I fail to understand the root of the controversy here. I do realize that sixty-six million dollars is massive pay, but it is insignificant on a broader scale.

I fail to understand the root of the controversy here. I do realize that sixty-six million dollars is massive pay, but it is insignificant on a broader scale. Are some overcompensated? Of course. But a great CEO deserves great pay for having a rare talent: being an excellent leader. A bad CEO will sink a company; a great one will bring it success. More importantly, it seems that much of the objection comes down to jealousy. If you took this guy's pay away and divided it among all disney employees, they would get about $325 a piece. He also arguably contributes orders of magnitude more value than a random disney employee. Finally, in this kind of jobs market, it seems that employees would have greater options. So I honestly ask: why are some so upset about this? I think he is indeed worth that much (based on disney's stock performance during his tenure, the market agrees). Is this just jealousy? Finally, Bob Iger has gotten rich by working lucrative jobs. Mrs. Disney got rich by being born to a certain person. Hypocrite. Downvoters care to comment?