While I certainly agree that Tim Cook is the "most* deserving of a high salary, it's still ridiculous that the average CEO in this country gets paid 127 TIMES what the average worker at their company gets. Arguably even Tim Cook's contributions aren't 127 times that of the average (not lowest-paid!) worker at Apple.
I know this will generate the usual retorts of "well, Apple's board of directors - the folks that determine Tim's pay - disagree, and they ought to know better than you!" But, of course, the dirty little secret in corporate America is that CEOs sit on each others companies board of directors - "I scratch your back, you scratch mine" appears to be the rule of the day. Consequently, CEO pay in the US often has no relationship to actual performance.
Does anyone have any up-to-date info on how CEOs in other countries are remunerated? The last time I checked, European CEO's pay was much more closely tied to the pay of his workers and, consequently, there wasn't as huge a gap as in the US.
That's just the CEO market at work. Big Deal. It's capitalism, get over it. Get the best price for what you have to sell. It's not a problem until it's concentrated in one person?
While I certainly agree that Tim Cook is the "most* deserving of a high salary, it's still ridiculous that the average CEO in this country gets paid 127 TIMES what the average worker at their company gets. Arguably even Tim Cook's contributions aren't 127 times that of the average (not lowest-paid!) worker at Apple.
I know this will generate the usual retorts of "well, Apple's board of directors - the folks that determine Tim's pay - disagree, and they ought to know better than you!" But, of course, the dirty little secret in corporate America is that CEOs sit on each others companies board of directors - "I scratch your back, you scratch mine" appears to be the rule of the day. Consequently, CEO pay in the US often has no relationship to actual performance.
Does anyone have any up-to-date info on how CEOs in other countries are remunerated? The last time I checked, European CEO's pay was much more closely tied to the pay of his workers and, consequently, there wasn't as huge a gap as in the US.
There's no reason to compensate someone vastly more than they could ever spend in a lifetime. Corporate leaders as the new royalty. One way (monarchies, feudalism) or the other (capitalism), you get the few screwing the rest. It just seems more palatable when you're screwed a certain way.
Does anyone have any up-to-date info on how CEOs in other countries are remunerated? The last time I checked, European CEO's pay was much more closely tied to the pay of his workers and, consequently, there wasn't as huge a gap as in the US.
U.S. CEOs earn from 400 to 500 times the median salary for workers. For CEOs in the U.K., the ratio is 22; in France, it's 15; and in Germany it's 12.
ork.chron.com/ceo-compensation-vs-world-15509.html
Thanks for the real data! It's actually much worse than I had thought! The "127 times" figure I remembered is actually PAY INCREASES relative to workers - i.e. CEOs pay is rising 127 faster than a regular worker's.
400-500 times? That's truly obscene. One of the more hilarious arguments against reigning in U.S. CEO pay is always "If we don't pay our CEOs what they want, they'll go elsewhere in the world and we'd lose our best CEOs." Well, judging by the figures you just gave - where the he11 would they go??? U.K. maybe; The rest of the world apparently is not retarded enough to accede to such ridiculous pay packages.
"[B]Gravity Payments CEO Dan Price has announced that he plans to raise the base pay of every employee to at least $70,000 per year over the next three years. ... Price began to contemplate the idea after reading an article on happiness: “It showed that, for people who earn less than about $70,000, extra money makes a big difference in their lives.”
How is Price going to be able to pay his 120 staffers this respectable wage?
He told the Times that he will cut his own salary of nearly $1 million to $70,000 per year, and use 75 to 80 percent of the company’s annual estimated $2.2 million in profits from this year to fund the raises. ?[/B]"
U.S. CEOs earn from 400 to 500 times the median salary for workers. For CEOs in the U.K., the ratio is 22; in France, it's 15; and in Germany it's 12.
ork.chron.com/ceo-compensation-vs-world-15509.html
"Gravity Payments CEO Dan Price has announced that he plans to raise the base pay of every employee to at least $70,000 per year over the next three years.
... Price began to contemplate the idea after reading an article on happiness: “It showed that, for people who earn less than about $70,000, extra money makes a big difference in their lives.”
How is Price going to be able to pay his 120 staffers this respectable wage?
He told the Times that he will cut his own salary of nearly $1 million to $70,000 per year, and use 75 to 80 percent of the company’s annual estimated $2.2 million in profits from this year to fund the raises. ?"
Just noticed the "naive guy" was named Entrepreneur of the Year for 2014. Maybe he's not so naive after all.
"Dan Gravity Payments CEO Dan Price has been named the Entrepreneur of 2014 by Entrepreneur Magazine, beating out a field of 9 other finalists to take the top prize, and landing himself on the cover of the magazine’s January issue."
What is so naive about wanting to make his company better? He thinks that his company will be a better company if his people have less to worry about in their day to day lives. I applaud the man. The important thing is it is coming from him, not as a government mandate. He is using his company's resources to make it a better place to work, which makes for a better company. Nothing naive here.
Just noticed the "naive guy" was named Entrepreneur of the Year for 2014. Maybe he's not so naive after all.
"Dan Gravity Payments CEO Dan Price has been named the Entrepreneur of 2014 by Entrepreneur Magazine, beating out a field of 9 other finalists to take the top prize, and landing himself on the cover of the magazine’s January issue."
TBH, Entrepreneur Magazine has always been complete fluff. They are like Entertainment Weekly or People Magazine.
What is so naive about wanting to make his company better? He thinks that his company will be a better company if his people have less to worry about in their day to day lives. I applaud the man. The important thing is it is coming from him, not as a government mandate. He is using his company's resources to make it a better place to work, which makes for a better company. Nothing naive here.
No, I agree as long as the decision was his, then at least he is responsible.
Their founder/CEO isn't doing anything illegal or immoral by taking a large salary. Frankly, I've always viewed the available window for them to exploit their niche dominance as being very narrow anyway. They'll probably be out of business in five years or so because they add little to no value to this camera tech that is already commoditized.
Illegal, no, immoral? Maybe. The point is that he's taking a large part of stock that could otherwise be used for better things. There's no evidence that he's worth more than a fraction of that, so economically, it's improper.
The point of my comment was to say that it's unfair to criticize Woodman, just because Tim Cook "only" took $70 million in compensation last year. Of course Woodman's comp is proportionally larger, but he's also in a much different situation and that grant won't hurt GoPro at all.
It's also worth noting that when Woodman received that grant, it was worth less than $30 million. It's only as high as it is now because the market has decided that the company is succeeding under his leadership and the stock price has increased significantly as a result.
Not really true. It's a small company, that's a very large proportion of its worth. A company uses its stock to purchase smaller companies that will help the company, to back loans, etc. this takes a large portion of that off the table. And the company isn't doing all that well.
Just noticed the "naive guy" was named Entrepreneur of the Year for 2014. Maybe he's not so naive after all.
"Dan Gravity Payments CEO Dan Price has been named the Entrepreneur of 2014 by Entrepreneur Magazine, beating out a field of 9 other finalists to take the top prize, and landing himself on the cover of the magazine’s January issue."
Big deal. We'll see if his company is around in a few more years.
Comments
(Deleted)
Actually, creating Apple is the best thing Stevo did for Apple (along with the Woz).
Point taken.
I was thinking of the things Stevo did to grow the company.
Why did the shareholders buy the stock? Were they forced to? And, after they bought it, were they lied to?
I know this will generate the usual retorts of "well, Apple's board of directors - the folks that determine Tim's pay - disagree, and they ought to know better than you!" But, of course, the dirty little secret in corporate America is that CEOs sit on each others companies board of directors - "I scratch your back, you scratch mine" appears to be the rule of the day. Consequently, CEO pay in the US often has no relationship to actual performance.
Does anyone have any up-to-date info on how CEOs in other countries are remunerated? The last time I checked, European CEO's pay was much more closely tied to the pay of his workers and, consequently, there wasn't as huge a gap as in the US.
Stock was $95 and the CEO make a killing.
Now the stock is $40.
That's just the CEO market at work. Big Deal. It's capitalism, get over it. Get the best price for what you have to sell. It's not a problem until it's concentrated in one person?
While I certainly agree that Tim Cook is the "most* deserving of a high salary, it's still ridiculous that the average CEO in this country gets paid 127 TIMES what the average worker at their company gets. Arguably even Tim Cook's contributions aren't 127 times that of the average (not lowest-paid!) worker at Apple.
I know this will generate the usual retorts of "well, Apple's board of directors - the folks that determine Tim's pay - disagree, and they ought to know better than you!" But, of course, the dirty little secret in corporate America is that CEOs sit on each others companies board of directors - "I scratch your back, you scratch mine" appears to be the rule of the day. Consequently, CEO pay in the US often has no relationship to actual performance.
Does anyone have any up-to-date info on how CEOs in other countries are remunerated? The last time I checked, European CEO's pay was much more closely tied to the pay of his workers and, consequently, there wasn't as huge a gap as in the US.
There's no reason to compensate someone vastly more than they could ever spend in a lifetime. Corporate leaders as the new royalty. One way (monarchies, feudalism) or the other (capitalism), you get the few screwing the rest. It just seems more palatable when you're screwed a certain way.
ork.chron.com/ceo-compensation-vs-world-15509.html
That's a surprisingly huge difference!
U.S. CEOs earn from 400 to 500 times the median salary for workers. For CEOs in the U.K., the ratio is 22; in France, it's 15; and in Germany it's 12.
ork.chron.com/ceo-compensation-vs-world-15509.html
That's a surprisingly huge difference!
Thanks for the real data! It's actually much worse than I had thought! The "127 times" figure I remembered is actually PAY INCREASES relative to workers - i.e. CEOs pay is rising 127 faster than a regular worker's.
400-500 times? That's truly obscene. One of the more hilarious arguments against reigning in U.S. CEO pay is always "If we don't pay our CEOs what they want, they'll go elsewhere in the world and we'd lose our best CEOs." Well, judging by the figures you just gave - where the he11 would they go??? U.K. maybe; The rest of the world apparently is not retarded enough to accede to such ridiculous pay packages.
http://www.geekwire.com/2015/this-seattle-startup-ceo-is-increasing-pay-for-every-employee-to-a-minimum-of-70k/
"[B]Gravity Payments CEO Dan Price has announced that he plans to raise the base pay of every employee to at least $70,000 per year over the next three years.
... Price began to contemplate the idea after reading an article on happiness: “It showed that, for people who earn less than about $70,000, extra money makes a big difference in their lives.”
How is Price going to be able to pay his 120 staffers this respectable wage?
He told the Times that he will cut his own salary of nearly $1 million to $70,000 per year, and use 75 to 80 percent of the company’s annual estimated $2.2 million in profits from this year to fund the raises. ?[/B]"
Perhaps he's naive but I respect him.
And?
Naive would be the best possible description.
Just noticed the "naive guy" was named Entrepreneur of the Year for 2014. Maybe he's not so naive after all.
"Dan Gravity Payments CEO Dan Price has been named the Entrepreneur of 2014 by Entrepreneur Magazine, beating out a field of 9 other finalists to take the top prize, and landing himself on the cover of the magazine’s January issue."
Naive would be the best possible description.
What is so naive about wanting to make his company better? He thinks that his company will be a better company if his people have less to worry about in their day to day lives. I applaud the man. The important thing is it is coming from him, not as a government mandate. He is using his company's resources to make it a better place to work, which makes for a better company. Nothing naive here.
TBH, Entrepreneur Magazine has always been complete fluff. They are like Entertainment Weekly or People Magazine.
[VIDEO]
No, I agree as long as the decision was his, then at least he is responsible.
Illegal, no, immoral? Maybe. The point is that he's taking a large part of stock that could otherwise be used for better things. There's no evidence that he's worth more than a fraction of that, so economically, it's improper.
Not really true. It's a small company, that's a very large proportion of its worth. A company uses its stock to purchase smaller companies that will help the company, to back loans, etc. this takes a large portion of that off the table. And the company isn't doing all that well.
You don't have to outright lie, you just paint a picture that isn't quite what it is.
Big deal. We'll see if his company is around in a few more years.