Paying $100,000,000 up-front to someone who hasn't yet delivered the same success seems to be putting the cart before the horse.
Paying $100,000,000 up-front to someone who hasn't yet delivered the same success seems to be putting the cart before the horse.
I'm guessing it was tied to shipping that autonomous car with no steering wheel that they made awhile back.
however - and this is page's big point - that payout has little to do with his overall contributions to the project, and rather that he had early responsibilties and stuck around.
http://fortune.com/2016/07/21/more-on-what-gm-paid-to-buy-cr...
It's the same bogus excuse for outrageous CEO pay: "We just can't seem to find anyone good without offering 1000X more than normal people make."
A $100MM bonus seems like a career-ending bonus to me. How do you keep going to work after that?
Sure, and the numbers get far larger than $100 million.
Larry Page and Sergey Brin for example, turned down very large acquisition offers, including for at least a billion dollars from Yahoo, at a time when they didn't even have a serious business model.
Mark Zuckerberg turned down several large offers for Facebook when it didn't have a serious functional business. He could have walked away nearly a billionaire before Facebook had even printed a dollar of profit.
Bill Gates turned away numerous, large acquisition offers in the first ~10 years of Microsoft's existence. IBM was interested in buying them for years.
The Snapchat owners turned down ~$3 billion from Google to go public instead as an exit. Even after the beating their stock has taken in the last few months, the market cap of Snap is $15 billion today.
from Facebook
Plenty of CEOs have career ending incomes / bonuses already.
Turning down $100mm when you have nothing of value yet is very different imo
Can anyone confirm?