• sushibowl@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 months ago

    Does that not mean that reddit would have made a 113 Million profit before his $193 million compensation package?

    No. His normal salary is around 300k a year. This $193 million figure was the presumed valuation of a stock/options package he received ahead of the IPO. It doesn’t cost the company anything to pay him in stock, so it doesn’t affect the profit/loss calculation.

    • charleroi2@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      If it doesn’t cost anything to company to pay in stocks, why don’t they give me like 1m $ value of stock? That would make me very happy and it costs nothing to them anyway

      • BreakDecks@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        I know you’re just being funny, but the idea is that Spez’s shares and resulting influence over a publicly traded Reddit will incentivize investors to buy stock, raising the value of the stock for all shareholders. The problem with this idea is that Spez is an idiot who is actively sabotaging Reddit’s long term viability.

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Surely it costs $193 million to pay him in stock. That stock would otherwise have been sold for that amount to other people, and he’s getting it for nothing.

      • sushibowl@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Because you’re exchanging stock worth $193 million for an equivalent amount of dollars, there’s technically no profit or loss involved in the transaction. In the same manner, when paying stock as a compensation, you secure services valued at $193 million for an amount of shares worth the same: the transaction is entirely equal. So you don’t make or lose any money by paying in stock.

        Of course, the trick is that the value of the CEO’s work for one year can be whatever he says. If your claim is that they could have gotten more value out of the stock had they sold it in the IPO, I think you are absolutely correct in that regard.