6 ms·

> If the SEC didn't have a strong case he wouldn't have settled so quickly. No one wants to fight the federal government wether they are guilty or not. "Forbe

> If the SEC didn't have a strong case he wouldn't have settled so quickly. No one wants to fight the federal government wether they are guilty or not. "Forbes lists Bechtolsheim's net worth at somewhere north of $16 billion. The SEC fine is less than 0.006 percent of his holdings." I'd settle immediately too. 900k fine or 400k illicit gains means nothing if you are worth 16B.

kirubakaran 3y ago
"I'd settle immediately too. 900k fine or 400k illicit gains means nothing if you are worth 16B." > [Andy] has also agreed to be barred from serving as an officer or director of a public company for five years Do you think that means nothing?
- StefanBatory 3y ago
  For five years that feels like nothing major, in fact. He can still use his connections and return after that time, not there but somewhere for sure.
- toyg 3y ago
  You don't need to be a director to make money. He's not barred from being an investor.
- rKarpinski 3y ago
  > Do you think that means nothing? It means nothing. He's 68 years old and worth 16B. The book "Den Of Thieves" (also about insider trading) makes a good case for why you don't want to fight the federal government, even when you can.
- godelski 3y ago
  > Do you think that means nothing? Yes. Even as other commenters have pointed out his age, let's be realistic at what $1B is (let alone 16!) Suppose you have an interest rate of 5% over the year. That's a pretty safe level and I'm sure he gets more. That means you're getting $50m for doing nothing (passive income), or just under $137k/day (overly simplified calculation based on yearly return divided by 365. No compounding, so consider lower bound). Try spending that much money a day! Then consider trying to spend that much money AFTER you've already bought a few nice homes, cars, and hell throw in a private jet (cheap is a few million, most are 10-20, and Elon's is $78M[0]). (At 16B, you're closer to $800m/yr or $2.19m/day!!!! $900k in fines isn't even half a day's "sitting on his ass doing nothing" for him, let alone work. [1]) The thing that often baffles me is why these people still work. You can do almost anything you want with that kind of money. But I think this also says something about money, power, and how these people think. It also makes me wonder why people get mad at tech workers with our high salaries (definitely not complaining!). Maybe I just don't understand business (I'm a researcher, not a MBA, so assume this is correct). But I just don't see how these salaries do anything for these people other than be a high score. The only way I can personally think of spending $10m in a year is by buying a house and I can't imagine wanting more than 2 (and even a $10m house is often too big! In most locations. Yes, I'm aware SF exists). I just wonder, can't you undercut everyone by taking a lower salary? Which would increase the company value? Or stop pushing deadlines so fast so there's higher quality? Or many other things because there's a ton of C-suit execs getting these salaries. I just don't understand, why work? I have to imagine, a key part must be addiction. Which I can get, I like a fair amount of work, but would rather take money to work as I see fit (but I guess they get this. But you're not at the technical level and personally (thus, highly biased) I find it is far less fun managing people). I think there's a real disconnect. In how we see billionaires, how they see us, and how they see themselves. That money is just an insane level. fwiw, I'm not even against billionaires. I just don't understand why once people have $100m they don't pull a Anderson or John Bogle. Because money isn't real anymore. Edit: let's add some nice numbers at this 5% rate. If you have $20m invested (earning that 5%) you're going to make $1m/yr for life. $100m gets you $5m/yr and $500m gets you $25m/yr. 10B gets you 500M, and $20B means you're a forever billionaire. Looking at Forbe's list, we got Bernard Arnault, Bezos, Musk, Zuckerberg, and Ellison (in order). That's $11.3B/yr ($31m/day), $9.9B/yr ($27.1M/day), $9.9B/yr ($27.1M/day (nearly tied)), $8.6B/yr ($23.7M/day), and $7.75B/yr ($21.2M/day) respectively. With $7.3B you make the $1M/day, which makes you the 367th richest person in the world. [0] https://www.scmp.com/magazines/style/celebrity/article/3198319/inside-elon-musks-new-us78-million-gulfstream-g700-private-jet-twitter-ceos-plane-arriving-2023-has https://www.scmp.com/magazines/style/celebrity/article/31983... [1] (edit add) Let's say that's half a day's work for you and you're a L4 at Google. Using Levels.fyi data, you got a base salary around $178k/yr and so this is equivalent to you dropping $200 ($320 if you include equity) if compared to his passive income alone (which again, is probably >5%). Let that sink in. Technically it is even less than you should value that $200 because he doesn't need to save anything. [2] If some billionaire wants to drop $50m on me, I'll go live my life reading math books, buy a B200 node (maybe even 2! Or a few more!), and research AGI for the rest of my life. I mean I'll also do that for a lot less too, but hey, that's 2 days of nothing for you Elon or Bezos. I'm sure it is worth more than that in publicity alone. ;)
  - rqtwteye 3y ago
    “The thing that often baffles me is why these people still work. You can do almost anything you want with that kind of money.” Simple. They love the work. That’s what they want to do. To become a billionaire you usually have to put in an enormous effort. Not many people are willing to do that.
    - godelski 3y ago
      Fair, I don't think I explained this well. Because even I would "work" (see [2]). But it is a completely different kind of work, not being bound. They can definitely run companies big or small with no concern of investors. No doubt billionaires work hard to get there. And no doubt it is a hard task. I guess part of it is why care about how much money you make anymore? If you care about "score" it seems odd to compare your assets when you can compare your companies' value. Because you can't actually do anything with that money in your bank, and the company's value is a more meaningful metric as to your "value." I think Jensen's rise says a lot more about his value than the $80B in assets or him being in the top 20 richest. (golden handcuffs aside) In that respect Jensen is doing much better than Musk or Bezos. Of course there's tons of metrics to consider but just using this to help ground a talking point.
      - rqtwteye 3y ago
        “ I guess part of it is why care about how much money you make anymore?” They are good at making money so it’s fun for them. On an aside I think Jensen is very good at looking folksy but in the end he is another super driven high achiever. He just expresses himself differently. You don’t get to that level if you aren’t a hard nosed business guy.
        godelski 3y ago
        I don't think you're understanding what I'm saying. Money in the pocket means nothing. Not even a good value for fictitious scoring. Arguably putting it in your pocket becomes shortsighted because you can make more money by putting it back into the company. Because really, it's doing nothing when you have it because you can't spend it. But if it is in the company then it can be spent. Reducing price of products increases number of sales. You can put it back into employees to make them work harder and be happier (more efficient workers). And so on. But you literally can't spend it if it is in your bank account. We're talking about divested fully liquidated dollars. That's the part I don't get.
JKCalhoun 3y ago
Wild. It's as though if I were rich enough I could run around robbing banks, just give the money back and a fine if I get caught.
- grugagag 3y ago
  A special class of robbers for sure. Some may even call it parasitism and it wouldnt be easy to disagree unless looked at it from an awkward distorted angle where it could look justified..

kirubakaran 3y ago

"I'd settle immediately too. 900k fine or 400k illicit gains means nothing if you are worth 16B." > [Andy] has also agreed to be barred from serving as an officer or director of a public company for five years Do you think that means nothing?

StefanBatory 3y ago
For five years that feels like nothing major, in fact. He can still use his connections and return after that time, not there but somewhere for sure.
toyg 3y ago
You don't need to be a director to make money. He's not barred from being an investor.
rKarpinski 3y ago
> Do you think that means nothing? It means nothing. He's 68 years old and worth 16B. The book "Den Of Thieves" (also about insider trading) makes a good case for why you don't want to fight the federal government, even when you can.
godelski 3y ago
> Do you think that means nothing? Yes. Even as other commenters have pointed out his age, let's be realistic at what $1B is (let alone 16!) Suppose you have an interest rate of 5% over the year. That's a pretty safe level and I'm sure he gets more. That means you're getting $50m for doing nothing (passive income), or just under $137k/day (overly simplified calculation based on yearly return divided by 365. No compounding, so consider lower bound). Try spending that much money a day! Then consider trying to spend that much money AFTER you've already bought a few nice homes, cars, and hell throw in a private jet (cheap is a few million, most are 10-20, and Elon's is $78M[0]). (At 16B, you're closer to $800m/yr or $2.19m/day!!!! $900k in fines isn't even half a day's "sitting on his ass doing nothing" for him, let alone work. [1]) The thing that often baffles me is why these people still work. You can do almost anything you want with that kind of money. But I think this also says something about money, power, and how these people think. It also makes me wonder why people get mad at tech workers with our high salaries (definitely not complaining!). Maybe I just don't understand business (I'm a researcher, not a MBA, so assume this is correct). But I just don't see how these salaries do anything for these people other than be a high score. The only way I can personally think of spending $10m in a year is by buying a house and I can't imagine wanting more than 2 (and even a $10m house is often too big! In most locations. Yes, I'm aware SF exists). I just wonder, can't you undercut everyone by taking a lower salary? Which would increase the company value? Or stop pushing deadlines so fast so there's higher quality? Or many other things because there's a ton of C-suit execs getting these salaries. I just don't understand, why work? I have to imagine, a key part must be addiction. Which I can get, I like a fair amount of work, but would rather take money to work as I see fit (but I guess they get this. But you're not at the technical level and personally (thus, highly biased) I find it is far less fun managing people). I think there's a real disconnect. In how we see billionaires, how they see us, and how they see themselves. That money is just an insane level. fwiw, I'm not even against billionaires. I just don't understand why once people have $100m they don't pull a Anderson or John Bogle. Because money isn't real anymore. Edit: let's add some nice numbers at this 5% rate. If you have $20m invested (earning that 5%) you're going to make $1m/yr for life. $100m gets you $5m/yr and $500m gets you $25m/yr. 10B gets you 500M, and $20B means you're a forever billionaire. Looking at Forbe's list, we got Bernard Arnault, Bezos, Musk, Zuckerberg, and Ellison (in order). That's $11.3B/yr ($31m/day), $9.9B/yr ($27.1M/day), $9.9B/yr ($27.1M/day (nearly tied)), $8.6B/yr ($23.7M/day), and $7.75B/yr ($21.2M/day) respectively. With $7.3B you make the $1M/day, which makes you the 367th richest person in the world. [0] https://www.scmp.com/magazines/style/celebrity/article/3198319/inside-elon-musks-new-us78-million-gulfstream-g700-private-jet-twitter-ceos-plane-arriving-2023-has https://www.scmp.com/magazines/style/celebrity/article/31983... [1] (edit add) Let's say that's half a day's work for you and you're a L4 at Google. Using Levels.fyi data, you got a base salary around $178k/yr and so this is equivalent to you dropping $200 ($320 if you include equity) if compared to his passive income alone (which again, is probably >5%). Let that sink in. Technically it is even less than you should value that $200 because he doesn't need to save anything. [2] If some billionaire wants to drop $50m on me, I'll go live my life reading math books, buy a B200 node (maybe even 2! Or a few more!), and research AGI for the rest of my life. I mean I'll also do that for a lot less too, but hey, that's 2 days of nothing for you Elon or Bezos. I'm sure it is worth more than that in publicity alone. ;)
- rqtwteye 3y ago
  “The thing that often baffles me is why these people still work. You can do almost anything you want with that kind of money.” Simple. They love the work. That’s what they want to do. To become a billionaire you usually have to put in an enormous effort. Not many people are willing to do that.
  - godelski 3y ago
    Fair, I don't think I explained this well. Because even I would "work" (see [2]). But it is a completely different kind of work, not being bound. They can definitely run companies big or small with no concern of investors. No doubt billionaires work hard to get there. And no doubt it is a hard task. I guess part of it is why care about how much money you make anymore? If you care about "score" it seems odd to compare your assets when you can compare your companies' value. Because you can't actually do anything with that money in your bank, and the company's value is a more meaningful metric as to your "value." I think Jensen's rise says a lot more about his value than the $80B in assets or him being in the top 20 richest. (golden handcuffs aside) In that respect Jensen is doing much better than Musk or Bezos. Of course there's tons of metrics to consider but just using this to help ground a talking point.
    - rqtwteye 3y ago
      “ I guess part of it is why care about how much money you make anymore?” They are good at making money so it’s fun for them. On an aside I think Jensen is very good at looking folksy but in the end he is another super driven high achiever. He just expresses himself differently. You don’t get to that level if you aren’t a hard nosed business guy.
      - godelski 3y ago
        I don't think you're understanding what I'm saying. Money in the pocket means nothing. Not even a good value for fictitious scoring. Arguably putting it in your pocket becomes shortsighted because you can make more money by putting it back into the company. Because really, it's doing nothing when you have it because you can't spend it. But if it is in the company then it can be spent. Reducing price of products increases number of sales. You can put it back into employees to make them work harder and be happier (more efficient workers). And so on. But you literally can't spend it if it is in your bank account. We're talking about divested fully liquidated dollars. That's the part I don't get.

JKCalhoun 3y ago

Wild. It's as though if I were rich enough I could run around robbing banks, just give the money back and a fine if I get caught.

grugagag 3y ago
A special class of robbers for sure. Some may even call it parasitism and it wouldnt be easy to disagree unless looked at it from an awkward distorted angle where it could look justified..