5 ms·
Wow, I really did not expect them to approve Elon's 2018 stock award. Does voting for it have any advantages for other share holders?
by Ballas 2y ago
Wow, I really did not expect them to approve Elon's 2018 stock award. Does voting for it have any advantages for other share holders?
- Tankenstein 2y agoPresumably, Elon would leave otherwise. Looks like the majority of tesla shareholders would like Elon to stay.
- sigmoid10 2y agoYou can think of him whatever you want, but he's an investor money magnet like noone else. Everyone who owns stock of any company would want him. He could probably take over some fruit juice company and do nothing while it's valuation would still increase like crazy.
- retrocryptid 2y agoI own stock in several companies. I would not want him anywhere near them. I have this weird desire to see them increase in value.
- marticode 2y agoI own stocks of several companies and I definitely hope he stays as far away from them as possible. He is a man-child into alt-right and antivax conspiracy theories, this is toxic to any brand unless you are selling to the MAGA crowd.
- LeoPanthera 2y agoThe irony is, there are plenty of products and brands that absolutely would like to sell to the MAGA crowd, but you would not expect electric cars to be one of them, especially as their presidential candidate announced that he would ban them.
- vardump 2y agoWhat if Musk is just pretending all this to sell to the MAGA people? He has pretty much always supported democrats after all.
- red-iron-pine 2y agono he hasn't. like, he donates HEAVILY to anti-union causes and the GOP.
- robertlagrant 2y agoI really think people should stop saying "alt right" for anyone more conservative than Bernie Sanders. Alt right is an actual thing, and the trick of calling a mild thing an awful thing stopped working a few years ago.
- tsimionescu 2y agoElon has retweeted things about The Great Replacement and anti-vax conspiracies. He is very much on the alt right, not "slightly right of Bernie Sanders".
- defrost 2y agoHe did grow up with the original unexpurgated Ag Pleez Deddy *. Not that's any excuse but that was how the twig was bent. * Original being more or less contemporous with the novels Riotous Assembly and Indecent Exposure which lampooned the times.
- robertlagrant 2y agoHard to know without citations what that means in practice. And retweets? I don't know. I like every YouTube video I watch regardless of whether I like it, so I know what I've watched. Things that you could do accidentally with a thumbslip should only have a certain weight attached, and being quick to reach for a description that includes people who want Jewish people dead should be done cautiously.
- smsm42 2y ago> quick to reach for a description that includes people who want Jewish people dead Never heard him being called Columbia University or Harvard student.
- troupo 2y ago> Everyone who owns stock of any company would want him. Of course they would: from financing his own private vendettas (using Tesla to finance his Twitter acquisition) to rerouting GPUs ordered by Tesla to Twitter, who wouldn't want Musk to do that?
- yardstick 2y agoI was curious, so looked up Tesla’s stock price over the last few years. Seems like it’s had a rough ride since it’s all time high around late 2021. Comparing today to just before the Twitter takeover, the Tesla valuation is majorly down. And this is adjusted for the stock splits.
- peutetre 2y agoHe already has left. He's a part-time CEO at best. Employees call him a pigeon CEO because "he comes in, shits all over us, and then leaves": https://electrek.co/2024/04/22/elon-musk-pigeon-ceo-former-tesla-manager/ https://electrek.co/2024/04/22/elon-musk-pigeon-ceo-former-t... The board seems to be working for Musk more than they're working for Tesla.
- Leherenn 2y agoIf you believe a significant amount of the stock value is due to Elon himself, and he's likely to leave the company if the stocks were not awarded it can make sense. So basically if current value - stock award > value without Elon.
- KingOfCoders 2y agoNo, also that Elon can't sell those is a red herring. This enables him to sell other shares but keep control.
- sourcecodeplz 2y agoYes, they get preferential treatment (chance to get in first) from Elon in other future IPOs.
- vasco 2y agoAnd go on a factory tour with Elon https://x.com/Tesla/status/1795410566099374251?t=xICSqi-3l1p6paqZwcrhgg&s=19 https://x.com/Tesla/status/1795410566099374251?t=xICSqi-3l1p... some of it is so ridiculous that it's funny.
- refurb 2y agoI’m entirely unsurprised. The deal was clear, the milestones were very high and it was done at a point in time when everyone expected Tesla was going to go bankrupt. He basically got 10% of the increased value of Tesla. He created $450B in value, and got $45B. Plus he can’t sell for 5 years.
- shafyy 2y agoHe didn not create $ 450B in value. What does that even mean. Maybe he helped to create $ 450B of hype-dollars, but this is not real money, and for certain not "value". And let's not forget that the people doing the real, hard work are not seeing any of this "value" while he cashes real hard cash.
- rapsey 2y agoMarket cap of the stock.
- shafyy 2y agoSure, but the market cap of the stock doesn't mean that this is some kind of real money or value (using value in the sense of value for society etc., not "valuation of the company). It's fictional. If everyone tried to cash out, that market cap would go to zero faster than Musk can whip out his dick on his G-5.
- rapsey 2y agoYou are projecting you own views and opinions on a metric and language that is completely standard in business and investing. You are free to do that but it will not make you win any arguments.
- refurb 2y agoIf ever traded their USD for another asset the value of USD would fall to zero too. Does that mean USD is not real money either?
- 2y ago
- yreg 2y agoFor some shareholders it might be a matter of keeping their word. Not sure if that holds a value for investors in publicly traded companies.
- belter 2y ago> For some shareholders it might be a matter of keeping their word. Well...There is at least the 21% majority "funding secured" shareholder, to which keeping his word was not so important...
- red-iron-pine 2y agoaren't have of those voting shareholders his cronies? or like literally his brother?
- yreg 2y agoHis brother owns 0.06% of the company.
- janaagaard 2y agoI should probably look this up somewhere on the net, but here goes anyway: What was the basis for Elon not receiving his stock award? As I understand it, he and the stock holders made an agreement some years ago, that entitled Elon to a certain amount depending on how the stock performed. It turns out the stock performed really well, entitling Elon him to a really, really big bonus. I get that this is somewhat weird given that people are being fired and that Tesla is currently not able to sell their cars at the same rate as they are being produced. But is this enough to withhold the bonus? Are there some aspects of the agreement that Elon did not adhere to? From my point of view it looks like Elon was simply able to make a really good deal with the shareholders.
- tsimionescu 2y agoA judge found that the bonus was awarded basically by Elon to himself, so it was invalidated. Technically it was awarded by the board, but at a time when Elon had extreme control over them.
- TheDong 2y agoTo quote from the judge's judgement: https://courts.delaware.gov/Opinions/Download.aspx?id=359340 https://courts.delaware.gov/Opinions/Download.aspx?id=359340 > Musk controlled only 21.9% of Tesla’s voting power, so he lacked mathematical voting control... > Defendants sought to prove otherwise, and they generally contend that the stockholder vote was fully informed because the most important facts about the Grant—the economic terms—were disclosed... Basically, the shareholders voted on the grant while having a full understanding of the economic terms. It was awarded by musk, to musk, with approval of the shareholders and (supposedly overly friendly) board. It really makes it sound like the judge might have been wrong based on the sequence of events we have now, which is: 1. The shareholders approve a stock grant on economic terms 2. A judge says "If the shareholders knew everything, they wouldn't have approved that" 3. The shareholders, now knowing everything, approve it again despite it having almost no benefit now That really really makes it sound like the shareholders did in fact want to approve it in 1, and so the information they didn't know wasn't all that important, was it? I know it's a different set of shareholders then and now, but still...
- belter 2y agoThey get a 10% dilution, so you will probably see many lawsuits. Specially connected and within the institutional investors and funds, that changed their mind at the last minute. What made them change their mind at the last minute? Any promises of stakes on xAI? Because Cathie Wood fund is a major shareholder, but has a stake on XAI, as she reluctantly admitted on CNBC. From the case details below, even if it romanticizes a little bit the Tesla journey, while forgetting the more than 5 Billion in government subsidies, his companies received until 2015, is pretty clear there is no Corporate Governance at Tesla. At least not as you learn about when studying for a MBA :-) The board and compensation committee are is long time friends, his accountant, his brother and so on. If Tesla shareholders are willing to invest in the company, it's their money. Delaware law exists to enforce shareholders protection for all shareholders, so they can continue to choose it as an ideal location to incorporate a company. This case also raises serious issues of what real companies governance means, and specially in public companies. Not only for Tesla but for many other companies. Explains why in general, CEO and Board Level compensation, continues to raise at a pace that obfuscates the raises of normal workers. It's governance by checklist. By it's not much different from a CEO, who would decide to blow 100 million on a Las Vegas party using corporate funds, or hire his family, under the the threat of leaving the company, or tanking the share price. If shareholders vote for it... https://courts.delaware.gov/Opinions/Download.aspx?id=359340 https://courts.delaware.gov/Opinions/Download.aspx?id=359340
- rapsey 2y ago> From the case details below, even if it romanticizes a little bit the Tesla journey, while forgetting the more than 5 Billion in government subsidies, his companies received until 2015, is pretty clear there is no Corporate Governance at Tesla. At least not as you learn about when studying for a MBA :-) Why do government subsidies get brought up so often as if those alone are to credit for the success of Tesla and SpaceX. As if the other companies in the same space do not get them.
- belter 2y agoBecause these companies simply would not exist without them?