6 ms·

> "Pichai, who expressed some annoyance during the meeting, said “I remember when Google was small and scrappy,” and added that, “We shouldn’t always equate fun

> "Pichai, who expressed some annoyance during the meeting, said “I remember when Google was small and scrappy,” and added that, “We shouldn’t always equate fun with money." Put your money where your mouth is, recommend the board make your CEO salary and compensation the same as when Google was 'small and scrappy' in the early years. Lead by example.

AlwaysRock 4y ago
To be fair I'm sure Pichai would be happy to get paid the amount of equity that early founders did...
sidewndr46 4y ago
Isn't Pichai personally invested in Google? I can't see what it would matter, given the amount of stock I would think he must own at this point.
- FollowingTheDao 4y ago
  > I can't see what it would matter Because getting rid of perks means higher or stable profits which means the stock goes up and Pichai makes more money.
  - sidewndr46 4y ago
    Sorry I was not clear, I meant his salary is irrelevant. I have no idea why he would collect it in the first place.
- qbasic_forever 4y ago
  All the more reason to do it then, at least show your subordinates that you're serious about taking measures to reduce expenses.
dontreact 4y ago
I don’t want to work in a place where any budget cuts result in people saying there is no fun to be had anymore. That’s a pretty negative environment. It seems like a reasonable statement to say, we should try and find ways for the work itself to be fun, and not only expect expensed travel and offsite to be the only source of fun.
- scarface74 4y ago
  I go to work exclusively to trade labor for money to support my addiction to food and shelter. I don’t go to work to have “fun”. I don’t hate my job any more than I hate breathing. They are both necessary for my survival.
  - dontreact 4y ago
    I’m sorry if you feel that way. If there is absolutely nothing you can find that is fun about your job then honestly yeah I would rather not have you on my team because it sounds like it would be a pretty bad time working together.
    - serverholic 4y ago
      Don’t high road him. Do you really think most engineers truly enjoy their jobs? Imagine a world where their needs are taken care of outside of work. Do you really think they’d stick around?
      - dontreact 4y ago
        I don’t know what the percentages are. All I know is there are many people who can enjoy some aspect of work, and I would much rather work with them than with someone who can’t enjoy anything about the work. People who are completely apathetic and find no enjoyment in any aspect of work probably are also best off working together.
        qbasic_forever 4y ago
bberenberg 4y ago
Would you be happy if they paid him $1 a year and drastically increased his equity stake? That's what CEO comp looks like in small and scrappy. I expect he would take it, and so would most anyone else.
- qbasic_forever 4y ago
  You can't increase his equity without buying back shares and that's going to cost money. But yes the general sentiment is if you are serious about reducing costs, then reducing salary is a major way to get there. The idea is cut costs and the share prices will rise as the company becomes more profitable.
  - bberenberg 4y ago
    That's not really how equity works. A company can issue equity out of thin air, and in fact, this is how most employee stock based comp works. In fact, Google specifically is criticized on their financial returns because of how much of their compensation is based in equity which dilutes existing shareholders outside the company. You can read about the high level ideas of this at https://www.wallstreetprep.com/knowledge/modeling-stock-based-compensation/ https://www.wallstreetprep.com/knowledge/modeling-stock-base...
- denton-scratch 4y ago
  Equity doesn't buy me breakfast, and nor does a dollar a year. You have to be rich already, if you're going to work for a dollar a year.
  - scarface74 4y ago
    Equity in public company vests frequently and you can sell it.
- marricks 4y ago
  > and drastically increased his equity stake But he also to roll a critical three times in a row on a D20 to get a payout. Just to make it have the same feeling as small and scrappy, you know.
m00x 4y ago
They didn't reduce comp, only perks, which affects him as well. If he cuts comp, I'm sure he'll do the same to himself. And honestly, swag is a great place to cut. It's such a waste of material and money. Most of it ends up in the dumpster.
- luckylion 4y ago
  How much did they typically spend on "swag" per employee per year?
- doomslice 4y ago
  They cut non-business critical travel which many employees for some reason felt was a perk of the job. I heard second hand that some employees would do "office tours" just to try the lunches at the different offices (under the guise of doing some in person meetings that certainly could have been done online). Cutting that kind of wasteful travel is necessary in an economic slowdown (and even necessary before that).
  - whatshisface 4y ago
    Perhaps necessary in an economic slowdown when you're a paper company with 2% margins... Let's be honest, Google does not "have" to do anything. They're just trying to grab some pennies. The interesting part is that they felt the pennies nearest at hand were in their employee perks, rather than in expanding their business. That is always a bad sign even if the company we're talking about is as profitable as Google. Not every business needs the best people working there, nor does every business need its employees to be highly motivated - it's a valid move in the extreme for Google to transition to being like SAP, but I can't believe all of the people in this thread that are defending that they have a right to do it without asking what their executives know that makes it seem so appealing.
  - dc-programmer 4y ago
    That is pretty decadent actually. Financials aside, I do believe frivolous activity like that creates a culture of unseriousness
- 4y ago
tpmx 4y ago
I remember when Google was small and scrappy He joined Google in 2004, the same year as its IPO. The company had 3021 employees at the end of that year.
- ghaff 4y ago
  To be fair, a 3,000 person company can feel a lot different from a 10,000 person company and certainly from 150,000 person company.
asah 4y ago
LoL, does that include his (early) stock package?
prox 4y ago
I remember a time when Google was still interested in people and doing good, not being Just Another Tech Conglomerate.
- scarface74 4y ago
  You actually believed that?
  - prox 4y ago
    Well let’s just say it didn’t get any better, quite the reverse

AlwaysRock 4y ago

To be fair I'm sure Pichai would be happy to get paid the amount of equity that early founders did...

sidewndr46 4y ago

Isn't Pichai personally invested in Google? I can't see what it would matter, given the amount of stock I would think he must own at this point.

FollowingTheDao 4y ago
> I can't see what it would matter Because getting rid of perks means higher or stable profits which means the stock goes up and Pichai makes more money.
- sidewndr46 4y ago
  Sorry I was not clear, I meant his salary is irrelevant. I have no idea why he would collect it in the first place.
qbasic_forever 4y ago
All the more reason to do it then, at least show your subordinates that you're serious about taking measures to reduce expenses.

dontreact 4y ago

I don’t want to work in a place where any budget cuts result in people saying there is no fun to be had anymore. That’s a pretty negative environment. It seems like a reasonable statement to say, we should try and find ways for the work itself to be fun, and not only expect expensed travel and offsite to be the only source of fun.

scarface74 4y ago
I go to work exclusively to trade labor for money to support my addiction to food and shelter. I don’t go to work to have “fun”. I don’t hate my job any more than I hate breathing. They are both necessary for my survival.
- dontreact 4y ago
  I’m sorry if you feel that way. If there is absolutely nothing you can find that is fun about your job then honestly yeah I would rather not have you on my team because it sounds like it would be a pretty bad time working together.
  - serverholic 4y ago
    Don’t high road him. Do you really think most engineers truly enjoy their jobs? Imagine a world where their needs are taken care of outside of work. Do you really think they’d stick around?
    - dontreact 4y ago
      I don’t know what the percentages are. All I know is there are many people who can enjoy some aspect of work, and I would much rather work with them than with someone who can’t enjoy anything about the work. People who are completely apathetic and find no enjoyment in any aspect of work probably are also best off working together.
      - qbasic_forever 4y ago

bberenberg 4y ago

Would you be happy if they paid him $1 a year and drastically increased his equity stake? That's what CEO comp looks like in small and scrappy. I expect he would take it, and so would most anyone else.

qbasic_forever 4y ago
You can't increase his equity without buying back shares and that's going to cost money. But yes the general sentiment is if you are serious about reducing costs, then reducing salary is a major way to get there. The idea is cut costs and the share prices will rise as the company becomes more profitable.
- bberenberg 4y ago
  That's not really how equity works. A company can issue equity out of thin air, and in fact, this is how most employee stock based comp works. In fact, Google specifically is criticized on their financial returns because of how much of their compensation is based in equity which dilutes existing shareholders outside the company. You can read about the high level ideas of this at https://www.wallstreetprep.com/knowledge/modeling-stock-based-compensation/ https://www.wallstreetprep.com/knowledge/modeling-stock-base...
denton-scratch 4y ago
Equity doesn't buy me breakfast, and nor does a dollar a year. You have to be rich already, if you're going to work for a dollar a year.
- scarface74 4y ago
  Equity in public company vests frequently and you can sell it.
marricks 4y ago
> and drastically increased his equity stake But he also to roll a critical three times in a row on a D20 to get a payout. Just to make it have the same feeling as small and scrappy, you know.

m00x 4y ago

They didn't reduce comp, only perks, which affects him as well. If he cuts comp, I'm sure he'll do the same to himself. And honestly, swag is a great place to cut. It's such a waste of material and money. Most of it ends up in the dumpster.

luckylion 4y ago
How much did they typically spend on "swag" per employee per year?
doomslice 4y ago
They cut non-business critical travel which many employees for some reason felt was a perk of the job. I heard second hand that some employees would do "office tours" just to try the lunches at the different offices (under the guise of doing some in person meetings that certainly could have been done online). Cutting that kind of wasteful travel is necessary in an economic slowdown (and even necessary before that).
- whatshisface 4y ago
  Perhaps necessary in an economic slowdown when you're a paper company with 2% margins... Let's be honest, Google does not "have" to do anything. They're just trying to grab some pennies. The interesting part is that they felt the pennies nearest at hand were in their employee perks, rather than in expanding their business. That is always a bad sign even if the company we're talking about is as profitable as Google. Not every business needs the best people working there, nor does every business need its employees to be highly motivated - it's a valid move in the extreme for Google to transition to being like SAP, but I can't believe all of the people in this thread that are defending that they have a right to do it without asking what their executives know that makes it seem so appealing.
- dc-programmer 4y ago
  That is pretty decadent actually. Financials aside, I do believe frivolous activity like that creates a culture of unseriousness
4y ago

tpmx 4y ago

I remember when Google was small and scrappy He joined Google in 2004, the same year as its IPO. The company had 3021 employees at the end of that year.

ghaff 4y ago
To be fair, a 3,000 person company can feel a lot different from a 10,000 person company and certainly from 150,000 person company.

asah 4y ago

LoL, does that include his (early) stock package?

prox 4y ago

I remember a time when Google was still interested in people and doing good, not being Just Another Tech Conglomerate.

scarface74 4y ago
You actually believed that?
- prox 4y ago
  Well let’s just say it didn’t get any better, quite the reverse