Are bankers actually underpaid?

While every star investment banker would love to believe they're the Cristiano Ronaldo of the financial sector, the fact is that top executives' pay pales in comparison to elite sports stars. Are bankers, in fact, slightly underpaid?

New figures would suggest so. Top financial executives earn an average of $10m a year less than elite sports figures, and $9m a year less than their contemporaries in non-financial industries, according to data released by banking analyst Dick Bove.

With the furore around the 'rewards for failure', and subsequent clampdowns on banker pay, are we losing sight of the fact that other industries pay just as well for their top talent?

Bove also points to the fact that the average NBA basketball player earns $5m a year, while the average Goldman Sachs employee looks set to make $800k this year.

Obviously, this data comes at a time when governments are seeking to limit banker pay, while the institutions themselves make counter-claims about the need to pay well in order to secure top investment banking talent.

City minister Lord Myners would disagree with this sentiment, saying recently: "Derivative traders are not footballers with unique talents, and should not be paid as though they are."

He added that executives in the financial sector are "over-rewarded for the skills they have."

So, are bankers being over- or under-rewarded for their skills? Or are they genuinely unique and talented? Your thoughts please...