what is the meaning of 'slug' here? Is it 'amount' or 'number'?
On his retirement Sarin was able to pick up a huge slug of shares under the company's medium-term bonus scheme, worth £1.4m at yesterday's share price, and the associated dividends, making a further £146,000.
I could not find that meaning in the definition of 'slug' in freedictionary.com, so I just guessed the meaning. In freedictionary.com, it says:
2. Informala. A shot of liquor.
b. An amount of liquid, especially liquor, that is swallowed in one gulp; a swig.
In Oxford, it says:
3an amount of alcoholic drink that is gulped or poured:he took a slug of whisky
I wonder if this a BrE usage, since I found the above usage in The Guardian. In both dictionaries it says it is used for 'amount of liquid/alcoholic drink'
I wonder if they used 'slug' because those shares were 'liquid asset'.
Investopedia explains 'Liquid Asset'
For an asset to be liquid it needs an established market with enough participants to absorb the selling without materially impacting the price of the asset. There also needs to be a relative ease in the transfer of ownership and the movement of the asset. Liquid assets include most stocks, money market instruments and government bonds.
Read more: Liquid Asset Definition | Investopedia]
Last edited by Olympian; 13-Dec-2011 at 21:10. Reason: formatting
It's an odd use of "slug."
In this sort of context (finance) people sometimes use the word 'tranche' (I've no idea if they do in French too, but that's the source of the borrowing).
It's from the Guardian:
Arun Sarin got £8.1m Vodafone payoff | Business | The Guardian
I assume it's meant negatively- implying greed.
@tdol - yes, that is the source.
It seems from reading that news story that he (Sarin) did it under the company's 'medium-term bonus scheme'. A couple of paras before that, it says:
"A Vodafone spokesman said: "We have paid Arun Sarin what we were contractually obliged to pay him and no more.""
So, his performance at Vodafone aside, if he got what he was contractually entitled to, why is this considered as greed? Or is that the reason it is considered greed (his performance, or lack thereof), as was the case in many executives of US financial institutions that were failing or were involved in questionable transcations/practices?