Hacker News Reader

Comment by liamcardenas | Hacker News Reader

Almost everyone I know who has run a business (myself included) has made similar sacrifices. This is not that rare. This guy seems to serially try to generate PR by making himself out to be a selfless CEO. In doing so, he is implying that most other CEOs/business owners are bad people.

View on HN

I wouldn’t be so cynical.

It’s important there are vocal leaders showing the sacrifices they are making — otherwise it’s easy for others to pretend it isn’t possible to make the same sacrifice.

I think it’s counter-productive. He is making this seem like a huge sacrifice when, in fact, it’s par for the course. I wish if he wanted to talk about it, he would make it less about himself and more about “what it takes to run a business”. In many cases, people pay themselves nothing, take on debt (without having ever made millions of dollars per year), and don’t guilt-trip/lord it over their employees.

(Ok I’ve said my piece, I won’t continue to be a hater :P)

> in fact, it’s par for the course.

I would be very surprised if any significant fraction of CEOs and business owners had cut their personal compensation to this degree. Sure there are a few here and than, but probably, what, less than 5%?

This guy is clearly trying to garner some promotion out of his sacrifice, but he did still make the sacrifice and I think it benefits our society to laud people who do this.

You are definitely right for CEOs of large companies. But for small (aka most) businesses, including startups, you might be surprised. It’s also important to note that some business owners don’t have the luxury of being able to cut their own salaries (because they are already living at subsistence levels) and sometimes don’t even take any salary to begin with. By paying himself nothing, he shows he already has resources accumulated (which is not a bad thing!). This is a luxury some business owners have and others do not.

I don't think the second sentence follows. Good people existing does not imply that everyone else is bad.

What's more, signaling corporate responsibility + personal ethics is a part of his company in the same way that Elon Musk's flamboyancy is a part of Tesla.

I much prefer the former.

> Good people existing does not imply that everyone else is bad.

It implies that to the immoral who pretend they’re moral. It reminds them of their own hollowness, which provokes a lashing out.

Gravity, which he co-founded in 2004 with his brother Lucas Price.

making a dramatic announcement to his 120-member staff on April 13, inviting NBC News and The New York Times to cover it

The reaction was tsunamic, with 500 million interactions on social media and NBC's video becoming the most shared in network history.

https://www.inc.com/magazine/201511/paul-keegan/does-more-pa...

I'm confused as to how he managed to parlay a tsunamic reaction of 500M social media interactions into a 16yo company whose finances are in need of slashing the CEO's salary to zero.

> ...company whose finances are in need of slashing the CEO's salary to zero.

You're only looking at one side of the equation. The CEO wanted to ensure that his employees were all making a living wage. He's so committed to that that he's taking the same wage. To spin that as a foundering business is rather disingenuous.

I wish more executives would take more modest wages. My employer would have a lot more runway if our execs were making the same as the rest of us. Hard to buy into "belt-tightening exercises" where we sack a dozen qualified and necessary employees whose salaries don't add up to a single executive salary...

> My employer would have a lot more runway if our execs were making the same as the rest of us.

He was making the same as the rest of his staff so where is his runway? First serious crisis in 5 years since that article and he's scrounging for $70K.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com