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

Sundar Pichai received $226M compensation, boosted by a triennial stock grant

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

511–520 of 543 posts

Re: Sundar Pichai received $226M compensation, boosted by a triennial stock grant

#511

Post by justinclift »

DSingularity wrote: post #495
autonomousErwin wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've heard this countless times as well and I wonder if the root cause comes from Google's inability to turn its research into practical applications. Case in point, 2017 Google Brain released the "Attention Is All You Need" paper however haven't done anything proactively to deliver it to mass users like OpenAI have done (among others) - perhaps this is the kick that Google needs to remind them that research alone is…

TBH no I don’t think that’s the case. I think they are actually approaching this space with care. Whether it’s social media, search, or ChatGPT there is an obvious human-race scale impact that I believe google recognizes that the “disrupters” disregard.

> human-race scale impact that I believe google recognizes

Not sure I buy that.

They're clearly ignoring the already existing human-race scale negative impact of their do-anything-to-capture-peoples-attention advertising business.

Re: Sundar Pichai received $226M compensation, boosted by a triennial stock grant

#512

Post by ohashi »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #458
ohashi wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except how profitable is Google's cloud? It lost 480 million last quarter. AWS made 5.2B last quarter. Google is selling at cloud at a loss to gain market share while it's biggest competitor is raking in profit. Sure, you can burn money and gain market share. But would anyone pick Google for a long term partner on any product? I sure as hell wouldn't. They have a tendency to simply discard products left and right. Th…

> Except how profitable is Google's cloud? It lost 480 million last quarter. If growth rates continue, in 5 years, it's on pace to be one of the most hundred profitable companies in the world...

That's like when I made my first sale, if my infinity % growth rate continues, I'll be infinite rich.

Re: Sundar Pichai received $226M compensation, boosted by a triennial stock grant

#513

Post by juujian »

dragonwriter wrote: post #379
juujian wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He has been CEO since 2015. Would it be a stretch to blame him for the current company culture of nurturing new products left and right just to kill them off after 3-5 years?

> Would it be a stretch to blame him for the current company culture of nurturing new products left and right just to kill them off after 3-5 years? “More wood behind fewer arrows” was Google’s direction from Larry Page starting in 2011, which was when they slaughtered a lot of existing and (from Google’s perspective) marginal projects and became a lot more prone to demanding that new efforts prove themselves adequat…

That's interesting, never knew the history behind that!

Re: Sundar Pichai received $226M compensation, boosted by a triennial stock grant

#514

Post by candyman »

Echos of Steve Ballmer who alienated many whiffed on cloud and mobile (!).

Google has killed their search with advertising and promotion to the point where results are useless.

Product management has been terrible for the things I use over a 10+ year period.

Based on recent employee accounts of the culture and mindset there it's a mess.

I don't know who this guy is, maybe he's just been a caretaker of a place that was already on this path but he doesn't seem to have done anything to improve it. And he's getting paid over $200M? No wonder working people get angry.

Re: Sundar Pichai received $226M compensation, boosted by a triennial stock grant

#515

Post by baby »

justinclift wrote: post #251
baby wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much influence/impact does a CEO at such a large company have tho? Is it rly his fault?

In his case, it seems like "not enough". Other CEO's though definitely have more impact in their respective companies. Intel's recent re-invigoration once Pat Gelsinger took over seems like a reasonable example.

Is it that he doesn’t have enough ways to impact the company or is it that he’s incompetent though?

Re: Sundar Pichai received $226M compensation, boosted by a triennial stock grant

#516

Post by baby »

ulfw wrote: post #356
baby wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much influence/impact does a CEO at such a large company have tho? Is it rly his fault?

If he has little impact, why is he being paid $226,000,000 in a year?

That’s the point of the whole convo no? I’m in the camp that CEO’s salaries make zero sense.

Re: Sundar Pichai received $226M compensation, boosted by a triennial stock grant

#517

Post by martin82 »

andrewstuart wrote: post #59

I simply don’t see what good this CEO has done. He’s destroyed googles reputation with developers. Destroyed customer trust in Google products. Done nothing to fix googles reputation for terrible customer service. Led Google to third place in cloud computing. AND been thrashed by Microsoft / ChatGPT, putting Googles core business at risk. Why is this guy CEO?

Well said. In my eyes, Google is basically a zombie company like MySpace already.

I fully expect the recent advancements in AI to bring to the surface more disruptive startups than Google can possibly gobble up, ultimately sealing its fate.

Re: Sundar Pichai received $226M compensation, boosted by a triennial stock grant

#518

Post by chaostheory »

rcme wrote: post #489
chaostheory wrote: post #481

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just really backwards > I get that you think you’re really smart, but there are tens to hundreds of millions of people in the world who could do your job adequately. This is my point, and you’ve just bolstered it. If knowledge workers ”band together”, the company will just hire elsewhere. Your arguments are terrible

It’s very difficult to just up and move a company. When the employees are unionized, the company is not able to leverage the knowledge of some workers to facilitate the transition. If the reason not to unionize is that the company will just move, how much job security do you have without the union? As soon as it’s cheaper to do your job elsewhere, your job will be gone. At least with a union, you have a hope of prote…

> It’s very difficult to just up and move a company.

This makes sense for factories, but it’s a weak argument for knowledge workers. There’s a lot less physical infrastructure and we’ve literally just proven that remote work is effective for entire organizations within the last 3 years.

> As soon as it’s cheaper to do your job elsewhere, your job will be gone

Did you not read my previous comments? The second a union is created is the same second it’s cheaper to move elsewhere for knowledge workers. You’ve even validated this argument with your “engineers from other places are good enough” line

You haven’t thought this through given your terrible logic, and your comments make it seem like you still haven't graduated and started work yet.

Re: Sundar Pichai received $226M compensation, boosted by a triennial stock grant

#519

Post by chaostheory »

polygamous_bat wrote: post #496
chaostheory wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do you have an actual argument, or do you just plan on name-calling until people shut up and fall in line? It’s literally the 2nd sentence. An ignorant person is someone who is lacking in knowledge. It’s pretty accurate in this case > Oh ok, I guess they can fire Sundar Pichai/Mark Zuckerberg when he underperforms, then? What? They don't own enough stocks to do that? What are you even trying to say?

> What are you even trying to say? Shares generally give you two benefits, one is a share of the up/downsides, and another is a right of governance in the company. The way employee share distributions are done right now means employees get a tiny fraction of the first and none of the second, even though they are a large stakeholder in the company's future.

This is a moot point if you understand how capitalism works and the goal of corporate executives: ensuring maximum value for shareholders. As I’ve mentioned before, Google employees own a large amount of stock compare to the average person. Consequently, they will benefit no matter what

Re: Sundar Pichai received $226M compensation, boosted by a triennial stock grant

#520

Post by onlyrealcuzzo »

ohashi wrote: post #512
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #458

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Except how profitable is Google's cloud? It lost 480 million last quarter. If growth rates continue, in 5 years, it's on pace to be one of the most hundred profitable companies in the world...

That's like when I made my first sale, if my infinity % growth rate continues, I'll be infinite rich.

Except Google Cloud has been on a pretty steady trajectory for about 15 years now...
Post reply on HN