4 ms·
As birdmanjeremy posted below, you have to discount for risk. This year he got $225k, next year he may get nothing. In any case I think you're underestimating
by davmre 12y ago
As birdmanjeremy posted below, you have to discount for risk. This year he got $225k, next year he may get nothing.
In any case I think you're underestimating the value of benefits provided by large tech companies. Free food, top-end health insurance, maternity/paternity leave, gym memberships, retirement contributions, bonuses, etc. all add up. I've commonly heard the rule of thumb that total cost-to-employer is roughly $2N for an employee making $N in nominal salary.
The point about location is reasonable: it's harder to get a six-figure salary doing remote work, which is effectively what this is. Still I think people shouldn't be shocked about the amount of money in play here. Given the risk, it's a good payout but not a great one for someone of his (clearly very high) skill level.
- riskable 12y agoThe 2x salary average is very misleading. The average for all employees everywhere in the US sure, but it's a sliding scale. The higher your salary the less your employer is paying as a percentage of your income. There's very little difference in overhead between someone making $100k and someone making $150k. The overhead difference will only be a few thousand dollars more for the person making $150k.
- mturmon 12y ago"There's very little difference in overhead between someone making $100k and someone making $150k." Logically, you would think so, but remember that many benefits scale with salary/seniority. Things like retirement plan matching and vacation accrual rate. Also perks like better offices, parking, "training" in attractive destinations.