3 ms·
That's all well and good, but I think the reduction should be put in the proper context. From the article: > Nadella received $79.1 million for the fiscal year
by bko 2y ago
That's all well and good, but I think the reduction should be put in the proper context. From the article:
> Nadella received $79.1 million for the fiscal year that ended June 30, up from $48.5 million in the prior year, according to a proxy filing Thursday. Most of his pay is in the form of stock. The board’s compensation committee said Nadella asked that the cash incentive portion reflect the security issues... It was originally supposed to be $10.66 million, but the full board approved a $5.2 million cash incentive instead.
I personally do believe effective executives are often easily worth their salaries. Not moral worth of course but pure economics. For instance, consider when Nike hired CEO John Donahoe, their stock jumped 10% which was around $16bn. Now either Nike shareholders are stupid (maybe), or the strategic move to appoint Donahoe was worth billions even above his salary of ~$30 million.
- dataflow 2y ago> I personally do believe effective executives are often easily worth their salaries. Did you literally mean "salaries" here, or total compensation?
- bko 2y agoTotal compensation. To me how its split up is irrelevant although the board often prefers stock to have their incentives more in line with long term stock performance.
- dataflow 2y agoYeah I figured the same, just wanted to make sure because the stocks are a massive portion of the total compensation, so it's a more controversial stance to take!