backtop


Print 30 comment(s) - last by hifloor.. on Jul 25 at 12:44 AM


  (Source: OLIVER LANG/Getty Images )
Annual salary for Mayer is $1 million

Many people believe Yahoo is on a continued downward spiral. The once massive web portal and search engine has been overshadowed by Google and has gone through a series of different CEOs in a relatively short period of time. So far, no one seems to be able to pull Yahoo out of the ditch.
 
Recently, Yahoo chose Marissa Mayer as its new CEO. Mayer was employee number 20 for Google and held a high position within the search giant. Many were likely wondering what exactly Yahoo offered Mayer to lure her away from her cushy and secure job with Google to the decisively unknown realm of Yahoo.
 
A regulatory filing presented by Yahoo yesterday outlines Mayer's new compensation package, and it's huge. Undoubtedly, the massive $70 million package was a large part of the reason Mayer left Google and went to Yahoo. The compensation package works out to $70 million in salary, bonuses, restricted stock, and stock options over the next five years. The new CEOs annual salary is $1 million and she can earn as much as $2 million in annual bonus.
 
The stocks options are worth $42 million and there's an additional $14 million in "make whole restricted options" that compensates Mayer for the forfeiture of compensation from Google. Reuters reports that if you include some of the stock grants Mayer could earn as much as $20 million a year or $100 million over the five-year term of her contract.
 
Mayer was the first female Google engineer and one of the company's earliest employees. She is already estimated to be worth as much as $300 million. Of course, if Yahoo continues its decline those stock options could be worth less than expected. 

Source: Reuters



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Moronic Board
By Yojimbo on 7/20/2012 2:17:51 PM , Rating: 1
How is value ideally determined in a capitalist system? by market conditions. Do you really think that CEOs are such valuable people, capable of doing jobs that only a few hundred people could possibly do, that there's a sensible bidding war between companies for their services? If that is the case it is only because the majority of people do not have the opportunity to have the history of experience that is demanded by those in power to be hired for such a position, not because of any outstanding abilities they have. I am not saying these people are not capable, I am saying that there are hundreds of thousands of other capable people that haven't been groomed for the job. It's a very closed culture, and that's what allows the salaries to be forced up to exorbitant levels. Otherwise the average salary would be much lower, and then the salaries of the people who perform better than the rest would also most likely be much lower. It's not a matter of how much money they made the company as in your example of GE's increase in market value during Jack Walsh's tenure (and, btw, I would think that shareholders would be more interested in profitability than increase in market value, most of which would come at the cost of diluting their share of the company), it's rather a matter of how much money they make the company above a "journeyman" replacement. Well it's always a hard decision who to hire, and when you have a lot of money at stake, you have a lot of money to throw around. But I think that the actual salaries have to do more with anxiety and with the closed culture than with actual value most of these people are adding to the company.

As far as Mayer, I agree that celebrity probably is a huge factor in the consideration. Look at how much Carly Fiorina made. There seems to be a clamor to put a woman as a CEO, and there are only a certain number of them they feel comfortable giving a job to. I mean look at how much money Danica Patrick makes without winning a race.


RE: Moronic Board
By Apone on 7/20/2012 6:54:28 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Do you really think that CEOs are such valuable people, capable of doing jobs that only a few hundred people could possibly do, that there's a sensible bidding war between companies for their services?


Yes, because the CEO names I have previously mentioned clearly illustrate that being CEO is not a job that everyone can do or is willing to do.

quote:
It's not a matter of how much money they made the company as in your example of GE's increase in market value during Jack Walsh's tenure (and, btw, I would think that shareholders would be more interested in profitability than increase in market value, most of which would come at the cost of diluting their share of the company), it's rather a matter of how much money they make the company above a "journeyman" replacement.


Do me a favor and research exactly how Mr. Jack Welch turned GE around (hint: there's a reason why he's nicknamed "Neutron Jack"). This is why not everyone can do a CEO's job which I agree goes beyond making money.

quote:
As far as Mayer, I agree that celebrity probably is a huge factor in the consideration. Look at how much Carly Fiorina made. There seems to be a clamor to put a woman as a CEO, and there are only a certain number of them they feel comfortable giving a job to. I mean look at how much money Danica Patrick makes without winning a race.


I'm confused, how exactly is Ms. Marissa Mayer a celebrity? Carly Fiorina? And Danica Patrick? Yeah I get that Danica Patrick is overhyped but she's not a CEO; she's popular because she's a trail blazer and obviously proved that being female and a race car driver are not mutually exclusive.


"Young lady, in this house we obey the laws of thermodynamics!" -- Homer Simpson














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki