, it is easy to blame the economy for your problems. Has the Board looked into such issues as USBANK's market share while Hanselman has been at the helm? Is it true that mortgage originations are way down in the bank's market area compared to their competition? If so, what is being done about this and is this due to poor marketing? Why doesn't the bank even have a web-page--something that is a no brainer? People like to point to the high dividend, but what happens to the stock price if the dividend is cut as it was once before? While other more successful banks are reducing bricks and mortar, U. S. Bank continues to contemplate additional branch offices--why? U. S. Bank has touted its union connections, but have we read of any $$$ being made? When Hanselman talks about being patient, I take this as code to shareholders that they should overlook mediocre performance until he is good and ready to retire. IMHO, give Hanselman three years from the date he took over and if the bank does not meet a minimum benchmark, replace him! If the Board gave him a deadline to perform, it could be said they are more interested in shareholder performance than their compensation.