Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella has now made $1 billion

fjtorres5591

Active member
May 16, 2023
264
63
28
Visit site
Previous reports have stated that Nadella's bonuses and awards in his contract are conditional and based on the company's fiscal performance rather than its stock price. He's making money for the company so why shouldn't be paid proportionally to what he makes for the owners?

Especially when you consider those owners are 72.25% institutional, 6.23% Microsoft insiders, and 21.51% retail investors. The institutional stockholders are mostly mutual funds and pension funds, not Wall Street gamblers. A lot of people live at least in part off the dividends MS pays out.

He's been a good steward of the company so whatever he makes in taking it to three billion is well earned.
 

Sean Endicott

Staff member
Oct 28, 2014
42
17
8
Visit site
Ya, one reason I phrased my thoughts at the end the way I did was that Nadella makes Microsoft more money than he costs the company. That being said, I think many argue that no one needs to be a billionaire, even if they earn more than that. To me, Nadella's compensation makes sense from Microsoft's perspective. He clearly helps the company grow and hit its targets. Whether it's moral, just, or right to have anyone be that rich is a question people other than Microsoft probably need to answer.
 

fjtorres5591

Active member
May 16, 2023
264
63
28
Visit site
Ya, one reason I phrased my thoughts at the end the way I did was that Nadella makes Microsoft more money than he costs the company. That being said, I think many argue that no one needs to be a billionaire, even if they earn more than that. To me, Nadella's compensation makes sense from Microsoft's perspective. He clearly helps the company grow and hit its targets. Whether it's moral, just, or right to have anyone be that rich is a question people other than Microsoft probably need to answer.
Beg to differ.
*Nobody* has the right to limit what others can honestly earn/achieve.
History has proven over and over that any society that limits what their best and brightest can achieve only encourages them to go elsewhere. Brain drain kills countries. And creates others. US, Canada, Australia are three examples. Argentina was one such until Peron. Now they are donors rather than recipents of excellence. Others, too.

Nadella himself is evidence of the old saying that "india people can succeed everywhere...except in india." That is coming to bite the homeland. As in FOXCONN backing out of a massive semiconductor foundry for lack of skilled technologists in the area. India losses are others' gains.

Any society that limits itself from the full effort of its best is a crippled society.

No artificial limits, please.
For people or companies. There is no such thing as "too successful" as long as it's done honest!y. Note I say honestly and not "fairly". Fair is an artificial limit in itself. As long as it conforms to the legal framework, freedom to succeed is essential for a healthy economy.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
324,492
Messages
2,245,611
Members
428,210
Latest member
Star-Evaluator