今天上午的話題是首席執(zhí)行官價值幾何，這個話題在新聞里已經(jīng)出現(xiàn)過，隨著上市公司紛紛召開股東大會還將更多。其中最引人注意的一條是，上周五雅虎向美國證監(jiān)會提交報告稱，在今后一年中，如果該公司經(jīng)營的業(yè)務被收購，造成CEO瑪麗莎·梅耶爾被免，梅耶爾將獲得5500萬美元的離職賠償金。這頂黃金降落傘實在不小，再加上已披露的去年1400萬美元和前年4200萬美元的年薪讓許多人都感覺有點不像話，畢竟雅虎請梅耶爾是來扭轉(zhuǎn)頹勢的，但她并沒做到。

我們需要挖的再深一些，找個完全不同的例子。周末票房數(shù)據(jù)顯示，迪士尼的《奇幻森林》連續(xù)第三周成為北美最賣座的電影，截至目前的全球票房已達到驚人的6.85億美元。也就是說今年迪士尼已經(jīng)有了兩部大熱影片，而現(xiàn)在還只是5月初。另一部高票房電影是兩個月前上映的《瘋狂動物城》，目前的全球票房為9.33億美元。我們都知道，下個周末《奇幻森林》就不會繼續(xù)高居榜首了，因為《美國隊長3：內(nèi)戰(zhàn)》的風頭會蓋過北美市場的所有影片。許多分析師認為，該片有望成為2016年的票房冠軍。美隊3是哪家公司拍的呢？還是迪士尼。

為什么人們看到迪士尼CEO鮑勃·艾格2015年4350萬美元的年薪時沒有義憤填膺？看看上面這些票房數(shù)據(jù)就明白了。迪士尼董事會跟艾格簽的合同到2018年結(jié)束，那時他將年滿67歲。一些華爾街分析師認為，迪士尼董事會可能會請他留任。艾格收入確實令人艷羨，但只要他值得，也不算特別高。

再看看另一位吸引眼球的高薪人物——智游網(wǎng)CEO達拉·科斯羅薩西。價值9460萬美元的薪酬讓他成為已披露數(shù)據(jù)的標普500指數(shù)公司中收入最高的首席執(zhí)行官。然而，他真能拿到那么多嗎？新聞報道都這么說，但其實并非如此。要想知道為什么，就得干點兒很少有人做的事，就是查詢智游網(wǎng)向美國證監(jiān)會提交的高管薪酬報告。我們發(fā)現(xiàn)，該公司披露的超高薪水包括9080萬美元的股票期權，科斯羅薩西實際上沒有拿到這些期權，有可能永遠也得不到。就算期權真的到手，他也未必能拿到真金白銀。部分期權的發(fā)放時間為2020年9月以后，就算他熬到那時，還有個附加條件是智游網(wǎng)的股價上漲81%。如果所有條件都實現(xiàn)，他拿到的期權屆時將價值8250萬美元。確實是一大筆錢，但該公司股東將獲利140億美元。也就是說，即便股東賺了130億美元，他也無法兌現(xiàn)期權。智游網(wǎng)董事會也許跟科斯羅薩西進行過激烈的討價還價，但對股東來說，這么安排似乎還不錯。

迪斯尼CEO艾格的薪酬也主要以股票為基礎，未來幾年時間里，他有可能獲得很高的收入，也可能不多，甚至有可能一無所得。企業(yè)公布數(shù)額巨大的高管薪酬時，幾乎都是這種情況。大家很少關注到一些關鍵性的細節(jié)，只知道又到了看著CEO的高薪眼淚汪汪、咬牙切齒的時候了，當然有時候確實是值得一哭的。但在大家怒噴本期社論前，或許可以考慮到美國證監(jiān)會網(wǎng)站上看看，仔細看看實際數(shù)字，然后再做決定。

譯者：Charlie

審校：夏林

?

Our topic this morning is how much CEOs are worth, which is in the news and will be more so as proxy season progresses. Most noted was Friday’s SEC filing by Yahoo YHOO -1.42% reporting that CEO Marissa Mayer would get a $55 million package if she is ousted as a result of Yahoo’s operating businesses being bought in the coming year. That golden parachute, combined with her reported pay packages of $14 million last year and $42 million the year before, struck many people as a bit much considering that she was brought in to turn Yahoo around and hasn’t done it.

We have to dig deeper to find an entirely different example. Weekend box office data show that Walt Disney’s The Jungle Book was the No. 1 movie in America for a third consecutive week; total worldwide box office is a staggering $685 million so far. That means Disney DIS -0.56% has two mammoth hits this year, and it’s only May 3; the other is Zootopia, released two months ago, with $933 million worldwide so far. We know Jungle Book won’t dominate again next weekend because it and all other movies in North America will be overwhelmed by Captain America: Civil War, which many analysts think may be the top movie of 2016. And who made that one? Disney again.

If you don’t recall howls of outrage when Disney reported that CEO Bob Iger’s 2015 pay package was worth $43.5 million, you can understand why. The board has signed him to a contract until 2018, when he’ll be 67, and some Wall Street analysts think the board may ask him to stay longer. He’s getting paid a ton, but it isn’t a lot if he’s worth it.

Which brings us to another high-profile pay package of the moment, that of Expedia EXPE -0.46% CEO Dara Khosrowshahi. At a valuation of $94.6 million, it makes him the highest paid CEO in the S&P 500 among companies that have reported. Except – is that what he really got paid? The headlines all say so. But it isn’t true. To see why, do something that hardly anyone does, which is read the SEC filing that reports his compensation. We find that $90.8 million of that huge reported figure is in the form of stock options that he hasn’t actually received yet and may never receive. Even if he does receive them, he may not make a dime from them. Some of the options cannot be given to him before September 2020, and even then he would get them only if Expedia stock had risen by 81%. In that case those options would be worth $82.5 million to him on the day he got them – a lot of money, but shareholders would have gained $14 billion. If they gained only, say, $13 billion, he won’t get those options at all. Now maybe the board could have driven a harder bargain with Khosrowshahi, but this doesn’t seem like a bad deal for the shareholders.

Iger’s pay package also consisted mostly of stock-based awards that may pay a lot, or a little, or nothing at all over a period of years. This is almost always the case when you see huge pay numbers reported. What you rarely see reported are the details that make all the difference. It’s the time of year for wailing and gnashing of teeth over excessive CEO pay, and sometimes it is definitely justified. But before you launch into a rage over the latest editorial, you might consider visiting sec.gov, reading the actual numbers, and deciding for yourself.