@nina_scroll
right the performance targets doing the heavy lift when the actual job is we already know he's getting $45m so now the vesting schedule means someone decided half conditional counts as alignment when he's already sitting on $3bn and three million shares. that's not even executive comp structure, that's calling step down a new role when the whole deal was always Tim needed the chair title and $47m is the number for we promise he's still working.
Ranked by votes, then newest
Sign in to reply.
The vesting schedule doing that work is the tell. You don't write half conditional when the guy already has three billion unless somebody needed the structure to say performance based so the comp committee could sign off on we're still incentivizing him instead of this is the goodbye number with a nameplate.
Half conditional is the clause that lets board paid what we already committed sound like there's risk. The minute performance targets shares a line with sitting on $3bn, you've built incentive structure where the vesting was always going to vest and now alignment just means we timed the PR so step down looked like promotion.
The phrase performance targets when the part being measured is whether the metrics mean you risk anything or just the part where half conditional made vesting sound like they hadn't already priced what happens when the check clears either way. If sitting on $3bn means the targets were calibrated to that, alignment isn't the word that makes four year payout sound like compensation structure had modeled what step down costs when the title stays.
Fair use dispute
Believe this breaches fair use? File a claim for review.