NYTimes Tries to Make Hay Out of High CEO Pay, Admits Its Example is 'Extreme' (and Shareholder-Approved)
The front of the New York Times Sunday Business section featured Natasha Singer article under the headline "A Rich Game of Thrones – C.E.O. Pay Gains May Have Slowed, But the Numbers Are Still Numbing," which hit the reliably liberal crowdpleaser, the pay of chief executives.
The issue has long been an awkward topic at the New York Times Co.Publisher Arthur Sulzberger earned bonus pay in the form of stock and stock options of $4.9 million dollars in 2005, and chief executive Janet Robinson departed last year in a golden parachute worth a staggering $15 million. Of course, the Times never mentions those particular instances of greedy executives, sticking with big bad corporations not named New York Times.
Even Singer's case for greedy chief executives boiled down to the outsized reward (in stock) of a single CEO, Timothy Cook of Apple, approved by shareholders by a wide margin. But before providing the pesky context, Singer tried to numb us with Cook's big number:
Is any C.E.O. worth $1 million a day?
That’s roughly $42,000 an hour. Or $700 a minute. Or $12 a second.
Think of it this way: In the time it took to read those words, you could’ve pocketed $100. Finish this article and -- well, you do the math.
At Apple, the answer to that question is an emphatic yes, and then some. Not since Steve Jobs has a chief executive at Apple, or any other public American corporation, for that matter, been as richly rewarded in stock as Timothy D. Cook, who succeeded Mr. Jobs as chief executive last August, a few months before Mr. Jobs died.
Mr. Cook was paid a cash salary of roughly $900,000 in 2011. On its own, that would have been a ho-hum paycheck for a top American C.E.O. in recent years.
But then came a wild extra, a one-time award, in the form of Apple stock. It was initially worth a staggering $376.2 million. As of the end of last week, it was valued at roughly $634 million, reflecting Apple’s soaring share price.
Many credit Mr. Cook, along with Mr. Jobs, for Apple’s recent success. And the company is quick to note that Mr. Cook’s pay package extends over 10 years. One-half of his stock is scheduled to vest in 2016, and the other in 2021, provided that Mr. Cook still works for Apple. And, at a time when some investors seethe over far smaller paychecks -- a mere eight figures is relatively commonplace for top chief executives these days -- Apple’s shareholders are hardly up in arms over the magnitude of Mr. Cook’s reward. To the contrary, a vast majority voted in favor of it.
Singer played the class card: "Data on C.E.O. compensation in 2011, albeit preliminary, confirm what many of us already know: the top brass generally do much, much better than the rest of us, whether times are good or bad." Only later did she admit her big example was unrepresentative:
Mr. Cook is an extreme example of this phenomenon. He is, experts agree, an outlier -- the only chief executive on the Equilar list to pull down a nine-figure paycheck. His stock award was so valuable, even at its initial price, that his total compensation eclipsed that of the next nine C.E.O.’s combined. Those nine included Lawrence J. Ellison of Oracle, at $77.6 million, a perennial on the best-paid list, and Philippe P. Dauman, of Viacom, at $43.1 million.
....
Analysts say the uptick in C.E.O. pay is a sign that corporations are returning to business as usual after the last recession. When the economy soured, executive pay fell sharply at many companies, though not as much as many ordinary Americans might have hoped. With the recovery in 2010, pay then skyrocketed. Now it’s stabilizing, suggesting, perhaps, that corporate boards see more predictable economic times ahead.
....
Corporate America hasn’t entirely embraced reform. Some companies and industry groups have asked the Securities and Exchange Commission to jettison -- or at least delay putting in place -- a provision in the Dodd-Frank law that would require companies to disclose the ratio of C.E.O. pay to median employee pay, the kind of statistic that could grab headlines in this era of the 1 percent.
Strangely, the brunt of the article is about shareholders pushing back against high CEO pay, the opposite of the picture of runaway pay Singer is trying to paint. And Singer found it surprising that a list of the top-earning CEO's read "like an A-list of corporate titans." (As opposed to an A-list of street musicians?) She also worked in a crack about New York Times enemy No. 1, Rupert Murdoch.
The rest of the top earners list reads like an A-list of corporate titans, from Robert A. Iger of Walt Disney, ranked seventh, with pay of $31.4 million, to William C. Weldon of Johnson & Johnson, ranked 13th, with $23.4 million. (Mr. Weldon plans to step down as chief later this month; he will stay on as chairman.)
Rupert Murdoch of the News Corporation took 10th place, with compensation of $29.4 million -- a 75 percent increase from 2010. In a year when the News Corporation and Mr. Murdoch’s son James were embroiled in a scandal over phone hacking, the elder Mr. Murdoch earned a cash bonus of $12.5 million. That is because the company did well financially, analysts said, even if its reputation plummeted.
- Clay Waters's blog
- Login to post comments















Comments
The media has their marching
Submitted by Darasen on Wed, 04/11/2012 - 11:32am.
The media has their marching orders from the White house to continue with the class warfare.
Nobody's Business
Submitted by locomotivebreath1901 on Wed, 04/11/2012 - 11:42am.
These wealth envy, neo-bolshevik propagandists at the NY Times need a "Nobody's Business" section.
I'm more concerned with greedy politicos and mendacious bureaucrats squandering TRILLIONS of tax dollars which will enslave my grandchildren!!
There's a reason why they do that.
Submitted by CobraMan on Wed, 04/11/2012 - 12:13pm.
"But then came a wild extra, a one-time award, in the form of Apple stock.".
There's a reason why they do that. It's an incentive for the CEO to, you know, keep the corporation successful and the stocks worth something. What good would, say, 10,000 shares of stocks be if the stocks were worth 3 cents? And that's what these people never bother to mention: The CEO's are awarded a set number of stocks, not a set dollar's worth.
Of curse, if they reported the truth, that stock is given in a set numbers of shares and not dollar value, it wouldn't be as dramatic, would it? After all, other than for trading value, the stock itself is worthless until sold at whatever price it is is worth at the time of the sale. But, man, a billion dollars worth of stock sounds much more dramatic than, say, 5 thousand shares!
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
Professional Sports
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Wed, 04/11/2012 - 12:43pm.
Why don't these lefties ever go after the salaries of the "executives" in professional sports? An NBA team is comprised of, what, 12 players? But the payroll for a team is probably closer to 100 or a lot more when you consider the stadiums they play in. The average "top executives" of an NBA team probably makes millions, while the average employee probably makes peanuts in comparison.
Why the pass when it comes to this business?
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
CEO Pay - recovering from the gloom days of Bush - back to . .
Submitted by Gary Hall on Wed, 04/11/2012 - 3:00pm.
CEO Pay - recovering from the gloomy days of Bush - heading back to the glory days of the Clinton era:
Credit is given to the underlying graphic, courtesy of the AFL/CIO, upon which I added the various administrations.
Isn't it time for our national MSM to give credit where credit is due?
hehe
(;~/ gary