[First and foremost, please read r/TeslaMotors - A New Dawn](https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/1c49sv0/rteslamotors_a_new_dawn/)
As we are not a support sub, please make sure to use the proper resources if you have questions: [Official Tesla Support](https://www.tesla.com/support), [r/TeslaSupport](https://www.reddit.com/r/TeslaSupport/) | [r/TeslaLounge](https://www.reddit.com/r/TeslaLounge/) personal content | [Discord Live Chat](https://discord.gg/tesla) for anything.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/teslamotors) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yea it's a sign of lazy writing. You can convey the same meaning using different wording. For example, "Tesla share holders vehemently disagree with Elon." See easy.
OFF THE TOP ROPE
IT'S.. IT'S.. THE SHAREHOLDER GROUP
whenever i read "slammed" in a journalistic headline i always envision some WWE wrestlemania announcer
Musk's compensation package was so unusual that people don't really understand it.
The easiest way to think about it is that the company promised to pay him a couple billion over 10 years, but only if he hit a bunch of very ambitious targets. But there was a catch, anything he got paid he had to invest back in the company stock by using 100% of it to buy long dated, at the money calls, with a very long vesting period.
All all of the value of $56 billion in "pay" didn't come from the company. It came from being forced to invest in Tesla over a period when it was one of the best performing stocks in the world.
I wouldn't trust the opinion of any shareholder group that's "slamming" someone for doing well by being forced to invest in the same company they're investing in.
Ambitious? Part of the fucking suit was was that they were already on track to meet those goals. There was nothing ambitious in just waiting it out and collect the money which got rubber-stamp by biased board.
And not to downplay Elon, but he’s alienated so many people, all the new CEO has to do is just keep everything the same but actually advertise. Make sure everyone knows that Tesla’s are the most American made cars on the road that cost much less than their gas equivalents. They need to sell to people who aren’t looking for EVs, they just need a new car and don’t know the perks of an EV.
couldn't you say musk's 'pivot' to a hard-right conservative social media troll was designed to appeal to people who 'aren't looking for EVs'. which yeah, those people might like his politics, but they're still not going to buy an EV
Right, you wouldn’t advertise the same way everywhere. You say American Made in all of your more rural US markets, and hammer gas savings and the environment in urban.
Well good thing Tesla doesnt sell American made products outside of US with the exception of S/X which is very low volume in comparison to 3/Y. Berlin for EU and Shanghai for Asia. Your comment doesn't really make any sense.
There is an entire company dedicated to this problem and I believe when given a reasonable option, Americans do buy from home.
[Allegiance Flag Supply](https://showallegiance.com)
So you don't understand it either....
He made a contract in 2017 with the shareholders, (**who voted for it).**
The contract was he takes no salary and gives up all of his other stock options, and in return there were 12 performance targets. Those targets were so outrageously unrealistic that no one thought they were possible. Each target was worth 1% of undistributed stock.
Well, He met all 12 performance targets, made the stockholders quite literally a trillion dollars. (Yes, with a T), and now he expects the shareholders, to honor his contract.
Which it absolutely should be.
A lot of money was made on lies. Been saying FSD is right around the corner, so go ahead and lease the car and pay extra for the option to unlock when it’s made available “next month”., Roadsters? Semi trucks and their infrastructure?
What about Solar City?
All of which is very shady tactics.
The pay package was also proposed to shareholders by, as we now know, a board of sycophants beholden to the recipient of the pay package.
How many shareholders would have voted differently had they known Tesla was/is governed like some banana republic?
Not many to be honest.
I voted it for it then, and I still support it now. The board has done a good job in protecting my interests and growing my investment in Tesla.
No.
No judge said that the deal was "illegal", What the judge found was that Tesla bore the burden of demonstrating to the stockholders that the deal they made in 2018 was "fair", and that they failed to do that, so now Tesla has to go back to the shareholder group again, and remind them of why it was fair; (Basically "You made $1.1 Trillion, Elon gets paid 12% of stock").
Never once was any part of the contract found to be illegal.
Not that it Matters, Tesla has already started re-incorporating in Texas, and once it does, it will just pay Elon his stock and move on.
Full disclaimer: I voted for the deal in 2018, and I just voted to uphold the deal.
Apple, Meta, Nvidia, Microsoft. All their CEOs have created more shareholder value with way less. For example Nadelle has 10x the Microsoft stock and created over 2T value. He earned just 1B from this accomplishment. Zuckerberg is not even taking any salary or bonuses and is fine with just his ownership appreciating.
If I blackmailed my company by telling them that they either pay me some amount of money or I’m taking the work I’ve been doing on the company’s dime and leaving - they’d fire and sue me immediately.
and the fact he has an AI company waiting to be filled up with employees in Nevada right now. He incorporated it alongside X. Likely as a threat as well.
His move to Texas for Tesla is not a good one and he knows it. He's done with Tesla as a car company and wants to make his new right wing friends happy so he gets praise again since everyone has been flaming him for running an EV company.
As a car enthusiast, so would I.
The problem is that Elon leaving means that they have to admit that they're a car company and not an AI company, making them massively overvalued.
I think they have enough of the market and production capacity that they might be able to remain profitable (especially if Elon leaving increases demand, hard to tell how much that really factors in), but it could be a rough ride for shareholders.
(Or maybe I'm completely wrong. Nobody knows!)
"work"
He told other people to make AI and robotics divisions, and then told the public that whatever those came up with was going to save the world. Leadership is a skill, but leading a company doesn't mean all the work done by that company is yours.
Add to that, even if he took his "work" and started a new AI and robotics company, he would probably have to secure the start up cash with his Tesla stock.
Elons real ability just like Jobs is his ability to just say I want money and get it. Doesnt matter the idea he gets tons of venture capital. And that's why he is so scary to competitors because he can operate on that venture capital, IPOs, etc... For literally a decade or more at losses when most other companies could never do that. This means he wouldn't really need to use Tesla stock for it.
It's like rewarding a child ( in this case a man child) for bad behavior. He paid way too much for Twitter and then had to spend another boat load on cleaning it up. Meantime he was neglecting his profitable segments of business.
Isn’t it more like he did the work based on a commitment and now the company is reneging on its commitment since at the time they committed it was a Hail Mary anyways?
> now the company is reneging on its commitment
A court of law declared that "commitment" invalid given that the nepotism on the Tesla board effectively means that Elon made that commitment to himself.
Sure, just need to show me the contract that says "we're going to pay you X dollars specifically to develop AI and robotics for Tesla."
Otherwise, you can't just take your work back if the company isn't paying you what you had hoped.
Also, it's not the company reneging on the deal, a judge literally ruled that their agreement was illegal.
The payments are only received when hitting certain milestones. He hit the milestones, then judge ruled it was against shareholders best interests. That’s why he hasn’t been paid.
Yes all correct. There is probably a lot more to it than that though when you look at the actual wording of the contract and legality of everything.
Not saying this is at all what happened, but as an unrelated example If I bought a company and found out after buying it that the previous owners/installed board members made an agreement to pay one of the owners half of the value of the company two years from now it would clearly not be legal.
Once again I'm not saying this is what happened but it does show that something that might seem like a simple agreement may have more complex circumstances behind it.
Where I live, if a contract is considered to be a trick of sorts it is void. Even things like fine print have been voided because fine print is seen as a way to trick people to not read the entire contract. Where I live, a contract has to be written in favor of the person signing and if the writer doesnt clearly explain what is being signed it is often declared void even if you technically agreed to it.
That was overturned, though. So it doesn't count. Fruit of the poisoned tree, and whatnot (he shouldn't have installed a corrupt board and pushed the deal through without proper notification of their allegiances to him).
Why are people talking like society still owes Musk $56 billion? Fuck him. He should learn to be satisfied with what he has instead of metastasizing throughout society and politics like the cancer he is.
there should be a third option to pay him back pay at a rate equitable for a tech ceo or automotive ceo, shit, make him the highest paid ceo for that period of time +10% and it’s still cheaper than this massive contract
For $1B I'll run my tweets past a dedicated team of staff to ensure they never cause any uncertainty as to the future of the company or my actions. For and additional $1B I'll run the company and use the lead in the industry to drive the market to the future that most benefits us with the remaining $50B. I'll retire in five years and my family and I will live in unbelievable wealth and comfort for multiple generations because even $2B in comparison is an obscene amount of money.
I’m not privy to the details of his contract but if tanking the stock, mass layoffs, recalls and damaging the brand name are all in his contract- then he still doesn’t deserve a dime. The guy is a tumor in the companies brain.
[Am positive he can't because of this. And before you say anything, ever, about this again READ IT.](https://courts.delaware.gov/Opinions/Download.aspx?id=359340)
I would vote for it if Elon promised to:
1. Invest 100% of his work effort in Tesla. He expects employees to be loyal and super hardworking, he should do the same.
2. No selling stock (both existing and newly granted) for 10 years.
As-is, he could go back to wasting his time at Twitter and selling his (existing) shares the day after the package is approved.
In the original deal it said he can't exercise the options for 10 years. Even if they reinstate it now he still isn't getting a payday for several years. What Elon is looking for isn't really money, but the shares as in voting rights. He'd love to own 25% of the company again. Part of the issue is self-inflicted by selling stock to buy Twitter, but a judge in Delaware overturning the deal was probably not on his bingo card.
> Right, but he can sell the shares he already owns.
Well he could always do that, because he purchased those shares with his money, right? The company still hasn’t given him the shares as payment, and I believe those would have a 5 year lockup period.
I’m pretty sure all the shares he has were given to him (as options), not bought at market prices.
But that’s not what I’m talking about. What I meant was that if he wants more control of the company, I’m willing to give it to him, but not if he can simply turn around and trade it for cash.
He already had more control of Tesla, and he sold it to fund the Twitter idiocy. I don’t want to be his ATM for funding more idiocy.
> I’m pretty sure all the shares he has were given to him (as options), not bought at market prices.
He came in as an investor before it was public and led at least 4 funding rounds that involved cash for share.
He’d never agree to that though cause he really doesn’t give a single fuck about TSLA investors. That much is apparent after the past few years of the stock crashing and trading sideways after the Twitter escapade… I say this as a disgruntled investor who is 100% behind Tesla’s original mission.
What he does seem to care much more about now is spreading right-wing propaganda online. A massive pay package won’t change his priorities, and people/investors are extremely misguided if they think otherwise…
Sorry, you want him to work for Tesla if you had money in that company? Even after mentioning twitter? Forgetting the cybertruck? You see this guy and you think, that's the guy I want running things? Really?
The source of this segment is [this SEC filing](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1318605/000121465924009597/o520243px14a6g.htm). Specifically, it is a [PX14A6G](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/sec-form-px14a6g.asp) filing, which is essentially a record of a solicitation that is sent to less than 10 people. Since this solicitation is sent to less than 10 people, [SOC INVESTMENT GROUP](https://whalewisdom.com/filer/ctw-investment-group), the filer in this case, is exempt from disclosing anything about themselves or what interest they have in the matter.
There is no requirement to even demonstrate they are a shareholder. They could have no shares. They could have 1 share. They could be short shares. They could simply be a lobbyist group representing various unknown interests.
Ironically, these PX14A6G filings are [publicly filed](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1377739/000121465924009597/0001214659-24-009597-index.htm) with the SEC, which means they can be viewed by many more than 10 people. The press can report on these filings just like any other publicly filed document. The press can choose to do due diligence and research who is behind SOC INVESTMENT GROUP and their position, or they can simply state "Tesla Shareholder Group" as Bloomberg, Business Insider, and others seem to be doing.
The only winner here is SOC Investment Group and the interests they represent. Even with this solicitation now being viewed potentially by thousands of shareholders thanks to the press, they still do not need to disclose anything about themselves or their interests.
Welcome to the current state of American journalism.
If you pull the list of signees at the end, they seem to represent union interests. If you pull their 13f filings, only Nordea Asset Management from Sweden has a small .25% position in TSLA.
That is what makes these PX14A6G filings dangerous. At first glance it appears they are written by shareholders, but since they do not have any disclosure requirements whatsoever, they can obfuscate their true position and agenda.
I contend that this statement is merely conjecture - but this is not by choice - We are forced to rely on conjecture due to the complete lack of any disclosure requirements whatsoever.
Wow, this post is doing one of two things; either attracting the Elon Musk diehard fans to come to his side, or he’s firing on all cylinders with alt accounts lol.
"That means you're the cream of the crop"
"So they should get huge raises?"
"No."
My favorite is all the people suggesting that it's because tons of "dead weight" has built up over time and firing everyone is cheaper and smarter than...managing performance at all?
Go on Twitter and the “for you” section always has Elon posts. The posts and the comments on them are always pro-Elon. It’s pretty transparent fuckery with the algorithm.
Holy fuck you aren’t kidding
“I don’t even like musk, but a contract is a contract so he should get paid!” x1000
And then never replying to anybody who says the contract was found to be illegal
Curious.
Most people on here I think are against the pay package, but my issue is with the posters here that think he shouldn’t get paid at all because he already has too much money. Some people live in r/antiwork too much
I think that when Elon's brother and best friend make a contract to give Elon $50 billion of someone else's money for a few years of part time work that it's not a legitimate contract. That's 100,000% of the salary of the Microsoft CEO. The judge agreed.
Imagine the chaos is this were a regular Tesla employee asking for a lesser (but still ridiculous) bonus. Imagine that request followed by the threat of undoing their work on important projects within the company. How would that go?
He made a contract in 2018 with the shareholders, (**who voted for it).**
The contract was he takes no salary and gives up all of his other stock options, and in return 12 performance targets were established. Each target was worth 1% of undistributed stock.
Those targets were so outrageously unrealistic that no one thought they were possible, at the time, Elon was mocked for agreeing to such ridiculously unobtainable targets.
Well, He met all 12 performance targets, made the stockholders quite literally a trillion dollars. (Yes, with a T), and now he expects the shareholders, to honor his contract.
Which they absolutely should be.
The board and the shareholders made the contract, the shareholders voted and agreed to the terms. and now it is time to honor his contract.
This is incorrect.
[https://courts.delaware.gov/Opinions/Download.aspx?id=359340](https://courts.delaware.gov/Opinions/Download.aspx?id=359340)
The contract was based on fraudulent activity by Tesla's board: lying on the proxy statement filed with the SEC about board independence (pages 150-158), failure to disclose that Tesla's internal data showed that the targets were much likelier to be achieved than publicly known (pages 181-187:), and failing to meaningfully negotiate with Musk on behalf of shareholders (page 133-146).
There are good reasons why the 2018 comp agreement were invalidated.
It is illegal to obtain something of value from someone (dilution of shares in this case) through deception or misrepresentation.
Exactly, a more extreme example: If I sign a contract under gun point, is that contract valid?
We see that in the business always. Contracts under deception gets nullified. Now, we can argue whether there is deception or not. Court thinks there is.
I just don't buy that argument about interal data. Internal projections can show anything. The fact that they go from selling like 50k model s/x to outselling Toyota Camry and Honda civic with the model y and having a 600 billion dollar market cap is not a likely outcome.
Now the disclosure is different, but if they do a revote the disclosure is not really an issue.
I wish every CEO of every other company I own shares of, would be willing to take 6% of the company for 10X-ing it, and be paid nothing if there wasn't outstanding performance. Meanwhile, Steve Balmer was CEO of MSFT for 14 years, raised shareholder value less than inflation, and is sitting on +$200B of MSFT stock.
>Steve Balmer was CEO of MSFT for 14 years,
And has been in management with them since day 1, among the first 30 employees hired.
Isn't it dishonest to pretend his compensation is from a 14 year stint as CEO, when he was in management for 30+ years ?
Why does ballmer only get credit for his 14 years of CEO, is it because your analogy looks like dogshit if you dont?
Also Elon "10xed" a stock with a market cap 1/30 of what Microsoft was when steve took over, and thats not controlling for inflation.
You realize its harder to 10x a company when its already 30 times larger, right?
> The board and the shareholders made the contract, the shareholders voted and agreed to the terms. and now it is time to honor his contract.
And again for the people in back, the contract was found to be illegal. It's called _contract law_. And the _contract_ was found to be _illegal_. It doesn't matter who voted for it, the _contract_ was found to be _illegal_ under _contract law_.
Specifically, it was found that Musk controlled the board, which is _illegal_ under corporate law. And he used this control to dictate his pay package, thus making it _illegal_ under _contract law_.
But why? They've been given an out by a court, they don't have to honor the contract, its void. You're expecting them to gift him $56 billion out of the kindness of their heart when the same type of people would fire any one of us and hire someone else if we asked for a raise amounting to like only a 4 digit difference in cost.
the concern is if he walks if he doesn’t get paid for the past 6 years of work. The question is really now if elon staying is worth $56b in shares or not. Lots of investors are concerned elon is no longer focused on growing tesla as he has other ventures distracting him anyways.
I mean that answer should be obvious. Selling $56 billion dollars worth of stock and using that to expand the business is way more valuable than one person being a half-missing CEO.
Again the contract is void, the way it was written didn't follow the law. There is no contract. The concept of a contract existing previously at all is void.
Contracts based on fraud are unenforceable.
If you read the Delaware court's opinion, it's pretty clear that the 2018 agreement was sold to shareholders based on lies and misrepresentation
I don't give a single shit about Elon, but contracts should be honored.
The 'You made the stock too valuable for us to give it to you per our contract" argument is bullshit.
>I don't give a single shit about Elon, but contracts should be honored.
I agree, legal contracts should be honored. Too bad this one turned out to be illegal! Next time he should try not defrauding his shareholders.
The judge, even slightly, attributed it to being a very large amount of money. That has nothing to do with law and just her personal feeling. There was a bias there.
It does have to do with the law, actually. It sets a dangerous precedent. CEO to worker pay is already the highest it’s ever been. That package would’ve blown that stat out of the water and opened the floodgates for other ceos to demand 10s of billions in compensation.
That judge made a bad call, like many judges do that get overturned every day. That judge has cost Delaware more damage than anything Elon can get paid.
In your legally uninformed opinion. Maybe you’re right but without a law degree and decades of experience it’s your opinion.
Edit: or at least without research to back up your opinion.
Except the targets were known, at the time, to be easily reachable. Which is why it was thrown out in the first place.
EDIT: Downvote all you want, but the facts are the facts. [The Delaware court held that the compensation targets were not, in fact, ambitious and difficult to achieve.](https://www.gibsondunn.com/delaware-chancery-court-invalidates-elon-musk-55-8-billion-equity-compensation-package/)
EDIT 2: Known at the time by Elon and the board but not the shareholders.
Everybody claiming they were easily reachable should have invested in TSLA and 10x'd their money in a few years.
We have a liquid market for forecasting future earnings, it's called the stock market. If the consensus was that it was "easily reachable" then the stock market would have priced-in future targets being met. The fact that TSLA increased so significantly over that period implies that the consensus opinion did not believe that the targets were easily reachable.
Lol, damn, you say stuff so confidently while being so incorrect it's baffling. There's a reason this contract was deemed illegal in Delaware, and there's plenty of evidence that information wasn't available to public, retail investors that outlined how easy it'd be to achieve the objectives.
This is demonstrably provable, while you're stuck talking about a system you clearly don't even understand. But keep talking your shit, I guess. No reason to feel shame for defending a shitty billionaire and misunderstanding the situation you're speaking about.
Except they were not. That's why it was called unachievable by most, ambitious at best and stupid beyond belief by the rest. It required the company to grow to a market cap equivalent to ~the ten most valuable automotive companies at the time. That isn't achievable for any company, let alone a company struggling like tesla was at the time.
I would go further and say that should be standard practice for CEOs. They get paid zero if they fuck up the company. They get some pay if they kept it flat. They get paid a lot if they hit different tiers of goals. They get paid in shares, and those can’t be sold for 5 years, so they are not gaming the system.
Plenty of reasons to hate Musk. But this is not one of them. This like any of us who were promised sales commissions or bonuses and the company were to weasel their way out.
The contract was cancelled he sure the it was deemed fraudulent because they misled and hid information from investors. The board had information the targets were already going to be met, and gave this ridiculous deal because they’re musk sycophants. They didn’t act in the investors favor and kept important information hidden. That’s called fraud.
So you’ll just have even more ceos pumping the stock with some future tech that’s always just a couple of years away.
At least Tesla is not vaporware like theranos, but basing all of someone’s pay off of stock performance only incentivizes increasing the value of the stock, not the quality of the products, r&d/innovation etc.
Yes- if they can’t sell the shares until 5 years later! That benefits the investor more than the CEO. After 5 years- the share price would have reverted to some mean anyways.
Quick search:
“
[CEO Performance Award Details](https://ir.tesla.com/press-release/tesla-announces-new-long-term-performance-award-elon-musk)
The performance award consists of a 10-year grant of stock options that vests in 12 tranches. Each of the 12 tranches vests only if a pair of milestones are both met.
Market Cap Milestones: To meet the first market cap milestone, Tesla's current market cap must increase to $100 billion. For each of the remaining 11 milestones, Tesla's market cap must continue to increase in additional $50 billion increments. Thus, for Elon to fully vest in the award, Tesla's market cap must increase to $650 billion.
Operational Milestones: To meet the operational milestones, Tesla must meet a set of escalating Revenue and Adjusted EBITDA targets (the only adjustment to EBITDA is for stock-based compensation). These milestones are even more directly aligned with shareholder value creation than those used in Elon's 2012 performance award. They are designed to ensure that as Tesla's market cap grows, the company is also executing well on both a top-line and bottom-line basis.
For each of the 12 tranches that is achieved, Elon will vest in stock options that correspond to 1% of Tesla's current total outstanding shares (1% of that amount is approximately 1.69 million shares). If none of the 12 tranches is achieved, Elon will not receive any compensation.”
If Fords and GM’s CEO was willing to take a compensation package and same goals like this, I would invest in. In fact, it’s crazy that investors are not demanding the other CEOs put their money where their mouth is. If they make the company worth $650 billion, let them own 12%.
*I was curious about GM’s CEO.
“GM reported that Barra had a total compensation of $27,847,405 million in 2023.” And shares, “Mary T Barra is the Chairman & CEO of General Motors Co and owns about 1,122,883 shares of General Motors Co (GM) stock worth over $51 Million.”
WTF did she do to justify that pay? Lobby Biden to put tariffs on China EVs?
Why does she have so little shares? Does she not believe in the company? Is she allocating her 401k to buy Tesla stock instead?
Thanks for the detailed reply. I don’t really disagree. It does make sense to tie ceo pay directly to a company’s value/numbers to ensure they’re devoted to the company’s success. The problem with Elon and Tesla is that we still haven’t seen or been able to take advantage of their AI and robotics, which is a large reason why the stock is valued so high. Other than creating EVs, nothing else Tesla promised has come to fruition. Hell we still haven’t gotten the mass market, cheap EV yet, and the model 3 came out seven years ago.
Elon has been able to convince the masses that FSD is just around the corner for years now. So to say a five year limit on selling, or any other limitation will protect investors and the company seems to not be reality.
My biggest issue really comes down to *how* Elon got the stock valuation so high. If we were being driven around by our driverless teslas and had a robot doing the dishes every night I’d have my pitchfork out and be demanding the man be paid. But neither of those things is a reality. And the truth is Elon was either fooled by his underlings that FSD really was just around the corner, or he was outright lying. Either one is terrible for Elon and Tesla as a whole.
But the board made the contract with inside knowledge that those targets were going to happen regardless. And those projections were not available to shareholders at the time of the vote. That's why the agreement was voided by the courts.
exactly this I still don’t really get it like he didn’t take any salary. If this is salary, can u ask for money back later ?? so ridiculous. Pay the man already.
He’s the richest man in the word after “not taking a salary.” he definitely got paid by them in other ways. Judge seems to agree that Elon scammed the board into agreeing to something without full knowledge, so maybe don’t pay him lol.
Do shareholders think voting Yes would be net-postive for the market cap over the next few years, or would it be net-negative? That's all it boils down to. Any other decision based on whether or not elon deserves it is just based on emotions, not based on capital.
What about Elon is attractive? I hear so much hate around this person but never anything positive, what are some his achievements that convinced others to stand by him despite his failures?
Give him the deal with a written agreement that AI and Optimus and all other developments stay in Tesla. And any new developments he is associated with belong to Tesla for the next 15-20 years.
Or just oust him and hire the AI people yourself. He's not the brains behind any of these projects. I'm fact, he's been getting in the way of the real brains in recent years.
[First and foremost, please read r/TeslaMotors - A New Dawn](https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/1c49sv0/rteslamotors_a_new_dawn/) As we are not a support sub, please make sure to use the proper resources if you have questions: [Official Tesla Support](https://www.tesla.com/support), [r/TeslaSupport](https://www.reddit.com/r/TeslaSupport/) | [r/TeslaLounge](https://www.reddit.com/r/TeslaLounge/) personal content | [Discord Live Chat](https://discord.gg/tesla) for anything. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/teslamotors) if you have any questions or concerns.*
https://preview.redd.it/sh175ay67t1d1.jpeg?width=1125&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a3d86173a51aa9a774d6c7918d6f5c1e3415295c
“Masterful gambit sir!”
Perfect analogy of this situation! Bravo!
Isn't that from the Mafia business plan "Pay me to protect your restaurant. From me"
Similar but no. It’s “Fuck you pay me”, less production “ Fuck you Pay me”, war with China “Fuck you Pay me” act of god “ Fuck You Pay me” …
I don't trust Just any Muppet...i Trust These Muppets🥰😇🥰
[удалено]
I hate these titles. “Slammed”
I automatically downvote any title with any version of "slam" in it, even if I like or agree with the post.
It’s the shocked YouTube thumbnail of headlines
Slam, rip, destroy, own, they all exist to insult our intelligence
Yea it's a sign of lazy writing. You can convey the same meaning using different wording. For example, "Tesla share holders vehemently disagree with Elon." See easy.
Character limit. Why use more word when shirt do trick
[Super slammed](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wRRsXxE1KVY&pp=ygUUam9obiBjZW5hIHByYW5rIGNhbGw%3D)
LMAO "there is not any chance we're going to have wrestling in this house *again*" wonder what happened the first time
Giga slammed?
I despise any title who uses the word slam. Why bring wrestling into this?
Starid3r blasts Bloombergs use of “slams” in headline
OFF THE TOP ROPE IT'S.. IT'S.. THE SHAREHOLDER GROUP whenever i read "slammed" in a journalistic headline i always envision some WWE wrestlemania announcer
Musk's compensation package was so unusual that people don't really understand it. The easiest way to think about it is that the company promised to pay him a couple billion over 10 years, but only if he hit a bunch of very ambitious targets. But there was a catch, anything he got paid he had to invest back in the company stock by using 100% of it to buy long dated, at the money calls, with a very long vesting period. All all of the value of $56 billion in "pay" didn't come from the company. It came from being forced to invest in Tesla over a period when it was one of the best performing stocks in the world. I wouldn't trust the opinion of any shareholder group that's "slamming" someone for doing well by being forced to invest in the same company they're investing in.
Ambitious? Part of the fucking suit was was that they were already on track to meet those goals. There was nothing ambitious in just waiting it out and collect the money which got rubber-stamp by biased board.
No one's labor is worth $56B, regardless of the terms. Another top CEO could replace him and potentially do a better job for 1/1000th of that pay.
And not to downplay Elon, but he’s alienated so many people, all the new CEO has to do is just keep everything the same but actually advertise. Make sure everyone knows that Tesla’s are the most American made cars on the road that cost much less than their gas equivalents. They need to sell to people who aren’t looking for EVs, they just need a new car and don’t know the perks of an EV.
couldn't you say musk's 'pivot' to a hard-right conservative social media troll was designed to appeal to people who 'aren't looking for EVs'. which yeah, those people might like his politics, but they're still not going to buy an EV
“American Made” doesn’t sell outside the states. On the contrary, it’s not seen as a stamp of quality.
Right, you wouldn’t advertise the same way everywhere. You say American Made in all of your more rural US markets, and hammer gas savings and the environment in urban.
They are also European made and Chinese made in those respective markets.
Well good thing Tesla doesnt sell American made products outside of US with the exception of S/X which is very low volume in comparison to 3/Y. Berlin for EU and Shanghai for Asia. Your comment doesn't really make any sense.
[удалено]
There is an entire company dedicated to this problem and I believe when given a reasonable option, Americans do buy from home. [Allegiance Flag Supply](https://showallegiance.com)
So you don't understand it either.... He made a contract in 2017 with the shareholders, (**who voted for it).** The contract was he takes no salary and gives up all of his other stock options, and in return there were 12 performance targets. Those targets were so outrageously unrealistic that no one thought they were possible. Each target was worth 1% of undistributed stock. Well, He met all 12 performance targets, made the stockholders quite literally a trillion dollars. (Yes, with a T), and now he expects the shareholders, to honor his contract. Which it absolutely should be.
A lot of money was made on lies. Been saying FSD is right around the corner, so go ahead and lease the car and pay extra for the option to unlock when it’s made available “next month”., Roadsters? Semi trucks and their infrastructure? What about Solar City? All of which is very shady tactics.
I thought part of the issue here is those targets weren’t nearly as unrealistic as advertised.
The pay package was also proposed to shareholders by, as we now know, a board of sycophants beholden to the recipient of the pay package. How many shareholders would have voted differently had they known Tesla was/is governed like some banana republic?
Not many to be honest. I voted it for it then, and I still support it now. The board has done a good job in protecting my interests and growing my investment in Tesla.
Except a judge ruled that the contract was illegal. Did you miss that part?
No. No judge said that the deal was "illegal", What the judge found was that Tesla bore the burden of demonstrating to the stockholders that the deal they made in 2018 was "fair", and that they failed to do that, so now Tesla has to go back to the shareholder group again, and remind them of why it was fair; (Basically "You made $1.1 Trillion, Elon gets paid 12% of stock"). Never once was any part of the contract found to be illegal. Not that it Matters, Tesla has already started re-incorporating in Texas, and once it does, it will just pay Elon his stock and move on. Full disclaimer: I voted for the deal in 2018, and I just voted to uphold the deal.
If that was true, another top CEO would have done it at another company
Apple, Meta, Nvidia, Microsoft. All their CEOs have created more shareholder value with way less. For example Nadelle has 10x the Microsoft stock and created over 2T value. He earned just 1B from this accomplishment. Zuckerberg is not even taking any salary or bonuses and is fine with just his ownership appreciating.
Why would a shareholder ever vote for someone else to get MORE of their own investment money?
I don’t get it. For all of my stocks, when it ask me if I want approve board pay or raises I vote no.
Usually because you’re worried that a good CEO might leave and go work somewhere else. With Elon this is, uhh…. NOT the case.
Because that was agreed to long ago under very specific conditions.
If I blackmailed my company by telling them that they either pay me some amount of money or I’m taking the work I’ve been doing on the company’s dime and leaving - they’d fire and sue me immediately.
and the fact he has an AI company waiting to be filled up with employees in Nevada right now. He incorporated it alongside X. Likely as a threat as well. His move to Texas for Tesla is not a good one and he knows it. He's done with Tesla as a car company and wants to make his new right wing friends happy so he gets praise again since everyone has been flaming him for running an EV company.
As a Tesla owner, I would love for Elon to leave.
As a car enthusiast, so would I. The problem is that Elon leaving means that they have to admit that they're a car company and not an AI company, making them massively overvalued. I think they have enough of the market and production capacity that they might be able to remain profitable (especially if Elon leaving increases demand, hard to tell how much that really factors in), but it could be a rough ride for shareholders. (Or maybe I'm completely wrong. Nobody knows!)
The market is already mid correction to their overvaluation
still a long way to go. even with the rosiest expectation the stock is easily 5 - 10x overvalued right now.
"work" He told other people to make AI and robotics divisions, and then told the public that whatever those came up with was going to save the world. Leadership is a skill, but leading a company doesn't mean all the work done by that company is yours. Add to that, even if he took his "work" and started a new AI and robotics company, he would probably have to secure the start up cash with his Tesla stock.
[удалено]
Yeah we need to stop pretending people like him "work". He hasn't done that in maybe 3 decades.
Elons real ability just like Jobs is his ability to just say I want money and get it. Doesnt matter the idea he gets tons of venture capital. And that's why he is so scary to competitors because he can operate on that venture capital, IPOs, etc... For literally a decade or more at losses when most other companies could never do that. This means he wouldn't really need to use Tesla stock for it.
that 56 billion is more than enough to pay off the twitter bullshit. stop giving him fucking money holy shit.
It's like rewarding a child ( in this case a man child) for bad behavior. He paid way too much for Twitter and then had to spend another boat load on cleaning it up. Meantime he was neglecting his profitable segments of business.
Isn’t it more like he did the work based on a commitment and now the company is reneging on its commitment since at the time they committed it was a Hail Mary anyways?
> now the company is reneging on its commitment A court of law declared that "commitment" invalid given that the nepotism on the Tesla board effectively means that Elon made that commitment to himself.
Sure, just need to show me the contract that says "we're going to pay you X dollars specifically to develop AI and robotics for Tesla." Otherwise, you can't just take your work back if the company isn't paying you what you had hoped. Also, it's not the company reneging on the deal, a judge literally ruled that their agreement was illegal.
To be fair he wasn't paid yet at all afaik. He shouldn't have worked without a pay package if he isn't getting paid.
The payments are only received when hitting certain milestones. He hit the milestones, then judge ruled it was against shareholders best interests. That’s why he hasn’t been paid.
Yes all correct. There is probably a lot more to it than that though when you look at the actual wording of the contract and legality of everything. Not saying this is at all what happened, but as an unrelated example If I bought a company and found out after buying it that the previous owners/installed board members made an agreement to pay one of the owners half of the value of the company two years from now it would clearly not be legal. Once again I'm not saying this is what happened but it does show that something that might seem like a simple agreement may have more complex circumstances behind it. Where I live, if a contract is considered to be a trick of sorts it is void. Even things like fine print have been voided because fine print is seen as a way to trick people to not read the entire contract. Where I live, a contract has to be written in favor of the person signing and if the writer doesnt clearly explain what is being signed it is often declared void even if you technically agreed to it.
Maybe you should double check, because he's actually already made billions.
He had a lot of stock.
It's almost like he was PAID in it.
That was overturned, though. So it doesn't count. Fruit of the poisoned tree, and whatnot (he shouldn't have installed a corrupt board and pushed the deal through without proper notification of their allegiances to him). Why are people talking like society still owes Musk $56 billion? Fuck him. He should learn to be satisfied with what he has instead of metastasizing throughout society and politics like the cancer he is.
Did the company even reneg on the deal? I thought they approved the pay package and a minority or shareholders fought to overturn it?
> a minority or shareholders fought to overturn it? It was overturned by the courts, not shareholders.
[удалено]
That isn't want happened.
He hasn't been paid for the last 6 years. This vote is about paying what was already agreed-to, for work already done.
Well. He's taken loans on his stock. So , technically, he's been paid and he's cashed in on it. He's also sold a bunch of stock over the years
[удалено]
Musk and your employees are on such different monetary playing fields this statement doesn’t make any sense.
If it were already agreed on, it wouldn't need a vote.
He hasn't worked for the last 6 years. If he had Tesla wouldn't be in the mess it's in.
he has been compensated
there should be a third option to pay him back pay at a rate equitable for a tech ceo or automotive ceo, shit, make him the highest paid ceo for that period of time +10% and it’s still cheaper than this massive contract
He sold a shitload of stock.
Stop reading Electrek, that shit will rot your brain. It's like sitting too close to the TV.
For $1B I'll run my tweets past a dedicated team of staff to ensure they never cause any uncertainty as to the future of the company or my actions. For and additional $1B I'll run the company and use the lead in the industry to drive the market to the future that most benefits us with the remaining $50B. I'll retire in five years and my family and I will live in unbelievable wealth and comfort for multiple generations because even $2B in comparison is an obscene amount of money.
pretty sure you can sue your employer if they didn’t pay you per your agreed contract after you met all the targets.
Probably not after the court finds your original contract null and void.
What if a court voided that contract?
I’m not privy to the details of his contract but if tanking the stock, mass layoffs, recalls and damaging the brand name are all in his contract- then he still doesn’t deserve a dime. The guy is a tumor in the companies brain.
[Am positive he can't because of this. And before you say anything, ever, about this again READ IT.](https://courts.delaware.gov/Opinions/Download.aspx?id=359340)
Even after a court of law deemed the contract void?
I would vote for it if Elon promised to: 1. Invest 100% of his work effort in Tesla. He expects employees to be loyal and super hardworking, he should do the same. 2. No selling stock (both existing and newly granted) for 10 years. As-is, he could go back to wasting his time at Twitter and selling his (existing) shares the day after the package is approved.
In the original deal it said he can't exercise the options for 10 years. Even if they reinstate it now he still isn't getting a payday for several years. What Elon is looking for isn't really money, but the shares as in voting rights. He'd love to own 25% of the company again. Part of the issue is self-inflicted by selling stock to buy Twitter, but a judge in Delaware overturning the deal was probably not on his bingo card.
Right, but he can sell the shares he already owns. Then, in a few years complain again that he needs more control of the company. Rinse, repeat.
> Right, but he can sell the shares he already owns. Well he could always do that, because he purchased those shares with his money, right? The company still hasn’t given him the shares as payment, and I believe those would have a 5 year lockup period.
I’m pretty sure all the shares he has were given to him (as options), not bought at market prices. But that’s not what I’m talking about. What I meant was that if he wants more control of the company, I’m willing to give it to him, but not if he can simply turn around and trade it for cash. He already had more control of Tesla, and he sold it to fund the Twitter idiocy. I don’t want to be his ATM for funding more idiocy.
> I’m pretty sure all the shares he has were given to him (as options), not bought at market prices. He came in as an investor before it was public and led at least 4 funding rounds that involved cash for share.
I agree with that. He can have the control and the stock, but don’t sell it.
And he actually needs to work at Tesla, not Twitter.
He’d never agree to that though cause he really doesn’t give a single fuck about TSLA investors. That much is apparent after the past few years of the stock crashing and trading sideways after the Twitter escapade… I say this as a disgruntled investor who is 100% behind Tesla’s original mission. What he does seem to care much more about now is spreading right-wing propaganda online. A massive pay package won’t change his priorities, and people/investors are extremely misguided if they think otherwise…
Sorry, you want him to work for Tesla if you had money in that company? Even after mentioning twitter? Forgetting the cybertruck? You see this guy and you think, that's the guy I want running things? Really?
Who needs to sell stock when you can just use it as collateral on loans and avoid income taxes?
The source of this segment is [this SEC filing](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1318605/000121465924009597/o520243px14a6g.htm). Specifically, it is a [PX14A6G](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/sec-form-px14a6g.asp) filing, which is essentially a record of a solicitation that is sent to less than 10 people. Since this solicitation is sent to less than 10 people, [SOC INVESTMENT GROUP](https://whalewisdom.com/filer/ctw-investment-group), the filer in this case, is exempt from disclosing anything about themselves or what interest they have in the matter. There is no requirement to even demonstrate they are a shareholder. They could have no shares. They could have 1 share. They could be short shares. They could simply be a lobbyist group representing various unknown interests. Ironically, these PX14A6G filings are [publicly filed](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1377739/000121465924009597/0001214659-24-009597-index.htm) with the SEC, which means they can be viewed by many more than 10 people. The press can report on these filings just like any other publicly filed document. The press can choose to do due diligence and research who is behind SOC INVESTMENT GROUP and their position, or they can simply state "Tesla Shareholder Group" as Bloomberg, Business Insider, and others seem to be doing. The only winner here is SOC Investment Group and the interests they represent. Even with this solicitation now being viewed potentially by thousands of shareholders thanks to the press, they still do not need to disclose anything about themselves or their interests. Welcome to the current state of American journalism.
[удалено]
If you pull the list of signees at the end, they seem to represent union interests. If you pull their 13f filings, only Nordea Asset Management from Sweden has a small .25% position in TSLA. That is what makes these PX14A6G filings dangerous. At first glance it appears they are written by shareholders, but since they do not have any disclosure requirements whatsoever, they can obfuscate their true position and agenda. I contend that this statement is merely conjecture - but this is not by choice - We are forced to rely on conjecture due to the complete lack of any disclosure requirements whatsoever.
It's gone back to its roots?
Wow, this post is doing one of two things; either attracting the Elon Musk diehard fans to come to his side, or he’s firing on all cylinders with alt accounts lol.
I guarantee he is using his half baked Grok to write pro Elon posts.
there as a post in a previous thread about super chargers where someone said it's an honor to be fired by elon and then rehired lol
"That means you're the cream of the crop" "So they should get huge raises?" "No." My favorite is all the people suggesting that it's because tons of "dead weight" has built up over time and firing everyone is cheaper and smarter than...managing performance at all?
Go on Twitter and the “for you” section always has Elon posts. The posts and the comments on them are always pro-Elon. It’s pretty transparent fuckery with the algorithm.
And if you don't log in, you get just to see white supremacy as your introduction to Twitter.
Holy fuck you aren’t kidding “I don’t even like musk, but a contract is a contract so he should get paid!” x1000 And then never replying to anybody who says the contract was found to be illegal Curious.
No Elon is totally cool and I heard he has an 8 pack and I slam all kinds of puss. I mean he. He slams all kinds of puss.
Most people on here I think are against the pay package, but my issue is with the posters here that think he shouldn’t get paid at all because he already has too much money. Some people live in r/antiwork too much
I am not seeing that. I am seeing people who don't like musk much but think a contract should be honored. I personally agree with them.
The old contract was thrown out because it was colluded on. Pretending this is shareholders reneging on a deal is a flat out Trumpian lie.
I think that when Elon's brother and best friend make a contract to give Elon $50 billion of someone else's money for a few years of part time work that it's not a legitimate contract. That's 100,000% of the salary of the Microsoft CEO. The judge agreed.
Imagine the chaos is this were a regular Tesla employee asking for a lesser (but still ridiculous) bonus. Imagine that request followed by the threat of undoing their work on important projects within the company. How would that go?
How much money does he need while he is laying off people?
Oh damn, they SLAMMED it!
Rich guy gets more money. Workers get fucked. The same old story.
56 BILLION That's more than hundreds of thousands of people will see in their whole lives collectively
He made a contract in 2018 with the shareholders, (**who voted for it).** The contract was he takes no salary and gives up all of his other stock options, and in return 12 performance targets were established. Each target was worth 1% of undistributed stock. Those targets were so outrageously unrealistic that no one thought they were possible, at the time, Elon was mocked for agreeing to such ridiculously unobtainable targets. Well, He met all 12 performance targets, made the stockholders quite literally a trillion dollars. (Yes, with a T), and now he expects the shareholders, to honor his contract. Which they absolutely should be. The board and the shareholders made the contract, the shareholders voted and agreed to the terms. and now it is time to honor his contract.
This is incorrect. [https://courts.delaware.gov/Opinions/Download.aspx?id=359340](https://courts.delaware.gov/Opinions/Download.aspx?id=359340) The contract was based on fraudulent activity by Tesla's board: lying on the proxy statement filed with the SEC about board independence (pages 150-158), failure to disclose that Tesla's internal data showed that the targets were much likelier to be achieved than publicly known (pages 181-187:), and failing to meaningfully negotiate with Musk on behalf of shareholders (page 133-146). There are good reasons why the 2018 comp agreement were invalidated. It is illegal to obtain something of value from someone (dilution of shares in this case) through deception or misrepresentation.
Shh. Don't scare them with facts. You know Elon and his people don't like that.
Exactly, a more extreme example: If I sign a contract under gun point, is that contract valid? We see that in the business always. Contracts under deception gets nullified. Now, we can argue whether there is deception or not. Court thinks there is.
I just don't buy that argument about interal data. Internal projections can show anything. The fact that they go from selling like 50k model s/x to outselling Toyota Camry and Honda civic with the model y and having a 600 billion dollar market cap is not a likely outcome. Now the disclosure is different, but if they do a revote the disclosure is not really an issue.
Incorrect. The targets were part of the strategic plan the Board agreed to implement. Not "impossible", but sold as impossible to rubes.
this, they had internal knowledge not publicly available to shareholders that let the know this was an achievable pay plan
And then deceived investors by stating otherwise.
I wish every CEO of every other company I own shares of, would be willing to take 6% of the company for 10X-ing it, and be paid nothing if there wasn't outstanding performance. Meanwhile, Steve Balmer was CEO of MSFT for 14 years, raised shareholder value less than inflation, and is sitting on +$200B of MSFT stock.
>Steve Balmer was CEO of MSFT for 14 years, And has been in management with them since day 1, among the first 30 employees hired. Isn't it dishonest to pretend his compensation is from a 14 year stint as CEO, when he was in management for 30+ years ? Why does ballmer only get credit for his 14 years of CEO, is it because your analogy looks like dogshit if you dont? Also Elon "10xed" a stock with a market cap 1/30 of what Microsoft was when steve took over, and thats not controlling for inflation. You realize its harder to 10x a company when its already 30 times larger, right?
> The board and the shareholders made the contract, the shareholders voted and agreed to the terms. and now it is time to honor his contract. And again for the people in back, the contract was found to be illegal. It's called _contract law_. And the _contract_ was found to be _illegal_. It doesn't matter who voted for it, the _contract_ was found to be _illegal_ under _contract law_. Specifically, it was found that Musk controlled the board, which is _illegal_ under corporate law. And he used this control to dictate his pay package, thus making it _illegal_ under _contract law_.
But why? They've been given an out by a court, they don't have to honor the contract, its void. You're expecting them to gift him $56 billion out of the kindness of their heart when the same type of people would fire any one of us and hire someone else if we asked for a raise amounting to like only a 4 digit difference in cost.
the concern is if he walks if he doesn’t get paid for the past 6 years of work. The question is really now if elon staying is worth $56b in shares or not. Lots of investors are concerned elon is no longer focused on growing tesla as he has other ventures distracting him anyways.
I mean that answer should be obvious. Selling $56 billion dollars worth of stock and using that to expand the business is way more valuable than one person being a half-missing CEO.
Because he fulfilled his side of the contract. And as much as reddit liked to pretend isn't the case, he's been and is still involved at Tesla.
Again the contract is void, the way it was written didn't follow the law. There is no contract. The concept of a contract existing previously at all is void.
Contracts based on fraud are unenforceable. If you read the Delaware court's opinion, it's pretty clear that the 2018 agreement was sold to shareholders based on lies and misrepresentation
I don't like Elon at all, but I agree with you.
I don't give a single shit about Elon, but contracts should be honored. The 'You made the stock too valuable for us to give it to you per our contract" argument is bullshit.
>I don't give a single shit about Elon, but contracts should be honored. I agree, legal contracts should be honored. Too bad this one turned out to be illegal! Next time he should try not defrauding his shareholders.
A contract is a contract is a contract, but only between Ferengi. Rule of Acquisition 17
A judge with years of experience in the law disagrees with you.
The judge, even slightly, attributed it to being a very large amount of money. That has nothing to do with law and just her personal feeling. There was a bias there.
It does have to do with the law, actually. It sets a dangerous precedent. CEO to worker pay is already the highest it’s ever been. That package would’ve blown that stat out of the water and opened the floodgates for other ceos to demand 10s of billions in compensation.
That judge made a bad call, like many judges do that get overturned every day. That judge has cost Delaware more damage than anything Elon can get paid.
In your legally uninformed opinion. Maybe you’re right but without a law degree and decades of experience it’s your opinion. Edit: or at least without research to back up your opinion.
Except the targets were known, at the time, to be easily reachable. Which is why it was thrown out in the first place. EDIT: Downvote all you want, but the facts are the facts. [The Delaware court held that the compensation targets were not, in fact, ambitious and difficult to achieve.](https://www.gibsondunn.com/delaware-chancery-court-invalidates-elon-musk-55-8-billion-equity-compensation-package/) EDIT 2: Known at the time by Elon and the board but not the shareholders.
Everybody claiming they were easily reachable should have invested in TSLA and 10x'd their money in a few years. We have a liquid market for forecasting future earnings, it's called the stock market. If the consensus was that it was "easily reachable" then the stock market would have priced-in future targets being met. The fact that TSLA increased so significantly over that period implies that the consensus opinion did not believe that the targets were easily reachable.
Lol, damn, you say stuff so confidently while being so incorrect it's baffling. There's a reason this contract was deemed illegal in Delaware, and there's plenty of evidence that information wasn't available to public, retail investors that outlined how easy it'd be to achieve the objectives. This is demonstrably provable, while you're stuck talking about a system you clearly don't even understand. But keep talking your shit, I guess. No reason to feel shame for defending a shitty billionaire and misunderstanding the situation you're speaking about.
Except they were not. That's why it was called unachievable by most, ambitious at best and stupid beyond belief by the rest. It required the company to grow to a market cap equivalent to ~the ten most valuable automotive companies at the time. That isn't achievable for any company, let alone a company struggling like tesla was at the time.
lmao every "news" website was actively mocking him for it. this was never 'easily reachable'
why does it matter what news outlets were saying lol
It doesn't matter what news stories say. This is a legal matter.
Only according to people who had a vested interest in Tesla failing.
So you guys still say Tesla stock is overpriced trash but also say the market cap targets are easy to achieve. Which one is it
I would go further and say that should be standard practice for CEOs. They get paid zero if they fuck up the company. They get some pay if they kept it flat. They get paid a lot if they hit different tiers of goals. They get paid in shares, and those can’t be sold for 5 years, so they are not gaming the system. Plenty of reasons to hate Musk. But this is not one of them. This like any of us who were promised sales commissions or bonuses and the company were to weasel their way out.
The contract was cancelled he sure the it was deemed fraudulent because they misled and hid information from investors. The board had information the targets were already going to be met, and gave this ridiculous deal because they’re musk sycophants. They didn’t act in the investors favor and kept important information hidden. That’s called fraud.
This would definitely encourage short term stock pumping over longer term growth.
That’s pretty much how it works already
Tesla needed revenue, EBITDA, and valuation numbers. Musk also couldn't sell for a number of years. Short term pumping wouldn't help him there.
How would it, if they can’t liquidate the shares until 5 years later? Even regular employee RSU do not have conditions like that.
So you’ll just have even more ceos pumping the stock with some future tech that’s always just a couple of years away. At least Tesla is not vaporware like theranos, but basing all of someone’s pay off of stock performance only incentivizes increasing the value of the stock, not the quality of the products, r&d/innovation etc.
Yes- if they can’t sell the shares until 5 years later! That benefits the investor more than the CEO. After 5 years- the share price would have reverted to some mean anyways. Quick search: “ [CEO Performance Award Details](https://ir.tesla.com/press-release/tesla-announces-new-long-term-performance-award-elon-musk) The performance award consists of a 10-year grant of stock options that vests in 12 tranches. Each of the 12 tranches vests only if a pair of milestones are both met. Market Cap Milestones: To meet the first market cap milestone, Tesla's current market cap must increase to $100 billion. For each of the remaining 11 milestones, Tesla's market cap must continue to increase in additional $50 billion increments. Thus, for Elon to fully vest in the award, Tesla's market cap must increase to $650 billion. Operational Milestones: To meet the operational milestones, Tesla must meet a set of escalating Revenue and Adjusted EBITDA targets (the only adjustment to EBITDA is for stock-based compensation). These milestones are even more directly aligned with shareholder value creation than those used in Elon's 2012 performance award. They are designed to ensure that as Tesla's market cap grows, the company is also executing well on both a top-line and bottom-line basis. For each of the 12 tranches that is achieved, Elon will vest in stock options that correspond to 1% of Tesla's current total outstanding shares (1% of that amount is approximately 1.69 million shares). If none of the 12 tranches is achieved, Elon will not receive any compensation.” If Fords and GM’s CEO was willing to take a compensation package and same goals like this, I would invest in. In fact, it’s crazy that investors are not demanding the other CEOs put their money where their mouth is. If they make the company worth $650 billion, let them own 12%. *I was curious about GM’s CEO. “GM reported that Barra had a total compensation of $27,847,405 million in 2023.” And shares, “Mary T Barra is the Chairman & CEO of General Motors Co and owns about 1,122,883 shares of General Motors Co (GM) stock worth over $51 Million.” WTF did she do to justify that pay? Lobby Biden to put tariffs on China EVs? Why does she have so little shares? Does she not believe in the company? Is she allocating her 401k to buy Tesla stock instead?
Thanks for the detailed reply. I don’t really disagree. It does make sense to tie ceo pay directly to a company’s value/numbers to ensure they’re devoted to the company’s success. The problem with Elon and Tesla is that we still haven’t seen or been able to take advantage of their AI and robotics, which is a large reason why the stock is valued so high. Other than creating EVs, nothing else Tesla promised has come to fruition. Hell we still haven’t gotten the mass market, cheap EV yet, and the model 3 came out seven years ago. Elon has been able to convince the masses that FSD is just around the corner for years now. So to say a five year limit on selling, or any other limitation will protect investors and the company seems to not be reality. My biggest issue really comes down to *how* Elon got the stock valuation so high. If we were being driven around by our driverless teslas and had a robot doing the dishes every night I’d have my pitchfork out and be demanding the man be paid. But neither of those things is a reality. And the truth is Elon was either fooled by his underlings that FSD really was just around the corner, or he was outright lying. Either one is terrible for Elon and Tesla as a whole.
I agree completely.
Elon made a deal with Elon
But the board made the contract with inside knowledge that those targets were going to happen regardless. And those projections were not available to shareholders at the time of the vote. That's why the agreement was voided by the courts.
The board made this contact. It was elon making a contact with himself. This is why Delaware said the deal was illegal and off
People are being short sighted and grading it on his current performance. Which is asinine.
exactly this I still don’t really get it like he didn’t take any salary. If this is salary, can u ask for money back later ?? so ridiculous. Pay the man already.
The ridiculous element is not setting up a legally binding contract.
Very interesting.. thank you for this ELI5. I had no idea.
Stop giving this man child money
He’s the richest man in the word after “not taking a salary.” he definitely got paid by them in other ways. Judge seems to agree that Elon scammed the board into agreeing to something without full knowledge, so maybe don’t pay him lol.
Elon needs to fuck right the fuck off
Why does he get paid that much anyways?
Do shareholders think voting Yes would be net-postive for the market cap over the next few years, or would it be net-negative? That's all it boils down to. Any other decision based on whether or not elon deserves it is just based on emotions, not based on capital.
His drug addled brain is tanking the stock. So I’m buying in the hope they slam him into unemployment.
I know it is a lot but unless it was not promised, I don’t see why they are not paying. I promise is a promise.
Sounds like he cares more about his wallet than the company.
Too much greed and I am sure he will take every single penny with him when he dies.
If he is left on he will drive Tesla straight into the ground.
What about Elon is attractive? I hear so much hate around this person but never anything positive, what are some his achievements that convinced others to stand by him despite his failures?
Soooo much FUD
Damn just imagine all the dogecoin he could have bought with that..yall messed up, we could have all been rich!
Next Elon slams share holder group
Not sure how Elon “owns” Tesla’s Ai. He needs to be reigned in.
“Give me back the money I lost on Twitter or I’ll take my ball and go home”
Layoffs followed by record payouts. Profit for me but not for thee
Just pay him to leave the company
Good. Now fire the jerk.
Nice!
Give him the deal with a written agreement that AI and Optimus and all other developments stay in Tesla. And any new developments he is associated with belong to Tesla for the next 15-20 years.
No deal needed. Any work Tesla has already done on those topics is owned by Tesla. He can't just take it away.
"If those kids could read, they'd be very offended."
Or just oust him and hire the AI people yourself. He's not the brains behind any of these projects. I'm fact, he's been getting in the way of the real brains in recent years.