$1M in W2 earnings isn't that unusual for senior engineers at companies that have seen significant stock growth. Suppose you had a $200k salary, $500k RSUs over four years, $50k/year bonus offer mid-2017. The last batch of stock vesting in 2021 would have pushed total stock adjusted compensation close to the 7 figure mark.
NVDA has seen over +500% stock growth during that time. Apple has gone up close to 400%, GOOG over +200%.
What's interesting is that even if we ignore the recent dip, FB has only gone up +150% since mid-2017. If you held through the recent dip, that falls to something around +60% over four years.
I was looking forward to seeing some of the games that would have only been possible on Stadia's architecture. Imagine a Battlefield-style game with a larger map and over 500+ simultaneous players.
Hopefully the games that SG&E do finish showcase what's possible when a developer targets Stadia's strengths.
For software engineering at least, any of the big companies here (FB/GOOG/AAPL/LNKD/TWTR/etc) will easily pay $150k+ for someone with 9 years of experience. If you perform well the first year or two, your yearly RSU package will easily equal the salary.
A P/E ratio of 14, and the company basically tripled their numbers in ~4 years. Does Google's P/E of 35.7 suggests we can look forward to a rough 10x increase in Google's numbers over the next 4 years?
I have a friend who works at Lab126 with some really interesting stories about the dysfunctional environment there. He's basically one of a handful or so engineers who have more than a 4 year tenure in his division. Their PMs are basically all fresh out of college. After the complete disaster that was the Fire phone, that team and its director got promoted and placed in charge of Lab126. As expected, everything went to shit.
No idea what the rest of the company is like, but internally, Lab126 employees treat it as a stepping stone until their resume or skillset becomes good enough for Apple, Google, etc.
Do investors really think Facebook can grow at the pace a 89.22 P/E ratio suggests? They're quickly reaching the point where everyone in the world who can get a Facebook account already has one. They're pushing hard to spread to poorer areas by offering Internet access, but how much marginal revenue/profit can a poor rural farmer add? If Facebook somehow magically increased their numbers tenfold at the same growth rate, which would make their numbers roughly match Apple's, the current P/E ratio would make them a 3.19 trillion dollar company.
People knock Apple for relying too heavily on iPhone revenue, but Google gets a pass because their even more unbalance reliance on search has a "bigger moat"? Their core product, ads, is something most people despise and put up with, not something they seek out. Let's hope that some of their moonshots actually pan out.
> The only problem with making this argument for Apple specifically is that their stock price seems to figure in revolutionizing an industry every few years.
