> Let's say you invested in Tesla for your pension and you see that the board give Must 3.5 years of company profits as bonus, nullifying any company profit for

> Let's say you invested in Tesla for your pension and you see that the board give Must 3.5 years of company profits as bonus, nullifying any company profit for that time: That’s irrelevant and wrong. First, they don’t give profits, they were options grants for equity which dilutes shareholders. Second, profits aren’t divided amongst shareholders because they don’t pay dividends. Your pension got a 10x gain from this agreement if it was invested and voted for it. Now the agreement is being withdrawn but your pension will keep the 10x. If you can’t see how that can be seen as unfair, I don’t know what to tell you. Musk led the company through a moonshot goal and the argument is “eh, we said we would give you a huge bonus for doing this but you’re already invested”. It’s not meaningfully different from taking away a software engineer’s options because they have a bunch of vested stock because “they already have skin in the game”. The conflict of interest is the only thing with merit. The fairness arguments are complete bullshit and will set a terrible precedent on their own.