Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google just gave Sundar Pichai a $692M pay package

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 192 posts

Re: Google just gave Sundar Pichai a $692M pay package

#31

Post by nilkn »

mountainriver wrote: post #26
crop_rotation wrote: post #4

Pichai has been a very poor CEO but Google's position was so strong that it is still doing fine. I am sure he is in the founder's good graces so as long as the company's stock takes a big dive he is gonna stay at the helm and keep raking in the big bucks.

Pichai has been a terrible CEO, he almost lost the AI race before it started because he was too focused on Google’s consumer products. I was shocked they kept him around. He’s very much just a money manager like Tim Cook or Steve Ballmer. Those types are great in the short term but risk the entire company’s future long term

I'm surprised people still think this. Google has the strongest position of any company in the world on AI. They have expertise and capability across the entire stack from chips to data centers to fundamental research to frontier models. Just because they weren't first-to-market with a chatbot doesn't mean they almost lost or made some terrible durable blunder.

That's about Google, though. The picture about Sundar specifically is harder to evaluate. The pessimistic take is that Google had that position already and Sundar failed to proactively lead through a fundamental product shift, forcing the company onto the defensive for some time. The optimistic take is that Sundar, having occupied the top spot since 2015, prioritized investments in the company's overall technology development, then successfully executed a rapid product pivot when the market changed, securing a dominant position in both research and product that nobody else can compete with long-term.

Re: Google just gave Sundar Pichai a $692M pay package

#32

Post by mlsu »

mikert89 wrote: post #25
geetee wrote: post #12

[flagged]

have you ever been in one of these mansions? my hot take is people seriously underestimate how great being rich is, and how enjoyable some ocean side mansions are

Ah, that's why the lifetime earnings for a big tech CEO is about 50-100mm. It's enough to afford one of these mansions and a few additional properties around the world -- about as much wealth as any individual human being needs or could possibly spend in one lifetime.

Right?

Re: Google just gave Sundar Pichai a $692M pay package

#33

Post by giwook »

laborcontract wrote: post #10

Can we please, please move past this generation of bean-counter CEOs. Google and Apple have done great things under Pichai and Cook, and yet I couldn't been less excited for what either is doing. Bring back experimental culture.

I agree with the sentiment.

Experimental culture is inherently risky though, and risk is not something you want too much of as a public company as your shareholders can and will be very loud.

They do still experiment but in their R&D divisions so as to shield their cash cows from risk as well as to be able to better conceal how much money they’re pouring into moonshots so as not to spook investors.

Waymo is the most recent moonshot I can remember going out of Google X, and they’re arguably a leader in the space. There are other projects in the works, and many more failed ones.

Re: Google just gave Sundar Pichai a $692M pay package

#35

Post by shevy-java »

crop_rotation wrote: post #4

Pichai has been a very poor CEO but Google's position was so strong that it is still doing fine. I am sure he is in the founder's good graces so as long as the company's stock takes a big dive he is gonna stay at the helm and keep raking in the big bucks.

I kind of agree. Google's trajectory is going upwards. Unfortunately so.

Re: Google just gave Sundar Pichai a $692M pay package

#36

Post by geetee »

delusional wrote: post #27
geetee wrote: post #12

[flagged]

You don't get to enjoy your single family home because you're at work all the time. The ultra-rich don't have that problem.

I always got the impression these ultra rich are workaholics that barely see their family.

Re: Google just gave Sundar Pichai a $692M pay package

#38

Post by jordanb »

pinkmuffinere wrote: post #28
turzmo wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would argue that Google has had declining quality in search results, bordering on completely unusable in the past few years, and that has resulted in people using LLMs for things that they would have searched for years ago. Although they are competitive in AI, I think it is surprising that their product continues to frustrate people and that they are a distant second place.

Without taking a stance on whether their search has improved or degraded, we can observe that the same claim (“search is so degraded it’s unusable”) has been common for like 5 years at this point. If it’s really such a problem, why haven’t people already switched? Google’s search is at 90% market share [1]. Surely if it was perceived as a problem to customers there should be some measurable effect? [1] https://gs.sta…

The only real competitor is bing (other search engines like DDG are just repackaged bing) and Microsoft is pursuing the same strategy as Google.

Re: Google just gave Sundar Pichai a $692M pay package

#40

Post by shevy-java »

dwa3592 wrote: post #13
crop_rotation wrote: post #4

Pichai has been a very poor CEO but Google's position was so strong that it is still doing fine. I am sure he is in the founder's good graces so as long as the company's stock takes a big dive he is gonna stay at the helm and keep raking in the big bucks.

>> Pichai has been a very poor CEO and then immediately follows with "but Google's position was so strong". Isn't it a CEO's job to make sure the company's position is strong among other responsibilities?

I think this refers less so on "Pichai did a great job" and more that Google is in a good position right now. One COULD say that Pichai is responsible for this - but probably many other semi-competent CEOs could have done about an equally solid job here. Google would have profited either way.
Post reply on HN