9 ms·

Tobacco industry generates highest net income per employee

84 points by qwerty2020 9y ago

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
jmarbach 9y ago
One reason for this is because the Tobacco industry benefits enormously from manufacturing economies of scale. Take for example Reynolds American's (mentioned in the article) largest manufacturing facility in Tobaccoville, near their HQ in Winston-Salem. The Tobaccoville plant is capable of producing 110 billion cigarettes a year¹, and employs just ~1,200 people². Let's say the average revenue per cigarette pack is $5, and there are 20 cigarettes in a pack. That works out to $0.25 revenue per cigarette. The Reynolds Tobaccoville plant is capable of producing $27.5 billion in revenue alone ($0.25 x 110 billion), for a labor cost of roughly 90 million (1,200 x $75,000). 1. http://www.nytimes.com/1987/08/23/business/what-s-new-in-tobacco-in-tiny-tobaccoville-a-giant-plant.html http://www.nytimes.com/1987/08/23/business/what-s-new-in-tob... 2. http://www.journalnow.com/business/business_news/local/update-reynolds-to-create-jobs-in-tobaccoville-to-expand-vuse/article_cc60b98c-e283-11e3-ac51-001a4bcf6878.html http://www.journalnow.com/business/business_news/local/updat...
- QAPereo 9y ago
  They also have giant emerging markets around the world, far more numerous than Canada, the US, and Western Europe. If history is a guided then generations of tobacco execs can strike it rich by killing people, before the gig is up. Edit: Reply: Indonesia meanwhile... China controls about 41% of the global market, but Asia Pacific market overall is 64%. That’s... a lot. Then there’s India... Africa... Still it is true that China is the number 1 in the world in terms of both production and consumption.
  - seanmcdirmid 9y ago
    Many of hose markets are extremely protected. The tobacco industry in China for example is completely local, growing in Yunnan and driving smoking policy as a bunch of SOEs.
  - topmonk 9y ago
    > If history is a guided then generations of tobacco execs can strike it rich by killing people, before the gig is up. You know, some people like cigarettes, despite the health effects. No one is "killing" you, if you decide to use a product even though you are aware of the risks.
    - QAPereo 9y ago
      Such people are a minority of smokers around the world, and given how addictive nicotine is, probably fooling themselves. The average smoker is in the Asia Pacific region, India, Indonesia, and Africa, and is impoverished. In those regions as elsewhere, socioeconomic class and education correlate with the lowest numbers of smokers.
      - topmonk 9y ago
        > Such people are a minority of smokers around the world, and given how addictive nicotine is, probably fooling themselves Do you have statistics on that? Sounds a little suspect. > The average smoker is in the Asia Pacific region, India, Indonesia, and Africa, and is impoverished. Another vague statistic. I'm really curious, where'd you get it? >In those regions as elsewhere, socioeconomic class and education correlate with the lowest numbers of smokers. Poor people like different things than rich people? So what?
        QAPereo 9y ago
        So you do like “obscure statistics” after all! Good! https://www.tobaccofreekids.org/assets/global/pdfs/en/Global_Cigarette_Industry_pdf.pdf https://www.tobaccofreekids.org/assets/global/pdfs/en/Global... Your turn.
        topmonk 9y ago
        > So you do like “obscure statistics” after all! Good! No, I just don't like people claiming a bunch of truths, with no data to back it up. Also, don't dump a bunch of propaganda on me and expect me to dig through it looking to verify your claims. Show me where in that does it say that the average smoker is "impoverished". Or that a majority of smokers around the world don't like to smoke, and are doing it simply because they are addicted.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- Alex3917 9y ago
  Tobacco is also subsidized, so the government is effectively paying Americans to smoke.
  - teej 9y ago
    Except for the $5+ tax per pack. What a ridiculous assertion.
    - throwawayjava 9y ago
      A more accurate statement might be that the government is paying people to produce cigarettes.
      - Alex3917 9y ago
        If buying a pack of cigarettes costs less than it would without the subsidies, then you're effectively getting free money every time you smoke.
        Clubber 9y ago
        It's not even close. If the government didn't do any subsidizing or taxing, cigarettes would be much cheaper. The magnitude would vary depending on state or country.
      - bmmayer1 9y ago
        So, let me get this straight. The government pays people to produce them, then charges people to smoke them?
        throwawayjava 9y ago
        Basically, yes. But it's not quite that clear cut. Tobacco growers receive farm subsidies [1], which isn't a tobacco-specific subsidy, but also isn't a "whoops didn't mean those farms" accident [2]. Tobacco products are then (heavily) taxed. Also, it's actually that the federal government pays people to grow tobacco and the state governments tax people to consume tobacco. And the federal subsidies are much lower than the state taxes. It's still a weird situation, and subsidies probably shouldn't be paid to farms producing tobacco. But the sort of corruption that makes this nonsense possible is totally legal in America, so. [1] https://farm.ewg.org/top_recips.php?fips=00000&progcode=tobacco https://farm.ewg.org/top_recips.php?fips=00000&progcode=toba... [2] http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/301645-senate-rejects-amendment-to-end-tobacco-farm-subsidies http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/301645-senate-r...
- Bromskloss 9y ago
  > the Tobacco industry benefits enormously from manufacturing economies of scale. I was expecting the rest of the comment to be an explanation of why this is so, but I feel that it really just restated, with specific numbers, the claim that they do indeed make a large amount of money (or at least revenue) per employee.
- jldugger 9y ago
  Crayola also has like 1,200 employees manufacturing packs of paper wrapped tubes of product for 5 bucks a pop. What about cigarettes is more beneficial for economies of scale?
  - skybrian 9y ago
    A much larger market. Nobody buys crayons or even school supplies every day.
    - bgia 9y ago
      Exactly. And nobody gets addicted to crayons.
      - jacoblambda 9y ago
        marines?
      - mikeash 9y ago
        I beg to differ. Still, feeding a crayon addiction is much cheaper, since they’re multi-use.
  - cjhveal 9y ago
    I'd hazard that the difference is in the demand for the products. The total addressable market for crayons is likely much smaller, and would be more quickly saturated if you were to ramp up production. Cigarettes have killer recurring revenue and the demand for them is highly inelastic.
  - flogic 9y ago
    Cigarettes are literally dried up leaves. Their customers light the product on fire and then buy more the next day. Given that as a viable business model, how do you not make ridiculous quantities of money?
    - TylerE 9y ago
- pxeboot 9y ago
  In low tax states, cigarettes retail for less than $5/pack. Manufacturers are likely only getting $3-4/pack, but your point still stands.
  - selectodude 9y ago
    Duty free pricing is about $3.75/pack. I imagine they sell them wholesale for $2.50.
- megaman22 9y ago
  Is the revenue per pack $5? In some jurisdictions, a pack of cigs costs less than that, and in others double or more. The biggest component in the price of tobacco appears to be sin taxes.
  - Clubber 9y ago
    I was thinking governments are probably the largest profiters of tobacco products though taxes. >Their data estimates that taxes make up 42.5% of the cost of a pack of cigarettes in the US, compared to 82.2% in the United Kingdom, which has the highest cigarette taxes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cigarette_taxes_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cigarette_taxes_in_the_United_...
    - jacobduchen 9y ago
      In the short term yes, in the long term governments lose money due to chronic diseases caused by tobacco
      - metaphor 9y ago
        > in the long term governments lose money due to chronic diseases caused by tobacco I don't follow how governments lose money in the long. Could you elaborate?
        polskibus 9y ago
        Smoking tobacco kills taxpayers. Illnesses caused by smoking are expensive to treat.
        deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
        jacobduchen 9y ago
        I think these estimates from the CDC are pretty conservative. In the US, EVERY YEAR: "Smoking-related illness in the United States costs more than $300 billion each year. Nearly $170 billion for direct medical care for adults More than $156 billion in lost productivity, including $5.6 billion in lost productivity due to secondhand smoke exposure" https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/economics/econ_facts/index.htm https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/econ... OFF-TOPIC A major way (the only way?) to curb tobacco usage is to simply increase taxes on tobacco usage, but politicians/bureaucracy prefers the short-term tobacco tax revenue. Cool article about Chinese tobacco tax rev: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-12-12/the-chinese-government-is-getting-rich-selling-cigarettes https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-12-12/the-chine...
- tryingagainbro 9y ago
  Revenue is meaningless in this case. Taxes and taxes and taxes make most of the sale. It's like someone listing as revenue Boeing jet sales when they only get $1000 for each sale.
M4v3R 9y ago
It's a shame and a terrible irony that one of the most successful industries on our planet is also one of the leading causes of deaths on Earth.
- KGIII 9y ago
  I believe making munitions is also quite profitable. You might be on to something.
- ejnulls 9y ago
  LOL. I'm sure your work improves lives greatly, most of the poeple on this site optimize click rates to hawk stuff people don't need.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- Clubber 9y ago
  >is also one of the leading causes of deaths on Earth. The methods of calculating that 400,000 number are highly suspect. Nearly 60 percent of the deaths occur at age 70 or above; nearly 45 percent at age 75 or above; and almost 17 percent at the grand old age of 85 or above! Nevertheless, without the slightest embarrassment, the public health community persists in characterizing those deaths as “premature.” tobacco-related deaths occur at an average age of roughly 72, an age at which mortality is not unusual among smokers and non-smokers alike. https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/blowing-smoke-about-tobaccorelated-deaths https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/blowing-smoke-a... I'm not disagreeing that they are harmful, but 400,000 deaths a year is hyperbole. Governments make a lot of money on that hyperbole too. In Fiscal Year 2010, the federal excise tax on cigarettes (currently $1.01 per pack) brought in $15.5 billion in revenue. In 2009, states raked in more than $24 billion by taxing cigarettes and $8.8 billion in settlement payments from tobacco companies http://dailycaller.com/2011/02/28/what-would-an-america-without-smokers-cost/ http://dailycaller.com/2011/02/28/what-would-an-america-with...
ianferrel 9y ago
Sure. Imagine how much income the crack industry would produce if they didn't have to waste so much labor avoiding law enforcement.
- KboPAacDA3 9y ago
  and marijuana, too.
- theparanoid 9y ago
  Just look at Miami in the 80s.
setgree 9y ago
I would be interested in more summary statistics rather than just mean (NIPE), particularly median. What story is actually being told by this data, that tobacco growth and sales are highly automated and they employ relatively few people, or that execs are disproportionately compensated relative to other industries, or what?
- qwerty2020 9y ago
  Author here -- boxplot distribution is in the article. Also, any story I could string together would definitely be speculative, so just stuck to the few facts I know for purposes of article. Will speculate here, however :) -- I'm going to guess primary driver is efficient manufacturing coupled with simple product offering. (e.g. this isn't some Tech company employing X% of it's workforce for R&D purposes)
sytelus 9y ago
Tabacco - average of $609k per employee Oil, Gas, & Consumable fuels - average of $421k per employee I think top 5 public software companies (GOOG, MSFT, FB, AMZN, AAPL) averages more than Tabacco.
- pinot 9y ago
  http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=microsoft+net+income+%2F+microsoft+employees&dataset= http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=microsoft+net+income+%2... http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?dataset=&i=google+net+income+%2F+google+employees http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?dataset=&i=google+net+inc... Facebook, however: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?dataset=&i=facebook+net+income+%2F+facebook+employees http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?dataset=&i=facebook+net+i...
- nekopa 9y ago
  From pinot's links: GOOG: $256K per employee MSFT: $186K per employee FB : $659K per employee AMZN: $6K per employee AAPL: $402K per employee
Iv 9y ago
Who would have guessed that addiction sells.
jakeogh 9y ago
160kμSv? Why? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRL7o2kPqw0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRL7o2kPqw0 Without the combustion and rads is nicotine interesting on it's own?
chinathrow 9y ago
And highest externalities too?
tryingagainbro 9y ago
A pack of cigarettes is about 20 gram, or about 2/3 of an ounce. So tobacco used to make a pack, is not free, but pretty close to it. Factories cost money but after the initial investment, they mint cash... I'm almost certain that Marlboro would sell you a gazillion packs for around $1 each on the black market---complete with e Vegas trip and hookers--if they could. Smuggling, to avoid taxes, was a huge business a while back when getting away with it was much easier. Taxes and advertising cost a lot.
itomato 9y ago
Excellent news for Legal Cannabis.
gmiller123456 9y ago
I used to work for Brown & Williamson Tobacco (though I did not receive my $608k per year), and I can absolutely attest that their profits are not as the author suggests "return on talent". I worked at corporate HQ, which is probably very different from the factories where the cigarettes were actually made. The vast majority of people spent the vast majority of their time looking for work to do, because we quite literally had nothing to do. We had something like 20 corporate holidays, plus many other "bonus" holidays announced a day or two ahead of time, and many half-days. One story goes that the CEO was talking to someone about our building and someone on the street asked her "How many people work in that building", and her response was "Oh, about half".

84 points by qwerty2020 9y ago

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

One reason for this is because the Tobacco industry benefits enormously from manufacturing economies of scale. Take for example Reynolds American's (mentioned in the article) largest manufacturing facility in Tobaccoville, near their HQ in Winston-Salem. The Tobaccoville plant is capable of producing 110 billion cigarettes a year¹, and employs just ~1,200 people². Let's say the average revenue per cigarette pack is $5, and there are 20 cigarettes in a pack. That works out to $0.25 revenue per cigarette. The Reynolds Tobaccoville plant is capable of producing $27.5 billion in revenue alone ($0.25 x 110 billion), for a labor cost of roughly 90 million (1,200 x $75,000). 1. http://www.nytimes.com/1987/08/23/business/what-s-new-in-tobacco-in-tiny-tobaccoville-a-giant-plant.html http://www.nytimes.com/1987/08/23/business/what-s-new-in-tob... 2. http://www.journalnow.com/business/business_news/local/update-reynolds-to-create-jobs-in-tobaccoville-to-expand-vuse/article_cc60b98c-e283-11e3-ac51-001a4bcf6878.html http://www.journalnow.com/business/business_news/local/updat...

QAPereo 9y ago
They also have giant emerging markets around the world, far more numerous than Canada, the US, and Western Europe. If history is a guided then generations of tobacco execs can strike it rich by killing people, before the gig is up. Edit: Reply: Indonesia meanwhile... China controls about 41% of the global market, but Asia Pacific market overall is 64%. That’s... a lot. Then there’s India... Africa... Still it is true that China is the number 1 in the world in terms of both production and consumption.
- seanmcdirmid 9y ago
  Many of hose markets are extremely protected. The tobacco industry in China for example is completely local, growing in Yunnan and driving smoking policy as a bunch of SOEs.
- topmonk 9y ago
  > If history is a guided then generations of tobacco execs can strike it rich by killing people, before the gig is up. You know, some people like cigarettes, despite the health effects. No one is "killing" you, if you decide to use a product even though you are aware of the risks.
  - QAPereo 9y ago
    Such people are a minority of smokers around the world, and given how addictive nicotine is, probably fooling themselves. The average smoker is in the Asia Pacific region, India, Indonesia, and Africa, and is impoverished. In those regions as elsewhere, socioeconomic class and education correlate with the lowest numbers of smokers.
    - topmonk 9y ago
      > Such people are a minority of smokers around the world, and given how addictive nicotine is, probably fooling themselves Do you have statistics on that? Sounds a little suspect. > The average smoker is in the Asia Pacific region, India, Indonesia, and Africa, and is impoverished. Another vague statistic. I'm really curious, where'd you get it? >In those regions as elsewhere, socioeconomic class and education correlate with the lowest numbers of smokers. Poor people like different things than rich people? So what?
      - QAPereo 9y ago
        So you do like “obscure statistics” after all! Good! https://www.tobaccofreekids.org/assets/global/pdfs/en/Global_Cigarette_Industry_pdf.pdf https://www.tobaccofreekids.org/assets/global/pdfs/en/Global... Your turn.
        topmonk 9y ago
        > So you do like “obscure statistics” after all! Good! No, I just don't like people claiming a bunch of truths, with no data to back it up. Also, don't dump a bunch of propaganda on me and expect me to dig through it looking to verify your claims. Show me where in that does it say that the average smoker is "impoverished". Or that a majority of smokers around the world don't like to smoke, and are doing it simply because they are addicted.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
Alex3917 9y ago
Tobacco is also subsidized, so the government is effectively paying Americans to smoke.
- teej 9y ago
  Except for the $5+ tax per pack. What a ridiculous assertion.
  - throwawayjava 9y ago
    A more accurate statement might be that the government is paying people to produce cigarettes.
    - Alex3917 9y ago
      If buying a pack of cigarettes costs less than it would without the subsidies, then you're effectively getting free money every time you smoke.
      - Clubber 9y ago
        It's not even close. If the government didn't do any subsidizing or taxing, cigarettes would be much cheaper. The magnitude would vary depending on state or country.
    - bmmayer1 9y ago
      So, let me get this straight. The government pays people to produce them, then charges people to smoke them?
      - throwawayjava 9y ago
        Basically, yes. But it's not quite that clear cut. Tobacco growers receive farm subsidies [1], which isn't a tobacco-specific subsidy, but also isn't a "whoops didn't mean those farms" accident [2]. Tobacco products are then (heavily) taxed. Also, it's actually that the federal government pays people to grow tobacco and the state governments tax people to consume tobacco. And the federal subsidies are much lower than the state taxes. It's still a weird situation, and subsidies probably shouldn't be paid to farms producing tobacco. But the sort of corruption that makes this nonsense possible is totally legal in America, so. [1] https://farm.ewg.org/top_recips.php?fips=00000&progcode=tobacco https://farm.ewg.org/top_recips.php?fips=00000&progcode=toba... [2] http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/301645-senate-rejects-amendment-to-end-tobacco-farm-subsidies http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/301645-senate-r...
Bromskloss 9y ago
> the Tobacco industry benefits enormously from manufacturing economies of scale. I was expecting the rest of the comment to be an explanation of why this is so, but I feel that it really just restated, with specific numbers, the claim that they do indeed make a large amount of money (or at least revenue) per employee.
jldugger 9y ago
Crayola also has like 1,200 employees manufacturing packs of paper wrapped tubes of product for 5 bucks a pop. What about cigarettes is more beneficial for economies of scale?
- skybrian 9y ago
  A much larger market. Nobody buys crayons or even school supplies every day.
  - bgia 9y ago
    Exactly. And nobody gets addicted to crayons.
    - jacoblambda 9y ago
      marines?
    - mikeash 9y ago
      I beg to differ. Still, feeding a crayon addiction is much cheaper, since they’re multi-use.
- cjhveal 9y ago
  I'd hazard that the difference is in the demand for the products. The total addressable market for crayons is likely much smaller, and would be more quickly saturated if you were to ramp up production. Cigarettes have killer recurring revenue and the demand for them is highly inelastic.
- flogic 9y ago
  Cigarettes are literally dried up leaves. Their customers light the product on fire and then buy more the next day. Given that as a viable business model, how do you not make ridiculous quantities of money?
  - TylerE 9y ago
pxeboot 9y ago
In low tax states, cigarettes retail for less than $5/pack. Manufacturers are likely only getting $3-4/pack, but your point still stands.
- selectodude 9y ago
  Duty free pricing is about $3.75/pack. I imagine they sell them wholesale for $2.50.
megaman22 9y ago
Is the revenue per pack $5? In some jurisdictions, a pack of cigs costs less than that, and in others double or more. The biggest component in the price of tobacco appears to be sin taxes.
- Clubber 9y ago
  I was thinking governments are probably the largest profiters of tobacco products though taxes. >Their data estimates that taxes make up 42.5% of the cost of a pack of cigarettes in the US, compared to 82.2% in the United Kingdom, which has the highest cigarette taxes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cigarette_taxes_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cigarette_taxes_in_the_United_...
  - jacobduchen 9y ago
    In the short term yes, in the long term governments lose money due to chronic diseases caused by tobacco
    - metaphor 9y ago
      > in the long term governments lose money due to chronic diseases caused by tobacco I don't follow how governments lose money in the long. Could you elaborate?
      - polskibus 9y ago
        Smoking tobacco kills taxpayers. Illnesses caused by smoking are expensive to treat.
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
      - jacobduchen 9y ago
        I think these estimates from the CDC are pretty conservative. In the US, EVERY YEAR: "Smoking-related illness in the United States costs more than $300 billion each year. Nearly $170 billion for direct medical care for adults More than $156 billion in lost productivity, including $5.6 billion in lost productivity due to secondhand smoke exposure" https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/economics/econ_facts/index.htm https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/econ... OFF-TOPIC A major way (the only way?) to curb tobacco usage is to simply increase taxes on tobacco usage, but politicians/bureaucracy prefers the short-term tobacco tax revenue. Cool article about Chinese tobacco tax rev: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-12-12/the-chinese-government-is-getting-rich-selling-cigarettes https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-12-12/the-chine...
tryingagainbro 9y ago
Revenue is meaningless in this case. Taxes and taxes and taxes make most of the sale. It's like someone listing as revenue Boeing jet sales when they only get $1000 for each sale.

M4v3R 9y ago

It's a shame and a terrible irony that one of the most successful industries on our planet is also one of the leading causes of deaths on Earth.

KGIII 9y ago
I believe making munitions is also quite profitable. You might be on to something.
ejnulls 9y ago
LOL. I'm sure your work improves lives greatly, most of the poeple on this site optimize click rates to hawk stuff people don't need.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
Clubber 9y ago
>is also one of the leading causes of deaths on Earth. The methods of calculating that 400,000 number are highly suspect. Nearly 60 percent of the deaths occur at age 70 or above; nearly 45 percent at age 75 or above; and almost 17 percent at the grand old age of 85 or above! Nevertheless, without the slightest embarrassment, the public health community persists in characterizing those deaths as “premature.” tobacco-related deaths occur at an average age of roughly 72, an age at which mortality is not unusual among smokers and non-smokers alike. https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/blowing-smoke-about-tobaccorelated-deaths https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/blowing-smoke-a... I'm not disagreeing that they are harmful, but 400,000 deaths a year is hyperbole. Governments make a lot of money on that hyperbole too. In Fiscal Year 2010, the federal excise tax on cigarettes (currently $1.01 per pack) brought in $15.5 billion in revenue. In 2009, states raked in more than $24 billion by taxing cigarettes and $8.8 billion in settlement payments from tobacco companies http://dailycaller.com/2011/02/28/what-would-an-america-without-smokers-cost/ http://dailycaller.com/2011/02/28/what-would-an-america-with...

ianferrel 9y ago

Sure. Imagine how much income the crack industry would produce if they didn't have to waste so much labor avoiding law enforcement.

KboPAacDA3 9y ago
and marijuana, too.
theparanoid 9y ago
Just look at Miami in the 80s.

setgree 9y ago

I would be interested in more summary statistics rather than just mean (NIPE), particularly median. What story is actually being told by this data, that tobacco growth and sales are highly automated and they employ relatively few people, or that execs are disproportionately compensated relative to other industries, or what?

qwerty2020 9y ago
Author here -- boxplot distribution is in the article. Also, any story I could string together would definitely be speculative, so just stuck to the few facts I know for purposes of article. Will speculate here, however :) -- I'm going to guess primary driver is efficient manufacturing coupled with simple product offering. (e.g. this isn't some Tech company employing X% of it's workforce for R&D purposes)

sytelus 9y ago

Tabacco - average of $609k per employee Oil, Gas, & Consumable fuels - average of $421k per employee I think top 5 public software companies (GOOG, MSFT, FB, AMZN, AAPL) averages more than Tabacco.

pinot 9y ago
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=microsoft+net+income+%2F+microsoft+employees&dataset= http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=microsoft+net+income+%2... http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?dataset=&i=google+net+income+%2F+google+employees http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?dataset=&i=google+net+inc... Facebook, however: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?dataset=&i=facebook+net+income+%2F+facebook+employees http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?dataset=&i=facebook+net+i...
nekopa 9y ago
From pinot's links: GOOG: $256K per employee MSFT: $186K per employee FB : $659K per employee AMZN: $6K per employee AAPL: $402K per employee

Iv 9y ago

Who would have guessed that addiction sells.

jakeogh 9y ago

160kμSv? Why? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRL7o2kPqw0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRL7o2kPqw0 Without the combustion and rads is nicotine interesting on it's own?

chinathrow 9y ago

And highest externalities too?

tryingagainbro 9y ago

A pack of cigarettes is about 20 gram, or about 2/3 of an ounce. So tobacco used to make a pack, is not free, but pretty close to it. Factories cost money but after the initial investment, they mint cash... I'm almost certain that Marlboro would sell you a gazillion packs for around $1 each on the black market---complete with e Vegas trip and hookers--if they could. Smuggling, to avoid taxes, was a huge business a while back when getting away with it was much easier. Taxes and advertising cost a lot.

itomato 9y ago

Excellent news for Legal Cannabis.

gmiller123456 9y ago

I used to work for Brown & Williamson Tobacco (though I did not receive my $608k per year), and I can absolutely attest that their profits are not as the author suggests "return on talent". I worked at corporate HQ, which is probably very different from the factories where the cigarettes were actually made. The vast majority of people spent the vast majority of their time looking for work to do, because we quite literally had nothing to do. We had something like 20 corporate holidays, plus many other "bonus" holidays announced a day or two ahead of time, and many half-days. One story goes that the CEO was talking to someone about our building and someone on the street asked her "How many people work in that building", and her response was "Oh, about half".