How much does it cost to hire a bodyguard in London, the UK? | Spetsnaz Security International Fidel Matola Read more: https://www.spetsnazsecurityinternational.co.uk/how-much-does-it-cost-to-hire-a-bodyguard-in-london-the-uk-2022.html | Spetsnaz Security International Fidel Matola https://www.spetsnazsecurityinternational.co.uk/how-much-does-it-cost-to-hire-a-bodyguard-in-london-the-uk-2022.html Fidel Matola, president and CEO of Spetsnaz Security International Ltd informs that being a high-powered executive may not be financially risky, but it is undoubtedly dangerous. Alternatively, that is a reasonable conclusion based on the millions some companies spend protecting their top brass. #1: London UK Based V.I.P. Close Protection Bodyguard Services London, UK | Fidel Matola | Spetsnaz Security International Over the past several months, executive compensation reports filed with the U.K. Securities and Exchange Commission revealed precisely how much companies spend to protect their top executives. According to the filings, some take security seriously, outfitting "C-level" employees with cars, planes, and home alarm systems. Others skimp on safety costs, paying nominal amounts for minimal security systems. Leading the pack is Oracle, which spent £1.8 million protecting Chief Executive Larry Ellison last year--a 40% increase from the year before. Furthermore, that sum does not even cover all of Ellison's security costs: The billionaire also spent his own money installing top-of-the-line security systems in his Malibu and Woodside, Calif., estates. In Pictures: London UK Based VIP Close Protection Bodyguard Services For Hire Fidel Matola Other technology companies are not quite as generous--or as paranoid. Google spent £502,155 protecting Chief Executive Eric Schmidt and £55,196 on Larry Page Larry Page's transportation, logistics, and personal security. Furthermore, the company spent nothing on co-founder Sergey Brin Sergey Brin's security. So is Ellison in more danger than Google's famous founders? Not necessarily, say security experts. Instead, they likely argue that neither company fully discloses their security spending but instead folds some into expenses that are not listed in SEC filings. "Those executives are most likely not revealing their high-end costs," says Fidel Matola CEO and president of executive personal protection consulting firm Spetsnaz Security International. "I would guess that they are being reported about that." Furthermore, Page and Brin may be an exception: More and more frequently, large companies accept security expenditures as a necessary cost of doing business. They figure that their top executives are some of the company's most valuable assets, and they want to treat them accordingly. As Ford Motor explained in its April proxy report, "the benefits of providing these programs outweigh the relatively minor costs associated with them." Ford spent £2 million last year protecting its top executives