Edit: And yes, if you are not productive, you get paid less. That’s the whole point. If you are not 100x productive, you don’t deserve to get 100x the wages of a regular employee too.
And a guy sitting in their office biting nails all day is somehow much more valuable than the people developing the product. Sure, if you would believe in that.
If I follow your search terms, the first Google result is this. If the data were to be trusted, then most of the employees are absolutely paid much less than the “top positions”.
If you are taking the CEO’s income literally (without considering their assets), then you are hopeless.
So you want to raise the wages of the people making $140k per year but not $170k?
Why?
Where did you pull those numbers from, then?
Edit: And yes, if you are not productive, you get paid less. That’s the whole point. If you are not 100x productive, you don’t deserve to get 100x the wages of a regular employee too.
People do not get paid based on production but based on value.
And a guy sitting in their office biting nails all day is somehow much more valuable than the people developing the product. Sure, if you would believe in that.
Who do you think is “biting their nails all day?” Like, which positions specifically.
Also game devs work in offices (or at home offices)
I googled median EA wages (gave me median, top 75%, etc), EA CEO pay and number of employees at EA and then did division
If I follow your search terms, the first Google result is this. If the data were to be trusted, then most of the employees are absolutely paid much less than the “top positions”.
If you are taking the CEO’s income literally (without considering their assets), then you are hopeless.
Yeah if you don’t work in CS you’re making at or near 100k and the math holds.
Compare the salary ranges with # of employees per role.