Jony Ive
Noob here. Apologies if I'm posting this in the wrong forum. Let me start off by saying I am a massive Jony Ive fan and hope he never leaves Apple or has his creativity stifled by Cook or anyone else.
Back in October when Apple announced stock grants for most of its executives Jony was missing from the list. According to Bloomberg: "because Ive isn?t classified as an executive officer by Apple under Securities and Exchange Commission rules, the company can keep his compensation private."
Is there a reason Ive is the only SVP not classified as an 'executive officer'? *In Walter Isaacson's book Steve is quoted as saying that he set it up so Jony has more operational power than anyone else at Apple except him. So I have to believe he's being compensated very well but I find it curious that he's treated differently than the other SVP's. Any ideas why that might be?
I know that Jony is not the showman that Phil Schiller or Scott Forstall are, but I'd love to see him more involved in Apple's keynotes. I think he's wickedly intelligent and he knows how to describe Apple's products in a very seductive way. Perhaps he prefers stay out of the limelight and requests not to speak? It's a shame because when I have heard him speak he comes across as genuine and humble whereas someone like Forstall comes across as more fake, almost as though he's trying to be a mini Steve. Especially with the way he dresses just like Steve did. Anyone else get that impression?
Back in October when Apple announced stock grants for most of its executives Jony was missing from the list. According to Bloomberg: "because Ive isn?t classified as an executive officer by Apple under Securities and Exchange Commission rules, the company can keep his compensation private."
Is there a reason Ive is the only SVP not classified as an 'executive officer'? *In Walter Isaacson's book Steve is quoted as saying that he set it up so Jony has more operational power than anyone else at Apple except him. So I have to believe he's being compensated very well but I find it curious that he's treated differently than the other SVP's. Any ideas why that might be?
I know that Jony is not the showman that Phil Schiller or Scott Forstall are, but I'd love to see him more involved in Apple's keynotes. I think he's wickedly intelligent and he knows how to describe Apple's products in a very seductive way. Perhaps he prefers stay out of the limelight and requests not to speak? It's a shame because when I have heard him speak he comes across as genuine and humble whereas someone like Forstall comes across as more fake, almost as though he's trying to be a mini Steve. Especially with the way he dresses just like Steve did. Anyone else get that impression?
Comments
I know that Jony is not the showman that Phil Schiller or Scott Forstall are, but I'd love to see him more involved in Apple's keynotes. I think he's wickedly intelligent and he knows how to describe Apple's products in a very seductive way.
He goes into a lot of detail during keynotes that would probably only be interesting to industrial designers:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JLjldgjuKI
I suspect he doesn't like the attention too though as he always seems a bit nervous. He showed a good sense of humour and confidence at the Steve Jobs event but he'd have to be able to do that during keynotes where there are less opportunities for anecdotes.
As for the unique treatment vs other senior staff, I guess it seems out of place but I imagine that most employees would rather have a title that falls under the commission rules and boost their résumé than have a title that avoids it but as an artist, Ive would probably rather be judged by the effect of his work than by a title or his bank balance:
http://macdailynews.com/2004/10/29/j...ake_nice_thin/
If the compensation was ever divulged, it might drive interviewers or the media in a direction he doesn't want. Only the Apple staff can offer the real reason of course.
Back in October when Apple announced stock grants for most of its executives Jony was missing from the list. According to Bloomberg: "because Ive isn?t classified as an executive officer by Apple under Securities and Exchange Commission rules, the company can keep his compensation private."
Is there a reason Ive is the only SVP not classified as an 'executive officer'? *In Walter Isaacson's book Steve is quoted as saying that he set it up so Jony has more operational power than anyone else at Apple except him. So I have to believe he's being compensated very well but I find it curious that he's treated differently than the other SVP's. Any ideas why that might be?
I am thinking that is caused by the fact that Jony Ive is not a U.S. Citizen, thus his appointment as an executive officer of Apple doesn't trigger an SEC filing. These fillings only apply to U.S. Citizens. So, if I were to become an executive, they wouldn't need to tell the SEC.
I am thinking that is caused by the fact that Jony Ive is not a U.S. Citizen, thus his appointment as an executive officer of Apple doesn't trigger an SEC filing. These fillings only apply to U.S. Citizens. So, if I were to become an executive, they wouldn't need to tell the SEC.
I wondered if Nationality had something to do with it. On the site askmen.com they claim Jony's salary is $2M but I'm not sure how they would know if it doesn't have to be filed with the SEC. If that figure Is true it's a much higher salary than the other executives receive (besides Tim Cook). Unless they're getting stock options that Jony isn't?
Noob here. Apologies if I'm posting this in the wrong forum. Let me start off by saying I am a massive Jony Ive fan and hope he never leaves Apple or has his creativity stifled by Cook or anyone else.
Back in October when Apple announced stock grants for most of its executives Jony was missing from the list. According to Bloomberg: "because Ive isn’t classified as an executive officer by Apple under Securities and Exchange Commission rules, the company can keep his compensation private."
Is there a reason Ive is the only SVP not classified as an 'executive officer'? *In Walter Isaacson's book Steve is quoted as saying that he set it up so Jony has more operational power than anyone else at Apple except him. So I have to believe he's being compensated very well but I find it curious that he's treated differently than the other SVP's. Any ideas why that might be?
I know that Jony is not the showman that Phil Schiller or Scott Forstall are, but I'd love to see him more involved in Apple's keynotes. I think he's wickedly intelligent and he knows how to describe Apple's products in a very seductive way. Perhaps he prefers stay out of the limelight and requests not to speak? It's a shame because when I have heard him speak he comes across as genuine and humble whereas someone like Forstall comes across as more fake, almost as though he's trying to be a mini Steve. Especially with the way he dresses just like Steve did. Anyone else get that impression?
I think if you have a creative genius that virtually defines your company, along with your CEO, you'll want to give him maximum leeway. Just like you say, in the bio, Steve put Jony as answerable to no one but Steve himself. They would play with prototypes, constantly iterating, hence resolving a lot of designer-boss conflicts. I'm sure Jony has all the compensation he would ever need. He did say it sucks sometimes that he doesn't get the recognition he deserves due to Steve sucking all the limelight. But I think at the same time he may not want to speak to much in public when there's so many other "manager-role-people" Steve wanted to come up and speak. In fact, when you have that Ace up your sleeve (Jony) even though everyone knows you have it, you don't want to flash that Ace around too much. If you speak too much about your design philosophy, there's a good chance others are going to "get" it and compete.