Did you read my posts? They gave out raises, and I've had to work my ass off to earn it. If I was producing at the level I was pre-raise, I would be out of a job.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Business booming for CEO that gave employees raise to $75k
- Thread starter Oblivion
- Start date
- Status
Did you read my posts? They gave out raises, and I've had to work my ass off to earn it. If I was producing at the level I was pre-raise, I would be out of a job.
Absolutely. The media coverage we got would have cost much much much more if it had been purchased via traditional methods.
And I don't for a second take the cynical view that the CEO only did this calculating the cost benefit of advertisement and sales versus salary increases. I'm sure he was well intentioned.
I would expect, though, that the increase in profitability and business has precious little to do with the positive effects of paying employees more and much much MUCH more to do with the equivalent of a massive and undercosted advertising blitz.
DontBeThatGuy
Member
Come on, man, I wasn't serious.
Yep, from my perspective I would agree with you.
Yeah. The GOP should take his ass to the congress for Un-muricanism.
Damerman
Member
nvm, misunderstood your post.
evil solrac v3.0
Member
he was joking.
Sure, but is it because of the increased pay, the increased publicity, the belief in the values the company has projected with the publicity (as the one exec sounds like), or some combination?
As I was replying, I don't think it's a surprise that competitive or greater pay, brings in talent, but this seemed motivated more about values, which can attract talent in a very different way.
To be fair, it went over my head too.
I've also had my sarcasm get me banned, so maybe I'm just bad at it
I'm all for pay increases, especially ones as generous and egalitarian as what Gravity appears to be doing.
But I can't help but wonder if this is a broadly sustainable way of doing business in market, rather than just a windfall of luck from the media publicity raising awareness of Gravity as an e-payments player, and drawing new clientele interested in their philosophy.
I mean the latter is reward for making that change first... but once everyone is doing it, it becomes a non-factor as far as clientele draw goes.
I don't think it'll matter too much TBH. It's clever and has worked out well for Gravity.
By the time we have to worry about the market sustainability of the split going too much towards employees (as if we'll ever have to), we'll have to deal with bigger and more significant structural unemployment issues...
But I can't help but wonder if this is a broadly sustainable way of doing business in market, rather than just a windfall of luck from the media publicity raising awareness of Gravity as an e-payments player, and drawing new clientele interested in their philosophy.
I mean the latter is reward for making that change first... but once everyone is doing it, it becomes a non-factor as far as clientele draw goes.
I don't think it'll matter too much TBH. It's clever and has worked out well for Gravity.
By the time we have to worry about the market sustainability of the split going too much towards employees (as if we'll ever have to), we'll have to deal with bigger and more significant structural unemployment issues...
That's my thought as well.
Once this sort of salary increase good will move no longer garners tons of undercosted advertisement that more than offsets the salary increases, will the actual benefits of paying those salaries outweigh the cost? I sincerely doubt it.
There's causation here between the increased salaries and increase in business but the causation is not the heartwarming tale of benevolent capitalists spreading wealth to make everyone so much happier and work better.
For certain industries and departments within them it's very sustainable. The cost of retraining and rehiring people goes beyond just dollars. A person who is good at their job and would work harder for just 10% more pay will leave for any opportunity that pays more, forever climbing that job-hopping ladder. But pay her well and she'll stick around and produce more. Promote her and she'll do even more. Or hire someone fresh out of college for a lot less, spend six months getting them acclimated and a year training them, and watch them leave for just a bit more, and repeat the cycle. The choice is a plain one to make.
But this doesn't work for everyone. For example, pay a wielder $20/hr instead of $18 and they might work a bit harder in the shop but there is only so much a wielder can do in 8 or 10 hours. Pay a programmer or network engineer $80k instead of $70k (or for those in markets like NorVA $150 instead of $130k) and they'll self-initiate projects and save the company thousands of man hours with new ideas and implementations.
Chezzymann
Member
I wonder if this can work as a viable model for other companies or if its all the free advertisement that's making it work
I don't believe the causality between pay and performance is quite that tightly bound.
But the more egalitarian pay structure certainly does signify a values shift that helps to promote a mindshare where all employees view themselves as greater stakeholders of the company's fortune.
M0nochromatic
Member
This interests me as well. I hope we get to see another case like it to determine the impact the coverage had on the business.
Each company that makes the announcement will experience diminishing returns on the coverage received because the story becomes increasingly old hat, thus decreasing the financial value of this widespread salary increase.
But there's still plenty of room to jump on the train and reap rewards.
I think it's moreso the combination of the huge amount of free advertising he's getting for a company based out of Seattle, where there is more cultural interest in supporting progressive ideas and the fact that the business is a credit card processing company. I don't think this idea would really catch fire outside of our neck of the woods.
This is definitely the exception to the rule. I think it will be more interesting to see where this company is at a year from now when the publicity is gone and its competition starts being more aggressive. Square just filed for its IPO and is likely to become even more aggressive in areas Gravity might fall behind (processing fees, hardware, etc).
From what I've researched in my own business, Gravity was wanting a 3% charge per swipe. Square wanted 2.75%. I don't think Gravity will be able to compete long term without changing things or being bought out.
Zen_Arcade
Banned
Mike Judge gave CEOs the best advice they could possibly get 16 years ago and all it would have costed them was the price a movie ticket.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8afqoDL3Qsk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8afqoDL3Qsk
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
This is what happens: the people who claim they deserve more are actually often replaceable by equally talented people if not more talented.
If people aren't happy with the salary and the salary itself is decent, you'll see plenty of talented folks looking to work there and the business will do fine. If the business does really well, you might see a high turnover, but logically pay would be rising to avoid that anyway.
And to show how ridiculous highly paid CEOs' positions are: if a sole individual is so important to the well being of a multi-billion dollar company, isn't that a HUGE problem they should be trying to resolve?
The better the business is doing, the higher the pay will be. So everyone has an incentive to make things work. And how do you avoid infighting over who is holding the company back, and hence salaries? You structure it so no one is important as an individual, that way no one can blame any single person because no single person can hurt the company.
If people aren't happy with the salary and the salary itself is decent, you'll see plenty of talented folks looking to work there and the business will do fine. If the business does really well, you might see a high turnover, but logically pay would be rising to avoid that anyway.
And to show how ridiculous highly paid CEOs' positions are: if a sole individual is so important to the well being of a multi-billion dollar company, isn't that a HUGE problem they should be trying to resolve?
The better the business is doing, the higher the pay will be. So everyone has an incentive to make things work. And how do you avoid infighting over who is holding the company back, and hence salaries? You structure it so no one is important as an individual, that way no one can blame any single person because no single person can hurt the company.
Alright Alright. I just assumed you read the OP and nothing else.
This is a really good point. I think a lot of CEOs are maybe like...25-30% more important than the average worker, because they do have a lot of responsibility and have to make company wide choices, but if the company can't execute on the plans or goals of the CEO, then the CEO can't make the impact needed to be succesful. To that end it makes sense to pay executives more money, but maybe not 200% more money.
I would be happy to offer a referral if you are serious about applying.
it's fucking gross that most CEO's would rather take in hundreds of times more than any of their workers than pay a cent more than they have to. this guy took a stand, did what he felt was right, and used the money in a way that was better for everyone in his company, not just him. and it's paying off. There's so many fucking things that could be great for multiple parties but people dont out of selfishness and/or impatience.
I see absolutely no reason a CEO or company owner has to make profits of hundreds of millions just to horde it away, essentially at the expense of their employees. They get people that hate them, unhappy workers, etc. but they get to see a bigger number in their account. It's just funny because if they treated people right, chances are they would pull in greater numbers to offset their 'sacrifices' in pay.
Regardless, I hope this trend continues. We need less greedy people at the top. I understand the point of a business is to make money but it shouldn't be at the expense of the people doing all the fucking work to make you your money. Especially places like Wal Mart. Pay your fucking people more, change your business, or go out of business if you can't sustain your company while paying people a fair wage. I cannot believe we've reached the point where not only are people living in poverty while still working long hours, but that pay has not kept up with inflation in many, many areas, most importantly being cost of living/housing/education
fuck i'm so mad now lol
astroturfing
Member
damn, this a pretty dangerous development. imagine if more businesses followed suit? more and more people would be paid more and they'd consume more, leading to more smartphone/tv/couch/car/luxury food/etc sales, leading to ever more accelerated carbon dioxide emissions, leading to ever worsening climate change.
really a depressing thought. it would be much healthier to rather support continuing accumulation of wealth at the very top, out of the hands of the average workers who are just waiting for the opportunity to consume and spend more.. and just imagine what would happen if all the tens of trillions of dollars sitting in tax havens were actually in circulation and being used by the masses, a pure catastrophe. end of our species probably.
really a depressing thought. it would be much healthier to rather support continuing accumulation of wealth at the very top, out of the hands of the average workers who are just waiting for the opportunity to consume and spend more.. and just imagine what would happen if all the tens of trillions of dollars sitting in tax havens were actually in circulation and being used by the masses, a pure catastrophe. end of our species probably.
I was about to say you're not even wrong. But then I recallibrated my sarcasm meter, and everything was alright with the world again.
The problem here is causation. The business is doing better not because of the higher pay increasing employee efficacy to substantially greater levels, but because of the increased revenue generated from a massively undercosted, highly effective, and likely accidental advertising campaign. There's a rather simple and direct line to draw from huge marketing campaign => increase in sales, and when the cost of A is less than the benefits from B, profit!
If a company undertakes such an across-the-board salary increase but sees no corresponding boom in sales because there was no free publicity, then there's an increase in business costs without an immediate and tangible benefit; thus the business would not be doing better but pay was higher.
Which calls into question how valuable this move would be for other companies that can't or won't reap the windfall of a massively undercosted, highly effective ad campaign coinciding with the significant salary increases.
Good for them but I don't see how increasing lower wage worker salaries would positively affect revenue in most fields? Like in industrial production your clients don't give a shit about your "image". It's 90% about how much your products cost and 10% what quality they are. So if you increase worker salaries quality might go up a bit but you would also lose on your product profit margins.
About CEO salaries... I think the main problem is the amount of money they get when they are fired. Like here's 30 millions for sucking at your job.
About CEO salaries... I think the main problem is the amount of money they get when they are fired. Like here's 30 millions for sucking at your job.
JimmyRustler
Gold Member
You pay people more, people work with more enthusiasm.... baffling... Who'd have thought? This CEO may have discovered a revolutionary concept right there.
/s
That's the whole thing though. Your $30-40k in the Midwest is worth $70k in these major cities. $70k in your area would be an absurd wage that would probably hurt the area more than anything. I'm sure these workers are now happier that they're able to enjoy their life and not stress about money.
Well I felt the company would do fine in spite of the criticism of the first thread but I didn't expect it to do significantly better until the thread was bumped about people leaving and new business partners coming in.
I suspected the company would be able to take on the new business and I'm glad that has happened and everyone who stayed or signed on is more fulfilled.
I suspected the company would be able to take on the new business and I'm glad that has happened and everyone who stayed or signed on is more fulfilled.
My entire business model is based on paying workers well, and it works wonders for construction. People will happily work hard if they feel they are earning a fair wage, as opposed to hating working for you at all. Then clients are super impressed by your work and ethics, and you get more work, business grows, etc.
Vicetrailia
Member
Yessir. Big savings on cost of poor quality, turnover and etc.
sixteen-bit
Member
Good to see this succeed.
Earthstrike
Member
Turnover costs money. Training is also an expense. This can actually affect the end cost of a good.
Herpes Reasons
Banned
Anyother sources besides Daily Kos? Not seeing it mentioned elsewhere.
kame-sennin
Member
For those who were interested in this topic, Dan was on the Daily Show last night.
Here's a link to the interviews: http://on.cc.com/1OEkFoQ
And the extended interview: http://www.cc.com/video-clips/d1b3og/the-daily-show-with-trevor-noah-exclusive---dan-price-extended-interview
To recap for anyone new to the thread, I am an employee at this company, and happy to answer any questions you might have.
Here's a link to the interviews: http://on.cc.com/1OEkFoQ
And the extended interview: http://www.cc.com/video-clips/d1b3og/the-daily-show-with-trevor-noah-exclusive---dan-price-extended-interview
To recap for anyone new to the thread, I am an employee at this company, and happy to answer any questions you might have.
True Savior
Member
Do you guys paypal me 100K for good publicity ?
Just once.
Just once.
Terrific news. Really uplifting. But i definitely don't mind the donation.
Just send me your paypal info, along with your SSN, Bank info, and your mothers maiden name. We'll get you taken care of!
LocknessMobster
Member
Thanks for sharing,seems like a real down to earth guy. We need more CEO's like him. Does Gravity have in house security or contract out at all?
- Status