<snip>AIG also claims that retention of individuals at Financial Products was vital to unwinding the subsidiary's business. However, to date, AIG has been unwilling to disclose the names of those who received these retention payments making it impossible to test their claim. Moreover, as detailed below, numerous individuals who received large "retention" bonuses are no longer at the firm. Until we obtain the names of these individuals, it is impossible to determine when and why they left the firm and how it is that they received these payments.
If AIG were confident in its claim that those who received these large
bonuses were so vital to the orderly unwinding of the unit, one would
expect them to freely provide the names and positions of those who got
these bonuses. My Office will continue to seek an explanation for why each one of these individuals was so crucial to keep aboard that they were paid handsomely despite the unit's disastrous performance.
<snip>
The top recipient received more than $6.4 million;
•
The top seven bonus recipients received more than $4 million each;
•
The top ten bonus recipients received a combined $42 million;
•
22 individuals received bonuses of $2 million or more, and combined they
received more than $72 million;
•
73 individuals received bonuses of $1 million or more; and
•
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x434149