Craig Federighi and Dan Riccio Receive Stock Grants Worth $50 Million Each

[MacRumors]

Following their appointments to Apple's senior executive team, Craig Federighi and Dan Riccio have each been granted 75,000 restricted stock units by Apple. The grants, which were revealed in filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission covering Federighi and Riccio, are worth roughly $50 million apiece at today's stock price, although they do not convert into actual shares for some time.

According to the vesting schedule, Federighi and Riccio will each see 25,000 of their restricted stock units convert into actual shares on December 23, 2013, with another 25,000 following on April 23, 2015 and the final batch of 25,000 converting August 23, 2016.

Including actual shares as well as previous restricted stock unit grants that are converting to shares over time, Federighi holds roughly $97 million worth of stock rights at Apple's present share price, while Riccio's holdings would be worth about $89 million.

Grants of restricted stock units are typically issued both as bonuses for previous work as well as incentives to remain with the company. With the units vesting over time, recipients are generally required to remain employed with the company through each vesting date in order for those units to convert into redeemable shares.

Article Link: Craig Federighi and Dan Riccio Receive Stock Grants Worth $50 Million Each

 

[Mad-B-One]

A good way to make sure your key personnel stays. I bet the top 500 companies are knocking on their doors daily.

 

[applesith]

Well earned, gentlemen!

 

[Spyriadon]

A fantastic incentive, ensuring that not only do they stay but that in order for the value of the stock to remain high they have to do there best work.

 

[Agent OrangeZ]

In B4 all of the "Occupy" folk show up and say "No one deserves to make that much money!!!!1111"

 

[Rootus]

In B4 all of the "Occupy" folk show up and say "No one deserves to make that much money!!!!1111"

You don't have to be extreme to observe that they probably aren't worth $50M. There is a lot of talent in this world.

 

[applesith]

You don't have to be extreme to observe that they probably aren't worth $50M. There is a lot of talent in this world.

Yes there is a lot of talent. But it's a matter of useful and unique talent worth flipping the bill for. The $50M isn't just for the amount of money they have and will generate for Apple: it's more the opportunity cost of losing them to a competitor.

 

[bad03xtreme]

I'm Jelly, I would rock that hairdo for that kind of jingle...

 

[jamojamo]

You don't have to be extreme to observe that they probably aren't worth $50M. There is a lot of talent in this world.

And there is a lot of competition for the top talent that has the right drive and skills and is in the right area. So how do you say they aren't worth $50 Million? They could easily impact the bottom line or market capitalization over time for that amount. (Positively or Negatively)

Talent alone only gets you so far - ask Jamarcus Russell, Adam 'Pacman' Jones, Ralph Sampson, and many, many starving artists.

Bottom line is that none of us has a real say in what Apple is paying them but I don't begrudge them their 'opportunity' to succeed, nor does it impact my opportunities to succeed in my chosen endeavors.

 

[617arg]

I don't know.....I look at some of these numbers and they begin to lose their meaning. After a certain point it almost doesn't matter. They will always be comfortable, so will their children and children's children, and further down the ladder of descendants......

If they are happy they will stay, if not they will either retire or go somewhere they feel they will be happier. If they are happy and just looking to shake down Apple with threats of leaving I'd rather see them go. Everyone can be replaced, and some fresh blood would be nice there at this point.

 

[3282868]

My first thought upon seeing the picture:

"Welcome to Sprockets. I am your host, Dieter."

 

[seetheforest]

Yes there is a lot of talent. But it's a matter of useful and unique talent worth flipping the bill for. The $50M isn't just for the amount of money they have and will generate for Apple: it's more the opportunity cost of losing them to a competitor.

I don't understand this. If a large company like Yahoo was desperate enough they could certainly throw larger amounts of money at these guys to jump ship. Like others are saying these guys could EASILY impact the bottom line by that amount. Why is $50M a good price? Does it placate the human drive for wealth enough to satisfy the employees? If so, when did $50M become the benchmark for curbing human greed?

The arguments for executives being paid this amount of money make little sense because the value that executives are paid is completely arbitrary. So what if they get $50M? Microsoft could easily go over that price if they wanted to.

The fact is that you are right, these guys are talented and unique and driven. They do a great job because they love the work and they do deserve to get paid well for it. I don't see why $5M isn't enough to satisfy almost all of their needs and allowing them to pursue product development at a company that they love. The only company I know that is full of high functioning, creative individuals.

The idea that there is an arms race for talent just doesn't hold water when plenty of companies have positive balance sheets in the billions and could steal talent with $$$ at almost any price.

 

[applesith]

I don't understand this. If a large company like Yahoo was desperate enough they could certainly throw larger amounts of money at these guys to jump ship. Like others are saying these guys could EASILY impact the bottom line by that amount. Why is $50M a good price? Does it placate the human drive for wealth enough to satisfy the employees? If so, when did $50M become the benchmark for curbing human greed?

The arguments for executives being paid this amount of money make little sense because the value that executives are paid is completely arbitrary. So what if they get $50M? Microsoft could easily go over that price if they wanted to.

The fact is that you are right, these guys are talented and unique and driven. They do a great job because they love the work and they do deserve to get paid well for it. I don't see why $5M isn't enough to satisfy almost all of their needs and allowing them to pursue product development at a company that they love. The only company I know that is full of high functioning, creative individuals.

The idea that there is an arms race for talent just doesn't hold water when plenty of companies have positive balance sheets in the billions and could steal talent with $$$ at almost any price.

Why as much as $5M? Some say that would be too high (it's above $250k which seems to be the "rich line" nowadays). I don't see why people care so much about what others are being paid. Nothing prevented these two individuals from getting to the $50M mark from nothing. Who honestly cares what they make.

 

[firewood]

There is a lot of talent in this world.

There is also a lot of highly paid "talent" in the world that drove major financial firms and other large companies bankrupt, or nearly so.

These executives that Apple is trying to keep are proven. They didn't bankrupt Apple (yet) and they survived Jobs maniacal scrutiny.

 

[ArtOfWarfare]

I don't know.....I look at some of these numbers and they begin to lose their meaning. After a certain point it almost doesn't matter. They will always be comfortable, so will their children and children's children, and further down the ladder of descendants......

That's nice in theory, but what is that "certain point"? Is it once your basic necessities are paid for in life? But why not a bigger house? And what about your kids education, don't they deserve the best? How about a second house on the other coast? And you're going to need a jet to fly between them. Couldn't you spend that money on cancer research?

You can always find a way to spend more money if you have more money, because other people would like your money, too.

It sort of comes down to if you give a mouse a cookie...

 

[astrorider]

You don't have to be extreme to observe that they probably aren't worth $50M. There is a lot of talent in this world.

Apple's not a charity...If they could pay them less (or someone else with the same talent) for the value Apple receives from them I'm sure they would.

 

[Ryth]

I don't know.....I look at some of these numbers and they begin to lose their meaning. After a certain point it almost doesn't matter. They will always be comfortable, so will their children and children's children, and further down the ladder of descendants.......

Not necessarily...a fool and his money are easily parted. We've seen lots of people get lots of $$$ and then blow it. They might not, but their children could easily...especially if they aren't raised correctly.

But yes, this amount of money has lost meaning and it's due to the FED and their easy money policy the last 8-12 years. Everything is out of whack...from home prices, to gas, to salaries, bonuses, etc.

 

[shulerg]

worth every penny, these two.

 

[Schmitty11]

I could use a small loan. Help me out fellas?

 

[carlgo]

Can they pay them offshore so they can avoid taxes in the US?

 

[Morod]

I dunno about Dan, but Craig ain't worth it, IMHO.
Apple, please bring back Bertrand Serlet!

 

[NumberNine]

In B4 all of the "Occupy" folk show up and say "No one deserves to make that much money!!!!1111"

The "occupiers" are just jealous whiners who want what others have.

 

[whooleytoo]

The $50M isn't just for the amount of money they have and will generate for Apple: it's more the opportunity cost of losing them to a competitor.

A hitman would be a lot cheaper..

 

[Swordylove]

Oh wow that's more than enough for me! Thank you! Thank you! I can retire now.

 

[allan.nyholm]

When I saw that guy on the right I remembered seeing him before. Dan Riccio sure does look like F. Murray Abraham.

F. Murray Abraham starred in Loaded Weapon 1 where my memory of the similarity originates from.