[pas]

That doesn't explain it. It might be a factor, but it's not a big factor. FAANG jobs pay extremely well and then there's the stock on top.

Is the vast majority working at these companies (with years of vesting, no?) so shortsighted? Especially the higher ups?

Is it a requirement at these companies that you have to be 10000% in debt and living paycheck-to-paycheck to be a SVP/VP/director/whatever so you have to be hyper-focused on that stock comp?

It's just ridiculous. (And note, I'm not saying it's not a factor, it might be, but it's just not the full picture.)

[sangnoir]

> FAANG jobs pay extremely well and then there's the stock on top.

When excluding RSUs, FAANG jobs are not extreme in any way. RSUs are not a cherry on top but an important component of remuneration. Often for mid-level and above (roughly TL/staff engineer and Manager-II), the value of RSUs is more than 50% of total compensation.

[pas]

tech/IT salaries are very high compared the median income of the country/region. and FAANG base salaries are top of that, so ... I would say they are infact extreme.

and then there's stock on top.

[danaris]

It's taken on a life of its own at this point. The idea that the quarterly stock price is The One And Only Metric That Matters arose for various reasons related to what was mentioned, but over the years it's become so ingrained in the minds of executives and other wealthy people that even when those conditions don't specifically apply, they still act as though they do.

[htrp]

Amazon cash comp was capped in the low 100s IIRC.

[ikiris]

The stock is not just on top. The stock is a large portion of the pay if you aren't just a nameless minion.