Apple Puts $383 Million Handcuffs On CEO Tim Cook
theodp writes "There are bonuses. And then there are bonuses. Apple's board, led by sadly frail-looking chairman Steve Jobs, signaled its long-term confidence in Tim Cook as the company's new leader, disclosing in a regulatory filing that it's awarding the new CEO one million restricted stock units that will vest over the next decade. Apple shares closed at $383.53 Friday. From the SEC filing: 'In connection with Mr. Cook's appointment as Chief Executive Officer, the Board awarded Mr. Cook 1,000,000 restricted stock units. Fifty percent of the restricted stock units are scheduled to vest on each of August 24, 2016 and August 24, 2021, subject to Mr. Cook's continued employment with Apple through each such date.'"
This way if the company continues to win and prosper, he will become wealthy. Otherwise no honey. This is the right way!
"Sum Ergo Cogito"
Motivation to look out for the long-term interest of the company instead of the next quarter.
Whoda thunk it?
Sadly, such motivation is missing from the portfolios of many CEOs.
These are not handcuffs. The only people who think these are handcuffs are day traders and speculators. Fuck them.
--
BMO
it's stock he can't sell for another 10 years. it's only worth 383 million if the stock price stays where it's at. Just look at GE after jack welch left. MS after bill gates. or almost any other company after an iconic CEO or founder steps down. the stock usually tanks.
usually it's the law of large numbers. you can't grow as fast when you're a huge company
Without someone willing to buy or sell a given security at any particular time, there is no liquidity and therefore no market. Speculators make the market by being willing to buy or sell.
and monetize this asset anytime?
That has to be one of the worst pro Photoshop jobs I have ever seen. Since when does Steve Jobs wear dresses? Like one of the ACs pointed out, a Redditer posted an analysis of the picture. Also, since when does /. link to TMZ as a reliable source?
This way if the company continues to win and prosper, he will become wealthy. Otherwise no honey. This is the right way!
He can tank Apple stock by 90% and walk away with 38m$ bonus for it. The right way?
Or he can double Apple stock and walk away with a $767m bonus.
Also keep in mind that he can be fired if he performs poorly, so if he tanks Apple stock in the next 5 years he gets $0.
Well, the thing is that the "cool factor" is something no other company does.
Look at the Macbook Air: The thing has been without proper competition for quite some time, and just recently the Ultrabook concept has been spawned just so that some companies will attempt to compete.
If Appe never had made the iPhone, the touch interface would never have gotten popular either.
If Apple is "a disgusting company with no creativity", then please tell me what IBM, Lenevo, Acer and all the other copycats is then?
I might be naive on this, but isn't this how bonuses already work? I thought that bonuses were tied to performance or meeting other goals...
Not necessarily. Sometime bonuses are given out for no immediately obvious reason. Sometimes they are given out because the company board's compensation committee are a bunch of buddies who give the CEO a bonus even when the company loses money. Even if there are performance goals attached, all too often they are too easy reach. Goal oriented bonuses are difficult. Make them too easy and you don't accomplish anything. Make them too hard and they serve no incentive purpose - no point in reaching for a goal you can't actually achieve. In fact incentives in general are difficult to align with the goals of the company. For example, many salesmen are on commission based on revenue. The problem is that this motivates them to sell as much as possible, regardless of profitability. Companies have been ruined by misaligned incentives and management pay is no exception. There is an old saying that if you tell me someone's incentives I'll tell you their behavior.
I'd like to see an example of someone getting a bonus when they've been doing a shitty job (excluding the easy google result of the banks after the bailout).
How about Carly Fiorina who was given $180 million for what can generously be termed uninspired performance and a declining stock price. How about AIG awarding $165 billion in bonuses AFTER receiving bailout money. It's not remotely difficult to find examples of executives being handsomely rewarded for mediocre or even terrible performance.
Yep.
TMZ can show all the drunken celebs-vomiting-on-their-feet pictures they want. It's self-induced stupidity. Showing an obviously frail, very private man demonstrates a complete lack of basic human decency and compassion.
If Jobs wanted to be seen like that, he'd go on The View or whatever. TMZ has shown themselves to be nothing but parasitical shitbags.
Trolling is a art,