Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

There really needs to be a different mode of compensation that forces the C-suite to prioritize long-term company success.



Apple[1], for example, has performance based RSU’s for its executives. RSU’s vest over 3-4 years and the number granted is dependent on Apple’s performance relative to the S&P.

Stock prices theoretically have future cash flows built in but markets are inefficient. In this case, if Broadcom starts losing customers in 2027 and revenue declines 5%, it would get hammered in the market at that point in time, punished much more than the 5% drop.

[1] From Apple’s SEC filing:

The value received by our named executive officers in 2022 from long-term equity incentives reflects exceptional stock price performance over the applicable vesting periods. As a result, for the applicable performance periods, performance-based RSUs vested at 200% of target for our named executive officers based on Apple’s TSR relative to other companies in the S&P 500 (“Relative TSR”), which was at: • the 96th percentile for performance-based RSUs held by Ms. Adams, Mr. Maestri, and Mr. Williams, and • the 99th percentile for performance-based RSUs held by Ms. O’Brien.

Mr. Cook was granted an equity award with 75% performance-based vesting and 25% time-based vesting


Theoretically, stock compensation should do that. In practice, many/most investors have a pretty short time horizon in mind as well. I'm not sure how you provide an incentive for long-term company success absent very deferred compensation which I imagine most people reading this wouldn't favor either if it applied to them. Bird in hand worth two in the bush and all that.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: