Bonuses help Apple's Tim Cook earn $59M in 2010, Steve Jobs keeps $1 salary

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
Apple Chief Operating Officer Tim Cook earned a huge pay increase in 2010, thanks to cash bonuses and stock-based compensation, bringing his total earnings to more than $59 million, while CEO Steve Jobs kept his traditional $1 annual salary.



The compensation was revealed on Friday in the company's 2011 Proxy Statement, filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.



Last March, Cook, 50, was given a "special award" to recognize his his "outstanding performance" in overseeing the company's day-to-day operations in 2009 when Jobs was on a medical leave of absence. He earned 75,000 restricted shares of AAPL stock, as well as a $5 million discretionary bonus.



Cook earned an annual salary of about $800,000, and added to his $52.3 million in stock awards and $5 million cash bonus, the chief operating officer received a total compensation of $59.1 million in fiscal 2010. It was a huge pay increase for Cook, who earned $1.64 million total in 2009.



Apple's Compensation Committee also determined in September that it was appropriate to increase Cook's base salary from $800,000 to $900,000, a raise that will be reflected in his compensation for the 2011 fiscal year.



Also given a raise last year was Bruce D. Sewell, who took over as Apple's general counsel and senior vice president in 2009. Sewell earned $650,000 in 2010, and will receive a $50,000 pay raise to $700,000 this year.







Not receiving a pay raise was Jobs, who has famously kept an annual salary of $1 per year since he rejoined Apple in 1997. Jobs remains well compensated, however, as he owns about 5.5 million shares of AAPL stock.



"Since rejoining the company in 1997, Mr. Jobs has not sold any of his shares of the Company's stock," the filing reads. "Mr. Jobs holds no unvested equity awards. The Company recognizes that Mr. Jobs's level of stock ownership significantly aligns his interests with shareholders' interests."



Apple's annual shareholder meeting will be held at the company's "Town Hall" (Building 4) at its Cupertino Calif., campus on Feb. 23 at 10 a.m. Pacific Standard Time. Admission to the meeting is allowed to shareholders on a first-come, first-served basis.
«134

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 73
    zoetmbzoetmb Posts: 2,292member
    $59 million? He must kiss the ground that Steve Jobs walks on every day of his life.
  • Reply 2 of 73
    As an MBA, let me point out having been around and seen many of his type, he didn't do anything remotely to earn this in a "fair" way. Anyone competent could have done what Cook did; Jobs magic is obviously the real reason for Apple's success. It is crazy in corporate America there is such a huge disconnect between what the average worker in a company earns and the top execs. The BOD doesn't answer to the common shareholder anymore. I suppose I could understand him getting $5 million, but $59 million?! Just how much is enough?
  • Reply 3 of 73
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cylack View Post


    As an MBA, let me point out having been around and seen many of his type, he didn't do anything remotely to earn this in a "fair" way. Anyone competent could have done what Cook did; Jobs magic is obviously the real reason for Apple's success. It is crazy in corporate America there is such a huge disconnect between what the average worker in a company earns and the top execs. The BOD doesn't answer to the common shareholder anymore. I suppose I could understand him getting $5 million, but $59 million?! Just how much is enough?



    And how much closer to a Tim Cook level bonus has that MBA gotten you?
  • Reply 4 of 73
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cylack View Post


    As an MBA, let me point out having been around and seen many of his type, he didn't do anything remotely to earn this in a "fair" way. Anyone competent could have done what Cook did; Jobs magic is obviously the real reason for Apple's success. It is crazy in corporate America there is such a huge disconnect between what the average worker in a company earns and the top execs. The BOD doesn't answer to the common shareholder anymore. I suppose I could understand him getting $5 million, but $59 million?! Just how much is enough?



    It is in the character of very few men to honor without envy a friend who has prospered. ~Aeschylus
  • Reply 5 of 73
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cylack View Post


    As an MBA, let me point out having been around and seen many of his type, he didn't do anything remotely to earn this in a "fair" way. Anyone competent could have done what Cook did; Jobs magic is obviously the real reason for Apple's success. It is crazy in corporate America there is such a huge disconnect between what the average worker in a company earns and the top execs. The BOD doesn't answer to the common shareholder anymore. I suppose I could understand him getting $5 million, but $59 million?! Just how much is enough?



    A lot of people think they can do a good job as president of the US too. There is a lot more to the job then you would think. Any plain old MBA isn't going to be a good fit to lead an engineering company. You need to be multi-talented. Remember that Tim is the potential successor to Steve Jobs. He not only knows all of Apple's operations, but he has the right spirit for Apple. His job is his life. It is not like he is some real estate mogul and this money isn't going to support some playboy lifestyle. I'm sure he invests his money in things that create jobs (or in Apple stock). Money is power and I like to see power in the hands of someone like Tim.



    Besides, his salary is $800,000. He had a one time bonus of $5 million probably for his role as temporary CEO at the beginning of the year. The rest is stock based compensation. That stock was probably given to him at $80 a share. Apple is now at $334 a share.
  • Reply 6 of 73
    nasseraenasserae Posts: 3,152member
    Now that what I call a bonus



    Maybe it should be mandatory for every CEO of a publicly traded corporation to have a salary of $1 and only be compensated with company shares!
  • Reply 6 of 73
    Having an MBA doesn't make a person a business expert any more than having a teaching degree makes one a great teacher.



    What Cook did was amazing. Steve had to leave Apple at a time when it's stock was down to less than $80 a share. Many were afraid Steve would not be coming back because of ongoing health issues. Investors were scared to even invest with Apple at that time.



    Cook set up a world-wide manufacturing process that made Apple even stronger than it had been with Steve. The connections he made with so many manufacturing facilities so easily and so readily gave Apple the opportunity it needed to remain healthy while Jobs was away. It also provided the opportunity for Apple to thrive now that Steve is back.



    Anyone competent? There might have only been a half a dozen people in the whole world who could have pulled off what he did. Investors didn't panic and Apple has now grown into the number one tech company in the world.



    Yes, Apple is Steve's vision, but the highly talented help him pull off that vision.



    Cook deserved what he made and there are millions of shareholders who are glad he was as good as he was.
  • Reply 8 of 73
    al_bundyal_bundy Posts: 1,525member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cylack View Post


    As an MBA, let me point out having been around and seen many of his type, he didn't do anything remotely to earn this in a "fair" way. Anyone competent could have done what Cook did; Jobs magic is obviously the real reason for Apple's success. It is crazy in corporate America there is such a huge disconnect between what the average worker in a company earns and the top execs. The BOD doesn't answer to the common shareholder anymore. I suppose I could understand him getting $5 million, but $59 million?! Just how much is enough?



    i have personally seen and read about so many MBA's at senior exec levels make so many stupid decisions that yes, he does deserve it and probably did a lot of work to earn it.



    RIM is a perfect example



    SJ might make good design decisions but someone has to turn it into millions of products manufactured on time. it's not like the iphones magically appear once SJ OK's a design
  • Reply 9 of 73
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cylack View Post


    As an MBA, let me point out having been around and seen many of his type, he didn't do anything remotely to earn this in a "fair" way. Anyone competent could have done what Cook did; Jobs magic is obviously the real reason for Apple's success. It is crazy in corporate America there is such a huge disconnect between what the average worker in a company earns and the top execs. The BOD doesn't answer to the common shareholder anymore. I suppose I could understand him getting $5 million, but $59 million?! Just how much is enough?



    I'm mostly with you on this one. There seems to be a big disconnect in a lot of areas concerning wages (ie. sports, entertainment).



    But...



    If Apple feels that Tim Cook is the guy it needs to succeed then you have to pay the piper or lose that person.



    Meaning: Apple doesn't believe that "any" competent person could do Tim's job.
  • Reply 10 of 73
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cylack View Post


    As an MBA, let me point out having been around and seen many of his type, he didn't do anything remotely to earn this in a "fair" way. Anyone competent could have done what Cook did; Jobs magic is obviously the real reason for Apple's success. It is crazy in corporate America there is such a huge disconnect between what the average worker in a company earns and the top execs. The BOD doesn't answer to the common shareholder anymore. I suppose I could understand him getting $5 million, but $59 million?! Just how much is enough?



    And just what would have happened to consumer and investor confidence if they had put 'anyone competent' in there? He was compensated for his value to the company, not what he did.
  • Reply 11 of 73
    Typo : Jobs returned to Apple in 1996 or 1997, not 2007.
  • Reply 12 of 73
    wonderwonder Posts: 229member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by blirette View Post


    Typo : Jobs returned to Apple in 1996 or 1997, not 2007.



    Think before you speak: He returned to Apple in 2007 after his absence due to illness.
  • Reply 13 of 73
    Apple took top spot on AMR's manufacturing and supply chain rankings THREE YEARS in a row beating out every other U.S company.



    Supplychaindigital: "The company’s supply chain strategy has been greatly admired for many years now but to remain in the No. 1 position of AMR’s findings is unprecedented."



    Dell was always known as the supply chain king, able to manufacture and deliver cheaper than anyone else and Apple beat them. Apple beat Wal-mart as well! This is one heck of a competitive advantage.



    This I believe is mainly due to Tim Cook.

    Wikipedia Bio on Cook: "... helped the company reduce inventory levels and streamline its supply chain, dramatically increasing margins"



    I don't know about levels of executive compensation and what is fair: seems like the large sum (vs previous year) is due to various factors like taking over when Jobs was sick and shares vesting (share compensation awarded can be spread over several years)



    Lots of companies (from rumors) have been head hunting Cook to be their CEO. (Look what happened to Rubenstein who became Palm CEO). What we don't need is Cook to go to HP or something. We want Jobs to be free of the nitty gritty of supply chains and have time to dream and innovate.
  • Reply 14 of 73
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Wonder View Post


    Think before you speak: He returned to Apple in 2007 after his absence due to illness.



    Or rather read the article. blirette is correct.
  • Reply 15 of 73
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Wonder View Post


    Think before you speak: He returned to Apple in 2007 after his absence due to illness.



    The poster did.



    Please reread the article. The passage is referring to Jobs' original return to Apple not after his illness. As does the following sentence.



    ****



    Not sure I could live on just a million a week.



    ****



    Meanwhile, people who work at the Apple store are barely scraping by, working at a tough job in a retail environment while standing on their feet all day.
  • Reply 16 of 73
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cylack View Post


    Just how much is enough?



    That's none of your business. He is worth what the BOD have determined that he is worth, not you.



    I bet you think he ought to be taxed heavily so liberal politicians can give HIS hard earned money to bums who are uninterested in employment for health insurance, housing, and food.
  • Reply 17 of 73
    sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 16,888member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cylack View Post


    As an MBA, let me point out having been around and seen many of his type, he didn't do anything remotely to earn this in a "fair" way. Anyone competent could have done what Cook did; Jobs magic is obviously the real reason for Apple's success. It is crazy in corporate America there is such a huge disconnect between what the average worker in a company earns and the top execs. The BOD doesn't answer to the common shareholder anymore. I suppose I could understand him getting $5 million, but $59 million?! Just how much is enough?



    Why the heck do YOU get to decide that $5 million is "enough?" Apple is absolutely booming. They can pay him what they want.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post


    Now that what I call a bonus



    Maybe it should be mandatory for every CEO of a publicly traded corporation to have a salary of $1 and only be compensated with company shares!



    Ridiculous. How would they live? You're actually going to pass a law to that fact? Hey guys, I think Nancy Pelosi is posting on AI.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by island hermit View Post


    I'm mostly with you on this one. There seems to be a big disconnect in a lot of areas concerning wages (ie. sports, entertainment).



    But...



    If Apple feels that Tim Cook is the guy it needs to succeed then you have to pay the piper or lose that person.



    Meaning: Apple doesn't believe that "any" competent person could do Tim's job.



    Exactly. It's reality. It reminds me a little bit of my job on a much smaller scale. We have members of the public that crow about teachers making too much money, getting "free" healthcare, "4 months" off a year, etc. Beyond their obvious misconceptions, they fail to realize one thing: Teachers are subject to economic incentives like everyone else. I came to my district because of the working environment, the students, reputation...and the MONEY. Apple is no different.
  • Reply 18 of 73
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by NomadMac View Post




    Meanwhile, people who work at the Apple store are barely scraping by, working at a tough job in a retail environment while standing on their feet all day.





    They work in a retail store. How much to they deserve.

    Although I've been impressed with the genius bar staff answering some of my questions, most staff I've been in contact with on the floor had to go in the back and ask someone for an answer to my questions.



    No special skills or knowledge makes for a smaller pay check.
  • Reply 19 of 73
    juandljuandl Posts: 228member
    How many more CEO's out there are willing to put it all on the line.
  • Reply 20 of 73
    nasseraenasserae Posts: 3,152member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post


    Ridiculous. How would they live? You're actually going to pass a law to that fact? Hey guys, I think Nancy Pelosi is posting on AI.



    Lighten up. It was a joke
Sign In or Register to comment.