175 karma · joined September 19, 2012
It's either intentionally misleading or lack of diligence in presenting the numbers.
Podcast website
I don't find myself very sympathetic. Feels like there is plenty of evidence that the business owners here aren't the most diligent or detailed oriented.
$45k+$65k+$35k+$60k+$20k+$11k adds up to $236k
Best case this is the result of their own naivety/incompetence, worse case this is just a distasteful marketing ploy.
>>Mid July, after 6 weeks of roasting 21 hours a day on the roaster in 3 shifts, working 12-16 hour days, regularly working until 11 pm to finish bagging and boxing.
Despite this work schedule, had no problem releasing their weekly hour-long podcasts every week in June/July.
Quite frankly, this is as sensible of a comp package for a CEO as one could propose. Compensated in primarily in equity with a long horizon for vesting. If a company wanted its executive to be aligned with the interests of its shareholders, is there really a better structure?
Aligning the incentives of the CEO to the incentives of shareholders by awarding the equivalent of an 0.012% ownership stake seems reasonable to me.
Marin County is one of the most segregated counties in the Bay Area, and by design from legacy housing policies. It's hard to ignore the fact that "preserving the essence" is the same thing as "continue to be a heavily segregated" locale.
"An inordinate number of the most segregated cities in the Bay Area are smaller cities that are more than 85 percent white in Marin County (Ross, Belvedere, Sausalito, San Anselmo, Fairfax, and Mill Valley are each in the top 10). Two of the top 10 are similarly small-sized, heavily white cities in San Mateo County (Portola Valley and Woodside)."
https://belonging.berkeley.edu/racial-segregation-san-franci...
The opening paragraph of this article:
"From the onset, we have chosen to use one of Wall Street's measures of a better CEO – namely, market cap. In other words, by this measure, CEOs that create the most value are the best CEOs. Sure, there are other measures perhaps more virtuous; but market capital is well-known, generally reliable, and historically trended. So, let’s just roll with it as our measure of “better CEOs” as we have lots to discuss.
An objective review of the data leads to the conclusion: top companies are increasingly founded and managed by software engineers."
The first 100 words in this paragraph and the "objective conclusion" drawn is all you need to read to know the remaining 7000+ words are completely logically flawed. It's like making the assertion "the best restaurants in the world serve the most meals, so an objective review of the data leads to the conclusion that fast food restaurants have the best chefs."
Who's the say this wasn't the intended effect - the benefit to the valuation of the 90% of shares still being held is greater than the opportunity cost of the 10% shares sold in the initial IPO?
https://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2014/09/25/flight-delaye...
You're naively assuming the equity owners meekly turnover the operations to the debtholders in bankruptcy when business performance suffers but cash flow is positive.
Equity holders are going to inflict a ton of pain on the employees and customers of the company first. They are going to layoff employees to the bare bones, sell otherwise performant assets, play games with vendors/receivables, and otherwise do anything else they can do to squeeze more runway before giving things up in bankruptcy.
I'm pretty sure the definition of "paycheck-to-paycheck" doesn't mean having "difficulty" (only $4500 of cushion!) affording discretionary and luxury expenses like "weekly date nights, 3 weeks of vacation, luxury 3 row SUV, Coach & Banana Republic clothes, and $7 grand for entertainment).
So if a recruiter asks you to name the first number, you should ask them for the pay range and they are legally obligated to disclose the range.
Source: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtm...
Asian cuisine makes much greater use of smaller fish that are oftentimes cooked whole, so the range of options tends to be larger as well.
% of students from top 1% by income ($630K) UPenn - 18.7% Stanford - 17.5% Harvard - 15.1% Columbia - 13.4% MIT - 5.7%
% of students from the bottom 60% by income ($65K) UPenn - 16.5% Stanford - 18.6% Harvard - 20.4% Columbia - 21.1% MIT - 23.4%
Source: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/01/18/upshot/some-c...
Anyone can live there, with some sort of local government oversight. You want to live somewhere nicer? Make money and pay more. You fall on hard times or want to cut costs while working on the next big idea? You don't have to worry about not having food on the table or roof over your head.
- Employers have to pay payroll taxes on the cash (~10-12% in taxes) - Employees have to pay income taxes on the cash (~25%+ in taxes)
So an employer would effectively need to give $1.50 in cash to equal the same spending power as $1.00 in HSA contributions.
The most basic insurance plan available caps out of pocket expenses at $6350, which while is still significant but likely won't cause medical bankruptcy. Even the most "premium" plan only caps out of pocket expenses at ~$3000, yet would cost $3000-5000 more in premiums.
A premium plan would provide a nice sense of security, but might be the best option to minimize expenses for an employee.