One Dollar Is Why We Love Apple
It was revealed yesterday that one dollar was the amount Steve Jobs was paid last year by Apple. One buck. Barely enough to get a soda these days, or even a pack of gum. This is the salary of a man who helped found Apple, then single-handedly rescued it from demise with the iMac and then created a new revenue stream with iTunes and the iPod.
A buck.
This is why we love Apple. Because inherent in this salary is an ethos of doing things differently and better. Take any old Fortune 500 executive and they would insist on a huge salary with a bevy of options thrown in. Not Steve. In the age of Enron�s and Worldcom�s this is a refreshing thing indeed.
Of course, Steve Jobs is not a poor man. His wealth is counted in the billions. But it is rare for someone to run a company and not get paid a huge salary. And he isn�t doing it for the power. He is doing it for the love of creating beautiful pieces of technology. The cult of the Mac can be traced directly to this spirit. Whether it is Steve Jobs obsessing over the details of the original Mac calculator, or over the interface of the iPod, the love is there. He wants to do the right thing and is passionate about it.
We see this passion in the products and as Apple users become imbued with it. It isn�t just a reality distortion field, it is a reality. This is why there is the Mac web. Ever heard of the Dell web? Or the Windows web? I haven�t. And it all goes back to that salary. Like Steve we care passionately about Apple.
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Slashdot
StumbleUpon
Comments
I love Steve Jobs as much as the next Apple devotee. Still, I have to say the $1 humble salary story is nonsense. His annual compensation from Apple has been in the tens to hundreds of millions since his return. It’s just not paid in “salary”. They gave him a rather substantial jet, in addition to many millions in bonuses and stock options. But if some people are impressed by the $1 salary, it must be a good idea!
“It was revealed yesterday that one dollar was the amount Steve Jobs was paid last year by Apple. One buck.”
No bonuses or share options this year?
You (JK, vortigern) don’t get it do you?
Sure, there are bonuses and share options, but guess what? These depend on Apple doing well, unlike a salary. So if Steve messes up, he doesn’t get as much back in his pocket.
The point is that other Fortune 500 CEOs don’t believe in their company quite as much - so they rely on the crutch of a salary AND they get the perks, stock options and golden handshakes.
Dude is one of the highest paid CEOs in Silicon Valley once you count the various perks (jet plus operating costs paid for) and how many stock options and other bonuses he gets.
True some of it depends on how Apple is doing, but not all of it by any means.
Based on salary alone, Michael Eisner is one the lowest paid executives of a Fortune 500 company (something like $750K/year). But I doubt anyone would attribute this kind of altruism and “passion” to Eisner.
It’s great that Jobs believes in his company and all, but he’s still a mega-billionaire CEO of a mega-billion dollar corporation.
I don’t know about not getting it, and I know little of SJs perks, but perhaps more than you
.
For instance, I knew I asked a question, where as you took it as something entirely different (I’m not sure quite what, sarcastic perhaps). Anyway that is besides the point, post posting my question I actually “googled” for the answer (you see I did not know, thats why I asked!). It would *appear*, again based on my (newfounded) knowledge, that this year SJ did only get his $1 from Apple! Of course last year he did get $75 million!!! in some sort of shares (same $1 salary), now they were classed as a particular type of share (exclusive, executive, exceeding, extortionate or some such thing, I can’t recall) that would appear to give income over 4 years. I don’t claim to know the technicalities of the whole deal but I did discuss it with my wife.
In short, we decided that if her employer offered her $75 million, no thats not even true. If her employer offered her a mere third of that over the next 4 years. Yep, just 25 million she would work for free for the next 2-3 years with a smile on her face! Note she would not even charge SJs $1, I hope you are listening Apple! SJ is a right greedy bast….!
(Steve if you are reading that greedy thing was just a joke, if you feel like sending, say, just 1% of those pesky apple shares my way, I’ll take ‘em of your hands.)
In all seriousness just look at the work of the Billy and Mel foundation, it could easily be pointed out as a more alturistic offering than working for *free*. In fact as much as I dislike MS I have no real objections to BG.
(BTW Bill (or Mel) if you are reading I must say, I was joking about wanting those Apple shares, but if you feel like sending me about 1 % of your MS shares I would be really grateful. Honest!)
Yes, I took your question as pure sarcasm
Sorry if that’s not what you meant.
My point was that all other CEOs -and that includes billg who I worked for - get an enormous base salary. They seem to get paid in one year what I might earn in a lifetime. On top of that, they get all these monster perks like jets, cars, shares, options. i would happily take a $1 salary combined with the perks of a CEO.
billg supports charities in a very non selfish manner, i have to admit that - but it is still a small portion of his wealth. like sj he doesn’t publicise his donations, he’d rather just do the charitable work.
i am quite aware of sj’s perks - not sure why you think i’m unaware of them.
ah well, if only this was my problem
Richard,
I did not think you were unaware of the “perks” as much as I was making a point about you completely misreading my comments
. I meant no offence.
Anyway if you are interested this is the article I found quite interesting
http://news.com.com/Apple+execs+underpaid,+board+says/2100-1047_3-5618069.html
My point was that this article to which I am responding makes the link between SJ alturistic nature and Apple, some wonderful thing.
But nobody ever makes the same link between BGs alturistic nature (I realise SB is currently CEO but that hardly counts in the context of the article) and MS.
Bill Gates is often associated with the nasty, monopolistic practices of MS. When he personally may be nothing like that. Apple is associated with the pure, fluffy-white personality of SJ when, in fact, Apple (perhaps even SJ) is nothing like that.
In short SJ is probably more like BG than most would like to admit, ie both are “good guys” that just happen to be far more wealthy than most of us, and whilst BG charity donations are a small % of his income (and I’m sure SJs also) they are far and away more than they have to give (ie nothing)
And, by the same token Apple is more like MS than we would care to like or think, if it has an oppertunity of a Monopoly it will take advantage of it, its main concern is to make money, not to improve peoples lives. Just look at ITMS and Ipod…
Just one more link:
http://www.macworld.com/weblogs/editors/
read the comments to see how many people are unhappy with the current Apple status, even on a Mac fansite. Of course the “excuses” for Apple not being able to sell ITMS for anything other than Apple products hold no water when everyone knows that there is a Moto phone about to be released.
billg supports charities in a very non selfish manner, i have to admit that - but it is still a small portion of his wealth.
The BG Foundation is currently worth $27 billion, of which BG personally donated $8 billion. That’s no small portion of his wealth. In fact, it’s approx 28% of his total net worth.
Obviously he still has billions left over, but it’s still awfully generous and shouldn’t be downplayed just because one might prefer some over operating system over his.
That should read “some OTHER operating system over his.”
Sorry, but Steve J only did this for the PR - OK sheepsters?
“The BG Foundation is currently worth $27 billion, of which BG personally donated $8 billion. That’s no small portion of his wealth. In fact, it’s approx 28% of his total net worth.”
Wow, thanks for the info, I did not realise it was as much as that.
I don’t care if SteveJ did this for PR or not. The point that I’m making is that other people in his position get exactly the same perks as him AND get a massive salary on top of that. SJ could quite easily command an exorbitant salary if he so desired. But he doesn’t.
Someone used Eisner as an example of a low paid executive. 750k is “low” pay? Wow. I want low pay now
SJ is ranked #494 for CEOs, but also #17 in High Tech which brings some relativity. http://www.forbes.com/static/execpay2004/LIRHEDB.html?passListId=12&passYear=2004&passListType=Person&uniqueId=HEDB&datatype=Person
He does get massive amounts in stock - but high tech stocks are relatively volatile - it is clearly tied to company peformance (a good thing). His CEO rating is a B according to Forbes.
The CEO of Hilton Hotels - while #15 on the list, is also rated an F.
Clearly, SJ could demand a whole lot more considering his performance - mega-business is evil and anyone who avoids the pitfalls is to be commended.
Someone used Eisner as an example of a low paid executive. 750k is “low” pay? Wow. I want low pay now
Low pay for a CEO at a company that size, yes. For someone of his net worth and the company’s value, $750k/year might as well be a dollar.
Of course, Eisner could have also (at the time) demanded a much higher salary. So obviously that means he doesn’t care about power or money, right?