Re:Remote work can also be a source of socioeconomic inequality
by nickff on Tuesday May 12, 2020 @08:09PM
(#23161763)
The problem is loss-aversion. Are you willing to risk losing some small percentage of revenue equivalent to many billions of dollars on the bet that Cook's replacement is as good or better? Tim Cook's salary is almost irrelevant; the important question is whether he is the absolute best person for the job.
As an example: how much value did Steve Jobs add during his second tenure at Apple? Did his compensation package make a significant dent in that?
The market for CEOs is a winner-takes-most deal. Similar to what happens with music artists, the top few albums of the year sell more volume than all the rest.
Re:Remote work can also be a source of socioeconomic inequality
by rmrfstar on Tuesday May 12, 2020 @08:30PM
(#23161957)
> The problem is loss-aversion.
Great point.
Increased risk aversion explains both the explosive growth of CEO compensation since 1960 and America's unwillingness to do bold and risky but nevertheless profitable things.
Gone are the days of [1].
Re:Remote work can also be a source of socioeconomic inequality
by solveit on Tuesday May 12, 2020 @08:36PM
(#23162004)
> I assure you that Apple has several Tim Cook quality employees earning orders of magnitude less.
Sure, but do you know exactly who they are? Or are we going to take a multibillion dollar bet on someone who's only probably as good as Tim Cook?
People thought Apple was going to crater after Jobs, and it was fine. It wasn't fine because it has a hyper-capable supreme leader, it was fine because it employs an army of extremely talented hard working people with a reasonably competent leader.
I assure you that Apple has several Tim Cook quality employees earning orders of magnitude less.
It's just so weird to me that we have one group of people priced at replacement cost, and another priced at who knows what? I think you would say they are priced as a multiple on surplus, but I would disagree.