John Browett, Apple's New Head of Retail, Sends Introductory Email to Store Employees

[mrxak]

"Market priced" and "skewed by self interest" are the same things. It wouldn't be a market if people weren't looking to make the best deal for themselves.

The great thing about self interest is everyone has their own, and they balance out so things are fair. Apple isn't giving this guy 60 million over a number of years out of charity, they're doing it because they expect he'll make more than 60 million for Apple (presumably quite a bit more). John Browett is coming to Apple because nobody else will match Apple's salary/benefits/intangibles. Both Apple and John Browett are looking out for themselves, and both win. That's how you know it's a free market.

If you had every company on the planet simultaneously engage in non-competitive behavior, say cutting every salary in half, Apple would still be making more than 60 million from John Browett's work. That's not very fair to him, is it? I suppose somebody like you would want the extra 30 million spread out amongst all of Apple's other employees, so they're all paid above-market salaries and losing money for Apple. Why stop there, though? Let's just spread the money equally across all of the planet, institute worldwide communism. Some people will be overpaid, others underpaid, and nobody will be motivated to work harder than anyone else. I'm sure that will work out just fine.

 

[sarge]

Oh really? So a executive pay package as set by a board of directors WITHOUT ANY INPUT FROM THE SHAREHOLDERS WHO ACTUALLY OWN THE COMPANY is what you refer to as market price? I mean I'm laughing here.

I was making a distinction between the self interest of a group of people who apparently are very good at convincing folks that there is a mechanism called the free market which is self-correcting and allocates capital prudently and efficiently when they're really operating in an entirely closed model.

I'm not a socialist, I'm just reasonable. As a shareholder in Apple, I ought to have some say in the executive pay packages wouldn't you agree?

BTW, I see Apple has just annoucned it is paying it's FoxConn workers a higher wage. A good thing too because if you don't pay people enough to cloth, feed and shelter themselves nobody will be motivated to work at all. They'll be motivated toward less desirable scenarios...

 

[RickyB]

Maybe they actually did it right there, but most of the stores here, it's really hit or miss as to what employee you happen to get. Most are high school or college kids who really don't care(they do not get commission). Also there prices are sometimes insanely higher than what you can find on Amazon or Newegg. The one thing they are actually not terrible with is that their stores are usually pretty nice and it is a good change to be able to actually touch or see a product before you buy it.

Their UK prices seemed to be slightly lower than their competitors, and they had a good range of stock. Their staff in the Aintree store seemed descent enough, a mix of ages.

But they obviously weren't making enough money and closed all their UK stores after only about a year after opening.

 

[ade2bee]

Much improvement... In the chains he left

I have to say that he was in charge of the worst tech retail store chain in the world, which, in my along with several people I've spoken to, has improved a lot in the month or 2 alone... perhaps Apple should have spoken to the person who was his replacement first ;-)

 

[blow45]

"Market priced" and "skewed by self interest" are the same things. It wouldn't be a market if people weren't looking to make the best deal for themselves.

The great thing about self interest is everyone has their own, and they balance out so things are fair. Apple isn't giving this guy 60 million over a number of years out of charity, they're doing it because they expect he'll make more than 60 million for Apple (presumably quite a bit more). John Browett is coming to Apple because nobody else will match Apple's salary/benefits/intangibles. Both Apple and John Browett are looking out for themselves, and both win. That's how you know it's a free market.

If you had every company on the planet simultaneously engage in non-competitive behavior, say cutting every salary in half, Apple would still be making more than 60 million from John Browett's work. That's not very fair to him, is it? I suppose somebody like you would want the extra 30 million spread out amongst all of Apple's other employees, so they're all paid above-market salaries and losing money for Apple. Why stop there, though? Let's just spread the money equally across all of the planet, institute worldwide communism. Some people will be overpaid, others underpaid, and nobody will be motivated to work harder than anyone else. I'm sure that will work out just fine.

Wtf are you telling us? John can't be motivated to work hard for a half, a third or even a quarter of that 60 million for one of the world's largest and most prestigious tech companies and style icons?

 

[mrxak]

I don't know, you'd have to ask him. But if Apple offers him less money, now that they've done the hard work of figuring out he's capable of the job, somebody else could come along and offer him just a little bit more.

Apple's not just beating other offers on the table, they're ensuring no other company will outbid them in the future, and hire him away next week.