EPT2nd this make me jelly that he makes this much and I make only 2,5euro per hour for selling his games in the shop
Bobby Kotick Gets a lot of stock bonus - Page 6
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
NIIINO
Slovakia1320 Posts
2nd this make me jelly that he makes this much and I make only 2,5euro per hour for selling his games in the shop | ||
|
Cloak
United States816 Posts
On April 28 2013 14:42 Mothra wrote: What does he even do? Like if his job were to suddenly not exist, does the end product not get made and sold? He takes things that are already making money, pressures them to make more money, and he gets a cut. Management in a nutshell. As Gabe Newell put it, management is not the ultimate career goal, nor should the compensation reflect that. It's just another subset of the corporation. But since they're the "deciders," they get to decide for themselves how much they're worth. And surprise, surprise, they're worth several orders of magnitude more than everybody else. | ||
|
yandere991
Australia394 Posts
On April 28 2013 17:48 Doublemint wrote: The Kotaku article is lying then? If so please elaborate. //edit: ah k so you are getting at the fact that it's mainly in stock awards. Still, I don't see how that should not be able to still spark a discussion. Whilst being a stock award does give it an amount of volatility to it what I meant was that it was vested over 5 years. So basically he is getting a fifth of it (or depending on how they want to tranche it) as income every year. What Kotaku is doing is taking his 5 year income as a sum and dividing it by his current annual salary. If his annual salary got a 800% increase that would be insane and the shareholders would go apeshit. Generally big companies have a performance test every year for each tranche which might lapse if the company does shit (for LTI plans only). Wonder if he can perform satisfactorily for 5 years. | ||
|
RaiZ
2813 Posts
On April 28 2013 14:32 Tatari wrote: Gamer logic: We hate Kotick? Better bend over and let him take our wallets and life savings to make him look good. I don't get some people sometimes... Let's all stop sc2 then ? | ||
|
vidium
Romania222 Posts
| ||
|
dartoo
India2889 Posts
A lot of people buy CoD etc etc, they have fun with the games, bobby makes money. | ||
|
SoniC_eu
Denmark1008 Posts
| ||
|
Surili
United Kingdom1141 Posts
| ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6325 Posts
On April 28 2013 18:04 Cloak wrote: He takes things that are already making money, pressures them to make more money, and he gets a cut. Management in a nutshell. As Gabe Newell put it, management is not the ultimate career goal, nor should the compensation reflect that. It's just another subset of the corporation. But since they're the "deciders," they get to decide for themselves how much they're worth. And surprise, surprise, they're worth several orders of magnitude more than everybody else. The CEO doesn't decide his own salary at least not in Europe. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7032 Posts
| ||
|
McBengt
Sweden1684 Posts
On April 28 2013 18:10 dartoo wrote: Well big ceo's make money......why are people so mad about this, I dont understand. A lot of people buy CoD etc etc, they have fun with the games, bobby makes money. Because of who it is. Bobby Kotick is the biggest asshole to ever plague the gaming industry. He epitomizes everything that is bad about free market capitalism, an opportunistic little toad without even a hint of passion or even interest in gaming. | ||
|
Doublemint
Austria8760 Posts
On April 28 2013 18:08 yandere991 wrote: Whilst being a stock award does give it an amount of volatility to it what I meant was that it was vested over 5 years. So basically he is getting a fifth of it (or depending on how they want to tranche it) as income every year. Basically what Kotaku is doing is taking his 5 year income as a sum and dividing it by his current annual salary. If his annual salary got a 800% increase that would be insane and the shareholders would go apeshit. Generally big companies have a performance test every year for each tranche which might lapse if the company does shit (for LTI plans only). Wonder if he can perform satisfactorily for 5 years. Yeah saw that as well after reading it for the second time. Still I am with this GMI Lady in that his performance/compensation ratio is rather off the charts and intransparent - apart from the fact that the company as a whole having a blast - while him being in charge that is. In addition it sets (another?) bad precedent of fat cats doing well while ordinary folks are hurting. Having his stock award doing well mainly depends on whether they will continue their CoD release spree every year and Blizzard going successfully Titan instead of WoW. I think chances are high he will be a happy Bobby. | ||
|
Lorizean
Germany1330 Posts
Activision Blizzard made $4.856bn in revenues in 2012 - which makes his salary 0.2% of that revenue. That is still a lot, but nowhere near a significant amount of Activions revenues. The fact that his Stocks are worth a lot more because Activion is worth a lot more shouldn't raise concern. His job is Management, so he should be paid according to monetary performance goals, not video game quality - and Activision is performing very well. If you don't like it, buy less CoDs. | ||
|
jalstar
United States8198 Posts
On April 28 2013 18:15 RvB wrote: The CEO doesn't decide his own salary at least not in Europe. IIRC CEO salary in America is 100's of times higher than in Europe. | ||
|
Teddyman
Finland362 Posts
| ||
|
Roxor9999
Netherlands771 Posts
On April 28 2013 18:25 Teddyman wrote: If the company gives out new shares the value doesn't come from sales or savings, it comes from other shareholders. This deal would practically be each shareholder agreeing to give 0,06% of their share to Kotick every year for 5 years. There is no person in the world that would give up their shares to some CEO. Most likely he is getting shares that were owned by activision. | ||
|
Teddyman
Finland362 Posts
On April 28 2013 18:39 Roxor9999 wrote: There is no person in the world that would give up their shares to some CEO. Most likely he is getting shares that were owned by activision. Nobody is giving their shares, the company would give him new shares. All other shares would lose 0,3% of their value over 5 years from dilution. | ||
|
stroggozz
New Zealand19 Posts
The way i see it he is getting paid a lot of money to destroy the company over a long term period, much like how the media ignores global warming so companies can make money in the short term(and destroy the world in the long term). This is one of the functions of todays society. Some people call it capitalism but thats too broad a term for me to use. The people that actually make the games should choose what the company does, or at least vote for their company leader. They know best. I really think the 'dont buy their games then' argument is very weak as well. | ||
|
Rarak
Australia631 Posts
On April 28 2013 15:42 xM(Z wrote: or, why wouldn't the same logic apply to media artists. after they get hired by a records/movie company, fuck them. 9 to 5 work hours and minimum wage. :p If they choose to do that sure, but artists that have any marketable talent they will get what they are worth due to the revenue and profit they can bring in. If you work for others you lose the right to IP. Think you can do it alone? Great do so. | ||
|
Patate
Canada441 Posts
On April 28 2013 14:48 Klipsys wrote: More deserving....? MORE DESERVING? You think that developers are more deserving that say, oh; teachers, nurses, police/EMS/Firefighters, social workers, single moms, peacecorps, habitat for humanity, big brothers/bigsisters etc... How in the...? They make computer games Based on the complexity of their job ( and the limited amount of individuals who could do such a job), yes they are more deserving than most people you mentioned.. especially big brothers/sisters and single moms. Speaking of which, why did you bother mentioning those? Wow.. | ||
| ||
