While very frustrating, it's just not reasonable at all to call that fraud or corruption. To make that case, you'll need to also make the argument that the CEO'

While very frustrating, it's just not reasonable at all to call that fraud or corruption. To make that case, you'll need to also make the argument that the CEO's remuneration is unreasonable to the given market rate; and more specifically, that you might be able to hire somebody else and achieve similar results for meaningfully less cash, and the CEO and board know this, and they're overcompensating intentionally. Now: I agree that the pay is absurd! I'm quite willing to believe she's not worth it, too. But she's hardly the first CEO to have ridiculous pay; nor am I convinced the board is overcompensating her for corrupt reasons - it may simply be a difference of perspective. And - perhaps I'm wrong, and this pay is a going market rate and a hypothetical cheaper replacement would do worse - I really don't believe that, but to call something corruption I'd need to be rather sure of that and of their knowledge of it.