How Much Do Tech Bosses Really Earn? (dice.com)

Nerval's Lobster writes: Everybody knows that tech's top figures, such as Google CEO Larry Page or Facebook co-founder Mark Zuckerberg, are worth billions of dollars thanks to stock options. But how much do everyday tech executives -- the CIOs, Chief Data Officers, and so on -- earn? Generally between $150,000 and $175,000 per year, not [including] possible perks such as stock options, according to a new analysis. That's based on national data, although anyone who works in tech knows that in high-demand areas such as Silicon Valley, salaries can skyrocket far higher for those with highly specialized skill sets and the right mix of experience. It's a good time to be a Pointy-Haired Boss, but then again, when isn't it?

Comments

when you're the boss of BP?

[ihtoit]

amirite?

This joker again? Really?

[Anonymous Coward]

A fucking dice link?

Re:This joker again? Really?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sadly, yes

And the data is BS as well. These numbers are way too low in terms of the "top out". In a large corporation the CIO will be earning a multi-million package and there will often be 10's or 100''s of people in the USD1M+ group. The comment about Equity is also irrelevant as only total compensation is the only number that matters - who cares how much is base and how much is variable (bonus)?

Top flight developers get paid way more than these median number this in many locales...particularly silicon valley, New York, global financial hubs.

Where did they get this data?

Re:This joker again? Really?

[lgw]

And the data is BS as well. These numbers are way too low in terms of the "top out". In a large corporation the CIO will be earning a multi-million package and there will often be 10's or 100''s of people in the USD1M+ group. The comment about Equity is also irrelevant as only total compensation is the only number that matters - who cares how much is base and how much is variable (bonus)?

You might be surprised. Yes, I'm sure that far more than $200k is the norm, but publicly traded companies disclose pay - including exercised equity - for senior officers. I did a broad survey of larger companies (but not top 50) a few year back, and what I found was that CEO and CFO typically made about $1M, as did COO (most companies don't have that separate from CEO). Other officers typically made a lot less, in the $300-$500k range. Of course they could be accumulating equity that they're not selling (or option not exercised).

Top executive pay is very mush like the pay of top Hollywood actors, professional athletes, university presidents, and college football coaches. They all have the same "competitive bidding for talent" (real or imagined talent) pushing up comp. It seems odd to me to obsess only on CEO pay when it's about the same as all these other guys.

Re:This joker again? Really?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's pretty much always imagined talent.

Re:This joker again? Really?

[Anonymous Coward]

I am have some evidence to back this up - I have a divisional CTO role in a large US corporation and I am three deep from group CIO (which puts me in a group of 100+ people).

Re:This joker again? Really?

[AmiMoJo]

Isn't it interesting that when pay is disclosed it tends to go up a lot. C level execs can point to what other companies pay when negotiating. Everyone lower down is strongly encouraged or even mandated to keep their pay secret.

Re:This joker again? Really?

[Anonymous Coward]

CEOs don't do anything other than get laid and snort coke all day. It's in the job description. Athletes do stuff, you can even watch them on tv doing stuff. I'd like to see Bill Gates or Elon Musk try to dunk a basketball.

seriously

[peragrin]

comparing a tech boss of a company with 10 people in it to oracle or google, or microsoft is just ridiculous

Small companies pay their bosses less oh wow, breaking news.

The company i work for has 20 people and the boss makes $200k a year. Does that mean i can compare his salary to a fortune 500 company? not even close. if my company goes under my boss loses his shirt. he is personally tied into the company. if a fortune 1000 company goes under the CEO gets paid millions.

Re:seriously

[dbIII]

comparing a tech boss of a company with 10 people in it to oracle or google, or microsoft is just ridiculous

Sadly that's what some people have done and got away with being paid a fortune to run a small business and then fly off to crap on something else after the funds inevitably run dry.

Before flying off to fuck up Australian telecommunications Sol Trujillo was in such a tiny startup being paid as if he was running Pepsi instead of a tiny government funded group selling stuff to the intelligence community.

It's what you don't see that counts

[markdavis]

>"But how much do everyday tech executives -- the CIOs, Chief Data Officers, and so on -- earn? Generally between $150,000 and $175,000 per year"

That really doesn't sound like a lot for those types of positions in big companies.... but those positions typically have LOTS AND LOTS of perks that often easily outstrip the salary. Several fully-paid insurances, paid vehicles, paid phones & other tech, large 401K and other funds, stock options (which can be worth a fortune), delayed balloons, education reimbursements, huge expense accounts, travel allotments, BONUSES, extra vacation, etc.

Re:It's what you don't see that counts

[Aighearach]

That really doesn't sound like a lot for those types of positions in big companies.... but those positions typically have LOTS AND LOTS of perks that often easily outstrip the salary.

Exactly. Where it says, "not [including] possible perks such as stock options" that translates the whole thing to: "One of the smaller lines on their paycheck is only $150k." That isn't news, even if you really care about the subject.

Re:It's what you don't see that counts

[Anonymous Coward]

paid phones and other tech...

Really? What pussies.
I prefer the old days - secretaries (for taking memos and discrete sex), a fully stocked bar in the office, two weeks in the Caribbean with said secretaries, car and chauffeur at a minimum, and yes, a real pension, not some lame ass 401K shit. And if you were a real man, going out and toppling some 3rd world communist government for lucrative natural resource contracts and laughs! These modern day wussbags have no idea how to "man up".

Re:It's what you don't see that counts

[crunchygranola]

You are leaving out the most prominent bit of "non-salary" compensation: bonuses.

Bonuses aren't salary, but a top level exec will always, always get them because if he does not qualify, he wouldn't be kept in the position anyway. What is a typical bonus for a top exec? 100% is usual. So, in fact even without factoring in options (which can easily outstrip all other forms of compensation), or severance packages, their real take-home pay is double what is quoted.

In publicly traded companies this stuff is in the annual SEC filings so you can look it up yourself, its all on-line these days. The last company I worked for HR gave me static about getting a salary increase commensurate with my experience, position and contribution claiming that what I wanted was 90% of what the CIO made. Can't have that! But I pointed out to him that the SEC filings showed that the CIO got a 100% bonus each year, so really what I was asking for was only 45%. We settled for 42.5%.

Re:It's what you don't see that counts

[markdavis]

>"You are leaving out the most prominent bit of "non-salary" compensation: bonuses."

Actually, not only did I not leave it out, I uppercased it.

Re:It's what you don't see that counts

[BlackPignouf]

A friend of mine worked as a trader assistant at Société Générale before the shit hit the fan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Soci%C3%A9t%C3%A9_G%C3%A9n%C3%A9rale_trading_loss).
Ten years ago, I was considering buying a small flat, and I asked him about the big nice flat he bought in Paris a few months before. I knew he had a much better salary than mine, but I just wanted to know which mortgage rate he got, and how long it would take him to pay the mortgage.
He was kinda evasive. It took him a few beers to admit that he didn't need a mortgage, and that he just used a bit more than 2 years worth of bonuses to pay the flat with cash. He was 25, had been working for 2 years and had already paid a flat that would usually be paid in 15-20 years by a couple with decent salaries.
Still, he complained that his both earned 10 times as much as he did.

Re:It's what you don't see that counts

[Anonymous Coward]

If you ever decide to come up and outside, buy new sunscreen. That stuff has a limited use life and the stuff you used last time expired long ago.

Re:It's what you don't see that counts

[phantomfive]

Can't have that! But I pointed out to him that the SEC filings showed that the CIO got a 100% bonus each year, so really what I was asking for was only 45%. We settled for 42.5%.

Nicely done.

Re:1st comment

[ihtoit]

nope. I beat you by a whole minute.

Contract/Consultants make more...

[Anonymous Coward]

Developers doing contract work make 150k + and routinely over 200k

I've turned down management positions before because I didn't want to take the pay cut...

Earn

[Anonymous Coward]

But how much do everyday tech executives -- the CIOs, Chief Data Officers, and so on -- earn?

They key word is in there. That's approximately how much they earn, on the basis that they show up to work and don't screw things up too horribly. The rest of the money/wealth they receive isn't earned, it's bestowed upon them as tribute for their privilege.

Dice?

[Anonymous Coward]

Really? A Dice Post. I do appreciate all the good effort made by whipslash, but is this an on going contract deal or did this really get accepted as a interesting story? Just wondering.

Katpcha: reform.

Pointless comparisons

[iotaborg]

These sort of comparisons are pointless when just looking at base salary. Equity awards and bonuses can easily exceed base for these types of positions. I mean, senior developers easily make $150k-$175k in total comp, even in inexpensive cities.

Re:Pointless comparisons

[crunchygranola]

Exactly. A top exec will be pulling in a 100% bonus typically. And then there are options, guaranteed severance packages, etc. Do you have an employment contract guaranteeing term of employment and compensation including severance? Those guys do. Base salary is a con job. Tell use total compensation of don't waste our time.

False assumption

[MerlynEmrys67]

In both the examples given (Page & Zuch) they did not get their wealth and billions from stock options, but from a direct ownership stake in the company. They Owned and retained a huge percentage of the companies that they founded and therefor get the value of the company that they retained. While they may get ongoing stock option packages, this is not the majority of their holdings.
Bad summary, bad article, etc. etc. etc.

Where are they looking? Those numbers are low

[AuMatar]

Experienced developers get that much plus equity anywhere in the bay area except a startup (where you'll get more equity and less salary). Managers will start at salaries like that and go higher. That's not counting specialty skills. THe last time I worked for a big corp in SV I was making more than that as a senior dev.

the real deal about compensation

[omgwtfroflbbqwasd]

In large companies ($1B+), you can expect that a Director's salary averages between $150-200K/yr. Officers will be between $200-300K/yr. But the real money is in the performance-based incentives. Directors generally get a 30% bonus and officers are 50% or more. Long-term incentives like restricted stock units (for public companies) are also straight up cash unless the stock is declining in value over the vesting period. All in all, total comp starts around $300K/yr and can hit $1M for companies whose stock is doing really well.

But permies get holidays

[ishmaelflood]

That's nice. I'm a salaried mechanical engineer for a large company on 137k (it just went up while I wasn't looking) plus a car plus a pension. I work 40.0 hours a week and get 5 weeks annual leave a year, and 18 sick days and 12 flex days. Much like you I have turned down management jobs, tres boring, too many hours doing budgets and meetings and dealing with people.

Re:But permies get holidays

[superwiz]

Mechanical engineers cannot make as much as programmers. The cost of replication of the work-product of a programmer is $0. The cost of replication of the work product of a mechanical engineer is the cost of materials (>$0). This difference creates an economic pressure to make programmers' salaries higher.

Re:But permies get holidays

[ishmaelflood]

If only we had data...

Re:But permies get holidays

[Anonymous Coward]

But the Mech. Engineer gets to build MOAB's... He sometimes gets to test them. Some jobs have intrinsic benefits well beyond such pedestrian elements such as mere "money".

Re:But permies get holidays

[superwiz]

You can only have data points. That is cross-section of data at different time points. You'll get other contributing factors which will make these less relevant. But the pressure of the cost of reproduction and its influence on economies of scale will always be there in production environments.

Re:But permies get holidays

[superwiz]

Engineer gets to build MOAB's.

I thought that was physicists?

Re:But permies get holidays

[aaarrrgggh]

I have mechanical engineers I pay $155k and $165k, electrical engineer at similar rates. It might not be the most a talented person can make... but it is pretty darn good in my book.

Re:But permies get holidays

[HornWumpus]

When a physicist wants to run an experiment, he starts by going to an engineer to build the apparatus.

Big old conventional bombs are far outside a physicist's area of competence.

Re:But permies get holidays

[aaarrrgggh]

Yes and no. As you allude, it is all about the value you provide. If I can pay you $200/hour and bill your time at $400-600/hour then I am pretty happy-- it generally covers direct and indirect overhead plus gross margins equal to salary. Likewise, if you can regularly do something in an hour that the client feels is worth $1,000 then paying you $XXX is well worth while.

Re:But permies get holidays

[Captain Hook]

Mechanical engineers cannot make as much as programmers. The cost of replication of the work-product of a programmer is $0. The cost of replication of the work product of a mechanical engineer is the cost of materials (>$0).

Surely that affect would have the opposite outcomes that you have stated.

What you've just stated is that once a programmer has produced a product that does what it needs to do, he is completely redundant because there is no significant cost to continually reusing that product. It's only a constant need for new features/bug fixes that keeps programmer gainfully employed

Mechanical and Electrical Engineers on the other hand, have a product which cost money to produce and will wear out over time. Therefore even if the product is functionally perfect, there will always be a need to refine the product to at least make future manufacturing costs cheaper.

Re:But permies get holidays

[khallow]

That's ridiculous. It depends on the value of the work output. Cost of replication is near irrelevant.

Re:But permies get holidays

[khallow]

And how much competition there is for the work in question.

Re:But permies get holidays

[K. S. Kyosuke]

Actually, chemists built MOAB.

Re:But permies get holidays

[nanoflower]

As with most things it depends. For some products, like games, there may be no ongoing work that requires keeping the programmers on staff (baring patches/DLC.) For other products like operating systems/databases there's an ongoing need for enhancement which requires programmers to do that ongoing work.

Re:But permies get holidays

[superwiz]

Are you proposing that Oppenheimer should get an emeritus chemistry doctorate posthumously?

Re:But permies get holidays

[superwiz]

The value of the work output cannot be established without the ability to sell the work product after producing it. If producing the product costs 0 (after its design), then whatever cost didn't have to be expanded on production can be expanded on design. The cost in production of physical things will always be non-zero. The cost of production of an extra copy of a program is $0. If the program makes it big (which is what you are gambling on when you pay someone to write it), you pay nothing to sell extra copies of it. If a gadget (a physical one) makes it big, you have to pay material costs to make extra gadgets. This difference in cost allows programmers to bid up their salaries higher.

Re:But permies get holidays

[K. S. Kyosuke]

Oppenheimer was posthumously working for the USAF in the 2000s?

Butter Ridges Law of Headlines = No

[Anonymous Coward]

Any headline that asks a question, the answer is no.

that's not a lot

[superwiz]

actually, that's very little. if any PM-level manager is making less than $150k, they should be looking for a new job. The only realistic way to measure a salary is in the multiples of minimal wage (because that's what really determines price levels of everything else in this service economy). If you are making only 15x what the people who are flipping burgers are making and you don't have all the top-level perks that come with being a public servant (pension, best medical insurance in the state, etc.), then you are getting taken for a ride. Your take-home pay may seem high, but you have to put a lot of it away to pay for your retirement (something that people who make half your salary don't have to do). And you will pay close to full-price for you children's college (vs someone making 1/3 of your salary who'll pay nothing for it). And god-forbid you get sick or your kid breaks a hand, you'll get laugh at why you have that medical insurance at all. It'll delay your care and all the money will be paid by you out of pocket to cover deductible. After you've deducted all of these, if you think that $150k will buy you a comfortable life, you are kidding yourself. You are not gonna be taking any luxury vacations anytime soon. If you are lucky, you'll be able to afford one life-long hobby to sink $100 a month into.

Re:that's not a lot

[phantomfive]

The only realistic way to measure a salary is in the multiples of minimal wage (because that's what really determines price levels of everything else in this service economy)

That's wrong, people get paid in exchange for the value the provide (or are perceived to provide). Programmers need to provide $X worth of value for the company, or they aren't worth keeping around. Same with managers.

Incidentally I keep seeing articles about "how little CEOs make" based on dubious statistics. It seems like someone is trying to counter the propaganda that we had earlier about how CEOs were making $300 million a year or other outrageous amounts (also based on dubious statistics).

Re:that's not a lot

[tehcyder]

If you are making only 15x what the people who are flipping burgers are making

If you are making 15x the minimum wage you are doing really well. The idea that if you're not earning millions then you're barely scratching a living would be funny if it wasn't so offensive.

And in the 1950s, even the top bosses only made something like 10 - 20x the average workers' salary. The idea that a CEO is worth hundreds of times the average salary is a relatively recent and ridiculous one.

Re:that's not a lot

[superwiz]

The idea that a CEO is worth hundreds of times the average salary is a relatively recent and ridiculous one.

It's as recent as the ability to take a company from nothing to a billion dollar company within a period of 5 years. If a company explodes in value like that, that value will be in someone's hands. It won't be workers who agreed to exchange their time for fixed wages.

If you're in the Bay Area/Mountain View/Silicon...

[Assmasher]

...Valley area and are a C-level executive on the tech side and make less than 250K? You're an idiot.

How Much Do Tech Bosses Really Earn?

[Anonymous Coward]

I dunno but Hillary make $300,000 an hour (when she works).

Zuckerberg got there

[Kartu]

By stealing idea from others. (at least, as far as I can trust "Social Network" movie)
He founded the company, mentioning stock options in this context is stupid.

Re:Zuckerberg got there

[Anonymous Coward]

> Zuckerberg got there by stealing idea from others. (at least, as far as I can trust "Social Network" movie)

"The Social Network" is hardly a documentary.

Money Money

[zotz]

Money Money

http://zotzbro.blogspot.com/20...

Who makes what?

Not Even Close

[dcw3]

The figures in the summary aren't even close to reality for anyone in a large company, or someone who's not living out in farm country. I see compensation data for over 400 folks in my organization, and have several in that pay range who aren't anywhere near the corner offices the article is referring to.

Re:If you're in the Bay Area/Mountain View/Silicon

[sabri]

...Valley area and are a C-level executive on the tech side and make less than 250K? You're an idiot.

https://open.buffer.com/transp...

Joel CEO 2010-08-01 New York, NY, USA $218,000

And I would argue that NY might be more expensive than SV.

This feels poorly written.

[Anonymous Coward]

So, the major tech leaders aren't "pointy haired" bosses; the reason their companies continue to succeed is proof of that.

They were largely engineers themselves, they understand the technology, they understand the market, they rarely stop working, and they got tremendously lucky. Except for the luck bit, those are pretty much the opposite of the Dilbert's Boss stereotype.