Hmm, I use perks as a significant way to judge a company, but more isn't necessarily better. You must always ask what? why?<p>Do the perks fit with the industry and intentions of the company? Are the perks well thought out and canceled when they are a detriment to the company and/or employees?<p>I've always worked for companies with unlimited coffee and some group outings. I would be largely for companies with unlimited fruit juices, functional athletics centers, well thought out awarded perks, etc.<p>Yet, I am very skeptical of companies with free soda. For example, Netscape was very short sighted and ended up with similar (and perhaps newly diabetic) employees. I love some of their results, but as a company I am glad they went and I wish they went earlier, certainly before their server products were considered an asset..<p>Similarly, I am not swayed by lots of stock options (is there a reason they are so frivolous with them? Is this place so miserable that vesting periods are all that can keep me here?) But I expect some together with a heartfelt apology for not giving me more from a manager who seriously tried.<p>Perks should be the food for conversation on the topic of compensation. (Or some such HR fueled poetic nonsense.)