Someone please call Ja Rule so he can make sense of this man’s salary…
This sounds like a comment on reddit
Yeah, it does. But I laughed, so ...
Sundar Pichai received $226M compensation, boosted by a triennial stock grant
41–50 of 543 posts
Re: Sundar Pichai received $226M compensation, boosted by a triennial stock grant
#42All the fired xooglers seemed to praise their former employeer on social media, so they seem to accept that they deserved to be fired. It's hard to be mad at the CEO, when the people who lost their jobs displayed no anger.
The ones I know that did not post on social media did not want to be fired. Consider the selection bias of people posting on social media. Also consider people would want to be positive on social media to keep their future employment prospects.
>The ones I know that did not post on social media did not want to be fired.
If they were mad about it, they would have posted, wouldn't they? Silence is violence and all that.
Re: Sundar Pichai received $226M compensation, boosted by a triennial stock grant
#43If you ever have been in leadership interviews then you will know that firing people is one of the quality one needs to evaluate or prove.
This is just business as usual for these roles and a lot of people shy away from these roles due to "responsibilities" such as this.
Re: Sundar Pichai received $226M compensation, boosted by a triennial stock grant
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Remind me again how big-co CEOs assume "all the risk"? Does anyone seriously believe this? I see it all the time as a "comeback" against CEOs, but I don't think I've ever seen anyone arguing that they actually are the ones that assume all the risk.
Is this a serious question? Pichai will not experience hardship in any circumstance. His access to a roof, food, healthcare, quality of life, etc. are not in danger, now or in the future. The worst possible outcome for him still leaves many more zeroes in his personal finances than the vast majority of employees will ever see at any point in their life.
[deleted]
Re: Sundar Pichai received $226M compensation, boosted by a triennial stock grant
#45Am argument or system taken to its extreme falls flat. Where are the limits of capitalism?
Re: Sundar Pichai received $226M compensation, boosted by a triennial stock grant
#46[dead]
Re: Sundar Pichai received $226M compensation, boosted by a triennial stock grant
#47Someone please call Ja Rule so he can make sense of this man’s salary…
I don't get it?
It is from a rather famous Dave Chappelle piece on celebrities : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7b5hJ0G_9c
Re: Sundar Pichai received $226M compensation, boosted by a triennial stock grant
#48... And getting caught flat-footed against Microsoft (and Adobe, but but not as loudly) in the precise field Alphabet is supposedly the insurmountable leader. Remind me again how big-co CEOs assume "all the risk"?
What's even the risk? If the CEO of Google gets fired, he just ends up as the CEO of another Fortune 500 company. If he can't even land that role, he can just go around pocketing $50k/event speaking fee. Of course, that's only if he doesn't want to degrade himself by taking on a VP-level role at another Fortune 500 company.
No need to find a new job, 4% interest @ 225M USD = 9M USD yearly.
Re: Sundar Pichai received $226M compensation, boosted by a triennial stock grant
#49... And getting caught flat-footed against Microsoft (and Adobe, but but not as loudly) in the precise field Alphabet is supposedly the insurmountable leader. Remind me again how big-co CEOs assume "all the risk"?
Reputational risk does affect the supply of viable CEO candidates (here we are deriding Pichai for perceived Google failures), but it’s far from the only factor. The main reason CEO total comp is so high in big companies is to align the CEO with the interests of shareholders. Something the layoffs with likely also aligned with.
Comp doesn't have to be high to be aligned. The reason it is so high is because of the massive risk and uncertainty of replacing a CEO. There are thousands of people at Google who would be perfectly fine CEOs and be willing to do it for small fraction of what Sundar Pichai costs, but how do you find them? Hiring is such an inexact process that there's a large chance that the guy you chose won't be one of those competent people. And a bad CEO at a company the size of Google can cost hundreds of billions of dollars. So this gives a competent CEO leverage to raise his comp to very high levels. When Pichai asks for $200 million, he knows that the board will give it to him because it just makes financial sense. They're not going to risk hundreds of billions of dollars on a potential bad CEO when they can pay their current CEO 0.1% of that to stay. Essentially CEOs are able to hold the board hostage.
Re: Sundar Pichai received $226M compensation, boosted by a triennial stock grant
#50If you ever have been in leadership interviews then you will know that firing people is one of the quality one needs to evaluate or prove. This is just business as usual for these roles and a lot of people shy away from these roles due to "responsibilities" such as this.
[dead]