4 ms·
That's part of the myth though, and your example is a great point supporting that. Sports franchises don't invest in top names because of performance, they inve
by Salgat 6y ago
That's part of the myth though, and your example is a great point supporting that. Sports franchises don't invest in top names because of performance, they invest in top names because it's marketing gold. These athletes of course have to perform well, but their value in performance becomes detached from their pay as they become more and more valuable for their marketing to the franchise. It's the same thing with CEOs and shareholders. When you pay outrageous compensations for CEOs, shareholders look in awe as that CEO must be amazing if they are receiving such high compensation, and as long as they do a decent job, they feel justified; it's one big positive feedback loop.
It's how mediocre CEOs like Marissa Mayer was able to get over $200 million in compensation, even though her background, while impressive, didn't warrant it. Yahoo shareholders ate that up. Take a look at someone like Shaquille O'Neal, who was able to command a 20 million dollar contract in 2009 even when he was at the end of his career and past his prime. He was marketing gold for his team.