Nice Work If You Can Get It: EA's Riccitiello, Moore Earn Big Bucks in Bad Year

May 29, 2009 -

Yes, Electronic Arts may have laid off 10% of its workforce and posted a billion dollar loss in recent months, but rank has its privileges, after all.

And ranking execs at EA are clearly among the privileged, based on a preliminary proxy statement filed by EA this week which lists compensation for its top officials. CEO John Riccitiello's fiscal 2009 package, which included salary, stock awards, option awards, benefits and a performance-based cash bonus, is valued at $6,365,823.

EA Sports President Peter Moore won't be brown bagging his lunch, either. EA lists Moore compensation package at $4,284,366. Here's the breakdown for Riccitiello (right) and Moore (left), EA's two most high-profile execs:

Here are Riccitiello's numbers:

  • Salary - $793,749  
  • Bonus -
  • Stock Awards - $1,055,461
  • Option Awards - $4,115,305
  • Non Equity Incentive Plan Compensation - $400,000 
  • All Other Compensation - $1,308
  • TOTAL - $6,365,823

And here are Moore's (cost of game launch tattoos not included):

  • Salary - $564,624 
  • Bonus -
  • Stock Awards - $1,443,741
  • Option Awards - $1,589,290
  • Non Equity Incentive Plan Compensation - $200,000
  • All Other Compensation - $486,711
  • TOTAL - $4,284,366

The Associated Press notes that Riccitiello's incentive bonus dropped from $625,000 in fiscal 2008 to the $400,000 figure listed above. In contrast to EA's filing, the AP estimates Riccitiello's total compensation at $11.1 million, using a $9.9 million valuation on stock options.

Not bad for a crappy year.           

UPDATE:  gamesindustry.biz reports that an unnamed EA spokesman has taken umbrage at the Associated Press claim that Riccitiello's options are worth $11.1 million:

Their calculation is inaccurate. It includes value of performance-based shares that will vest over several years - and only if high performance hurdles are met.

As reported, it appears as though those shares are compensation for this year, which they are not. Accurately, they are an opportunity to earn shares over the coming years if company objectives are met.

The spirit of those shares is to link executive compensation to the achievement of long term financial objectives. That programme, which is in place for all of EA's top executives, is designed to align interests of shareholders and management.


Comments

Re: Nice Work If You Can Get It: EA's Riccitiello, Moore ...

You mean 3 years before obama and his gang take over this company like they're doing to the auto industry and "socialize" it by giving everyone a piece of it? Unions are what destroy the industry.

Go out and try to get to a CEO position level before you come here and talk nonesense.

Re: Nice Work If You Can Get It: EA's Riccitiello, Moore ...

Fortunately we had statistics a while ago on the level of unionization at EA, which is practically zero. (In most places except at one developer studio it is zero.) Blaming unions for "destroying the industry" when the industry doesn't even have unions shows a lot about the people that blame everything on unions...

Re: Nice Work If You Can Get It: EA's Riccitiello, Moore ...

The clock is ticking CEO's.... I give you all about another three years of this kind of BS before the world revolts against this kind of greed.

Re: Nice Work If You Can Get It: EA's Riccitiello, Moore ...

So...if the two of them both gave up their yearly loot for about a hundred years, EA wouldn't have had a billion dollar deficit!! Woo!

Re: Nice Work If You Can Get It: EA's Riccitiello, Moore ...

His compensation package could pay the salary of 60 EA employees. It really is ridiculous the levels that CEO and other company leader'd compensation packages have risen too.

Re: Nice Work If You Can Get It: EA's Riccitiello, Moore ...

And they wonder why they're going out of business. I'm adding this to my Top 5 EA Finacial Mistakes list.

Re: Nice Work If You Can Get It: EA's Riccitiello, Moore ...

Cmon now, really? Yeah, it seems excessive to most people here, but think about it. The cost of these guys salaries is miniscule in comparison to the amount of cash that flows through EA. Cutting their salaries would have an insignificant impact on EA's financials.

I guess it would be good PR, to show fiscal thriftyness in these times, but it wouldn't go much beyond that.

Re: Nice Work If You Can Get It: EA's Riccitiello, Moore ...

EA? Out of Buisness? Someone's going loopy.

Re: Nice Work If You Can Get It: EA's Riccitiello, Moore ...

That's just the two most visable. There is still the CFO, the General Counsel, CIO, the head of HR, the head of marketing, their deputies, etc etc etc

Re: Nice Work If You Can Get It: EA's Riccitiello, Moore ...

Err, I meant if they had enough guys in the upper ranks to account for 50 million dollars in salary and compensation.  Bah, you guys can do the math.

Re: Nice Work If You Can Get It: EA's Riccitiello, Moore ...

Even if they have 50 guys total in the million plus range, their billion dollar loss would still be worth 20 years of salaries.  http://www.xkcd.com/558/

Re: Nice Work If You Can Get It: EA's Riccitiello, Moore ...

Like most companies posting huge losses (some requiring bail-outs), the LAST thing they think of doing is cutting the outrageous executive compensation. But Union workers on the production lines? Their contracts MUST be renegotiated.

Keep saying if I ever end up rich I'm going to buy the companies that make my favorite products, but have recently been taken over by douchebag MBAs,  and gut their exec ranks, hire younger, cheaper execs. Perhaps some with a clue.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Sora-ChanI realize that they have ways getting around it, but one reason might be due to earthquakes.04/17/2014 - 4:42am
Matthew WilsonSF is a tech/ economic/ trade center it should be mostly tail building. this whole problem is because of the lack of tail buildings. How would having tail apartment buildings destroy SF? having tail buildings has not runed other cities around the US/world04/16/2014 - 10:51pm
Matthew WilsonAgain the issue is you can not build upwards anywhere in SF at the moment, and no you would not. You would bring prices to where they should have been before the market distortion. those prices are not economic or socially healthy.04/16/2014 - 10:46pm
ZippyDSMleeYou still wind up pushing people out of the non high rise aeras but tis least damage you can do all things considered.04/16/2014 - 10:26pm
ZippyDSMleeANd by mindlessly building upward you make it like every place else hurting property prices,ect,ect. You'll have to slowly segment the region into aeras where you will never build upward then alow some aeras to build upward.04/16/2014 - 10:25pm
Matthew WilsonSF have to build upwards they have natural growth limits. they can not grow outwards. ps growing outwards is terable just look at Orlando or Austin for that.04/16/2014 - 4:15pm
ZippyDSMleeIf they built upward then it would becoem like every other place making it worthless, if they don't build upward they will price people out making it worthless, what they need to do is a mix of things not just one exstreme or another.04/16/2014 - 4:00pm
Matthew Wilsonyou know the problem in SF was not the free market going wrong right? it was government distortion. by not allowing tall buildings to be build they limited supply. that is not free market.04/16/2014 - 3:48pm
ZippyDSMleeOh gaaa the free market is a lie as its currently leading them to no one living there becuse they can not afford it makign it worthless.04/16/2014 - 3:24pm
Matthew WilsonIf you have not read http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2014/04/introducing-steam-gauge-ars-reveals-steams-most-popular-games/ you should. It is a bit stats heavy, but worth the read.04/16/2014 - 2:04pm
Matthew Wilsonthe issue is when is doesn't work it can screw over millions in new york city's case. more often than not it is better to let the free market run its course without market distortion.04/16/2014 - 9:36am
NeenekoTrue, and overdone stagnation is a problem. It is a tricky balance. It does not help that when it does work, no one notices. Most people here have benifited from rent controls and not even realized it.04/16/2014 - 9:23am
ZippyDSMleehttp://www.afterdawn.com/news/article.cfm/2014/04/15/riaa_files_civil_suit_against_megaupload04/16/2014 - 8:48am
ZippyDSMleeEither way you get stagnation as people can not afford the prices they set.04/16/2014 - 8:47am
Neenekowell, specifically it helps people already living there and hurts people who want to live there instead. As for 'way more hurt', majorities generally need less legal protection. yes it hurt more people then it helped, it was written for a minority04/16/2014 - 8:30am
MaskedPixelantehttp://torrentfreak.com/square-enix-drm-boosts-profits-and-its-here-to-stay-140415/ Square proves how incredibly out of touch they are by saying that DRM is the way of the future, and is here to stay.04/16/2014 - 8:29am
james_fudgeUnwinnable Weekly Telethon playing Metal Gear http://www.twitch.tv/rainydayletsplay04/16/2014 - 8:06am
ConsterTo be fair, there's so little left of the middle class that those numbers are skewing.04/16/2014 - 7:42am
Matthew Wilsonyes it help a sub section of the poor, but hurt both the middle and upper class. in the end way more people were hurt than helped. also, it hurt most poor people as well.04/16/2014 - 12:13am
SeanBJust goes to show what I have said for years. Your ability to have sex does not qualify you for parenthood.04/15/2014 - 9:21pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician