Google's chief accepted gear but no pay as Apple board member

[AppleInsider]

Before he resigned from the company's board of directors this week, Google Chief Executive Eric Schmidt was essentially a volunteer during his tenure with Apple, accepting only products.

All the Google executive did accept, according to public records from the Securities and Exchange Commission revealed by BusinessWeek, was $8,712 in Apple products, and a $7,580 unknown "commemorative gift." The publication also recalled, as previously known, that Schmidt passed on stock options and a $50,000 retainer fee offered by the Cupertino, Calif.-based company.

Apple's directors are entitled to one of each of the company's new products, as well as a discount on hardware purchases. The directors do capitalize on the offering: former U.S. Vice President Al Gore took $13,161 in Apple products, while Arthur Levinson, former CEO of Genentech, took $8,923.

While Apple's board members are allowed 30,000 shares of the company stock, and the option to purchase an additional 10,000 shares each year, Schmidt passed. Instead, in September 2006, the Google executive bought 10,000 shares on his own, on the open market, at a cost of about $740,000. Today, BusinessWeek calculates, those shares would be worth $1.7 million.

Apple board members are also entitled to a $50,000 annual retainer fee, paid as $12,500 each quarter. But Schmidt also passed on that offering.

He practices the same actions with his own company as well. Schmidt's salary with Google is only $1 a year, and he hasn't accepted stock options from the company for several years.

Schmidt had served on the Apple Board of Directors since August of 2006. With Android for mobile phones out and Chrome OS for computers on the way, it was decided that Google and Apple were competing in too many similar markets. With his effectiveness diminished, he resigned from the board.

Schmidt already had to recuse himself from board meetings that involved iPhone plans, many of which would clash with Google's own attempts to promote its Android mobile operating system. Though the Google executive was adamant that the two companies don't occupy the same markets, the Federal Trade Commission has been investigating the Apple-Google link for a possible violation of antitrust laws through unfair collaboration.

Even though Schmidt resigned, the FTC declared this week that it would still be looking into links between the Apple and Google boards. Levinson still serves both companies, and if federal scrutiny continues, he may be forced to resign from one of his positions.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[Quadra 610]

But he got over $8000 in cool Apple stuff, plus Apple shares.

Al gore, of course, took the most Apple gear. In excess of $13,000 worth (one fully loaded Mac Pro and a pack of Skittles, LOL.)

EDIT:

In before the article update.

[c4rlob]

If only more executives were this responsible and well behaved when it came to perks. He clearly values his reputation and stake in Google enough not to risk tainting his resume with unnecessary offerings from Apple. Good on him.

[meelash]

Wait, so how is he making money? I don't understand what motivation he has to work for a *business* and not accept monetary compensation. I mean it's not like Google and Apple are philanthropic outfits or something.

[roehlstation]

Originally Posted by meelash

Wait, so how is he making money? I don't understand what motivation he has to work for a *business* and not accept monetary compensation. I mean it's not like Google and Apple are philanthropic outfits or something.

Simply thinking ahead.

[Sipadan]

Talk about not being greedy, I wish him the best even though he left Apple. He earned my respect by not squeezing every possible cent he could while on board. If only the financial moguls could follow the example....wishful thinking

[cmf2]

Originally Posted by meelash

Wait, so how is he making money? I don't understand what motivation he has to work for a *business* and not accept monetary compensation. I mean it's not like Google and Apple are philanthropic outfits or something.

Clearly he's already made his money, and the stocks that he's purchased seem to be doing well.

[Abster2core]

Originally Posted by Quadra 610

But he got over $8000 in cool Apple stuff, plus Apple shares.

Al gore, of course, took the most Apple gear. In excess of $13,000 worth (one fully loaded Mac Pro and a pack of Skittles, LOL.)

EDIT:

In before the article update.

Are you implying that he was given the shares for free or otherwise?

[meelash]

Originally Posted by roehlstation

Simply thinking ahead.

I don't know what that means.

[PatsFan83]

Originally Posted by meelash

Wait, so how is he making money? I don't understand what motivation he has to work for a *business* and not accept monetary compensation. I mean it's not like Google and Apple are philanthropic outfits or something.

I think when you are worth 4.4 billion dollars, you probably get over the making money part, and do things purely out of self interest.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_E._Schmidt

[Rot'nApple]

Originally Posted by Sipadan

Talk about not being greedy, I wish him the best even though he left Apple. He earned my respect by not squeezing every possible cent he could while on board. If only the financial moguls could follow the example....wishful thinking

Screw the financial monguls... We need...

"Mr. Schmidt goes to Washington"... (get it, "Mr. Smith goes to Washington" ... the movie starring James Stewart about a naive man who is appointed to fill a vacancy in the US Senate. His plans promptly collide with political corruption, but he doesn't back down... No? Never mind.)

But he sure would be a breathe of fresh air then the lot of crooks we have in there now...

Anyone care to join in a letter writing campaign to that ethical and transparent Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, and tell her what we think about where "apparently Congress is not philosophically averse to private air ... The Air Force had asked for one Gulfstream 550 jet (price tag: ... But the House Appropriations Committee, at its own initiative, added to the 2010 Defense appropriations bill another $132 million for two more airplanes and..."

http://www.rollcall.com/media/37552-1.html

Yes Mr. Schmidt, nowadays, we need more of you in Washington!

[Leonard]

Originally Posted by meelash

Wait, so how is he making money? I don't understand what motivation he has to work for a *business* and not accept monetary compensation. I mean it's not like Google and Apple are philanthropic outfits or something.

He makes millions just off the billions he already has.

[hypoluxa]

How does any CEO etc live off of $1 a year? Where exactly does their "normal" income to live off of come from? I don't see living off stock purchases to be that secure. Someone please enlighten me.

[sflocal]

Originally Posted by hypoluxa

How does any CEO etc live off of $1 a year? Where exactly does their "normal" income to live off of come from? I don't see living off stock purchases to be that secure. Someone please enlighten me.

He's already ridiculously rich from Google. Looks like money is not a key factor for motivating him unlike other CEO's. His $1/year salary is probably more than just symbolic for him compared to other $1/yr CEO's that most likely are doing it not just because it's the "right thing do to" but more because it will (doubt it) make them "look" like they care about wasteful spending.

[webfrasse]

Originally Posted by meelash

I don't know what that means.

expect that from you either;-)

[emulator]

Originally Posted by Quadra 610

Al gore, of course, took the most Apple gear. In excess of $13,000 worth (one fully loaded Mac Pro and a pack of Skittles, LOL.)

probably his fat fingers could not handle any portables. fat gore is just that.

[digitalclips]

Originally Posted by meelash

Wait, so how is he making money? I don't understand what motivation he has to work for a *business* and not accept monetary compensation. I mean it's not like Google and Apple are philanthropic outfits or something.

Free R&D info I guess lol

[jetlaw]

Originally Posted by hypoluxa

How does any CEO etc live off of $1 a year? Where exactly does their "normal" income to live off of come from? I don't see living off stock purchases to be that secure. Someone please enlighten me.

It's called getting paid in restricted stock. Just because Stevo only took a $1 salary doesn't mean that he only received $1 in total compensation. As a publicly traded company this information is easily ascertainable. Just take a look on any trading or finance site. Steve's total compensation including stock is approximately 14.6 Million/year despite his $1 basic compensation package.

[roehlstation]

Originally Posted by meelash

I don't know what that means.

He may simply have been positioning himself.

[AjitMD]

There was nothing charitable about the CEO if Google being on Apple board. It benefited him to sit on the board of one of the most innovative companies and have a strategic view of Apple and the industry. It allowed Google plan ahead. Anyway, while Apple has been planing the evolution of the iPod, iPhone, etc Google has been developing Android, plus a web based OS. This conflict of interest did not start all of a sudden. This kind of conflict of interest should have been allowed to happen. The CEO of Google should have left a long time ago.

I think the Android is a lame product because the iPhone has the economies of scale, a value chain, and a proprietary system. The lack of integrated hardware and software is an hindrance.

[AppleStud]

Originally Posted by sflocal

He's already ridiculously rich from Google. Looks like money is not a key factor for motivating him unlike other CEO's. His $1/year salary is probably more than just symbolic for him compared to other $1/yr CEO's that most likely are doing it not just because it's the "right thing do to" but more because it will (doubt it) make them "look" like they care about wasteful spending.

you'd be surprised how many executives work yet don't need the money. Sure, they take it since they're not gonna work for free, but not every executive is a greedy sleezebag. There is such a thing as enjoying your work and enjoying the challenge of running a company.

[ncee]

Originally Posted by AppleStud

you'd be surprised how many executives work yet don't need the money. Sure, they take it since they're not gonna work for free, but not every executive is a greedy sleezebag. There is such a thing as enjoying your work and enjoying the challenge of running a company.

And when there isn't ANYTHING you need or want, that you don't already have …

and when you or your kids, or there kids will not have to work - they may choose to work, but they won't need to work, to make or have enough money to live.

Money IS very important, and when you have BILLIONS (and make MILLIONS in interest EACH DAY), getting paid does not have the same urgency as those of us, who make $45,000.00 a year.

He make MORE in interest each DAY, then many of us, make a year, WORKING!

To get paid say, $125,000.00 for a seat on the board of directors … does what for him?

By the way, boy would I LOVE to be in his shoes

Skip

[charlituna]

Originally Posted by hypoluxa

How does any CEO etc live off of $1 a year? Where exactly does their "normal" income to live off of come from? I don't see living off stock purchases to be that secure. Someone please enlighten me.

Eric was very rich already. put that money in the bank and you can live off the interest. particularly when you can get things for free. and you can bet that Apple isn't the only company that would had him whatever he wanted without blinking. He's just as much a celeb as Brad Pitt (who would be loaned the car of his dreams so he'd be seen driving it around time and rack up serious free advertising for the company)

[anantksundaram]

Originally Posted by c4rlob

If only more executives were this responsible and well behaved when it came to perks. He clearly values his reputation and stake in Google enough not to risk tainting his resume with unnecessary offerings from Apple. Good on him.

It would have created more social value if he took the money/shares and gave it to charity.

[AjitMD]

Originally Posted by AppleStud

you'd be surprised how many executives work yet don't need the money. Sure, they take it since they're not gonna work for free, but not every executive is a greedy sleezebag. There is such a thing as enjoying your work and enjoying the challenge of running a company.

Yea, most of them are sleaze bags. Look at Koz... he already had money but still stole from the company. The Enron crowd was rich but that was not enough. The Dell guy was rich but kept on giving himself tons of options over the years. QCOM got nepotism going and they get options all the time that they sell... even with buybacks, there is huge dilution going on. The guy who ran GM to the ground got paid a ton of money. Bank of American CEO took in $30M last year after sticking to the stock holders.

There a huge disparity in CEO and upper mgt salaries even in companies that can run but themselves like Coke... well until some idiot came up with the "New Coke" and almost ran the company to the ground. Uh... he got a nice bonus and pay, but some low level got fired.

[801]

Al Gore picked out the system you wish you had....

[joe in miami]

Originally Posted by 801

Al Gore picked out the system you wish you had....

I can't believe he got a Nobel Prize for an animated slide show. The other nominee, Irena Sendler, a lady plumber during WWII, smuggled over a thousand jewish children out of ghettos and into freedom, was caught and beaten nearly to death by the Nazis, lost the Nobel to Gore's slide show.

[anantksundaram]

Originally Posted by joe in miami

I can't believe he got a Nobel Prize for an animated slide show.

But it was a Keynote slide show!

(As an aside, I happen to think that climate change is a serious issue).

[MacTripper]

Originally Posted by 801

Al Gore picked out the system you wish you had....

Al Gore is such a hypocrite. Talks the environmental talk, but doesn't walk the environmental walk.

He's got only one set of eyeballs and no real time update of data on the other two monitors, so why need three 30" displays?

And he's right up close, so he's essentially using 15" - 17" of the first 30" (notice the keyboard is close to the center monitor and no place to put it in front of the other monitors? very awkward!).

I had a 30" you tend to sit back about 4-5 ft from the screen and put the keyboard on your lap, to take it all in and increase the font/size so your not straining to see like he is doing and moving your head around trying to find stuff on the monitor.

Also since he's so close, he has to turn and move his head and body to see the other screens, to get close to squint at whats on those screens (with the keyboard positioned on the center monitor no less!) quite a chore to do all the time (I had another 23" monitor with the 30" so I know from experience)

So essentially the other two 30" monitors are a complete waste of time, effort, money and energy. (not to mention the TV that's on in the original picture)

Given the chaotic and unorganized mess of his office...


Actions speak louder than words.

[jazzguru]

Originally Posted by MacTripper

Al Gore is such a hypocrite. Talks the environmental talk, but doesn't walk the environmental walk.

His computer is only the tip of the iceberg.

A Tale of Two Houses

[joe in miami]

Originally Posted by MacTripper

Al Gore is such a hypocrite. Talks the environmental talk, but doesn't walk the environmental walk.

He's got only one set of eyeballs and no real time update of data on the other two monitors, so why need three 30" displays?

And he's right up close, so he's essentially using 15" - 17" of the first 30" (notice the keyboard is close to the center monitor and no place to put it in front of the other monitors? very awkward!).

I had a 30" you tend to sit back about 4-5 ft from the screen and put the keyboard on your lap, to take it all in and increase the font/size so your not straining to see like he is doing and moving your head around trying to find stuff on the monitor.

Also since he's so close, he has to turn and move his head and body to see the other screens, to get close to squint at whats on those screens (with the keyboard positioned on the center monitor no less!) quite a chore to do all the time (I had another 23" monitor with the 30" so I know from experience)

So essentially the other two 30" monitors are a complete waste of time, effort, money and energy. (not to mention the TV that's on in the original picture)

Given the chaotic and unorganized mess of his office...


Actions speak louder than words.

Originally Posted by anantksundaram

But it was a Keynote slide show!

(As an aside, I happen to think that climate change is a serious issue).

Gore is the epitome of America's Blue Blood. Born with a silver spoon and fork, son of a Senator, raised in a life of privilege and access, occupied the White House for 8 years, invented the internet in his spare time, then couldn't even carry his own home state of Tennessee during a Presidential election. Talks about climate change, yet has a carbon footprint the size of Manhattan, ie: three 30" monitors that give him a tan while he surfs, and flies 100,000 miles on his private jet. He's disgusting.

[anantksundaram]

Originally Posted by joe in miami

Gore is the epitome of America's Blue Blood. Born with a silver spoon and fork, son of a Senator, raised in a life of privilege and access, occupied the White House for 8 years, invented the internet in his spare time, then couldn't even carry his own home state of Tennessee during a Presidential election. Talks about climate change, yet has a carbon footprint the size of Manhattan, ie: three 30" monitors that give him a tan while he surfs, and flies 100,000 miles on his private jet. He's disgusting.

Chill, man.

I said I thought climate change was a serious issue, not Al Gore.

[ouragan]

Before he resigned from the company's board of directors this week, Google Chief Executive Eric Schmidt was essentially a volunteer during his tenure with Apple, accepting only products.

All the Google executive did accept, according to public records from the Securities and Exchange Commission revealed by BusinessWeek, was $8,712 in Apple products, and a $7,580 unknown "commemorative gift." The publication also recalled, as previously known, that Schmidt passed on stock options and a $50,000 retainer fee offered by the Cupertino, Calif.-based company.

Apple's directors are entitled to one of each of the company's new products, as well as a discount on hardware purchases. The directors do capitalize on the offering: former U.S. Vice President Al Gore took $13,161 in Apple products, while Arthur Levinson, former CEO of Genentech, took $8,923.

While Apple's board members are allowed 30,000 shares of the company stock, and the option to purchase an additional 10,000 shares each year, Schmidt passed. Instead, in September 2006, the Google executive bought 10,000 shares on his own, on the open market, at a cost of about $740,000. Today, BusinessWeek calculates, those shares would be worth $1.7 million.

Apple board members are also entitled to a $50,000 annual retainer fee, paid as $12,500 each quarter. But Schmidt also passed on that offering.

He practices the same actions with his own company as well. Schmidt's salary with Google is only $1 a year, and he hasn't accepted stock options from the company for several years.

Eric Schmidt is a true leader. If only Apple could be lead by such a healthy and honest, law abiding, man. Less greed, more honesty.

[BenRoethig]

To be honest, I'm a bit suspicious. Schmidt is either a really great guy or had an agenda.

[FuturePastNow]

Why else would a CEO be on the board of another company, but for the swag?

I mean, that's why I'd do it...