8 ms·

Early Retirement in the N.F.L. and at Google, and the Paradox of Success

91 points by yagibear 12y ago

Sone7 12y ago
"Presumably America’s companies are better run when the most talented executives put in a 50-year career than if they put in only 20 or 30." Are we talking about the executives most talented at increasing shareholder profits, or executives most talented at improving people's lives? To put it another way, there's a lot of good reasons we put term limits on politicians, why are business executives different?
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- omonra 12y ago
  I am not sure if you are kidding, but the serious answer is that politicians who can stay in power without limits (witness Putin now) tend to rearrange the political process of their country with sole purpose of never leaving their post. Then they lose all accountability and do as they please without worry of being voted out. Companies, on the other hand, exist in the ecosystem of the market (so a single CEO can not rearrange the playing field). If the company is doing poorly, its shares will drop and forces will gather to remove the CEO (note how Balmer or recent CSFB CEO were removed).
  - JetSpiegel 12y ago
    Of course it can: monopolies, collusion, corruption at the highest level, lobbying.
    - walterbell 12y ago
      Some founders have special classes of voting shares, e.g. Google and Facebook.
    - zo1 12y ago
      2 / 4 of those items you mention are actually problems caused by having a corruptible state, not by the market.
hacknat 12y ago
I actually wonder how common it is to retire early? First of all what is "early"? If it is before 65 then a good number of people do. Getting to the spirit of the article though, a good chunk of the people that I know who don't "have to work" anymore, don't, or do so infrequently. I think it is rare indeed for someone to become a billionaire or hundred-millionaire without the manic drive that this article speaks of, but I do know plenty of millionaires who either don't work or take it very easy. It actually would make sense that a lot of millionaires wouldn't work anymore. Presumably they make most of their money in a one-time deal (i.e. their company gets sold), if they were a solid software engineer, etc at said company it might not seem worth it to go back and work another company doing CRUD. Maybe the right opportunity comes along, maybe it doesn't, but why pressure yourself if you don't "have to work".
mathgeek 12y ago
"At the same time, there is a depressing message for the rest of us: Maybe the fact that you would even consider retiring to a life of luxury at a young age is a sign you aren’t going to succeed at a high enough level to make that an option." Now wait a second... didn't the author just finish talking about diminishing utility? This sounds like the mindset of someone who really doesn't understand just how little it takes to work and/or retire comfortably. The vast majority of people don't need to travel the world in a private jet to enjoy retiring luxuriously in their 50's (or in most cases even earlier).
- Thieum22 12y ago
  Indeed, Mr Money Mustache is a good resource for people looking for an early retirement with an average salary: http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/ http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/
  - brianwawok 12y ago
    Even faster on a nice engineer salary.
    - ska 12y ago
      The amount of salary doesn't really matter so much as the fraction of it you are willing to live on long term.
      - pessimizer 12y ago
        You don't live on fractions, but on absolute amounts.
        Kliment 12y ago
        The "fraction" refers to expense rate versus savings rate. If your "absolute amount" is low enough relative to your income, your savings rate is high so you can retire earlier.
        12y ago
mark_l_watson 12y ago
I am more like Mr. Money Mustache. When I was 47 my wife and I sold a nice house just north of the Del Mar Race Track, and moved into a tiny but really nice house in Sedona Arizona. Major downsizing. As it turned out, I got bored in retirement and in the last 15 years I have written a bunch of books, consulted for some great companies like Google, but the difference is that I have had a lot of freedom now, and probably averaged less than 10 hours per week, not including writing, in the last 15 years. I have to admit to a lot of curiousity about how Google's CFO will do after a few years of leasure - I hope he enjoys his travels!
- imjk 12y ago
  Just out of curiosity, how has your income from these more, I assume, passion-based writing projects and consulting jobs compared to the income from your original profession that allowed you to initially retire in the first place?
  - mark_l_watson 12y ago
    I made much more money when working for large companies, on site or as an employee. I don't charge much when working remotely unless a customer wants me to be always available during working hours in which case I charge onsite rates. Working onsite at Google in 2013 paid well but cost of living in Silicon Valley is very expensive. Where I live in Arizona, life is much less expensive than in California. BTW, I just came back from a 2 1/2 hour hike in the local mountains with five friends. Having this freedom is worth so much more to me than extra income.
michaelochurch 12y ago
Money isn't about money. It's about status and power for many people. That's different from being ambitious in general. I probably wouldn't stop working if I made $20 million, but I'd work differently. I'd take more risks, play less politics, and be able to focus more due to fearlessness. I, however, don't view work for work's sake as being valuable. When I'm 55, I might decide that it's time to do more traveling and less working. There are, however, a lot of people who see money as "life's scorecard" and that leads them astray, because ultimately optimizing for that one factor is (beyond a certain point) astronomically stupid. If you enjoy your work, keep at it. But a lot of these people don't. When you look at why they keep going, though, it turns out that they're not really into the work or the money themselves but the status that come with them. A surprising percentage of people don't really care what it is they do, so long as they can use a private jet to do it.
lettergram 12y ago
Personally, I am trying to work as hard as I can so I can start a company. Even if I had $5 million I would probably keep pushing myself to ensure I had what I felt I needed to achieve my goals. Money lets you purchase other peoples time, it's boosts your productivity, and if you can hire someone to build you something you can do ever greater things. Although this is just my motivation, I am sure most of the highly productive or motivated people feel the same way. They want to do something great, and they know they have to work to get there.
- nkozyra 12y ago
  Well there's work and then there's "work," and I think this is the big part of what the article misses. Put it this way - if someone asked me if I wanted to be making $250K/yr at CorpTech or $250K/yr hitting baseballs, the choice is pretty clear (at least for me, you may hate baseball). When a job is fun or emotionally rewarding, it changes the way you perceive "work." I bring this up in response to your comment because owning and running your own company is an emotionally gratifying experience. Granted, there are moments that tear your heart out, moments that leave you awake at night, but if you're wired for this kind stimulus, you enjoy it. It stops being about (just) the money.
  - thaumasiotes 12y ago
    > if someone asked me if I wanted to be making $250K/yr at CorpTech or $250K/yr hitting baseballs, the choice is pretty clear (at least for me, you may hate baseball) Well, of course. But that doesn't make the choice unclear ;)
- bryondowd 12y ago
  This has always been my understanding of the obscenely rich. At some point, it can't be about material goods, and even status seems like a thin draw. It's got to be about power. Not necessarily as in a corrupt, evil way, but just the ability to impact the world on a national or global scale. The difference between a millionaire and a billionaire isn't how many private islands they can buy, it's how many people can be paid to further their goals, whatever those goals may be. Usually, this comes in the form of companies and/or politics. More money and more companies lets you change the world. And really, what person hasn't at some point had the thought, "Man, if I ruled the world, I would fix XYZ" You may not be able to rule the world, but with enough success and money, you can probably fix a few XYZs.
kriro 12y ago
"""The real question is not why these four men are all retiring""" I disagree. NFL players on average retire for very different reasons than Google execs. It may not be the case for the recent retirees but even if you are fully healthy it's really risky to keep playing in the NFL (concussions alone, check health premiums of NFL players etc.). Many players should probably retire earlier. It's a lot better to enjoy less money than to have more money and Alzheimers or the like at age 50. +it's more likely that NFL players that retire early kind of have a good feeling for how many more high level seasons they could have played. At least I'd think it's easier to judge the capabilities of your body than the capabilities of your mind. (QB's are the exception, I guess Locker could have stayed around as a journeyman for a couple of years and made relatively safe money holding a clipboard). I don't have any evidence but I also suspect some of the surprise early retirements may be ralted to PED use and/or uncertainty if that can be kept up "undetected". At least it's reasonable to think this is the case for a higher %age than in other fields. tl;dr: apples, oranges. NFL retirement is extremly different from most other forms of retirement. The high level abstraction of "retired but didn't have to" is at least somewhat questionable.
- philwelch 12y ago
  I remember when Tiki Barber, a running back, retired early. He was on a talk show and when they asked him why he retired, he said that being a running back in the NFL was like running full-speed into a brick wall over and over again.
brandonmenc 12y ago
Jason Worilds is retiring so he can devote more time to his religion, the Jehova's Witnesses. I don't necessarily disagree with the author, but another reasonable explanation is that successful people like their jobs, and in the absence of larger pursuits, like religion, they see no reason to move on. Retirement in and of itself isn't the "prize" for every single person.
Htsthbjig 12y ago
Wow, Shocking news!! People want to enjoy the money they have earned ... I have a company and have rich friends, this is completely normal, people do what they always wanted to do when they get money. It is called "financial independence". I read and write on HN(for other people a waste of time) because I like it, and because I can. I travel just because I can. I work on projects that probably will not make money(and end making the most money of all because nobody risks doing it) just because I can. What is really a Paradox is that when you start doing what you really want to do,instead of what others tells you to do, you could start making more money than ever. You are not a slave of money. It is a common belief of people living in NY. People earning a million dollars a year but spending half of that in a condo.
jim4000 12y ago
How am I supposed to take a person writing about the NFL seriously when he or she puts periods in between the letters? This is a mediocre article, at best.
- gyardley 12y ago
  The spelling of 'NFL' vs. 'N.F.L.' isn't up to the individual NYT writer. Whatever his preference, his editor will make sure it complies with the New York Times Manual of Style and Usage, which in its 2015 edition still calls for 'N.F.L.'
  - jim4000 12y ago
    Ah, that's interesting.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
cjbprime 12y ago
It's strange to see the author come to this conclusion (fierce drive is necessary for high income, and as a result prevents early retirement) without trying it out on anyone. Why not just ask executives who are still at Google why they do it, and mention what the most common responses were?
- eloisant 12y ago
  The responses would be a pretty boring "because I love what I do and I want to keep doing it".
peter303 12y ago
I dont understand all this "retirement" anxiety. Anyone with half a brain can find a job/lifestyle they'd love doing forever and save enough money not to have to worry about it. Why fritter away you life on activities you hate?
- zrail 12y ago
  This is not true in my experience. There are a lot of people who want to do a job that doesn't pay well (like teaching elementary school) or there aren't any jobs in their area other than physical labor (much of the midwest US outside of the cities). Saying "anyone with half a brain can find a job they love" is really dismissing quite a lot of people that are not in the same privileged situation as you.

91 points by yagibear 12y ago

Sone7 12y ago

"Presumably America’s companies are better run when the most talented executives put in a 50-year career than if they put in only 20 or 30." Are we talking about the executives most talented at increasing shareholder profits, or executives most talented at improving people's lives? To put it another way, there's a lot of good reasons we put term limits on politicians, why are business executives different?

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
omonra 12y ago
I am not sure if you are kidding, but the serious answer is that politicians who can stay in power without limits (witness Putin now) tend to rearrange the political process of their country with sole purpose of never leaving their post. Then they lose all accountability and do as they please without worry of being voted out. Companies, on the other hand, exist in the ecosystem of the market (so a single CEO can not rearrange the playing field). If the company is doing poorly, its shares will drop and forces will gather to remove the CEO (note how Balmer or recent CSFB CEO were removed).
- JetSpiegel 12y ago
  Of course it can: monopolies, collusion, corruption at the highest level, lobbying.
  - walterbell 12y ago
    Some founders have special classes of voting shares, e.g. Google and Facebook.
  - zo1 12y ago
    2 / 4 of those items you mention are actually problems caused by having a corruptible state, not by the market.

hacknat 12y ago

I actually wonder how common it is to retire early? First of all what is "early"? If it is before 65 then a good number of people do. Getting to the spirit of the article though, a good chunk of the people that I know who don't "have to work" anymore, don't, or do so infrequently. I think it is rare indeed for someone to become a billionaire or hundred-millionaire without the manic drive that this article speaks of, but I do know plenty of millionaires who either don't work or take it very easy. It actually would make sense that a lot of millionaires wouldn't work anymore. Presumably they make most of their money in a one-time deal (i.e. their company gets sold), if they were a solid software engineer, etc at said company it might not seem worth it to go back and work another company doing CRUD. Maybe the right opportunity comes along, maybe it doesn't, but why pressure yourself if you don't "have to work".

mathgeek 12y ago

"At the same time, there is a depressing message for the rest of us: Maybe the fact that you would even consider retiring to a life of luxury at a young age is a sign you aren’t going to succeed at a high enough level to make that an option." Now wait a second... didn't the author just finish talking about diminishing utility? This sounds like the mindset of someone who really doesn't understand just how little it takes to work and/or retire comfortably. The vast majority of people don't need to travel the world in a private jet to enjoy retiring luxuriously in their 50's (or in most cases even earlier).

Thieum22 12y ago
Indeed, Mr Money Mustache is a good resource for people looking for an early retirement with an average salary: http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/ http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/
- brianwawok 12y ago
  Even faster on a nice engineer salary.
  - ska 12y ago
    The amount of salary doesn't really matter so much as the fraction of it you are willing to live on long term.
    - pessimizer 12y ago
      You don't live on fractions, but on absolute amounts.
      - Kliment 12y ago
        The "fraction" refers to expense rate versus savings rate. If your "absolute amount" is low enough relative to your income, your savings rate is high so you can retire earlier.
      - 12y ago

mark_l_watson 12y ago

I am more like Mr. Money Mustache. When I was 47 my wife and I sold a nice house just north of the Del Mar Race Track, and moved into a tiny but really nice house in Sedona Arizona. Major downsizing. As it turned out, I got bored in retirement and in the last 15 years I have written a bunch of books, consulted for some great companies like Google, but the difference is that I have had a lot of freedom now, and probably averaged less than 10 hours per week, not including writing, in the last 15 years. I have to admit to a lot of curiousity about how Google's CFO will do after a few years of leasure - I hope he enjoys his travels!

imjk 12y ago
Just out of curiosity, how has your income from these more, I assume, passion-based writing projects and consulting jobs compared to the income from your original profession that allowed you to initially retire in the first place?
- mark_l_watson 12y ago
  I made much more money when working for large companies, on site or as an employee. I don't charge much when working remotely unless a customer wants me to be always available during working hours in which case I charge onsite rates. Working onsite at Google in 2013 paid well but cost of living in Silicon Valley is very expensive. Where I live in Arizona, life is much less expensive than in California. BTW, I just came back from a 2 1/2 hour hike in the local mountains with five friends. Having this freedom is worth so much more to me than extra income.

michaelochurch 12y ago

Money isn't about money. It's about status and power for many people. That's different from being ambitious in general. I probably wouldn't stop working if I made $20 million, but I'd work differently. I'd take more risks, play less politics, and be able to focus more due to fearlessness. I, however, don't view work for work's sake as being valuable. When I'm 55, I might decide that it's time to do more traveling and less working. There are, however, a lot of people who see money as "life's scorecard" and that leads them astray, because ultimately optimizing for that one factor is (beyond a certain point) astronomically stupid. If you enjoy your work, keep at it. But a lot of these people don't. When you look at why they keep going, though, it turns out that they're not really into the work or the money themselves but the status that come with them. A surprising percentage of people don't really care what it is they do, so long as they can use a private jet to do it.

lettergram 12y ago

Personally, I am trying to work as hard as I can so I can start a company. Even if I had $5 million I would probably keep pushing myself to ensure I had what I felt I needed to achieve my goals. Money lets you purchase other peoples time, it's boosts your productivity, and if you can hire someone to build you something you can do ever greater things. Although this is just my motivation, I am sure most of the highly productive or motivated people feel the same way. They want to do something great, and they know they have to work to get there.

nkozyra 12y ago
Well there's work and then there's "work," and I think this is the big part of what the article misses. Put it this way - if someone asked me if I wanted to be making $250K/yr at CorpTech or $250K/yr hitting baseballs, the choice is pretty clear (at least for me, you may hate baseball). When a job is fun or emotionally rewarding, it changes the way you perceive "work." I bring this up in response to your comment because owning and running your own company is an emotionally gratifying experience. Granted, there are moments that tear your heart out, moments that leave you awake at night, but if you're wired for this kind stimulus, you enjoy it. It stops being about (just) the money.
- thaumasiotes 12y ago
  > if someone asked me if I wanted to be making $250K/yr at CorpTech or $250K/yr hitting baseballs, the choice is pretty clear (at least for me, you may hate baseball) Well, of course. But that doesn't make the choice unclear ;)
bryondowd 12y ago
This has always been my understanding of the obscenely rich. At some point, it can't be about material goods, and even status seems like a thin draw. It's got to be about power. Not necessarily as in a corrupt, evil way, but just the ability to impact the world on a national or global scale. The difference between a millionaire and a billionaire isn't how many private islands they can buy, it's how many people can be paid to further their goals, whatever those goals may be. Usually, this comes in the form of companies and/or politics. More money and more companies lets you change the world. And really, what person hasn't at some point had the thought, "Man, if I ruled the world, I would fix XYZ" You may not be able to rule the world, but with enough success and money, you can probably fix a few XYZs.

kriro 12y ago

"""The real question is not why these four men are all retiring""" I disagree. NFL players on average retire for very different reasons than Google execs. It may not be the case for the recent retirees but even if you are fully healthy it's really risky to keep playing in the NFL (concussions alone, check health premiums of NFL players etc.). Many players should probably retire earlier. It's a lot better to enjoy less money than to have more money and Alzheimers or the like at age 50. +it's more likely that NFL players that retire early kind of have a good feeling for how many more high level seasons they could have played. At least I'd think it's easier to judge the capabilities of your body than the capabilities of your mind. (QB's are the exception, I guess Locker could have stayed around as a journeyman for a couple of years and made relatively safe money holding a clipboard). I don't have any evidence but I also suspect some of the surprise early retirements may be ralted to PED use and/or uncertainty if that can be kept up "undetected". At least it's reasonable to think this is the case for a higher %age than in other fields. tl;dr: apples, oranges. NFL retirement is extremly different from most other forms of retirement. The high level abstraction of "retired but didn't have to" is at least somewhat questionable.

philwelch 12y ago
I remember when Tiki Barber, a running back, retired early. He was on a talk show and when they asked him why he retired, he said that being a running back in the NFL was like running full-speed into a brick wall over and over again.

brandonmenc 12y ago

Jason Worilds is retiring so he can devote more time to his religion, the Jehova's Witnesses. I don't necessarily disagree with the author, but another reasonable explanation is that successful people like their jobs, and in the absence of larger pursuits, like religion, they see no reason to move on. Retirement in and of itself isn't the "prize" for every single person.

Htsthbjig 12y ago

Wow, Shocking news!! People want to enjoy the money they have earned ... I have a company and have rich friends, this is completely normal, people do what they always wanted to do when they get money. It is called "financial independence". I read and write on HN(for other people a waste of time) because I like it, and because I can. I travel just because I can. I work on projects that probably will not make money(and end making the most money of all because nobody risks doing it) just because I can. What is really a Paradox is that when you start doing what you really want to do,instead of what others tells you to do, you could start making more money than ever. You are not a slave of money. It is a common belief of people living in NY. People earning a million dollars a year but spending half of that in a condo.

jim4000 12y ago

How am I supposed to take a person writing about the NFL seriously when he or she puts periods in between the letters? This is a mediocre article, at best.

gyardley 12y ago
The spelling of 'NFL' vs. 'N.F.L.' isn't up to the individual NYT writer. Whatever his preference, his editor will make sure it complies with the New York Times Manual of Style and Usage, which in its 2015 edition still calls for 'N.F.L.'
- jim4000 12y ago
  Ah, that's interesting.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

cjbprime 12y ago

It's strange to see the author come to this conclusion (fierce drive is necessary for high income, and as a result prevents early retirement) without trying it out on anyone. Why not just ask executives who are still at Google why they do it, and mention what the most common responses were?

eloisant 12y ago
The responses would be a pretty boring "because I love what I do and I want to keep doing it".

peter303 12y ago

I dont understand all this "retirement" anxiety. Anyone with half a brain can find a job/lifestyle they'd love doing forever and save enough money not to have to worry about it. Why fritter away you life on activities you hate?

zrail 12y ago
This is not true in my experience. There are a lot of people who want to do a job that doesn't pay well (like teaching elementary school) or there aren't any jobs in their area other than physical labor (much of the midwest US outside of the cities). Saying "anyone with half a brain can find a job they love" is really dismissing quite a lot of people that are not in the same privileged situation as you.