2 ms·
This is misleading. His compensation may have been effectively $10M last year, but it's almost certainly based on a stock grant several years in the past. Twitt
by kevinpet 13y ago
This is misleading. His compensation may have been effectively $10M last year, but it's almost certainly based on a stock grant several years in the past. Twitter did not offer him $10M/year, they offered him some probability of $250k/year and a small chance of $10M/year. Now the bet has paid off and he's collecting, but it's incorrect to compare a winning lottery ticket to how many lottery tickets are being offered to current hires.
- timr 13y ago"This is misleading. His compensation may have been effectively $10M last year, but it's almost certainly based on a stock grant several years in the past." They hired him this year.
- kevinpet 13y agoYou're right, or at least close enough to make my comment based on faulty assumptions. It looks like they hired him without the "senior" title last year. I was basing my assumption on the article's statement that he made $10M "last year".
- tyre 13y agoHis base salary was only – 'only' being relative to the misleading title – $145k. From the article: "He drew a salary of $145,513 and a bonus of $100,000."