Determining an individual's compensation, especially a prominent figure like Tom Skilling, requires specific access to financial records. Publicly available data on executive salaries is often limited, subject to company policies and disclosure requirements. Information regarding compensation packages, including base salary, bonuses, and stock options, can be difficult to obtain unless explicitly reported in regulatory filings or through other legitimate channels.

Understanding compensation structures, including Skilling's, is significant in the context of corporate governance and transparency. Analysis of executive pay can illuminate trends, raise awareness of potential imbalances, and inform discussions about accountability and performance-based compensation. Such information helps to assess the alignment between executive compensation and company performance, which in turn allows for a deeper understanding of corporate culture and decision-making processes.

Further analysis of this issue necessitates a focus on specific regulatory frameworks and the reporting requirements for compensation disclosures. This will lead naturally into a more comprehensive discussion about executive compensation in relation to corporate performance, ethical considerations in compensation packages, and the role of compensation structures in organizational success.

What is Tom Skilling's Salary?

Determining Tom Skilling's compensation involves accessing specific financial records. Publicly available data regarding executive compensation is often limited and requires careful examination.

• Compensation structure
• Disclosure requirements
• Public data access
• Executive pay trends
• Performance alignment
• Regulatory frameworks
• Corporate governance
• Ethical considerations

Understanding Skilling's compensation illuminates corporate governance and transparency. Analysis reveals executive pay trends, potentially highlighting imbalances and performance-related discrepancies. Regulatory frameworks dictate disclosure procedures for executive compensation. This information fosters a deeper understanding of corporate culture and decision-making processes. For example, discrepancies between executive pay and company performance can signal issues within a company. Further, examining disclosure practices helps understand the level of transparency within organizations. These aspects are crucial to maintaining ethical standards and accountability within the corporate world.

1. Compensation Structure

Compensation structure, a crucial aspect of organizational management, dictates the various components that make up an executive's total compensation. Understanding this structure is essential for evaluating the appropriateness and alignment of compensation, as exemplified by the case of Tom Skilling. The elements of a compensation package are multifaceted and influence decisions concerning performance, incentives, and overall organizational health.

• Base Salary and Benefits:

  Base salary, often the most visible component, establishes a foundation for compensation. Benefits such as health insurance, retirement plans, and paid time off are further elements of the total compensation package. Evaluating the base salary and benefits in relation to industry standards and the individual's role is critical for assessing fairness and competitiveness. In Skilling's case, such an analysis would involve comparing his base compensation to peers in similar positions, industry benchmarks, and potential risk factors associated with his responsibilities.

• Bonuses and Incentives:

  Incentive-based compensation, including bonuses and profit-sharing plans, often ties compensation to performance metrics and organizational objectives. The structure of these incentivesthe specific criteria, the target levels, and the payout methodssignificantly influences the direction and motivation of individuals. Determining if incentives are aligned with overall corporate goals becomes pertinent when examining a figure like Skilling. Such examination requires assessing the success metrics and the potential for the incentives to promote or deter ethically questionable decisions.

• Stock Options and Equity:

  Stock options and equity grants provide significant incentives to executives to align their interests with long-term company success. The terms of these grants, including vesting schedules, strike prices, and potential for dilution, are crucial elements. In the context of an executive like Skilling, an analysis of stock option terms would determine whether such structures encouraged short-term gains at the expense of long-term value creation or if they promoted strategic alignment.

• Performance Evaluation and Appraisal:

  Formal performance evaluation and appraisal processes define how an executive's performance is assessed. The metrics employed, the frequency of evaluations, and the involvement of various stakeholders impact an individual's compensation. Analysis of this process determines how compensation is linked to achievements and whether the process is reliable and equitable.

In conclusion, dissecting the compensation structure surrounding a figure like Tom Skilling, including base salary, bonuses, stock options, and performance evaluations, provides valuable insight into executive compensation practices and their potential implications. Understanding these elements allows for a more nuanced comprehension of the factors influencing such compensation. Moreover, such an examination is critical for analyzing organizational effectiveness and promoting ethical conduct within the corporate landscape.

2. Disclosure Requirements

Disclosure requirements significantly impact the accessibility of information related to executive compensation, including Tom Skilling's. These regulations dictate the types of compensation data that companies must publicly report, thereby influencing the availability of information regarding specific individuals' pay. Understanding these requirements is crucial for evaluating the transparency and fairness of compensation structures within corporations.

• Regulatory Frameworks:

  Various laws and regulations govern the disclosure of executive compensation. These frameworks often mandate the reporting of base salaries, bonuses, stock options, and other forms of compensation. Specific sectors or industries might have additional requirements. Understanding the specific regulations in place at the time of the relevant executive compensation is vital. Different jurisdictions often have different standards, further complicating data collection.

• Reporting Mechanisms:

  Companies typically disclose compensation details in SEC filings (if applicable), annual reports, or proxy statements. These documents may outline the methods used to determine compensation, such as performance metrics, market comparisons, and recommendations from compensation committees. Access to these documents is often public, allowing for external analysis of compensation levels and structures. Determining the specific reporting mechanisms used by the company in question is key to accessing relevant data.

• Data Limitations and Accessibility:

  While disclosure requirements aim for transparency, access to specific details within these reports can be limited. Extensive financial statements and reports might not offer a concise overview of compensation, requiring interpretation and analysis to gather specific compensation figures. Moreover, historical data might not be equally available, especially when regulations have changed over time. Interpreting historical compensation requires consideration of the specific regulatory environment of those times.

• Privacy and Confidentiality Concerns:

  Certain elements of compensation details, such as specific salary figures, might be considered confidential and not subject to public disclosure. These elements could include, for example, benefits packages or certain components that, although part of the overall compensation package, are not readily available to the public. Balancing the need for transparency with confidentiality is crucial in the context of executive compensation.

In conclusion, disclosure requirements are essential for the public's understanding of compensation practices. However, limitations in access, variations in regulatory frameworks, and differing reporting mechanisms can significantly impact the amount of publicly available compensation information, including specific figures like Tom Skilling's. Analyzing these complexities is critical to properly understanding executive compensation within the context of transparency and corporate governance.

3. Public Data Access

Public data access plays a critical role in understanding executive compensation, including that of Tom Skilling. The availability and nature of such data directly influence the degree to which the public can assess compensation practices and potentially discern patterns or trends. This accessibility is essential for maintaining transparency and fostering informed discussion regarding corporate governance and executive accountability.

• Regulatory Filings and Reports:

  Publicly filed documents, such as those with regulatory bodies like the SEC, often contain data on executive compensation. These reports frequently include detailed breakdowns of salaries, bonuses, and stock options, providing a view into the total compensation packages. Analyzing these filings allows for the identification of trends in executive compensation, comparisons with industry standards, and assessments of the relationship between compensation and performance.

• Company Websites and Annual Reports:

  Companies sometimes publish information about executive compensation on their websites or in annual reports. These resources often include summaries of compensation, but levels of detail and transparency can vary. A thorough examination of available information necessitates attention to the specific presentation and content in the company materials.

• News Articles and Financial Analysis:

  News articles and financial analyses may report executive compensation figures. However, reliance on these sources requires verification against primary, official data sources. The accuracy and completeness of such information might vary; verification through regulatory filings is crucial.

• Limitations and Gaps:

  Public data access isn't always complete or readily available. Specific compensation details might not be publicly reported, particularly if certain elements are considered confidential. Regulations and policies regarding disclosure can influence the scope and extent of information that's publicly accessible. Historical data on compensation might also be incomplete or require further research. These limitations must be acknowledged when seeking a comprehensive understanding.

In summary, public data access is essential for understanding executive compensation. While resources exist to uncover details, such as regulatory filings, it's vital to approach these data with critical assessment of potential limitations and incomplete information to achieve meaningful insights. Analyzing data from various sources, including regulatory filings and company reports, combined with news articles and financial analysis, offers a more complete perspective. The absence of certain data points highlights the need to acknowledge potential gaps in the information available when evaluating executive compensation, including that of figures like Tom Skilling.

4. Executive pay trends

Executive pay trends provide a crucial context for understanding compensation, including that of Tom Skilling. Examining these broader trends reveals potential factors influencing individual compensation packages. Pay structures often reflect market dynamics, industry performance, and perceived value contribution. For example, periods of economic prosperity might correlate with increased executive compensation, whereas economic downturns could lead to reduced or more tightly controlled executive pay. Furthermore, industry-specific trends, such as rapid growth in certain sectors, can drive executive pay upward as companies seek top talent to drive expansion.

Analyzing trends in executive compensation helps assess the reasonableness of an individual's pay. This analysis includes comparing Skilling's compensation to the compensation of comparable executives in similar roles and industries at the same period. Significant deviations from these trends could suggest unusual circumstances, such as performance-related incentives or other compensation arrangements. For example, a dramatically high salary relative to prevailing trends might warrant deeper scrutiny regarding the justification and potential alignment with corporate objectives. Conversely, pay significantly below the trend could suggest an undercompensation of a role's critical responsibilities or a lack of alignment with corporate goals.

Understanding executive pay trends, therefore, is essential to assessing individual compensation fairly. By examining broader patterns and industry benchmarks, a more informed judgment can be made about the context of an individual's compensation. While focusing on an individual like Tom Skilling, considering the broader context provides a more complete and nuanced understanding, helping to avoid isolated interpretations and promote a more comprehensive assessment. Challenges in this analysis include data access and the complexity of accounting for varied compensation packages. However, such analysis helps build a strong foundation for evaluating executive compensation practices in a broader context, furthering transparency and ethical conduct.

5. Performance Alignment

Performance alignment, a crucial aspect of executive compensation, is directly related to understanding Tom Skilling's salary. It examines the degree to which an executive's compensation structure is linked to their performance and the achievement of corporate goals. A strong performance alignment suggests that compensation reflects contributions to organizational success. Conversely, misalignment could indicate potential conflicts of interest or ineffective incentive structures.

• Incentive Structure Design:

  Compensation structures that tie executive pay to measurable performance metrics, such as profitability, market share, or revenue growth, demonstrate a strong performance alignment. These incentives motivate executives to focus on achieving organizational objectives rather than pursuing personal gain independent of company success. For example, stock options or bonuses tied to specific performance targets are clear demonstrations of this alignment. Conversely, compensation structures that decouple executive pay from measurable results can weaken incentives, potentially creating misalignment between executive and organizational interests.

• Performance Measurement Criteria:

  The selection of metrics used to assess performance is critical. Metrics must be relevant, reliable, and aligned with the company's strategic goals. If the metrics are arbitrary or fail to reflect key performance drivers, the incentive structure, and, by extension, compensation levels, will be weakened. The appropriateness of performance metrics used to determine Skilling's compensation would require careful review to determine if they accurately reflected the impact of his actions on organizational success.

• Transparency and Accountability:

  A transparent process for evaluating performance and adjusting compensation based on results strengthens alignment. If the evaluation process is opaque or inconsistent, it can erode trust and create doubts about the fairness and effectiveness of the compensation structure. The transparency of the process used to determine Skilling's compensation, including the criteria used to assess his performance, would be a vital element to evaluate.

• Conflict of Interest Considerations:

  Strong performance alignment strives to minimize potential conflicts of interest between executive compensation and the pursuit of short-term gains over long-term value creation. A carefully structured incentive system should discourage behaviors that prioritize personal benefit over organizational success. In the context of an executive like Skilling, an examination of the compensation structure needs to consider whether any potential conflicts of interest might have influenced his decisions or whether the compensation structures fostered behavior that prioritized personal gain over company success. For example, the emphasis of incentives on short-term gains over sustained, long-term company value creation should be examined to ascertain if this potentially incentivized unethical conduct.

Understanding performance alignment, particularly in the context of executive compensation, provides crucial insight into the effectiveness of a company's governance structure and compensation strategy. Properly aligned compensation structures aim to motivate executives to act in the best interests of the organization, fostering accountability and ethical behavior. Further investigation into the specifics of Tom Skilling's compensation, including the performance metrics used and the transparency of the process, would help determine the degree of alignment between his compensation and the achievement of corporate goals.

6. Regulatory Frameworks

Regulatory frameworks play a critical role in determining the visibility and accessibility of information regarding executive compensation, including Tom Skilling's. These frameworks dictate disclosure requirements, influencing how compensation details are presented and the degree of public scrutiny they receive. Specifically, regulations concerning corporate financial reporting and executive compensation help shape the narrative surrounding compensation levels and potentially identify potential conflicts of interest or irregularities. The effectiveness of these frameworks in promoting transparency is a key component of corporate governance.

Different jurisdictions have varying regulatory frameworks, impacting the nature and extent of disclosed information. For instance, some regulations might mandate the reporting of specific components of executive compensation packages, such as stock options or bonuses, while others might place a greater emphasis on total compensation figures. The lack of standardized global regulations can lead to variations in compensation disclosure practices across organizations and industries. The specific nature of the regulatory environment in place at the time significantly influences the types and specifics of information publicly available. This highlights the importance of considering the historical context when analyzing compensation figures like Tom Skilling's.

Analysis of regulatory frameworks related to executive compensation is crucial for evaluating the transparency and accountability of corporate governance practices. In cases where regulatory scrutiny is absent or weak, it creates opportunities for undisclosed or potentially inappropriate compensation structures. The absence of clear disclosure requirements can lead to opacity in executive compensation, potentially obscuring conflicts of interest, and making it challenging for shareholders, investors, and the public to assess the fairness and appropriateness of compensation levels. Furthermore, examining these frameworks can reveal inconsistencies and gaps in the disclosure of information, illuminating potential loopholes and areas requiring improvement. In the broader context of corporate governance, strong regulatory frameworks contribute to a more ethical and transparent corporate landscape. Understanding the impact of regulatory frameworks on executive compensation data, like Skilling's, is thus essential for maintaining accountability and promoting trust in the financial markets.

7. Corporate Governance

Corporate governance, encompassing the structures and processes by which companies are directed and controlled, is intrinsically linked to executive compensation. The level and nature of executive compensation, including figures like Tom Skilling's, are often a reflection of a company's governance practices. Strong governance structures, characterized by transparency and accountability, typically result in compensation practices that align with shareholder interests and promote ethical behavior. Conversely, weak governance can lead to situations where executive compensation is detached from performance or even incentivizes actions detrimental to the organization's long-term success.

Effective corporate governance includes a well-defined compensation committee, independent directors who oversee executive pay, and transparent disclosure policies. These elements contribute to establishing fair and equitable compensation practices. For example, in cases of executive compensation packages perceived as excessive or misaligned with performance, a robust governance framework can provide a framework for scrutiny, review, and justification. Conversely, the lack of a robust compensation committee, weak oversight by independent directors, or insufficient disclosure can create opportunities for excessive or inappropriate compensation, as potentially exemplified in cases of executive malfeasance. The lack of checks and balances can lead to a disconnect between executive compensation and organizational performance.

Understanding the relationship between corporate governance and executive compensation, like Tom Skilling's, is vital for shareholders, investors, and the public. Strong corporate governance fosters trust and confidence, potentially attracting investment and promoting sustainable growth. Conversely, weak governance can lead to reputational damage, decreased investor confidence, and even legal ramifications. Ultimately, a thorough understanding of the governance framework surrounding executive compensation decisions is crucial for evaluating the overall health and sustainability of a company. This knowledge extends beyond individual cases and has broader implications for the structure and regulation of the corporate landscape. Rigorous investigation into compensation practices, such as Skilling's, often exposes deficiencies in governance structures, necessitating reforms and best practices to prevent similar outcomes in the future.

8. Ethical Considerations

Examining executive compensation, like Tom Skilling's, necessitates a framework for ethical evaluation. Compensation structures should align with organizational performance and adhere to ethical principles. Misalignment between compensation and performance, or the perception of such misalignment, can raise concerns about fairness, transparency, and the potential for unethical behavior. This analysis explores how ethical considerations relate to the determination of executive compensation, including Skilling's, acknowledging the potential for conflicts of interest and the need for accountability.

• Compensation Alignment with Performance:

  A fundamental ethical concern centers on whether an executive's compensation is commensurate with their performance and contributions to the organization. If compensation significantly outweighs performance or is decoupled from meaningful contributions, ethical questions arise regarding fairness and equity. Examples in business history illustrate how exorbitant salaries, particularly when not directly tied to demonstrable results, can be perceived as unethical, leading to public distrust and potentially impacting investor confidence. In the context of Skilling's compensation, analysis should evaluate whether his pay reflected his actual contribution to Enron's success or whether it might have created incentives misaligned with long-term shareholder value.

• Transparency and Disclosure:

  Ethical compensation practices demand transparency in the process of determining and disclosing executive pay. Opaque or poorly documented procedures may lead to suspicions of conflicts of interest or manipulation. The absence of clear criteria or justifications for executive compensation can erode public trust. In cases like Skilling's, the transparency of the compensation decisions and the justifications behind them are crucial. Was the public given sufficient insight into the metrics used for assessing his performance and determining his compensation? Lack of transparency can be a critical ethical failing, potentially contributing to a perception of unethical dealings.

• Potential Conflicts of Interest:

  Compensation structures can inadvertently encourage conflicts of interest, situations where an executive's personal interests diverge from those of the company or its shareholders. For instance, overly generous stock options or bonuses might incentivize short-term gains at the expense of long-term sustainability. The focus on immediate financial returns, disconnected from long-term strategic objectives, raises ethical questions. Analyzing the incentive structure surrounding Skilling's compensation should determine if it could have influenced him to prioritize personal gain over organizational success, thereby potentially creating a conflict of interest. Understanding the relationship between compensation and the attainment of organizational goals is essential in evaluating the ethical implications.

• Fairness and Equity:

  Ethical considerations extend to the principle of fairness in executive compensation. Compensation structures should treat executives consistently and fairly, taking into account factors like market comparisons, performance levels, and job responsibilities. Comparing Skilling's compensation to his peers and industry benchmarks is necessary to determine if his compensation was fair relative to comparable roles and responsibilities. Any significant deviation might raise concerns about equity and potentially trigger questions about the fairness of the compensation system.

In conclusion, evaluating the ethical implications of executive compensation like Tom Skilling's requires a multi-faceted approach. Addressing concerns about alignment with performance, transparency, conflicts of interest, and fairness helps ensure that compensation decisions are not only justified but also ethically sound. Careful scrutiny of such details is essential to prevent potential harms to stakeholders, maintain public trust, and uphold ethical standards within the corporate landscape.

Frequently Asked Questions

This section addresses common inquiries surrounding Tom Skilling's compensation. Specific details on executive compensation, particularly from a historical perspective, can be challenging to acquire. Publicly available data often involves limitations and interpretation.

Question 1: What was Tom Skilling's salary?

Precise figures for Tom Skilling's total compensation are challenging to ascertain definitively. Public disclosure of executive compensation, particularly in past decades, varied considerably. Information regarding salary, bonuses, and stock options might be scattered across different documents or require intricate analysis of company reports and regulatory filings. Consequently, a precise and definitive figure is often elusive.

Question 2: How was Skilling's compensation determined?

Compensation structures for executives frequently incorporate various elements, including base salary, performance-based bonuses, and equity grants. The specific methodology for determining these components, including performance metrics and market comparisons, is often not fully detailed in public documents. Skilling's compensation likely followed a pattern typical of executive compensation during his tenure, which involved a complex combination of fixed and variable components tied to performance targets.

Question 3: Was Skilling's compensation typical for his role and industry?

Assessing whether Skilling's compensation was typical requires comparison with other executives holding similar roles within comparable industries during a similar period. Finding precise comparative data can be difficult, as compensation structures often contain confidential or nuanced components. Comparisons must also account for factors such as company performance and prevailing economic conditions. A thorough analysis considering these variables is essential to drawing accurate conclusions.

Question 4: What were the specific components of Skilling's compensation package?

Precise details regarding the specific components of Skilling's compensation package are often limited by confidentiality or the nature of past disclosure requirements. While some publicly available information might exist, the full picture often requires complex analysis of financial reports and regulatory filings to determine the composition of the total compensation package.

Question 5: How did Skilling's compensation compare to company performance?

Scrutinizing the link between Skilling's compensation and company performance requires careful analysis of financial data, including revenue, profits, and market share. Determining whether compensation aligned with actual performance requires thorough analysis, particularly considering potential conflicts between short-term gains and long-term value creation. This often involves a complex examination of financial records, performance evaluations, and the prevailing market conditions.

Question 6: What role did regulatory frameworks play in disclosing Skilling's compensation?

Regulatory frameworks governing disclosure of executive compensation have evolved over time. The nature and extent of disclosure requirements during Skilling's tenure can influence the availability of public data. Assessing the specific influence of these frameworks requires examining the relevant legislation and regulations during the period in question. Determining the applicability and interpretation of these regulations is essential to interpreting the information available.

In summary, acquiring precise details about Tom Skilling's salary often requires meticulous research and a complex interpretation of available data. Varied factors, such as historical disclosure practices, and evolving regulatory frameworks, impact the accessibility and clarity of such information. A comprehensive evaluation necessitates careful analysis considering these variables.

Further exploration into corporate governance and compensation practices within organizations is pertinent for a more thorough understanding of the complexities surrounding executive compensation.

Tips for Researching Executive Compensation

Researching executive compensation, such as that of Tom Skilling, requires a methodical approach. Gathering accurate and comprehensive information often involves navigating complex financial data, regulatory frameworks, and historical contexts. These tips provide guidance for a thorough and rigorous investigation into executive compensation details.

Tip 1: Identify Relevant Regulatory Frameworks. Different jurisdictions and time periods have varying regulations regarding executive compensation disclosure. Understanding the specific legal requirements in place during the relevant time frame is crucial for identifying the appropriate reporting mechanisms and interpreting the information discovered. For example, comparing disclosure requirements in 2000 to those in 2023 reveals significant changes.

Tip 2: Utilize Publicly Available Financial Records. Company filings, SEC disclosures, and annual reports often contain information about executive compensation. Scrutinizing these documents for details on salary, bonuses, stock options, and other compensation elements is essential. Carefully examine the methodology for determining these figures and look for patterns.

Tip 3: Analyze Company Performance Data. Connecting executive compensation to a company's financial performance is critical. Comparing compensation figures to indicators such as revenue, profitability, and market share provides context. Anomalies between compensation and performance necessitate further investigation.

Tip 4: Employ Comparative Analysis. Assessing executive compensation against industry standards and peer group compensation allows for context. Benchmarking compensation levels with data from similar roles and time periods reveals potential deviations from norms. Factors like company size, industry, and geographic location should be considered when making comparisons.

Tip 5: Evaluate the Complexity of Compensation Packages. Executive compensation is frequently multifaceted, encompassing base salary, bonuses, stock options, and benefits. A comprehensive evaluation requires understanding the details of each component to gain a complete picture. For example, the terms of stock optionsvesting schedules, strike pricesare important elements to analyze.

Tip 6: Consult Relevant News Articles and Financial Analyses. News articles and financial analyses can offer insights but require critical evaluation. Confirm reported information with primary sources to avoid inaccurate data. Beware of potential biases in reporting.

Following these tips provides a framework for a more thorough and accurate analysis of executive compensation, like that of Tom Skilling. A systematic and comprehensive approach is essential when navigating the complexities of compensation data to avoid drawing inaccurate conclusions.

Further investigation into executive compensation, particularly in historical contexts, often involves delving deeper into specific company documents. Understanding the nuances of compensation structures and the relevant regulatory environment enhances the accuracy and reliability of the findings.

Conclusion

Determining Tom Skilling's salary necessitates meticulous examination of available data. Publicly accessible information regarding executive compensation, particularly from past periods, is often limited. This limitation arises from factors such as evolving disclosure requirements and varying regulatory frameworks across jurisdictions. Analysis reveals that accessing precise figures frequently requires detailed review of company filings, annual reports, and other potentially confidential documents. Critical examination of performance metrics, compensation structures, and industry context is essential for a comprehensive understanding. The link between executive compensation and corporate performance, particularly in the context of a complex and dynamic organization, requires careful evaluation. Evaluating Skilling's compensation necessitates a thorough consideration of various elements, including base salary, bonuses, stock options, and overall performance alignment with company objectives. Furthermore, the evolving regulatory landscape and disclosure requirements significantly impact the availability and nature of information. Thus, a definitive answer to the precise amount of Tom Skilling's salary remains elusive due to the multifaceted nature of the inquiry.

The analysis highlights the complexities inherent in assessing executive compensation, especially within a historical context. The challenge lies not only in the availability of data but also in accurately interpreting its context. Understanding these intricacies underscores the importance of a comprehensive approach to evaluating compensation structures within organizations. Robust governance, transparency, and accountability are essential to ensure compensation aligns with performance and promotes ethical business practices. Further research into executive compensation, including its impact on corporate performance, ethical conduct, and investor confidence, is crucial to develop robust, transparent, and effective corporate governance models. A continued focus on clear disclosure standards and enhanced oversight is critical for maintaining public trust in the financial markets.

Article Recommendations

Details

Details

Details

ncG1vNJzZmibkafBprjMmqmknaSeu6h6zqueaKSVlrGqusZmq6GdXZi1orrGnmawoJGpeqq%2FjK2mpmWjoLatuMinnmarkaGus8WNoaumpA%3D%3D