>Pop artists make similar money scantily clad and squeezing autotune
Which pop artist is making anywhere near 220M in take home over 3 years? 70M/year is Taylor Swift numbers, and shes the highest earning female artist ever.
Which pop artist is making anywhere near 220M in take home over 3 years? 70M/year is Taylor Swift numbers, and shes the highest earning female artist ever.
I wasn't the one that made the implication that Taylor Swift's lifetime revenue was "peanuts"
> What pop artist makes that much?
>> Swift
>>> But she's the top of pop artists, that's not a fair comparison (implied: because google should be paying a more "normal" amount)
In which case "but Google is the top of tech" would be a fair counterpoint. But if the argument is that even the top of pop artists doesn't come close, then... I'm not sure what argument we're having, actually, but yes, it's a different point.
The implication is that 220M is peanuts because pop artists who just sell sex and use autotune make that kind money. Describing Taylor swift as someone who "squeeze autotune" is ridiculous; Taylor Swift has arguable done more than Sundar.
Are pop stars who "dress sexy and abuse autotune" making sundar money? Does Taylor Swift fit that profile? How did we go from "scantily clad and squeezing autotune" to "actually I meant elite popstars"? You have a guy making 3-4x more than his peers (at Microsoft and Apple, who CEO, despite performing better than Sundar took a pay cut!), being compared to the highest grossing entertainer of all time.
Satya and Tim weren’t being courted by anyone when they took their jobs.