7 ms·

JFC, this article is so stupid. It's equity in a company that's worth 3 trillion dollars. Would the shareholders like to get the former CEO of Hewlett Packard,

JFC, this article is so stupid. It's equity in a company that's worth 3 trillion dollars. Would the shareholders like to get the former CEO of Hewlett Packard, or Yahoo, or Gateway, or Palm, or jawbone? If the CEO of the world's first trillion dollar company can't make a lot of money, then who can? It's a free market.

sgt 5y ago
Question is - does he need to?
- imgabe 5y ago
  Who or what determines what someone needs to earn? How much do you earn? Could you survive if you got paid 15% less? How about 50% less? Well, if you don't need it then, how about we just cut your pay based on what some arbitrary person decides you "need".
  - Eji1700 5y ago
    Well in this case, the board and shareholders.
    - imgabe 5y ago
      They don't determine how much Cook or anyone needs to earn, they determine how much they are willing to pay to get the CEO they want.
  - hulitu 5y ago
    > Who or what determines what someone needs to earn? As the song says: "Oh Lord, won't you buy me a Mercedes Benz? My friends all drive Porsches, I must make amends"
- refurb 5y ago
  Question is - is it anyone's business what a company pays its CEO beyond those who own it?
  - detaro 5y ago
    Shareholder vote surely is "those who own it".
  - Hamuko 5y ago
    Yes, it's the shareholders business for they own the company.
    - refurb 5y ago
      That’s why I said “beyond those who own it?”
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - sgt 5y ago
    I know of one entity whose business it is; the government. They could heavily tax him (or find new ways to do it), or even legislate top allowed compensations. They don't do that now, but it's perfectly within their rights to do so if politics takes a hard left.
    - jacquesm 5y ago
      > but it's perfectly within their rights to do so if politics takes a hard left. I don't see that happening the USA.
    - refurb 5y ago
      But we’re talking about pay, not taxes. Of course the government could tax him heavily - that’s not the question at hand.
  - hulitu 5y ago
    Theoretically, no. But look what a beautiful thread is on HN. Religion has thought mere mortals to be interested in the life of gods.
- bogota 5y ago
  Is it?
- hulitu 5y ago
  I don't know about you, or Cook, but where i live, everybody needs. When you don't need they look at you like at an alien. They even teach children in school that there are 2 important things in life: money and power. Back to Apple: if they start to look at 99 Milions $ maybe you shall search for another supplier. Just saying.
josefx 5y ago
> If the CEO of the world's first trillion dollar company can't make a lot of money, then who can? Isn't this completely contradicted by > It's a free market. ? Wouldn't you expect that a company operating on free market principles went for a good but cheap option? Instead when you look at these companies it is always people born rich and well connected. Even better when you include Theranos, you can have a family history of con artists and the people in these circles will still throw money at you for decades. I would say the market for CEOs is about as free as an Italian getting a pair of custom concrete boots by the local mafia. Edit: Just checked Cook actually doesn't seem to come from a family that rich. So used to it and when I write a comment I manage to refer to the one guy who wasn't born rich.
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > Wouldn't you expect that a company operating on free market principles went for a good but cheap option? In an ideal competitive free market, there is no “good, but cheap” option; the marginal cost equals the marginal value delivered.
  - manicdee 5y ago
    Not really. In this case there is also a huge serving of sunk cost fallacy: how will we cope if Tim leaves? What unique value does Tim bring to Apple that someone else can’t? Apple has been missing Steve Jobs’ pedantic attention to detail for a while, perhaps Apple would actually be better off with someone else? But they aren’t going to try because they don’t want to spend the effort looking.
    - thatguy0900 5y ago
      Apple is the first company in the world to hit 3t and under Steve's care. Saying they haven't replaced him because they haven't bothered looking is absurd. Why bother fucking with the most valuable company in the world. That's like saying LeBron James is only on the team because no ones bothered to find anyone better.
- tshaddox 5y ago
me_me_me 5y ago
Its free market and the shareholders can say what they want its not a dictatorship.

sgt 5y ago

Question is - does he need to?

imgabe 5y ago
Who or what determines what someone needs to earn? How much do you earn? Could you survive if you got paid 15% less? How about 50% less? Well, if you don't need it then, how about we just cut your pay based on what some arbitrary person decides you "need".
- Eji1700 5y ago
  Well in this case, the board and shareholders.
  - imgabe 5y ago
    They don't determine how much Cook or anyone needs to earn, they determine how much they are willing to pay to get the CEO they want.
- hulitu 5y ago
  > Who or what determines what someone needs to earn? As the song says: "Oh Lord, won't you buy me a Mercedes Benz? My friends all drive Porsches, I must make amends"
refurb 5y ago
Question is - is it anyone's business what a company pays its CEO beyond those who own it?
- detaro 5y ago
  Shareholder vote surely is "those who own it".
- Hamuko 5y ago
  Yes, it's the shareholders business for they own the company.
  - refurb 5y ago
    That’s why I said “beyond those who own it?”
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- sgt 5y ago
  I know of one entity whose business it is; the government. They could heavily tax him (or find new ways to do it), or even legislate top allowed compensations. They don't do that now, but it's perfectly within their rights to do so if politics takes a hard left.
  - jacquesm 5y ago
    > but it's perfectly within their rights to do so if politics takes a hard left. I don't see that happening the USA.
  - refurb 5y ago
    But we’re talking about pay, not taxes. Of course the government could tax him heavily - that’s not the question at hand.
- hulitu 5y ago
  Theoretically, no. But look what a beautiful thread is on HN. Religion has thought mere mortals to be interested in the life of gods.
bogota 5y ago
Is it?
hulitu 5y ago
I don't know about you, or Cook, but where i live, everybody needs. When you don't need they look at you like at an alien. They even teach children in school that there are 2 important things in life: money and power. Back to Apple: if they start to look at 99 Milions $ maybe you shall search for another supplier. Just saying.

josefx 5y ago

> If the CEO of the world's first trillion dollar company can't make a lot of money, then who can? Isn't this completely contradicted by > It's a free market. ? Wouldn't you expect that a company operating on free market principles went for a good but cheap option? Instead when you look at these companies it is always people born rich and well connected. Even better when you include Theranos, you can have a family history of con artists and the people in these circles will still throw money at you for decades. I would say the market for CEOs is about as free as an Italian getting a pair of custom concrete boots by the local mafia. Edit: Just checked Cook actually doesn't seem to come from a family that rich. So used to it and when I write a comment I manage to refer to the one guy who wasn't born rich.

dragonwriter 5y ago
> Wouldn't you expect that a company operating on free market principles went for a good but cheap option? In an ideal competitive free market, there is no “good, but cheap” option; the marginal cost equals the marginal value delivered.
- manicdee 5y ago
  Not really. In this case there is also a huge serving of sunk cost fallacy: how will we cope if Tim leaves? What unique value does Tim bring to Apple that someone else can’t? Apple has been missing Steve Jobs’ pedantic attention to detail for a while, perhaps Apple would actually be better off with someone else? But they aren’t going to try because they don’t want to spend the effort looking.
  - thatguy0900 5y ago
    Apple is the first company in the world to hit 3t and under Steve's care. Saying they haven't replaced him because they haven't bothered looking is absurd. Why bother fucking with the most valuable company in the world. That's like saying LeBron James is only on the team because no ones bothered to find anyone better.
tshaddox 5y ago

me_me_me 5y ago

Its free market and the shareholders can say what they want its not a dictatorship.