I suppose he deserves it. Unlike the CEO of Mozilla whose pay has increased just about as much as the userbase has shrunk.
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.
Tim Cook to Receive $750 Million Worth of Apple's Stock This Week
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Agreed. He didn’t earn $750m. He is a custodian of an ongoing concern, not an innovator or a creator. He isn’t a Marjorie Post who help pioneer the concept of a food conglomerate, or Clarence Birdseye who invented flash freezing, or Milton Hershey who gambled his entire existence on a town and factory to produce a product nobody in the US had heard of with a recipe he hadn’t perfected yet.
He is being rewarded for not dying or moving on before 10 years and for working hard and not making more mistakes than good moves. Used to earn a nice watch, a bonus, a party and a company car from the board for that…
But a bonus equal to 50x his meager $15m salary? No. He didn’t earn that.
That would be fine if Wall Street also picks up the bill for their investors causing a financial crash or their companies laying the foundation for a worldwide pandemic.
No taxation and no responsibility is the new slogan for modern capitalism.
So is the job description of Apple CEO against your professional and personal ethics? How is that relevant here?
That's not how compensation works. It's not a 1:1 ratio with some subjective measurement of how hard your job is. Surely you know this? It's based on how much your company think's your worth in the current market.
A lot of folks here are saying apple should instead use the money to pay their employees more . . . i don't quite understand. Are apple employees underpaid? I never have heard of that as an issue. If you split 750m amongst 147000 employees (as of 2020) . . . that's a one time payment of just over $5k. Say we split that as an hourly wage increase (obviously translated for exempt employees, too) - that would be a $2.45 per hour increase.
I also think it's silly that people are demanding apple back out on a decade-old contract to grant him x amount of shares (regardless of price) to what? Translate that magically into payroll funding? That makes no sense.
Don't get me wrong - apple has a huge boatload of money and could probably stand to pay their lower-paid employees more. But that's a completely different topic than this article.
I also think it's silly that people are demanding apple back out on a decade-old contract to grant him x amount of shares (regardless of price) to what? Translate that magically into payroll funding? That makes no sense.
Don't get me wrong - apple has a huge boatload of money and could probably stand to pay their lower-paid employees more. But that's a completely different topic than this article.
I recently watched that History channel series on Hulu myself....
I agree. The cost of living in California is probably more per week than I make in three months.
Presumably we can use the same logic in reverse then? Why should the government tax those 147,000 employees for small amounts when they can just do one big tax on Tim Cook instead?
Easy to say when it hasn't been offered to you. But if you're as humanitarian as you portray yourself, why would you not accept it and use it for humanitarian and charitable purposes?
It's a non starter if you don't understand how business works. You can be the hardest working garbage man (to use an example you brought up) in the world, but you're never going to be paid the same amount as the hardest working chief executive officer of a multi-trillion dollar company. This is common sense.
What moral and ethical standard are you basing this on? Is money inherently evil?
Keep in mind that Apple didn't give him 750 million. They granted 5 million shares so long as he stayed in employment for 10 years...a security and the only reason it's paying out 750 million is because Tim's leadership elevated the stock price to insane highs versus when he took over. From 15 dollars a share to $150 now since Tim took over. So while Tim isn't 100% responsible for everything Apple has done since 2011, a payout of 75 million for him just staying there is now worth 750 million all thanks to great leadership. I'm jealous of the payout but investors aren't complaining.
That’s part of the reason they’re tanking. Not sure if it’s true yet, but I heard they let go of members from crucial teams while the CEO took that huge pay bump.
Wow. $750 million for destroying a once great company.....
Obviously it isn't - my explanation was in response to the statement ""He's worked hard to earn his success.""
which you left out of the quote. So you are creating an discussion or arguing about something I'm not claiming.
The problem is what one "deserves" is not determined by a standard formula. It's up to each individual company. It seems like some of you think there's some arbitrary holy standard by which compensation should be determined. That of course is simply not true.
From the Mozilla Org web page:
"As CEO of Mozilla Corporation, Mitchell is focused on accelerating the growth levers for the core Firefox browser product and platform, while investing in innovative solutions to mitigate the biggest challenges facing the internet."
Well, based on that performance metric their basis for remuneration is clear
It's not about what anyone deserves. A CEO that creates value for his shareholders gets paid a portion of that value. And under Tim's leadership, the market cap of Apple has increased from $350B to $2.5T. Yes, that's trillions with a T, i.e. an increased value of $2,150,000,000,000! So when Tim gets a $750M compensation, that's only 0.035% of the value he has created. The reason a $750M bonus seems crazy to most people is that they can not fathom how much 2.5 trillion is. It's a lot. Even something 'small' as 1%, which would also be a reasonable bonus, would be $21 billion instead of the $750M he received. So I think $750M is very reasonable for what he has done.
What are you talking about? Your first paragraph was one point, which I quoted in full and responded to. Your second paragraph was another point, which I also quoted in full and responded to. I didn't leave anything out. Proof:
Slippery slope arguments etc - but maybe paying a single person 10000x more than the average staff seems excessive in terms of their contribution. Their must be dozens of people at Apple alone that could do a similar job as Tim - but since he's still steering the ship there is no need to change the CEO.
Fully agree there is a need for a pay differential. I have no inherent problems with capitalism. But - just as _some_ kind of minimum wage seems beneficial for a society - there seems to be a moral case for a maximum income as well.
No, the only thing that's BS is people not admitting they're envious. Of course you can earn that amount of money. "Earn" simply means you are receiving compensation in return for your work. It's simply a fact that he earned it, and didn't do so while idle, but is doing everything expected of him by the company.