4 ms·

He reportedly tore up a settlement at the last moment. Fireworks!

• deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
• vinceguidry 8y ago
  The settlement required him to step down as chairman for two years and let someone else run the company.
  • jyxent 8y ago
    Isn't the chairman position just part of the board of directors? I think he would have still been CEO with the agreement. If the SEC wins now, he won't be able to serve as CEO.
  • minimaxir 8y ago
    Having the SEC file against you is far, far worse.
  • dragontamer 8y ago
    No. Chairman of the board only runs the board of directors. The settlement would have allowed Musk to remain CEO (in charge of the company). The board of directors is in charge of the CEO... and Musk would have been allowed to remain a director (just not the leader / chairman of the directors). It was a super-lenient deal. I'm surprised Musk rejected it. True, the SEC was forcing Musk to take on 2-new board members, but Musk still has all of his old buddies on the board and would have likely remained in severe control of the company. Note that as the biggest shareholder, Musk also has the ability to vote on who comes and goes on the board-of-directors, and thus he'd be able to effectively choose the chair as well !! So Musk ultimately would have STILL remained in charge of the company by a severe margin. Musk is a big shareholder, is on the board of directors, AND is the CEO. He's the fox guarding the hen-house. Completely legal because companies can operate however they want... but SEC was trying to get the board of directors to at least look like they were somewhat independent. I mean, it probably would have been good for Tesla to get a more independent looking board...