Your comments continue to be insightful and mature, Adam.
Just wanted to acknowledge that it's great to have your contributions on this forum.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Shareholders Advisory Group Doesn't Want Tim Cook to Get $99 Million Pay Package
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Just wanted to acknowledge that it's great to have your contributions on this forum.
I’m not seeing the correlation between Hollywood actors and the CEO of one of the largest (Most successful) tech companies in the world.
Tim Cook has been with Apple for 24 years, and that comes with extensive knowledge of understanding the DNA of what Apple is. I don’t know about you, but someone is compensated based off experience, education and leadership/technical abilities. And actor isn’t in that same league and it’s a set of totally different technical abilities, that doesn’t necessarily demonstrate and/or execute leadership, directive or understanding of core operations that would follow under a CEOs job description.
I've no problem with the bonus itself. My issue is that the people down at the bottom of Apple, the public face that Apple sells as the Apple Retail Stores and AppleCare advisors get squat.
Those folks have to argue for a 2% raise each year during performance reviews. Sure they're thrown a few shares of stock now and again but it's token at best.
Sure Tim makes the big decisions and deserves to be compensated but how about spreading it around a little? maybe commit to five years of 5% pay increases for your public facing employees who are a large portion of the reason Apple has the reputation it does. When 90% of the incentives go to the top 5%, it leaves the remainder rather disgruntled.
Those folks have to argue for a 2% raise each year during performance reviews. Sure they're thrown a few shares of stock now and again but it's token at best.
Sure Tim makes the big decisions and deserves to be compensated but how about spreading it around a little? maybe commit to five years of 5% pay increases for your public facing employees who are a large portion of the reason Apple has the reputation it does. When 90% of the incentives go to the top 5%, it leaves the remainder rather disgruntled.
Which similar companies? Most competitors have founders who have been determining the true direction of the company while extracting enormous amount of value from the companies making them worth hundreds of billions of dollars from companies that make far less profit than Apple. For instance the only company that made more profit last year was Amazon. While Bezos took a small salary he continued to increase his share in the company that made him the world’s richest man.
Good. This should be fuel for little Timmy to get the engineering department to start innovating.
There should never be that amount of money paid to one person, period.
Save your rhetoric of defending billionaires while you live paycheck to paycheck and are one medical emergency from living in the streets. I don’t want to hear it.
Apple apparently needs to pay its Chinese factory employees a lot more for assembling their products because they’re the real MVP.
They’re the ones working longer hours and shattering deadlines to get this inanimate objects to your hands.
Save your rhetoric of defending billionaires while you live paycheck to paycheck and are one medical emergency from living in the streets. I don’t want to hear it.
Apple apparently needs to pay its Chinese factory employees a lot more for assembling their products because they’re the real MVP.
They’re the ones working longer hours and shattering deadlines to get this inanimate objects to your hands.
Overall Cook has done a good job. Sure there were bumps but the Apple Watch changed the smartwatch game and AirPods basically made a whole new segment of fully wireless earbuds that everyone copied.
For perspective:
99 million divided by 154,000 employees is 643 dollars. That would be a one time 3% raise for the lowest paid employees of the company (~22K), and that would be much less than the recently announced pay raises.
Do I think any one person should be worth $100M a year in compensation? Maybe not, but apparently Apple thinks so or they would can him and hire someone cheaper.
99 million divided by 154,000 employees is 643 dollars. That would be a one time 3% raise for the lowest paid employees of the company (~22K), and that would be much less than the recently announced pay raises.
Do I think any one person should be worth $100M a year in compensation? Maybe not, but apparently Apple thinks so or they would can him and hire someone cheaper.
$99 million?
It could be worse. If executive compensation is based on 'company performance', it would seem that ISS really doesn't have much of a dog in that fight. Although typing '$99 million' does seem excessive for ANY CEO, but there are smaller fish that are making more money at much much smaller companies. Heck, I did IT for a company that was a 'little fish' whose CEO wanted to be a BIG FISH and dragged down a mid/high 6-figure salary plus bonuses and perks! The company folded shortly after they brought in their son-in-law to do all of their IT support. (To save money)
*shrug* There are bigger issues at Apple than TCooks salary, IMO.
It could be worse. If executive compensation is based on 'company performance', it would seem that ISS really doesn't have much of a dog in that fight. Although typing '$99 million' does seem excessive for ANY CEO, but there are smaller fish that are making more money at much much smaller companies. Heck, I did IT for a company that was a 'little fish' whose CEO wanted to be a BIG FISH and dragged down a mid/high 6-figure salary plus bonuses and perks! The company folded shortly after they brought in their son-in-law to do all of their IT support. (To save money)
*shrug* There are bigger issues at Apple than TCooks salary, IMO.
HAH! How many 'hippies' are multi-billionaires now. Yikes. If I had only bought Microsoft and Apple stock when I had the money to buy some. DANG!!!
He has already stated he might not stay another 10 years, so they would be wise to ride this train as long as they can. Steve Jobs put him in charge for a reason. Remember his widow’s fortunes are tied to Apple’s success.
OMG!!!
I shouldn't have...
I really shouldn't have...
But curiosity killed the cat, and...
I'm a couple months older than Tim Cook.
OMG!!!
Why didn't I stop before I...
Wow...
And I thought he was 'old'...
He won't live forever, and I'm sure there are 'rules of succession in place'. I wish I was getting 'only' $99 million... I suddenly feel ancient...
I shouldn't have...
I really shouldn't have...
But curiosity killed the cat, and...
I'm a couple months older than Tim Cook.
OMG!!!
Why didn't I stop before I...
Wow...
And I thought he was 'old'...
He won't live forever, and I'm sure there are 'rules of succession in place'. I wish I was getting 'only' $99 million... I suddenly feel ancient...
When Apple starts to actually decline based on their poor choices as the haters always predict instead of continuing to widen the gap, maybe someone might agree the board is a problem. Success is key. In a put up or shut up world, they deliver even when it seems impossible. Why change what’s working better than any other company. Change for idealistic purpose is foolish in business.