2 ms·

Here's a counter point: - They are saying that maliciously as signalling for cost savings. - They know this will slowly rot and destroy long term development.

• lenerdenator 2y ago
  You're right about the first three; they've made up a number which gets them the maximum return on shares. Most of Krishna's compensation is shares. I don't think they care about competition at all, though. In fact, I'd venture to say that most publicly-traded companies are helmed by people who don't care about the competition beyond what it means for share price. And share price is itself a relatively poor metric for long-term sustainability and growth at a company, because most of the people who are supposed to care about it as an indicator of those things are already hedged and ready to divest at a moment's notice. No one with any real voting power at most major companies has put all of their eggs in the company basket; they diversify. Executives who are compensated in shares also get compensated so well that they reach the point of diminishing returns on what money can buy you in a given society. If you, for a decade, get paid $1.5 million in cash, then get bonuses for meeting short-term performance targets, there's basically nowhere in the Western world you can't exist comfortably. And that's before you exercise stock options. So the risk of failure has no real bite to it.