unfair, but funny
Mar. 20th, 2004 10:59 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
khedronIt's unfair to take two linked proposals, reject the first one, and then say "well, now the second one is completely ludicrous!" when it would have been reasonable in the context of the first proposal. Unfair, but funny, that is. From the most recent Apple Computer shareholder report:
"The Company's CEO, Steven P. Jobs, receives an annual salary of $1 per year. Notwithstanding the nominal salary of the Company's CEO, the Committee believes that it would be imprudent to permanently cap the CEO's annual salary at $1,000,000 as competitive market forces, cost of living and who the CEO is will certainly change over time. Additionally, the proposal seeks to limit the salary paid to executive officers to no more than the amount paid to the CEO. Limiting executive pay to no more than $1 per year makes no sense. The base salaries of our executive officers, while greater than $1 annually, are generally consistent with the salaries paid by comparable technology companies. [...]"
"The Company's CEO, Steven P. Jobs, receives an annual salary of $1 per year. Notwithstanding the nominal salary of the Company's CEO, the Committee believes that it would be imprudent to permanently cap the CEO's annual salary at $1,000,000 as competitive market forces, cost of living and who the CEO is will certainly change over time. Additionally, the proposal seeks to limit the salary paid to executive officers to no more than the amount paid to the CEO. Limiting executive pay to no more than $1 per year makes no sense. The base salaries of our executive officers, while greater than $1 annually, are generally consistent with the salaries paid by comparable technology companies. [...]"
