<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>edwardhauder.com</title>
	<atom:link href="http://edwardhauder.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://edwardhauder.com</link>
	<description>Ed Hauder&#039;s Equity Compensation Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Mar 2010 18:11:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>New SEC Staff Guidance Addresses Equity Awards&#8217; Disclosure</title>
		<link>http://edwardhauder.com/2010/03/03/new-sec-staff-guidance-addresses-equity-awards/</link>
		<comments>http://edwardhauder.com/2010/03/03/new-sec-staff-guidance-addresses-equity-awards/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Mar 2010 18:06:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ed Hauder</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Equity Compensation Plans]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://edwardhauder.com/?p=285</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On March 1, 2010, the SEC Staff again updated the Regulation S-K Compliance &#38; Disclosure Interpretations (C&#38;DIs).
If a company chooses to report the grant date fair value assumptions for equity awards in relation to the Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table, it can satisfy the Summary Compensation Table disclosure requirements for such information by referencing the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://edwardhauder.com/2010/03/03/new-sec-staff-guidance-addresses-equity-awards/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>More SEC Guidance on Revised Proxy Disclosure Rules</title>
		<link>http://edwardhauder.com/2010/02/17/more-sec-guidance-on-revised-proxy-disclosure-rules/</link>
		<comments>http://edwardhauder.com/2010/02/17/more-sec-guidance-on-revised-proxy-disclosure-rules/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Feb 2010 22:04:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ed Hauder</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Proxy Disclosure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SEC]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://edwardhauder.com/?p=253</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On February 16, 2010, the SEC Staff updated the C&#38;DIs for Regulation S-K with a few additional questions and answers, as follows:

Question 116.07
Question: Instruction 3 to Item 401(a) provides that if the  information called for by paragraph (a) is being presented in a proxy or  information statement, no information need be given respecting [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://edwardhauder.com/2010/02/17/more-sec-guidance-on-revised-proxy-disclosure-rules/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>RMG Issues FAQs on New SEC Proxy Disclosure Rules</title>
		<link>http://edwardhauder.com/2010/02/15/rmg-issues-faqs-on-new-sec-proxy-disclosure-rules/</link>
		<comments>http://edwardhauder.com/2010/02/15/rmg-issues-faqs-on-new-sec-proxy-disclosure-rules/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2010 12:00:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ed Hauder</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Corporate Governance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RiskMetrics Group (RMG)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RiskMetrics Group (RMG) Policies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SEC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[compensation consultant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[directors]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://edwardhauder.com/?p=246</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[RiskMetrics Group (RMG) recently issued several FAQs related to the new SEC proxy disclosure rules.  Previously, I blogged about the RMG FAQ regarding Compensation Risk Disclosures, and today I will address the two other FAQs, one on compensation consultant conflicts and the other on the enhanced disclosure about directors &#8211; qualifications, diversity policies, and board [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://edwardhauder.com/2010/02/15/rmg-issues-faqs-on-new-sec-proxy-disclosure-rules/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>RiskMetrics Weighs In on Compensation Risk Disclosures</title>
		<link>http://edwardhauder.com/2010/02/12/riskmetrics-weighs-in-on-compensation-risk-disclosures/</link>
		<comments>http://edwardhauder.com/2010/02/12/riskmetrics-weighs-in-on-compensation-risk-disclosures/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2010 14:52:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ed Hauder</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Corporate Governance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Proxy Disclosure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RiskMetrics Group (RMG)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SEC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Item 402(s)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[risk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[risk assessment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://edwardhauder.com/?p=242</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The new proxy disclosure rules (Item 402(s) to be precise) require public companies to include a narrative disclosure discussing the company&#8217;s compensation policies and practices as they relate to the company&#8217;s risk management if risks arising from the company&#8217;s compensation policies and practices for its employees are &#8220;reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://edwardhauder.com/2010/02/12/riskmetrics-weighs-in-on-compensation-risk-disclosures/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Sample RMG Burn Rate Commitment Language</title>
		<link>http://edwardhauder.com/2010/02/05/sample-rmg-burn-rate-commitment-language/</link>
		<comments>http://edwardhauder.com/2010/02/05/sample-rmg-burn-rate-commitment-language/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 13:52:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ed Hauder</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Burn Rate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RiskMetrics Group (RMG)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RiskMetrics Group (RMG) Policies]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://edwardhauder.com/?p=238</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Last week I blogged about the new burn rate commitments that RiskMetrics Group&#8217;s (RMG&#8217;s) Research Group was accepting.  Thanks to a reader, I&#8217;m now able to share sample burn rate commitment language that was supported by RMG:
The Company commits to a three-year average burn rate for the years 2010, 2011 and 2012 not to exceed [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://edwardhauder.com/2010/02/05/sample-rmg-burn-rate-commitment-language/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Another Burn Rate Commitment RiskMetrics Should Consider</title>
		<link>http://edwardhauder.com/2010/01/29/another-burn-rate-commitment-riskmetrics-should-consider/</link>
		<comments>http://edwardhauder.com/2010/01/29/another-burn-rate-commitment-riskmetrics-should-consider/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Jan 2010 17:22:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ed Hauder</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Burn Rate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RiskMetrics Group (RMG)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RiskMetrics Group (RMG) Policies]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://edwardhauder.com/?p=236</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Well, as expected, RiskMetrics Research Group is being a little flexible when it comes to companies&#8217; burn rate commitments for 2010 (for the full details, read this blog entry). But, as I indicated, given the speculative nature of two of the new allowable options, I don&#8217;t think many companies will easily undertake such commitments.
After giving [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://edwardhauder.com/2010/01/29/another-burn-rate-commitment-riskmetrics-should-consider/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Changes to RiskMetrics Group&#8217;s Burn Rate Commitment Policy</title>
		<link>http://edwardhauder.com/2010/01/27/changes-to-riskmetrics-groups-burn-rate-committment-policy/</link>
		<comments>http://edwardhauder.com/2010/01/27/changes-to-riskmetrics-groups-burn-rate-committment-policy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 23:15:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ed Hauder</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Burn Rate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RiskMetrics Group (RMG)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RiskMetrics Group (RMG) Policies]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://edwardhauder.com/?p=230</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[RiskMetrics Group just announced that its Research Group is allowing companies some flexibility in their burn rate commitments for 2010. Companies that have a 3-year average burn rate that exceeds their GICS industry group cap must either publicly commit to maintaining their burn rate for the next three years at the burn rate cap for [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://edwardhauder.com/2010/01/27/changes-to-riskmetrics-groups-burn-rate-committment-policy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NY Times Book Review: Money for Nothing</title>
		<link>http://edwardhauder.com/2010/01/17/ny-times-book-review-money-for-nothing/</link>
		<comments>http://edwardhauder.com/2010/01/17/ny-times-book-review-money-for-nothing/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Jan 2010 14:17:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ed Hauder</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Book Reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Corporate Governance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Shareholder Approval]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Shareholder Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://edwardhauder.com/?p=222</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Today&#8217;s New York Times reviews a new book, Money for Nothing: How the Failure of Corporate Boards Is Ruining American Business and Costing Us Trillions, from a former investment banker, John Gillespie, at Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns, and the co-founder of Salon.com, who worked at Dow Jones and Time Inc., David Zweig .
The book [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://edwardhauder.com/2010/01/17/ny-times-book-review-money-for-nothing/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How Will Your Company Fare Under RiskMetrics&#8217; Pay For Performance Policy?</title>
		<link>http://edwardhauder.com/2010/01/14/how-will-your-company-fare-under-riskmetrics-pay-for-performance-policy/</link>
		<comments>http://edwardhauder.com/2010/01/14/how-will-your-company-fare-under-riskmetrics-pay-for-performance-policy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Jan 2010 14:05:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ed Hauder</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Pay for Performance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RiskMetrics Group (RMG)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RiskMetrics Group (RMG) Policies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GICS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[performance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TSR]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://edwardhauder.com/?p=216</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Well, as I&#8217;m sure you know, RiskMetrics consolidated its Pay for Performance (P4P) Policies into a more unified approach for 2010.  Additionally, RiskMetrics tweaked the P4P Policy a bit.  However, the initial screen applied to determine whether a more in-depth analysis is warranted remains comparing a company&#8217;s 1- and 3-year Total Shareholder Returns (TSR) to [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://edwardhauder.com/2010/01/14/how-will-your-company-fare-under-riskmetrics-pay-for-performance-policy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>RiskMetrics Issues FAQs for Tax and Governance Havens</title>
		<link>http://edwardhauder.com/2010/01/13/riskmetrics-issues-faqs-for-tax-and-governance-havens/</link>
		<comments>http://edwardhauder.com/2010/01/13/riskmetrics-issues-faqs-for-tax-and-governance-havens/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Jan 2010 21:24:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ed Hauder</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Global]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RiskMetrics Group (RMG)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RiskMetrics Group (RMG) Policies]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://edwardhauder.com/?p=213</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On January 4, 2010, RiskMetrics issued a set of Frequently Asked Questions on Tax and Governance Havens: International Incorporation Issues.
RiskMetrics identifies the following countries as tax and governance havens:

Anguilla
Antigua/Barbuda
Bahamas
Barbados
Cayman Islands
Guernsey
Isle of Man
Jamaica
Jersey
Liberia
Marshall Islands
Mauritius
Monaco
Netherland Antilles
Panama
Virgin Islands (UK)

So what exactly is the consequence for a company to be incorporated in a tax and governance haven? RiskMetrics&#8217; policy [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://edwardhauder.com/2010/01/13/riskmetrics-issues-faqs-for-tax-and-governance-havens/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
