Apple Executives Receive Restricted Stock Units Worth Millions

Discussion in 'Mac Blog Discussion' started by MacRumors, Oct 17, 2017.

  1. MacRumors macrumors bot

    MacRumors

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2001
    #1
    [​IMG]


    [​IMG]
    Several Apple executives were today awarded 128,584 restricted stock units or RSUs worth upwards of $20 million at Apple's current price. The RSUs are set to vest after a set period of time and serve as bonus compensation to encourage employees to stay with the company.

    Johny Srouji, Phil Schiller, Dan Riccio, Luca Maestri, Craig Federighi, Eddy Cue, and Angela Ahrendts all received 128,584 restricted stock units this month. 64,885 RSUs were awarded on 10/1, while an additional 63,699 were awarded on 10/15.

    For the first batch, the vesting of the restricted stock units depends on Apple's total shareholder return starting on the first day of fiscal 2018 and ending on the last day of fiscal 2020. Up to 200 percent of the shares can vest should Apple's performance in the S&P 500 be in the 85th percentile or higher relative to other companies.

    If Apple's performance falls below that, a smaller percentage of shares will vest, but should the company hit its target, each executive could receive 129,770 shares worth over $20 million at today's prices. Apple did not hit that target with its last performance based stock award.

    The second batch of RSUs will vest over time and each executive will see the full award of 63,699 shares should they stay with the company. One-third of the shares will vest on April 1, 2020, another third on April 1, 2021, and the final third on April 1, 2022. Chris Kondo, Apple Senior Director of Corporate Accounting, also received a smaller award of 12,740 shares that will vest starting in 2018.

    At a maximum, each executive could earn up to 193,469 shares by 2022, worth more than $30 million today.

    Article Link: Apple Executives Receive Restricted Stock Units Worth Millions
     
  2. farewelwilliams macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2014
    #2
    Johny Srouji and Dan Riccio definitely earned their shares
     
  3. adamneer macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2013
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    #3
    Somehow, I now feel slightly deflated over the 50 shares I own.
     
  4. Rogifan macrumors Core

    Rogifan

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2011
    #4
    Dan Riccio? How so?
     
  5. farewelwilliams macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2014
    #5
    shrinking an xbox kinect into a portable device for the face id feature ain't easy.
     
  6. ilovemykid3302012 Suspended

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2017
    #6
    He did that or the company they purchased it from did it?
     
  7. robotica macrumors 6502a

    robotica

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2007
    Location:
    Edinburgh
  8. farewelwilliams macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2014
    #8
    of course he didn't do it by himself. he led the team. much like craig federighi doesn't do any programming but instead leads the teams
     
  9. ilovemykid3302012 Suspended

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2017
    #9
    I'm still inclined to believe the company they purchase the part from had a slightly larger hand in making it but hey, that's just my opinion.
     
  10. tridley68 macrumors 6502a

    tridley68

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2014
  11. farewelwilliams macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2014
    #11
    it's not like primasense already made the mobile module and then Apple purchased it -> slapped it on the iPhone without any additional engineering.

    and this isn't the ONLY reason why Dan Riccio deserved the shares. he still needs to worry about the iPad and Macs
     
  12. Brookzy macrumors 601

    Brookzy

    Joined:
    May 30, 2010
    Location:
    UK
    #12
    Ive's promotion to Chief Design Officer a few years back - meaning he is no longer a SVP - was partially so they could stop disclosing his remuneration.

    And you can bet that's because he's by a long, long way Apple's highest paid employee.
     
  13. timborama macrumors 6502a

    timborama

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2011
    #13
    You do realize Apple doesn't actually design or make the Face ID mechanism. They just source it from the company that invented it, and repckage it into a phone. Pretty much like everything else that the iPhone consists of. They just repackage other manufactures chips, screens, battery into their own industrial design. Although they do design the Axx, but someone else actually fabricates it.
     
  14. farewelwilliams macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2014
    #14
    incorrect
    they bought primasense (the people that made kinect) and engineered the mobile version of it. one that doesn't take up too much space or power.
     
  15. timborama macrumors 6502a

    timborama

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2011
    #15
    Ok yu proved my point, primasense desgined it.
     
  16. farewelwilliams macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2014
    #16
    they didn't source the module because it didn't exist. kinect was this giant device that sit in front of your TV. Apple invented the mobile version after they bought primasense.
    so no they didn't "source" it.

    also the software for face id didn't exist. who do you think engineered the software for secure facial recognition.
     
  17. Naraxus macrumors 6502a

    Naraxus

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2016
    #17
    Please tell me what Eddy Cue and Angela Ahrendts have done to earn their bonuses other than destroying the Apple retail experience and Cue's inability to ink anything of substance for Apple original programming.
    --- Post Merged, Oct 17, 2017 ---
    Which he's done nothing of late to deserve a bonus of any kind
     
  18. blackberrycubed, Oct 17, 2017
    Last edited: Oct 17, 2017

    blackberrycubed macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2013
    #18
    Overpayed management and a bean counter at the helm. Lord help us......

    Phill schiller is the one I abhor the most.
     
  19. 69Mustang macrumors 604

    69Mustang

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2014
    Location:
    In between a rock and a hard place
    #19
    You've assumed a lot. Most of it's wrong. Hardly any of it is sourced. Beyond the fact that Apple acquired Primesense, and early Primesense tech was used in the original Kinect... yeah, nothing else you've assumed is correct. Cursory internet info would tell you that.
     
  20. macpro2000 macrumors 6502a

    macpro2000

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2005
    #20
    My 2,400 shares used to look like a lot until I saw this.
     
  21. R3k macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    Location:
    Sep 7, 2011
    #21
    Apples retail experience is fine and much like it was a decade ago, albeit busier. What are you talking about?
     
  22. Macs4u macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2008
    Location:
    Stoke on Trent
    #22
    Apples retail experience is NOTHING like it used to be, at least not where my nearest few stores are. The feeling of magic in the store has gone. Staff using android phones. I was actually talked out of a MacBook Pro by a “specialist” and told that the surface are stunning. Tim Cook is at the helm and as such, money is the motivation for him. With jobs it was passion and money, in that order.

    Matt
     
  23. PG(Austin) macrumors regular

    PG(Austin)

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2004
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    #23
     
  24. navaira macrumors 68040

    navaira

    Joined:
    May 28, 2015
    Location:
    Amsterdam, Netherlands
    #24
    Aren't we glad that Apple are trying to encourage Eddy Cue to stay.
     
  25. Carnegie, Oct 18, 2017
    Last edited: Oct 18, 2017

    Carnegie macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    #25
    This represents another small tweak from previous years in Apple's (annual) executive compensation packages.

    Those packages have been consistent for the (now 9) senior vice presidents over the last few years. They've all been getting, more or less, the same compensation (not counting certain smaller benefits, e.g. insurance premiums).

    They've been getting a salary of $1 million, non-equity incentive compensation of up to $4 million (determined by company performance), and stock awards valued at $20 million at the time they were granted. For FY 2015 and 2016, the grant value of the stock awards was 60% time based and 40% performance based (determined by total stock return). The time-based RSU vested, in equal portions, in years 3, 4, and 5. The performance-based RSUs vested in year 3.

    For FY 2017 the stock award split went to 50% time based and 50% performance based - $10 million fair value at grant date for each kind. The fair value for the performance-based RSUs was (as it had previously been) determined using a Monte Carlo valuation. That meant that the target number for the performance-based RSUs granted didn't match the number of time-based RSUs granted even though their fair values were the same and they were granted on the same date (i.e. used the same closing stock price). Put simply, the total stock return over the relevant 3 years was expected to be better than the target such that more than the target number of performance-based RSUs would be received. That also meant that the value of the target number of performance-based RSUs on the grant date was less than $10 million.

    For FY 2018 - which includes the stock awards which were just reported - there seem to be 2 small changes. First, the grant dates for the time-based and performance-based RSUs are different and thus the closing stock price used to determine the share numbers are different. Second, the target number of performance-based RSUs granted seems to be based on their value on the grant date (i.e. they were worth $10 million on that date), not based on the target number needed to make the Monte Carlo valuation yield a $10 million fair value on grant date. (The Monte Carlo valuation will, I expect, still be used in determining the fair value reported for this stock award in the proxy statement for the 2019 annual meeting.)

    You left out Chief Operating Officer Jeff Williams. That makes 8 senior vice presidents. The ninth, General Counsel Bruce Sewell, is retiring so it makes sense that he didn't get a new stock award.
    --- Post Merged, Oct 18, 2017 ---
    They weren't reporting his stock awards, or reporting his compensation in annual proxy statements, even before that title change. Apparently he wasn't considered an executive officer. But that title change may well have been motivated, at least in part, by concerns about (potential) SEC scrutiny over the lack of Section 16 reporting for him. The last Section 16 filing for him came in 2009.
     

Share This Page

29 October 17, 2017