3 ms·

Nvidia has 26,000 employees and is worth 1.8 trillion which puts it at 69 million/employee.

bamboozled 3y ago
I bet most employees get a slight fraction of that 69 million. Imagine what having more millionaires would do for the world and the economy ? Such a silly system we’ve created.
- throwaway49849 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - steego 3y ago
    You think the total valuation of all companies divided by the total number of people comes out to a few cents? The US GDP per capita was $80k in 2023. The global GDP per capita is $13K. Even if you were to split up the valuation of OpenAI for every single person in the world, everyone would be getting $10. How did you arrive at a few cents and what point are you actually trying to make?
    - throwaway49849 3y ago
      >You think the total valuation of all companies divided by the total number of people comes out to a few cents? No, where did I say that? The person I was replying to wants to share OpenAI's value specifically, so I only mention OpenAI. Also, I didn't say "a few cents", I said cents, intended as a relative contrast to "millions." >The US GDP per capita was $80k in 2023. The global GDP per capita is $13K. Yes, and the US per capita GDP would drop to $15.8k if the "excess" was redistributed to the rest of the world. But now everyone is equal, regardless of what they do, right? Is this fair? >Even if you were to split up the valuation of OpenAI for every single person in the world, everyone would be getting $10. That's not how it works and I think you know that. Where does this tangible $10 come from if there is no buyer? Or do you think someone is willing to spend $80B on a company which is then immediately destroyed because the money is taken from the shareholders and sent to everyone else? There would be no company left. Do you think that the very idea of this impending dissolution-upon-purchase wouldn't lower the value of the company drastically? >what point are you actually trying to make? That it's silly to suggest redistributing OpenAI compensation.
      - steego 3y ago
        I know it’s silly. Speaking of which, how did you arrive at a few pennies in your estimate?
        throwaway49849 3y ago
        See my edit above, I never said "a few pennies" or "a few cents", I said "cents" intended as a relative contrast to "millions." We don't know how much a company is worth if it is expected to be immediately destroyed upon purchase, so if "dollars" or "10s of dollars" is more palatable to you, feel free to mentally substitute that instead.
        steego 3y ago
        “We don't know how much a company is worth if it is expected to be immediately destroyed upon purchase.” That’s what you wanted to say. Better, you could have lead with a question, “Why would someone buy a company at a huge premium if doing so immediately destroys the value upon purchase?” Let’s try it out.
- steego 3y ago
  Why would someone buy a company at a huge premium if that premium provides each employee financial freedom to leave, thus destroying the value of the company upon purchase? We’re all disappointed with the inequities in reality on some level, but what would you suggest otherwise? Do you at least recognize that a buyer would likely pay significantly less for a company if paying more meant employees (its most valuable asset) could just walk up and leave?

I bet most employees get a slight fraction of that 69 million. Imagine what having more millionaires would do for the world and the economy ? Such a silly system we’ve created.

throwaway49849 3y ago
[flagged]
- steego 3y ago
  You think the total valuation of all companies divided by the total number of people comes out to a few cents? The US GDP per capita was $80k in 2023. The global GDP per capita is $13K. Even if you were to split up the valuation of OpenAI for every single person in the world, everyone would be getting $10. How did you arrive at a few cents and what point are you actually trying to make?
  - throwaway49849 3y ago
    >You think the total valuation of all companies divided by the total number of people comes out to a few cents? No, where did I say that? The person I was replying to wants to share OpenAI's value specifically, so I only mention OpenAI. Also, I didn't say "a few cents", I said cents, intended as a relative contrast to "millions." >The US GDP per capita was $80k in 2023. The global GDP per capita is $13K. Yes, and the US per capita GDP would drop to $15.8k if the "excess" was redistributed to the rest of the world. But now everyone is equal, regardless of what they do, right? Is this fair? >Even if you were to split up the valuation of OpenAI for every single person in the world, everyone would be getting $10. That's not how it works and I think you know that. Where does this tangible $10 come from if there is no buyer? Or do you think someone is willing to spend $80B on a company which is then immediately destroyed because the money is taken from the shareholders and sent to everyone else? There would be no company left. Do you think that the very idea of this impending dissolution-upon-purchase wouldn't lower the value of the company drastically? >what point are you actually trying to make? That it's silly to suggest redistributing OpenAI compensation.
    - steego 3y ago
      I know it’s silly. Speaking of which, how did you arrive at a few pennies in your estimate?
      - throwaway49849 3y ago
        See my edit above, I never said "a few pennies" or "a few cents", I said "cents" intended as a relative contrast to "millions." We don't know how much a company is worth if it is expected to be immediately destroyed upon purchase, so if "dollars" or "10s of dollars" is more palatable to you, feel free to mentally substitute that instead.
        steego 3y ago
        “We don't know how much a company is worth if it is expected to be immediately destroyed upon purchase.” That’s what you wanted to say. Better, you could have lead with a question, “Why would someone buy a company at a huge premium if doing so immediately destroys the value upon purchase?” Let’s try it out.
steego 3y ago
Why would someone buy a company at a huge premium if that premium provides each employee financial freedom to leave, thus destroying the value of the company upon purchase? We’re all disappointed with the inequities in reality on some level, but what would you suggest otherwise? Do you at least recognize that a buyer would likely pay significantly less for a company if paying more meant employees (its most valuable asset) could just walk up and leave?