> Thats not how you negotiate, apply leverage, and determine a middle-ground. Neither is populating the compensation board with people rife with conflicts of i

> Thats not how you negotiate, apply leverage, and determine a middle-ground. Neither is populating the compensation board with people rife with conflicts of interest (nor is lying about it to shareholders). That was one of the key findings here: the board, as a result of musk's actions, failed to properly negotiate in the best interest of shareholders. > This may be true, but don't think it is fully fleshed out logic. Elon would get his pre-deal portion of profit, with or without ongoing participation. It was found by the judge to be fully fleshed out logic. elmu would get no compensation without participation, because his wealth would decrease as a result of lack of participation, and increase as a result of his participation. That was judged to be enough motivation for him to participate. > It also ignores the damage Elon could do by leaving, which the company is also paying to avoid. It doesn't ignore that: it was directly addressed. As judged, that threat is empty, he was always going to stay anyways. Plus, he would lose billions in wealth via stock price decline if he bailed. Doubt it? The package was voided, and he's staying. Indeed, you pointed this out yourself: > The judge partially addresses the second part by bringing up statements where Elon said he had no intention of leaving. However, it seems obvious that there was a presumption that there would be some sort of additional compensation In the judge's judgement, there was no such presumption, and saying a presumption one makes up is "obvious" doesn't help the case for it being so. In any case, he was already going to achieve additional compensation via stock appreciation. To be absolutely clear: if you own a company, and you increase the value of the company, even if you take no paycheck, you have been compensated. The appreciation in value of your stocks is compensation. If the value increases ten billion in 1 year, you have been compensated ten billion that year for your efforts. Now, billions is a lot of compensation for 1 year, but if elmu wants more compensation than that, he has to honestly put together a compensation board that represents shareholders, honestly negotiate against it, honestly disclose all relevant info, and honestly hold a shareholder vote. He failed at all these, so now he has to start over (if he wants). >if you know your partner is really invested in your team school project, what stops you from checking out. The analogy here is, 'if you know musk is really invested in _his_personal_ school project, what stops _him_ from checking out?' Obviously the fact that he's really (and literally) [in]vested in his own personal project!