Stock fluctuations are irrelevant with this amount... stock could tank 20% and here's still getting $175M
The stock would be worth less than his options price. Why would he still get $175M?
They’re not options, they’re grants of stock units which vest over time. A unit of stock is a share granted and vesting at its full price, not an option to buy stock at some price later.
While startups use options, most large public tech companies typically do not.
Sundar, like many other Google insiders, almost certainly has so much money he could just retire and live a life of luxury if he wanted to. And almost certainly he could probably choose a position within Alphabet with less responsibility like Chief Product Officer. To me it’s almost certainly a matter of the founders thinking he’s the best person in the world for the job of CEO and paying him a ton to justify the res…
> it’s easily worth it but is it really? How do we accurately measure CEO performance? We can barely measure developer productivity in any sort of meaningful fashion. Blowing $200m on what is effectively a faith based assessment seems a bit questionable.
when dealing with 1%, what is the need for accurate measurements? they calibrate his pay to other CEOs in tech and other industries, and that is good enough.
I think this is somewhat naive. The growth mindset pervades the entire economy, and virtually everyone's interests are bound into it one way or another. Yes, of course there are people who prioritize lifestyle over chasing money. No one will debate that. But if those people's retirement plans are dependent on a 401k or drawing payments from a pension fund and not just cash savings, then they are amongst the growth-ob…
To add on to this, unbridled capitalism also leads to more goods and services affordable for the average consumer. This makes the idea of taking a lower paying job appealing because you can still live a fairly comfortable life.
Is it unbridled that accomplishes that? Before regulations and unions people worked more hours per week, even children, and were exploited to a criminal degree. Mostly the profits went to capital owners. Collective assets like the environment suffered. Progress was certainly made and highly visible, yet at great cost.
Just to be fair, for 90% of the world, the kinds of compensation many hacker news readers have (a Silicon Valley engineer who gets a high base plus bonus plus equity) would also be considered “holy guacamole, whatever is the angle I look at it … does not make any f_ing sense”
If you look at the cost of living in SF and what you get, it starts to make sense. What is the equivalent argument for hundreds of millions?
Janitors, baristas, waiters, waitresses, bus drivers are also living in the Bay Area on nowhere close to those salaries.
SF engineer salaries are still insane to these people. And they need to deal with the cost of living in SF.
This isn't really a surprise. We've created a society that depends on growth. CEOs sign up for a job where they're responsible for growing a company, so they're obviously the type to value growth and want more for themsleves too – there's not a lot of CEOs who do it out of the goodness of their hearts. The investors, from the board down to individual nameless shareholders, all demand more money every quarter... even…
"Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell." ~ Edward Abbey What irks me is lots of products are "done" but continue to receive pointless changes - whether that be UX changes, half-backed features, or regressions in functionality. And for what? So the marketing department has something to market, so engineers can justify their continued employment? This problem isn't limited to the business wor…
In the case of FOSS the reputation for old being worse has something to do with ever evolving platforms.
You can still use unchanged GNU utilities and apps from the mid 90's. But you'd have to run it with layers of emulation or shims. And it couldn't handle newer formats or protocols.
Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai was awarded compensation worth more than $225 million in 2022, which marked a staggering 3,474% increase from the previous year, making him the nation’s highest-paid CEO, according to Equilar data. There’s a whole rabbit hole to go down, but CEO compensation is not well defined. In this case it’s likely that Pichai was granted options with a multiyear vesting schedule, plus perhaps performa…
I disagree. Yes we should think about option grants differently, but not that differently. At the end of the day I don't think anyone would say Sundar has been that much better than his replacement level CEO. Certainly not better enough to deserve 225 million in equity. The stock is up 10% this year, still below 2021 levels.
why should he be better than replacement level CEO? why can't we assume 225 million is what an average CEO running a Google sized company deserves? Like how we accept 300-500K is what an average Google SWE deserves?
Google is a $1.6T company. For a guy that runs it to earn $200 M a year is basically nothing. Can he do good enough of job? Great, he's then definitely worth it (and, actually, he's worth much more).
> (and, actually, he's worth much more). Bullshit. Fucking nonsense, bullshit. I fail to understand how thinking people could ever believe that this is true - it's got to be innumeracy and a healthy dose of propaganda. Would Google lose the now-equivalent of 200m annual if any one of the top 100 leaders within the corp ascended to the goddamned throne? Fuck no. It's nonsense to believe any one person is worth compens…
Why's it so hard to believe that a worse CEO for one year would result in a 0.01% lower market cap? Given that framing, 200m is a very drastic under estimation.
Either I'm missing a joke or you need to travel more. Calling mexican immigrants roaches is a thing.
My assumption was that it referred to this [1], but then I’m not a racist POS so maybe I’m out of the loop. 1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roach_(smoking)
Yeah that's definitely not the situation here unfortunately.
> $225 million in 2022, which marked a staggering 3,474% increase from the previous year
This is obviously a "creative" calculation done in order to get the highest number possible, which makes the best clickbait. I'm disappointed that so many Hacker News commenters are stupid enough to fall for this.