Apple's Steve Jobs tops list of highest paid CEOs
Despite a $1 yearly salary, Apple chief executive Steve Jobs still managed to top Forbes' list of highest paid CEOs for 2006, raking in more than $646 million through stock-based compensation -- more than twice that of the next highest paid boss.
The financial publication reported that chief executives of America's 500 biggest companies got a collective 38 percent pay raise last year, to $7.5 billion; an average $15.2 million apiece.
Jobs' $646.6 million came in the form of restricted stock options that vested during the year, bringing his 5-year compensation total for work done at Apple to $650.17 million.
While some components of executive compensation have changed over the years, Forbes noted that exercised stock options are still the main component of pay. Based on the 200 bosses tracked by the publication, stocks accounted for 48 percent of executive pay, or an average gain of $7.3 million per CEO.
Following Jobs as the second highest paid chief executive was Occidental Petroleum boss Ray Irani, who earned $321.64 million. He was followed by IAC/InterActiveCorp chief executive Barry Diller ($295 million), Fidelity National Finl CEO William P Foley II ($179 million), and Yahoo chief Terry Semel ($174 million).
Michael Dell, founder of Apple rival Dell, came in as the 6th highest compensated chief executive with a paycheck of $153 million.
It should be noted that Forbes counts compensation when it turns into cash or marketable stock but does not value or count options until the executive exercises them.
The financial publication reported that chief executives of America's 500 biggest companies got a collective 38 percent pay raise last year, to $7.5 billion; an average $15.2 million apiece.
Jobs' $646.6 million came in the form of restricted stock options that vested during the year, bringing his 5-year compensation total for work done at Apple to $650.17 million.
While some components of executive compensation have changed over the years, Forbes noted that exercised stock options are still the main component of pay. Based on the 200 bosses tracked by the publication, stocks accounted for 48 percent of executive pay, or an average gain of $7.3 million per CEO.
Following Jobs as the second highest paid chief executive was Occidental Petroleum boss Ray Irani, who earned $321.64 million. He was followed by IAC/InterActiveCorp chief executive Barry Diller ($295 million), Fidelity National Finl CEO William P Foley II ($179 million), and Yahoo chief Terry Semel ($174 million).
Michael Dell, founder of Apple rival Dell, came in as the 6th highest compensated chief executive with a paycheck of $153 million.
It should be noted that Forbes counts compensation when it turns into cash or marketable stock but does not value or count options until the executive exercises them.
Comments
Stock options: in other words, Steve kicked ass because Apple kicked ass. I see nothing wrong with this.
I could have sworn I saw a story that said that Apple doesn't issue options for their top people anymore, rather, they just issue stock. It may be that Jobs is still exercising outstanding options issued before they changed their policy.
So if he made 650 mil in 5 years, and of that, 646 was this year... I assume that means he made far less for the previous years, and this is a one-time event not expected to be duplicated each year?
That said, shareholders in Dell should be sending Michael Dell a bill for their losses.
Any article about excessive CEO pay that does not include stock value appreciation during the same time, is simply irresponsible journalism. It's sad to see the standards for journalist sliding so far downhill. Try reporting the real story, with some balance, people...
Any article about excessive CEO pay that does not include stock value appreciation during the same time, is simply irresponsible journalism. It's sad to see the standards for journalist sliding so far downhill. Try reporting the real story, with some balance, people...
I have a couple theories about your post: Your rant is either a generalized statement about other journalistic sites or you misread 'executive' as 'excessive'.
At Apple, compensation for the CEO and his pet Vice-Presidents is insane, demented, unwarranted and the reason why Apple will NEVER succeed in the market place beyond its paltry 5% or 6% US market share.
I am sooo glad that I don't own any Apple stock. I wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot pole.
It is somewhat reassuring to see that Steve Jobs has been exposed for what he is, greedy and insecure to the point of endangering the company he should lead. Others question his lack of leadership, see:
"Will Steve Jobs have to leave Apple?"
http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/31868/128/
I have said it before and it bears repeating:
At Apple, compensation for the CEO and his pet Vice-Presidents is insane, demented, unwarranted and the reason why Apple will NEVER succeed in the market place beyond its paltry 5% or 6% US market share.
I am sooo glad that I don't own any Apple stock. I wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot pole.
It is somewhat reassuring to see that Steve Jobs has been exposed for what he is, greedy and insecure to the point of endangering the company he should lead. Others question his lack of leadership, see:
"Will Steve Jobs have to leave Apple?"
http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/31868/128/:
That is just incorrect on so many levels.
Steve gets paid a $1 salary. Therefore, in order to make a profit for himself he has to make a profit for the company and it's stockholders. It's a reflection of his commitment and ability to bring Apple to where it is today.
I wish more CEOs would do this.
It's too common for a new chief executive to come in with a huge bonus on top of a huge salary and then leave 6 months to a couple years later with a huge severabce package after furthur ruining a company.
I am sooo glad that I don't own any Apple stock. I wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot pole.
Because steadily increasing stock value offends you?
...why Apple will NEVER succeed in the market place beyond its paltry 5% or 6% US market share.
You're right, Apple may never get past 5 or 6^ marketshare. With more and more cheap PCs being being sold everyday it's harder for Apple to maintain marketshare. But we all know that marketshare means nothing if not put into proper context.
Apple is the fastest growing OEM in the US. Apple has record profits and is selling twice as many machines as it did just 3 years ago. The stock is soaring and upcoming Apple releases indicate Apple's frowth to improve even more in the years to come.
I love how the best argument against Apple is to compare its specialized OS to the sale of WIndows, despite it running on pretty much any x86 architecture. Would it not be more prudent to compare the sale of Macs to other OEMs. If we do that, then your argument becomes less effective as Apple is shown as the 5th largest computer maker in the US. If we then compare the areas in which Apple competes in (IOW, negating all crappy $500 PCs sold by HP and Dell that contain 3yo HW) we see that Apple is actually at or near the top of the pack.
Hey, as an apple stock holder I believe that Steve Jobs is worth every penny. Just take a look at what Apple stock has done over the last 3 years vs. what DELL stock has done for it's investors. If we are making money Steve Jobs deserves a cut as well. When Steve Jobs came back to Apple it was a 5 billion dollar company. Now it's a $80 Billion company. Enough said.
That said, shareholders in Dell should be sending Michael Dell a bill for their losses.
Any article about excessive CEO pay that does not include stock value appreciation during the same time, is simply irresponsible journalism. It's sad to see the standards for journalist sliding so far downhill. Try reporting the real story, with some balance, people...
I'm with solipsism, what article were you reading? It was in no way dissing Jobs or calling it excessive. It was a fact reporting article. In fact, the article made me feel proud of Apple for being able to make Steve Jobs #1 on the list. It shows where they've come as a company.
Seriously $640million isn't a big deal for a CEO who posts 30% over their earnings and has HAD the record quarter every quarter for nearly the last year.
Just because you make $30,000 don't be upset ;-) When you run a huge empire, and still have the ability to focus on small details and see an entire project through while answering to hundreds of millions of people, we'll talk about your raise.
ouragan, I'm very glad you don't own Apple stock either.. because it helps me sleep better at night, knowing I don't have to share the 1.3 million dollars I reported in earnings on Apple stock this year :-)
I'm not bothered at all by what Jobs makes. What worries me is that there isn't a _visible_ succession plan. Apple seems to be a 'one man show' at the top, and Jobs won't live forever...
Good point. Where are we going to find someone with a similar RDF?
But, I am sure that we will find out soon enough...
I have said it before and it bears repeating:
At Apple, compensation for the CEO and his pet Vice-Presidents is insane, demented, unwarranted and the reason why Apple will NEVER succeed in the market place beyond its paltry 5% or 6% US market share.
I am sooo glad that I don't own any Apple stock. I wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot pole.
It is somewhat reassuring to see that Steve Jobs has been exposed for what he is, greedy and insecure to the point of endangering the company he should lead. Others question his lack of leadership.
Go back to your PC and Troll elsewhere
p.s. My AAPL stock is running at 300% + increase
I'm with solipsism, what article were you reading? It was in no way dissing Jobs or calling it excessive. It was a fact reporting article. In fact, the article made me feel proud of Apple for being able to make Steve Jobs #1 on the list. It shows where they've come as a company.
Absolutely correct. I love Apple products and I love watching my AAPL soar. Steve's large 'take home compensation' is due to 100% performance not, as with many CEOs, a huge salary regardless of company success. Let's hope he earns ten times as much in a few years based on stock.
I have said it before and it bears repeating:
At Apple, compensation for the CEO and his pet Vice-Presidents is insane, demented, unwarranted and the reason why Apple will NEVER succeed in the market place beyond its paltry 5% or 6% US market share.
I am sooo glad that I don't own any Apple stock. I wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot pole.
It is somewhat reassuring to see that Steve Jobs has been exposed for what he is, greedy and insecure to the point of endangering the company he should lead. Others question his lack of leadership, see:
"Will Steve Jobs have to leave Apple?"
http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/31868/128/
Stock options: in other words, Steve kicked ass because Apple kicked ass. I see nothing wrong with this.
Couldn't agree more. Steve has earned it - let's just hope he uses it as wisely as he's earned it.
And I'm pretty sure that iPod+iTunes has a bit more than 6% market share.
I don't mean to insult a fellow Canuck, but be careful around here. Most of us know how deliberate Apple's strategy is, and how successful it's been to date. If you've got a valid criticism, do share, but raving controversies don't help much.