The problem seems to stem from the fact that most people are presented with paltry-sounding offers from places like google. As is mentioned in many of the response here, it seems that the guy probably quoted total compensation. However, prima facie the only number people see is the salary number from their offer. The offer doesn't tell you how good the bonus will be, nor can you immediately appreciate stuff like 401K match or stock / options awards.
So yeah, I think a lot of people would be jealous if they thought they received a 100K offer from google while some other person received 250K.
This is highly relevant. I had an offer from Google with a base salary lower than a competing offer from a startup...but when I factoried in benefits, stock, etc. on both sides Google's offer was about 50% larger. Of course, you're eating the same food as you get promoted, so some benefits/perks become a smaller fraction of your comp as your total comp goes up, but they're still significant around 250k.
Did it actually amount to 50% more or did it have the potential to? Because if it's only potential than it's worth less than 50%. The other offer is money "in the hand" as it were.
My expected value is 50% higher. That's assuming I get the standard bonus (rather than the superstar one), keep eating roughly the same amount of food, etc.
Does Google fail to explain the non-base comp in offer letters, leading to recruits taking competing offers that actually pay less total? That seems to be a very easy to fix mistake, so I'm surprised they'd keep making it.
So yeah, I think a lot of people would be jealous if they thought they received a 100K offer from google while some other person received 250K.