6 ms·
Google's annual revenue was $110 billion in 2017 [1]. Even if headcount doubled and salary has increased, that's $7 billion a year. That's not peanuts, but at a
by why_only_15 8y ago
Google's annual revenue was $110 billion in 2017 [1]. Even if headcount doubled and salary has increased, that's $7 billion a year. That's not peanuts, but at a company level it's not a massive expense.
[1]: https://www.androidauthority.com/alphabet-q4-2017-earnings-834774/ https://www.androidauthority.com/alphabet-q4-2017-earnings-8...
- justicezyx 8y agoAnytime Pull out the revenue gun. It sounds like the revenue is actually produced by the machines though. I wonder why there isn't another search company competing with Google... Btw, if you use glass door to deduce Google's cost on employee, you probably have no idea how company works...
- _dmurph 8y agolol yeah I know, but it's at least the low bar. I would guess employees are one of the largest expenses for Google.
- _dmurph 8y agoTrue. I'm also guessing this number changes a lot with stock grants (that number was just base pay), and that yearly number seems pretty low (NYT has the entry level engineer at 124,000 https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/08/technology/google-salaries-gender-disparity.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/08/technology/google-salarie...) so glassdoor might not have good data. I wouldn't be surprised if it was much more than 6%.
- why_only_15 8y agoI also wouldn't be surprised if it was more than 6% - but I very much doubt it could be over 12-15%. That's still not a very high percentage of revenue. It's most definitely a significant cost, but unlikely to be their biggest cost.