Dr Martens: Top bosses miss out on bonuses after ‘disappointing year’
The top bosses at iconic British shoe maker Dr Martens will not be paid their bonuses after the brand suffered a “disappointing year” as its pre-tax profit was slashed.
The Northamptonshire-headquartered company, which is listed on the London Stock Exchange, posted a profit of £93m for the year to March 31, 2024, below the minimum threshold of £149m for its executive directors to qualify for a bonus.
In its full-year results, Dr Martens blamed weak consumer demand in the US for the puncture in its earnings.
America is one of the business’s biggest markets, but it has faced a number of challenges in the region, including the hangover from bottleneck issues in its Los Angeles warehouse.
The long-term incentive plan awards granted in 2021 when Dr Martens floated on the London Stock Exchange are due to vest this month.
However, the company said that its performance has not met the minimum required threshold and as a result nothing will be paid out.
The company’s global bonus scheme is awarded to executive directors based on performance, subject to pre-tax profit targets and strategic objectives being met.
The executive directors elected to waive their bonus for Dr Martens’ latest financial year, the equivalent of £122,750 and £59,096 for the CEO and former CFO respectively.
The base salary of Dr Martens’ CEO Kenny Wilson has not been increased for its new financial year and remains at £735,420.
In April 2024 the company announced that Wilson “had agreed the time was right for him to step down”.
He will be succeeded by chief brand officer Ije Nwokorie before the end of the financial year.
‘We set stretching targets and did not meet them’ – Dr Martens
Writing in the company’s annual report, remuneration chair Lynne Weedall said: “FY24 has been a disappointing year and again we faced a number of challenges.
“These included a difficult consumer environment in the USA, with widespread caution from wholesale customers, and increased depreciation and amortisation charges as a result of our ongoing investment programmes.”
She added: “We set stretching targets for ourselves and did not meet them.
“With regard to the strategic objectives, our sustainability (ESG) targets were met in full, reflecting our effort during the year to progress our sustainability agenda.
“We were not able to meet the threshold level of performance for our other strategic objectives with the result that one out of three targets was met in aggregate.
“As a result, the formulaic outcome of the GBS is 8.33 per cent of maximum.
“Considering the disappointing financial performance, our executive group have taken the decision to waive their entitlement to a bonus in respect of the FY24 strategic objectives.”
Weedall added: “The committee is comfortable that actions taken on pay during the year across the company were appropriate and balanced the interests of all stakeholders and that the remuneration policy operated as intended.
“In FY25 there is particular focus on setting targets that are appropriate, that support our business strategy and deliver operational improvements.”