alt Hacker NewsIt's really interesting to me how unaggressive Jensen has been vs. his peers about tighting up control over his company (even during the recent years when he had huge leverage):
- His board setup is ... odd. He isn't Chairman of the Board (a role over 50% of Fortune 100 CEOs apparently hold). He seems to be responsible for Nvidia having a wierdly more egalitarian structure (all directors including him, are equal, with a designated lead independent director)
- His compensation (~$35M, primarily stock) is ... not up there with other tech CEOs
- He doesn't seem to have ever pushed for super-voting rights (he only has like ~3.5% of the company), but I guess that's hard to change once you IPO
I kinda wonder if this ends with him taking a month off, spending 12-18 months transitioning to a successor and ending as the chairman of the board or some such. He really does seem vital to the company (and thus the stock price).
Replies
I wonder how much of this is to do with how recent and explosive (relative to the history of the company) nvidia’s growth was. Like before the back to back booms of cryptocurrency and AI, the company was mainly selling products to gamers (iirc, their datacenter business was like 10% in 2019). It wasn’t that long ago that nvidia’s comparable companies were like… super micro and western digital, rather than Apple and Google.
Also having been more capital intensive and founded further back, Jensen had less sway in the early days of the company and may have put off using the growth to his advantage.
Jensen cooperated with china well before the affair. I'm pretty sure her being a chinese spy did not change anything in his decisions. His position on China did not change for years. And he is right. As long as we export chips to china it's really hard for them to invest into developing their own chips from scratch. It's just too expensive. If that door closes they will be incentivised to go for it that much harder. As it is right now they are one step behind us but in the future this won't be the case anymore and since we don't have hardware manufactuing experts in US it's just a matter of time we'll get surpassed. Sure we can bet on AI to overcome that but it's way easier for china to get a software stack going then for us to get hardware manufacturing back.
A Taco Bell exec is on the board IIRC. I'm sure she is more than competent and capable. But it's a bit amusing.
I love Taco Bell though, so she is probably doing a good job.
Jensen effectively is Nvidia, and is likely the only person that truly knows the company - this is what ties him to his place and of that doesn't ensure it I don't think anything else would. Almost all significant successes Nvidia had were results from direct action from him, and he truly knows the tech
The fact that him staying is even a considerable possibility, although made much smaller by the second affair if it is true, is a testament to that.
> He isn't Chairman of the Board (a role over 50% of Fortune 100 CEOs apparently hold).
Combining these roles is extremely poor governance, and it shouldn’t be legal but unfortunately it is.
Instead he made his daughter Senior Director of Product Marketing, made his son Director of Robotics Product, and made his son-in-law VP of AI Infrastructure Growth.
Maybe his idea of asserting control is less about voting rights and more about family allegiance.
A flat structure means nobody is a clear competitor with Huang for the top job. If Huang was able to get his way as was, adopting a more traditional structure would have just made somebody else a significantly more powerful #2. A lack of a clear successor might make the transfer of power rougher unfortunately.
Huang's net worth is over $200B, high enough to be in the world top-ten. He has been very well compensated by Nvidia. Either he decided he has enough money at some point or his current compensation numbers are just marketing. The real numbers were clearly much higher in the past, if not presently.
I suspect he's going quietly because the scandals haven't finished emerging yet[1]. At this point, it wouldn't surprise me if somebody has photos of secret Nvidia bunga bunga parties. I do find it interesting that Americans will tolerate lies, murder, and all sorts of other things from their highest elected officials but, if a CEO is revealed to be overly randy, he's got to go.
______________
[1]https://www.businessinsider.com/kimberly-powell-nvidia-exec-...
Then perhaps we will have a second NeXT and a Jensen Huang who will revolutionize the industry when he comes back.
Yep, he wasn't innovating at all, though:
He could've gave us seamless private cloud GPUs (basically let you run anything on any device, rent out your GPU to earn money, let you play GTA-6 on your phone...)
Could've had the true AI App Store
Could've bought OpenRouter (instead Stripe bought them):
Have not just cloud gaming but the true cloud App Store where Claude and ChatGPT are just apps
This way no terrorist can smuggle Jensen's physical shovels aka GPUs in a potato bag ;-)
As another comment thread brought up, his children are both working pretty nice sinecures, which would have been huge negative press during any kind of corporate governance struggle. I don’t think it was even widely known, I was a Jensen fanboy and I just now learned about it.
How about this all is some sort of theater for him to "peacefully" exit the whole operation and retire, given he not gonna be poor and is very likely to not go in jail given his role in making NVIDIA the company it is.
[flagged]
Seems like much more sane governance for a publicly-traded company.
Honestly this arrangement (total comp aside) is how it should be for all these companies. When Facebook went public the dual class structure (and Zuck retaining voting control) was a big point of contention.