Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

[deleted] t1_j9j6k5y wrote

[deleted]

173

pamdathebear t1_j9jdwho wrote

Zoom is worth 22b. Yuan's net worth is 4b. You're quoting zoom's peak price. But i agree, salary is meaningless.

199

[deleted] t1_j9jea6f wrote

[deleted]

56

jballs t1_j9lcynd wrote

Seriously what's the difference between a $24B vs a $4B net worth? You could never spend either amount in a lifetime, and your heirs are going to be wealthy for several generations.

1

pamdathebear t1_j9m7uaw wrote

You can't even buy a struggling NFL franchise with $4b

5

jballs t1_j9m8koz wrote

I like to imagine that at the billionaires annual brunch, the double digit billionaires gather in a group, side-eying everyone else just muttering stuff like, "you hear that Zoom guy only has a measly $4 billion? that broke ass bitch."

3

tommylala t1_j9kqd8w wrote

Instead of laying off 10 people in the company who probably need the salary to support their family. I think it is a nice gesture. Can the ceo do more, probably yes but still a nice gesture overall.

31

txa1265 t1_j9ksgb5 wrote

300k differential is likely to be 2 people AT MOST. It is one of those performative PR moves that is meaningless.

−3

tommylala t1_j9kswxu wrote

That is still 2 family... but wow, 300k is the norm? I need to find a new job.

12

txa1265 t1_j9ktl2q wrote

No - $300k would assume salary, then healthcare, other benefits, company items and administrative costs and overhead ... x2.

Salary is generally half or less of overall employee acquisition costs

7

Bartiparty t1_j9j6wnf wrote

As i know my billionaires, at the end he wil probably have more money with this alary cut because some tax-loophole or somthing.

19

Amy_Schumer_Fan t1_j9khd37 wrote

Salaries are easy to tax. But you don’t pay tax when your stock value increases until you sell some of it. So yeah, it’s not even a loophole.

10

charliehustles t1_j9ktkbf wrote

Positive sentiment that may encourage investors because he’s a good guy for doing this.

2

ChocolateBunny t1_j9l9qxr wrote

But it's the kind of thing people have been asking of their leadership in other tech companies to do? to make some sort of sacrifice to indicate that they are sharing in the hurt that other employees are going through even if it's obviously not in the same magnitude?

I mean would you rather they give up nothing like the other tech CEOs?

3

[deleted] t1_j9llxyt wrote

[deleted]

0

ChocolateBunny t1_j9lwtyf wrote

$1 is a start, especially when it's enough to keep a small handful of people employed when they otherwise wouldn't be. All the other tech CEOs are giving away $0 and let people on the bottom rung of the ladder take all of the fallout.

0

monkeywaffles t1_j9ki0aw wrote

I'm just trying to figure out why take the $6000 at all? Why not $1 like we see other CEOs take?

I'd think healthcare plan offset, but even my company 'values' that at far higher, and still would likely be included in 'other'.

2

maxluck89 t1_j9kiohf wrote

Probably some legal reason, like he can't do certain duties if he's not compensated for them? Idk

8

monkeywaffles t1_j9krmjv wrote

Yea, its just a strange amount. I've heard of CEOs being paid $1, but $6034 is weirdly specific

1

setphasorstolove t1_j9l7rdo wrote

Untrue. Say you own 24billion dollars worth of pokemon cards. Federal regulations will only allow you to sell a small portion of that at a time, and it takes several months to liquidate.

Grocery stores don't take pokemon cards as cash so the cash salary is still meaningful

1

[deleted] t1_j9lm6st wrote

[removed]

1

setphasorstolove t1_j9mcl4u wrote

You try liquidating 100M in a day or two and report back. I'm eager to hear your results.

Hell, I'll be generous and give you a week.

1

[deleted] t1_j9mhaed wrote

[deleted]

1

setphasorstolove t1_j9nd7rk wrote

I'll take "people who have never spent a day near corporate finances enact judgement like they're a 20 year wall street veteran" for 200, alex

−1

[deleted] t1_j9o2r8b wrote

[deleted]

1

GetStable t1_j9ofkcm wrote

You don't appear to have been hired based on your communication skills. There's no need to be a condescending dipshit, and you're the only one acting this way.

0

CaseyTS t1_j9kvoal wrote

So there's no excuse for the ultra-rich CEOs to all do this sort of thing. They still get power from controlling companies, which is compensation enough for a billionaire. More money incrementally moved to the general payroll and out of billionaires pockets is pretty much always a good things.

0

goodluckonyourexams t1_j9l7iq1 wrote

Yeah, people who are billionaires equally won't care about a million. Doesn't mean all CEOs will work "for free". You gonna work 80 hours for control?

2