Hacker News Reader

>If you’re on the board of an organization like that, settling for a second-best CEO to save a 7-figure sum just doesn’t make sense.

You're falsely associating higher pay with performance, when oftentimes they can be inversely correlated.

https://www.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/CEOperformanc...

https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/when-ceos-are-paid-bad...

https://www.epi.org/blog/ceo-pay-still-not-related-to-perfor...

View on HN

I didn’t say anything about performance. What I said is that it’s untenable for a board to penny-pinch a few million dollars for someone managing orders of magnitude more in resources.

A board gains nothing from pointing to a 2005 Stanford GSB blog post if a CEO they hired runs the company into the ground.

Again, all this to say we should just tax CEOs more and let companies pay what they want.

>second-best

Your performance comment is right there. What else is "second-best" other than a comment on performance?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com