Reddit Files to Go Public, Reveals That It Paid CEO $193M Last Year | Hacker News Reader

Reddit Files to Go Public, Reveals That It Paid CEO $193M Last Year

thedailybeast.com

35 pointsscrubs31 comments

Paying 1/4 of your revenue to the CEO is certainly a choice...

Interestingly enough, Sam Altman has ~$60M invested in Reddit and ~10% voting control.

Its including options and rsu?

Yes, not all cash compensation, but that's still an insanely high amount considering the total revenue being what it is.

Well, Tesla "decided" to pay 55bln to Musk. The court had to step in to prevent that.

Maybe the system we have in place that decides how much CEOs get is due for update?

No, that's socialist. We should give them more money because they few actually pulled themselves up by their own bootstraps. They're simply better than we are in every way.

The system didn't make a decision on how much the CEO gets paid. It made the decision that the board of a public company can't give the shareholders money to their friends.

> the board of a public company can't give the shareholders money to their friends

Crazy!

Delaware should also reorganize Tesla so that shareholders have a vote as to how Musk is paid—just like every other public company.

Yeah... going public is basically just a way for him to cash out (again)

That’s a pretty shocking figure even by tech company standards. I wonder why so much? And how they can justify that?

The community wrote fuck Spez on their pixel collage and its hurt his feelings

Maybe it's age - maybe it's because I don't use Reddit "properly" - but I feel like it has got worse over time and as the user-base has grown. I prefer to remain a lurker; no account, just viewing r/popular or occasionally specific sub-Reddits depending on what I'm looking for.

In ~2007 I'd go to Digg for low-brow content; pics of cats, posts for shock-value, humor, etc. and Reddit for news or discussion, etc. It felt almost like Slashdot but maybe less tech centric - maybe nostalgia is slanting my memory but that's how I remember it. It feels like Reddit has morphed into the former (with Ads now) - at least judging by popularity (or whatever the algorithm is feeding me). I might be wrong, it's above my paygrade and skills, but it feels like any changes that would need to happen to make Reddit a successful growth stock are at odds with what I liked about it in the first place.

cool, still don't use it since they fucked all the third party apps.

?? narwhal is great. winston is a new one that is getting lots of traction. not sure what you're talking about.

It doesn't make the API deal with Google for $60m sound so good if it won't even pay a third of the CEO's salary...

His annual salary is around $280k a year from the S-1. This is stock compensation.

Anyone who invests in Reddit deserves to lose their money

But in actual world will probably make a killing

I'm not in love with Reddit, but I would love to hear why you hate it.

I'm in the process of trying to delete my reddit account, but they do not honour GDPR deletion requests. Not sure why they're operating in the EU?

If they have no employees and no servers in the EU, there is nothing they are required to do. You could try to get a judgement in a US court based on a EU law, but that won't go well.

Are you sure? I used to see adverts for jobs in their Amsterdam office. Going on their careers page, they currently are looking for SREs in Amsterdam, Dublin, and Berlin.

IANAL, but my understanding is the GDPR applies if they have users located in the EU, regardless of where the servers and company is located.

If Reddit wants to serve ads to users in the EU and store their info (email, ip, post content, etc), then the GDPR absolutely applies.

Enforcement is another question, but several US companies have been fined due to GDPR violations.

[dupe]/Related:

Reddit S1

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39472782

And yet they're too broke and destitute to continue API access...

That was more of a decision to stop all the 3rd party clients to capture more ad revenue.

It can be justifiable, but it doesn't mean that is right or ethical.

Business isn't ethical unless its a bcorp or a benefit corporation. They have one guiding principle, to make money for their shareholders.

This is the type of bullshit that psychopaths use to justify their actions.

No company is entitled to their business model, especially if they can only "capture value" by destroying the competition and/or stopping others from creating value on their own.

Having a "guiding principle" does not mean that other principles should be ignored. Go ahead and focus on making money, but do not use that as an excuse to become a rent-seeking parasite on the rest of society.

This is literally US law and has been around forever. Here's an example from 1919. Ford tried to take their excess profits to give employees raises and reduce the price of their cars.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Co.

If you bothered to read the footnotes of the wikipedia page, you'll see:

    Dodge is often misread or mistaught as setting a legal rule of shareholder wealth 
    maximization. This was not and is not the law. Shareholder wealth maximization is
    a standard of conduct for officers and directors, not a legal mandate. The business
    judgment rule [which was also upheld in this decision] protects many decisions that
    deviate from this standard. This is one reading of Dodge. If this is all the case
    is about, however, it isn't that interesting.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com