8 ms·

yeah, he probably has enough to just quit regardless of the vesting plan. just sounds like the wealth fund trying to gain some pr.

by seaman1921 5y ago

matsemann 5y ago
Why would the wealth fund need PR..?
- jedberg 5y ago
  If the people of your country perceive the wealth fund as "evil" they tend to revolt, so they need PR to keep the people happy.
  - djrobstep 5y ago
    Drawing a bit of a long bow to consider a trillion dollar fund voting in its own shareholder interests anything other than financially driven.
    - nimchimpsky 5y ago
      [dead]
  - seanhunter 5y ago
    How would the people of Norway revolt against their own country's sovereign wealth fund? Norway is a very small country with (I seem to remember) the largest wealth fund in the world due to investments of revenue from the oil industry. I highly doubt people there are going to perceive it as evil based on whether or not it's taking a particular stance on Apple's vesting plan. They do have a tradition of taking stances on corporate governance as a matter of principle and this looks like that.
    - tyfon 5y ago
      Norwegian here, can confirm. We do not see the wealth fund as an evil thing :) The fund has a policy of being an active investor to improve worker rights, prevent unethical practices and has a ban on investing in certain areas like weapons, oil and gas (due to diversification issues), tobacco etc. Edit: Just a note, the funds operation is completely transparent and you can follow the actions and read about strategy, what time frames they are looking at when investing (very long) and more on their web page [1]. [1] https://www.nbim.no/en/ https://www.nbim.no/en/
- _3u10 5y ago
  In Canada CRA’s (our IRS) pension plan uses offshore accounts and other avoidance strategies to not pay Canadian taxes. It’s not a good look. Obviously this is a different issue but it’s important for govts to be consistent. It’s like during WW2 when the Royal family obeyed rationing.
  - loufe 5y ago
    I had no idea this was the case. Can you provide a reference?
    - _3u10 5y ago
      I can’t find it anymore. I gave it a good 5 searches it seems to all be tax related articles on tax shelters. I think maybe it’s because of how google deprioritizes old content now. It was from around 2014-2015 if I recall correctly.
  - novok 5y ago
    Why does the CRA pension plan even have taxes on it in the first place? It's like taxing a government agency for it's budget that it receives it's tax dollars for.
    - _3u10 5y ago
      Because of the rule of law, essentially the same reason govt employees pay tax
      - novok 5y ago
        Let me reiterate, why is the law set up like that?
Jolter 5y ago
Then why pay him that much in the first place?
- andy_ppp 5y ago
  He says he's giving all of his wealth away when he dies anyway. So I'm guessing he has plans to give it to causes he really thinks are important going forward. I'm pretty sure someone like Tim Cook doesn't need the cash so there must be a reason for the compensation and to be fair Apple's execution has been nothing short of incredible since he took over.
  - asfdgadrhadfh 5y ago
- 55555 5y ago
  As a sign of respect, and so he can hold his head high while standing alongside his peers.
  - oblio 5y ago
    Yeah, because at that level, that's what's going to make the difference between him and his peers as they're chatting :-)
  - dundarious 5y ago
    I think people at this level have enough economic dignity points already. Let those on the bottom rung have a few.
  - evilos 5y ago
    He is Tim Cook. Everyone knows who he is and his compensation hardly matters in terms of prestige.
- seaman1921 5y ago
  It might be a bit hard to believe, but in reality many passionate employees don't really care about the pay - they genuinely want to build a great product - but they are still paid well because the company looks after the top talent in every possible way.
conradfr 5y ago
> yeah, he probably has enough to just quit I bet most peope in the world would retire after only one year of his base salary ($3M in 2021). edit: not considering taxes ;)
- rmbyrro 5y ago
  With current life expectancy and inflation prospects, one would need to live quite modestly or invest these 3M very wisely to retire on such a small amount.
  - tromp 5y ago
    In many parts of the world you can live luxuriously for decades with $3M in assets. It feels wrong to call what 99% of the world population can never expect to save, a "small amount".
  - berdario 5y ago
    Life expectancy has been decreasing, and you'd keep those 3M invested (bond if not stocks) to fend off inflation. 3M is absolutely a mind-boggling amount. Ok, housing in San Francisco will eat most of that, but the vast majority of people in the world retire on way less than that
    - kortilla 5y ago
      > but the vast majority of people in the world retire on way less than that You’re missing something big here. Most people who retire on way less than that are doing so at retirement age. For example, let’s assume death at 78. The money required to retire at 30 needs to last 48 years. The money required to retire at 65 only needs to last 13 years. And that’s not even taking into account that social security is only available at normal retirement age and you wouldn’t be contributing to it by retiring early. $3 million is not going to be a secure retirement. It’s going to be very modest living subject to ruin by either inflation (if you go the bond route) or depressions (if you go the stock route).
      - 5y ago
jpalomaki 5y ago
They are following advice from another company (ISS). I would assume that ISS on the other hand have some policies on how to evaluate these things and what to recommend (random results from Google [1]). While this does not make difference in case of Mr Cook, it might be relevant for less wealthy managers and they likely want to apply similar policies for everybody. [1] https://www.issgovernance.com/file/policy/active/americas/US-Equity-Compensation-Plans-FAQ.pdf https://www.issgovernance.com/file/policy/active/americas/US...
devoutsalsa 5y ago
I’m not sure he has enough. If he puts that $2B in a savings account earning the average 0.06% interest, he’d only be getting $100K per month. How can anyone live in so little? And he’d be losing a lot to inflation.
- Hinrik 5y ago
  Nobody keeps anything close to that kind of amount in a savings account. They put it into various asset classes that appreciate by a lot more than 0.06%/year.
  - kthejoker2 5y ago
    Woosh
- MR4D 5y ago
  I presume this is sarcasm. That being said, if his wealth is all in AAPL, then he would earn about 1/2% on it - roughly $11 million per year.
zeruch 5y ago
The wealth fund doesn't need "PR", as it's one of the world largest already (actually the largest, even surpassing Chinas and both of Singapores combined wealth funds) https://www.swfinstitute.org/fund-rankings/sovereign-wealth-fund https://www.swfinstitute.org/fund-rankings/sovereign-wealth-... Its making a point about a position it's held for a while; that it closely scrutinizes all its investments, a habit it's had for a while, and one it attributes to it's success relative to the nations small size.

yeah, he probably has enough to just quit regardless of the vesting plan. just sounds like the wealth fund trying to gain some pr.

matsemann 5y ago

Why would the wealth fund need PR..?

jedberg 5y ago
If the people of your country perceive the wealth fund as "evil" they tend to revolt, so they need PR to keep the people happy.
- djrobstep 5y ago
  Drawing a bit of a long bow to consider a trillion dollar fund voting in its own shareholder interests anything other than financially driven.
  - nimchimpsky 5y ago
    [dead]
- seanhunter 5y ago
  How would the people of Norway revolt against their own country's sovereign wealth fund? Norway is a very small country with (I seem to remember) the largest wealth fund in the world due to investments of revenue from the oil industry. I highly doubt people there are going to perceive it as evil based on whether or not it's taking a particular stance on Apple's vesting plan. They do have a tradition of taking stances on corporate governance as a matter of principle and this looks like that.
  - tyfon 5y ago
    Norwegian here, can confirm. We do not see the wealth fund as an evil thing :) The fund has a policy of being an active investor to improve worker rights, prevent unethical practices and has a ban on investing in certain areas like weapons, oil and gas (due to diversification issues), tobacco etc. Edit: Just a note, the funds operation is completely transparent and you can follow the actions and read about strategy, what time frames they are looking at when investing (very long) and more on their web page [1]. [1] https://www.nbim.no/en/ https://www.nbim.no/en/
_3u10 5y ago
In Canada CRA’s (our IRS) pension plan uses offshore accounts and other avoidance strategies to not pay Canadian taxes. It’s not a good look. Obviously this is a different issue but it’s important for govts to be consistent. It’s like during WW2 when the Royal family obeyed rationing.
- loufe 5y ago
  I had no idea this was the case. Can you provide a reference?
  - _3u10 5y ago
    I can’t find it anymore. I gave it a good 5 searches it seems to all be tax related articles on tax shelters. I think maybe it’s because of how google deprioritizes old content now. It was from around 2014-2015 if I recall correctly.
- novok 5y ago
  Why does the CRA pension plan even have taxes on it in the first place? It's like taxing a government agency for it's budget that it receives it's tax dollars for.
  - _3u10 5y ago
    Because of the rule of law, essentially the same reason govt employees pay tax
    - novok 5y ago
      Let me reiterate, why is the law set up like that?

Jolter 5y ago

Then why pay him that much in the first place?

andy_ppp 5y ago
He says he's giving all of his wealth away when he dies anyway. So I'm guessing he has plans to give it to causes he really thinks are important going forward. I'm pretty sure someone like Tim Cook doesn't need the cash so there must be a reason for the compensation and to be fair Apple's execution has been nothing short of incredible since he took over.
- asfdgadrhadfh 5y ago
55555 5y ago
As a sign of respect, and so he can hold his head high while standing alongside his peers.
- oblio 5y ago
  Yeah, because at that level, that's what's going to make the difference between him and his peers as they're chatting :-)
- dundarious 5y ago
  I think people at this level have enough economic dignity points already. Let those on the bottom rung have a few.
- evilos 5y ago
  He is Tim Cook. Everyone knows who he is and his compensation hardly matters in terms of prestige.
seaman1921 5y ago
It might be a bit hard to believe, but in reality many passionate employees don't really care about the pay - they genuinely want to build a great product - but they are still paid well because the company looks after the top talent in every possible way.

conradfr 5y ago

> yeah, he probably has enough to just quit I bet most peope in the world would retire after only one year of his base salary ($3M in 2021). edit: not considering taxes ;)

rmbyrro 5y ago
With current life expectancy and inflation prospects, one would need to live quite modestly or invest these 3M very wisely to retire on such a small amount.
- tromp 5y ago
  In many parts of the world you can live luxuriously for decades with $3M in assets. It feels wrong to call what 99% of the world population can never expect to save, a "small amount".
- berdario 5y ago
  Life expectancy has been decreasing, and you'd keep those 3M invested (bond if not stocks) to fend off inflation. 3M is absolutely a mind-boggling amount. Ok, housing in San Francisco will eat most of that, but the vast majority of people in the world retire on way less than that
  - kortilla 5y ago
    > but the vast majority of people in the world retire on way less than that You’re missing something big here. Most people who retire on way less than that are doing so at retirement age. For example, let’s assume death at 78. The money required to retire at 30 needs to last 48 years. The money required to retire at 65 only needs to last 13 years. And that’s not even taking into account that social security is only available at normal retirement age and you wouldn’t be contributing to it by retiring early. $3 million is not going to be a secure retirement. It’s going to be very modest living subject to ruin by either inflation (if you go the bond route) or depressions (if you go the stock route).
    - 5y ago

jpalomaki 5y ago

They are following advice from another company (ISS). I would assume that ISS on the other hand have some policies on how to evaluate these things and what to recommend (random results from Google [1]). While this does not make difference in case of Mr Cook, it might be relevant for less wealthy managers and they likely want to apply similar policies for everybody. [1] https://www.issgovernance.com/file/policy/active/americas/US-Equity-Compensation-Plans-FAQ.pdf https://www.issgovernance.com/file/policy/active/americas/US...

devoutsalsa 5y ago

I’m not sure he has enough. If he puts that $2B in a savings account earning the average 0.06% interest, he’d only be getting $100K per month. How can anyone live in so little? And he’d be losing a lot to inflation.

Hinrik 5y ago
Nobody keeps anything close to that kind of amount in a savings account. They put it into various asset classes that appreciate by a lot more than 0.06%/year.
- kthejoker2 5y ago
  Woosh
MR4D 5y ago
I presume this is sarcasm. That being said, if his wealth is all in AAPL, then he would earn about 1/2% on it - roughly $11 million per year.

zeruch 5y ago

The wealth fund doesn't need "PR", as it's one of the world largest already (actually the largest, even surpassing Chinas and both of Singapores combined wealth funds) https://www.swfinstitute.org/fund-rankings/sovereign-wealth-fund https://www.swfinstitute.org/fund-rankings/sovereign-wealth-... Its making a point about a position it's held for a while; that it closely scrutinizes all its investments, a habit it's had for a while, and one it attributes to it's success relative to the nations small size.