Compensation in Shares - Solution to pay discussion?

News that Goldman Sachs top executives will only be paid in shares this year is supposed to take the wind out of the sails for opponents of excessive bonuses. But does it really solve the problem of excessive executive compensation? Would it be better to pay someone $100 million in shares? After all, the recipient of this compensation would not be able to consume more than a tiny fraction of the amount in any case - whichever way the amount is awarded - the rest would be saved and invested in one way or another. We argue that TOTAL compensation for senior executives (including all perks, bonuses, incentive payments) must be more closely monitored by the fiduciaries that handle savings for the real end-investors (pension fund members, holders of mutual funds).