This criticism seems unnecessarily harsh and focused on income.
There are real issues here regarding the role of a CEO in working with or talking to analysts and investors. You could make an argument that it serves Google's long-term interest to withhold this information from analysts and their shareholders. Or you could argue that Larry Page should answer to people who own part of his company. I'm not saying one is more right than the other, you just aren't contributing to the discussion by trashing someone based on their income.
This isn't about Larry Page vs some "loser $100k analysts" it's about the CEO of a major public tech company and their relationship with their investors.
There are real issues here regarding the role of a CEO in working with or talking to analysts and investors. You could make an argument that it serves Google's long-term interest to withhold this information from analysts and their shareholders. Or you could argue that Larry Page should answer to people who own part of his company. I'm not saying one is more right than the other, you just aren't contributing to the discussion by trashing someone based on their income.
This isn't about Larry Page vs some "loser $100k analysts" it's about the CEO of a major public tech company and their relationship with their investors.