5 ms·

Tesla investors back $56B Musk pay deal

23 points by onemoresoop 2y ago

bearjaws 2y ago
Astonishing given his recent action of taking away H100s.
datavirtue 2y ago
That's more than Tesla is worth.
- constantcrying 2y ago
  Wrong. Absolutely wrong. You are being lied to by the media who claims that Musk is greedy and wants money from Tesla. That is false and deliberately misleading, Musk doesn't get money, he gets shares which means he gains control, this is what this is about. The reality is also more interesting. Musks pay package can, by definition, not be larger than the worth of the company.
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago
    It means he can offload the shares he currently holds.
  - fooker 2y ago
    The shares can be used as a collateral to borrow against, something Musk has done repeatedly. Or can be sold, with some more nuances. So yes, he also wants the money.
    - constantcrying 2y ago
      Sure, no doubt that the monetary worth is important. But it completely misses the larger context. This is a struggle about power. Musk wants shareholders to give him back the company he sold. Tesla right now is struggling, a lot. The Cybertruck, the only recent new model, had a slow start and has suffered from a recall. Competition right now is extremely fierce, Tesla is by no means unique in the market any longer. That is the situation in which Tesla is asking shareholders to give him control over the company. I am sure you agree that is a far more interesting story than "evil billionaire want's company to give him billions".
      - dazc 2y ago
        Musk wanted shareholders to honour a deal agreed already. All car companies, including Toyota, are currently 'struggling'. If aliens landed today they would surmise that cars were the dominant species, closely followed by dogs. As has been the case for 50 years or more. In other words, 'struggling' is a relative term.
        constantcrying 2y ago
        >All car companies, including Toyota, are currently 'struggling'. Tesla won't exist in a decade if they continue on current trajectories. Their situation is completely non-comparable to Toyota, VW, Hyundai or any of the other larger car makers. None of them have it easy, but none of them are in the situation Tesla is in, just look at their recent financials results.
        bryanlarsen 2y ago
        Tesla is profitable, lots of cash in the bank and little debt. Tesla will be fine. Tesla share price might not be, but the company itself is fine.
        constantcrying 2y ago
        >Tesla is profitable, lots of cash in the bank and little debt. Tesla will be fine. If the trends of their last quarter continue they won't be fine, that much is painfully obvious.
        bryanlarsen 2y ago
        If the trends continue for a decade, sure.
        rayiner 2y ago
        You mean this trajectory? https://stockanalysis.com/stocks/tsla/revenue/ https://stockanalysis.com/stocks/tsla/revenue/ They had 18% revenue growth last year, 50% the year before that, 70% the year before that, and 28% the year before that. By comparison Toyota’s revenue is barely growing: https://stockanalysis.com/stocks/tm/revenue/ https://stockanalysis.com/stocks/tm/revenue/
  - noncoml 2y ago
    Hard to get an argument serious when the main argument is “You are being lied to by the media” Stocks give you both control and equity, and can be exchanged for money. Don’t know which part of that simple fact does the media lie to us about.
    - constantcrying 2y ago
      And? This doesn't change the fact that the statement "Musks compensation is worth more than what the company is worth" fundamentally shows a severe lack of understanding about the situation. >“You are being lied to by the media” The framing is completely misleading. Again and again the headlines are about money and not the actual thing Musk gets in return.
      - noncoml 2y ago
        “what the company is worth” Market cap is $560b. That’s how much the company is worth. Like it or not.
        constantcrying 2y ago
        I am not arguing the market cap. I am pointing out that Musk doesn't get Money, he gets shares. And pretending this isn't about power over the company is completely misleading.
    - dazc 2y ago
      The media article referenced does kind of suggest this is a $56 billion 'pay' package.
  - Daviey 2y ago
    If he sells these, or a portion, OTC to someone else he bags the money. How is this not remuneration?
    - constantcrying 2y ago
      The shares he is gaining now he can't sell for a certain amount of time. This is about him wanting control over the struggling company back. That context also makes the situation far more interesting, because it is the sole reason why shareholders would even vote for his proposal. Because it is a vote about him as a leader.
- panick21_ 2y ago
  Its not cash. Its stocks based on the stock price, sales and profit. If the company isn't successful he doesn't get much.
rayiner 2y ago
> The pay proposal received 72% of the votes cast, similar to the 73% total in 2018, when it was first approved. Welp.
Dig1t 2y ago
I don't understand why this is surprising. The shareholders already voted to do this once, and it was revoked by a judge in Delaware for obvious political reasons. Why is it surprising that the same people who voted for it the first time are voting for it again? It even got the same percentage of approval votes as the first time it happened.
- dazc 2y ago
  Turkeys don't vote for Thanksgiving - shock, horror!
- JamesBarney 2y ago
  It's surprising because it's after the fact. They get to keep the gains even if they revoke the pay package.
- tzs 2y ago
  > I don't understand why this is surprising. The shareholders already voted to do this once, and it was revoked by a judge in Delaware for obvious political reasons What obvious political reasons?
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
daft_pink 2y ago
It’s just to reinstate what was already promised to him. I think it’s unfair to withhold this from him as he delivered on his end of the deal.
cashsterling 2y ago
So they are giving Musk ~8% of their current market cap. I guess the logic from shareholders is "if we don't approve the package, the stock is likely to drop more than 10%". I don't know exactly how the vote was carried out... but I do wonder if the vote was manipulated in any way.
- jauntywundrkind 2y ago
  The funny part is the original case that got Elon's pay package revoked was that the board was around the board not being independent enough. So the same board going & reapproving a pay package doesn't seem like real remedy for the case against Elon's pay package. > Judge Kathaleen McCormick threw out Musk’s pay package in January, ruling that the board members had been insufficiently independent from the Tesla CEO while negotiating the package. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/article/2024/jun/14/elon-musks-45bn-tesla-pay-package-not-a-done-deal-say-legal-experts https://www.theguardian.com/technology/article/2024/jun/14/e... If this stock starts being liquidated at any significant volume, the stock will also definitely drop. Even if these holdings are to be doled out & possible exercised, it sure seems like the company could hire & keep a lot of great people with this stock holding.
  - JamesBarney 2y ago
    But the shareholders voted for it again. If the board and shareholders all agree to pay the CEO a share of their money, who some judge in delaware to disagree. > If this stock starts being liquidated at any significant volume, the stock will also definitely drop. Even if these holdings are to be doled out & possible exercised, it sure seems like the company could hire & keep a lot of great people with this stock holding. Yeah but maybe not Elon, and I believe based on this vote the shareholders fear losing him.
    - jauntywundrkind 2y ago
      If he illegally appoints a board of yes men who remain faithful to him, then it doesn't matter how the board votes: it's not a legal & legitimate board looking out for the company as a whole. That case has already been decided. And the board re-voting doesn't change that outcome.
fabiofzero 2y ago
Tesla shareholders are part of the "one is born every minute" category, it seems.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
ryandvm 2y ago
It's reductive, but the great thing about democracy is that the voters get exactly what they deserve.
Ajay-p 2y ago
I think Musk should get the pay package. It's an obscene amount of money, but the shareholders voted for it, and it would be wrong for the court to stand in the way going forward.

23 points by onemoresoop 2y ago

bearjaws 2y ago

Astonishing given his recent action of taking away H100s.

datavirtue 2y ago

That's more than Tesla is worth.

constantcrying 2y ago
Wrong. Absolutely wrong. You are being lied to by the media who claims that Musk is greedy and wants money from Tesla. That is false and deliberately misleading, Musk doesn't get money, he gets shares which means he gains control, this is what this is about. The reality is also more interesting. Musks pay package can, by definition, not be larger than the worth of the company.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago
  It means he can offload the shares he currently holds.
- fooker 2y ago
  The shares can be used as a collateral to borrow against, something Musk has done repeatedly. Or can be sold, with some more nuances. So yes, he also wants the money.
  - constantcrying 2y ago
    Sure, no doubt that the monetary worth is important. But it completely misses the larger context. This is a struggle about power. Musk wants shareholders to give him back the company he sold. Tesla right now is struggling, a lot. The Cybertruck, the only recent new model, had a slow start and has suffered from a recall. Competition right now is extremely fierce, Tesla is by no means unique in the market any longer. That is the situation in which Tesla is asking shareholders to give him control over the company. I am sure you agree that is a far more interesting story than "evil billionaire want's company to give him billions".
    - dazc 2y ago
      Musk wanted shareholders to honour a deal agreed already. All car companies, including Toyota, are currently 'struggling'. If aliens landed today they would surmise that cars were the dominant species, closely followed by dogs. As has been the case for 50 years or more. In other words, 'struggling' is a relative term.
      - constantcrying 2y ago
        >All car companies, including Toyota, are currently 'struggling'. Tesla won't exist in a decade if they continue on current trajectories. Their situation is completely non-comparable to Toyota, VW, Hyundai or any of the other larger car makers. None of them have it easy, but none of them are in the situation Tesla is in, just look at their recent financials results.
        bryanlarsen 2y ago
        Tesla is profitable, lots of cash in the bank and little debt. Tesla will be fine. Tesla share price might not be, but the company itself is fine.
        constantcrying 2y ago
        >Tesla is profitable, lots of cash in the bank and little debt. Tesla will be fine. If the trends of their last quarter continue they won't be fine, that much is painfully obvious.
        bryanlarsen 2y ago
        If the trends continue for a decade, sure.
        rayiner 2y ago
        You mean this trajectory? https://stockanalysis.com/stocks/tsla/revenue/ https://stockanalysis.com/stocks/tsla/revenue/ They had 18% revenue growth last year, 50% the year before that, 70% the year before that, and 28% the year before that. By comparison Toyota’s revenue is barely growing: https://stockanalysis.com/stocks/tm/revenue/ https://stockanalysis.com/stocks/tm/revenue/
- noncoml 2y ago
  Hard to get an argument serious when the main argument is “You are being lied to by the media” Stocks give you both control and equity, and can be exchanged for money. Don’t know which part of that simple fact does the media lie to us about.
  - constantcrying 2y ago
    And? This doesn't change the fact that the statement "Musks compensation is worth more than what the company is worth" fundamentally shows a severe lack of understanding about the situation. >“You are being lied to by the media” The framing is completely misleading. Again and again the headlines are about money and not the actual thing Musk gets in return.
    - noncoml 2y ago
      “what the company is worth” Market cap is $560b. That’s how much the company is worth. Like it or not.
      - constantcrying 2y ago
        I am not arguing the market cap. I am pointing out that Musk doesn't get Money, he gets shares. And pretending this isn't about power over the company is completely misleading.
  - dazc 2y ago
    The media article referenced does kind of suggest this is a $56 billion 'pay' package.
- Daviey 2y ago
  If he sells these, or a portion, OTC to someone else he bags the money. How is this not remuneration?
  - constantcrying 2y ago
    The shares he is gaining now he can't sell for a certain amount of time. This is about him wanting control over the struggling company back. That context also makes the situation far more interesting, because it is the sole reason why shareholders would even vote for his proposal. Because it is a vote about him as a leader.
panick21_ 2y ago
Its not cash. Its stocks based on the stock price, sales and profit. If the company isn't successful he doesn't get much.

rayiner 2y ago

> The pay proposal received 72% of the votes cast, similar to the 73% total in 2018, when it was first approved. Welp.

Dig1t 2y ago

I don't understand why this is surprising. The shareholders already voted to do this once, and it was revoked by a judge in Delaware for obvious political reasons. Why is it surprising that the same people who voted for it the first time are voting for it again? It even got the same percentage of approval votes as the first time it happened.

dazc 2y ago
Turkeys don't vote for Thanksgiving - shock, horror!
JamesBarney 2y ago
It's surprising because it's after the fact. They get to keep the gains even if they revoke the pay package.
tzs 2y ago
> I don't understand why this is surprising. The shareholders already voted to do this once, and it was revoked by a judge in Delaware for obvious political reasons What obvious political reasons?

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

daft_pink 2y ago

It’s just to reinstate what was already promised to him. I think it’s unfair to withhold this from him as he delivered on his end of the deal.

cashsterling 2y ago

So they are giving Musk ~8% of their current market cap. I guess the logic from shareholders is "if we don't approve the package, the stock is likely to drop more than 10%". I don't know exactly how the vote was carried out... but I do wonder if the vote was manipulated in any way.

jauntywundrkind 2y ago
The funny part is the original case that got Elon's pay package revoked was that the board was around the board not being independent enough. So the same board going & reapproving a pay package doesn't seem like real remedy for the case against Elon's pay package. > Judge Kathaleen McCormick threw out Musk’s pay package in January, ruling that the board members had been insufficiently independent from the Tesla CEO while negotiating the package. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/article/2024/jun/14/elon-musks-45bn-tesla-pay-package-not-a-done-deal-say-legal-experts https://www.theguardian.com/technology/article/2024/jun/14/e... If this stock starts being liquidated at any significant volume, the stock will also definitely drop. Even if these holdings are to be doled out & possible exercised, it sure seems like the company could hire & keep a lot of great people with this stock holding.
- JamesBarney 2y ago
  But the shareholders voted for it again. If the board and shareholders all agree to pay the CEO a share of their money, who some judge in delaware to disagree. > If this stock starts being liquidated at any significant volume, the stock will also definitely drop. Even if these holdings are to be doled out & possible exercised, it sure seems like the company could hire & keep a lot of great people with this stock holding. Yeah but maybe not Elon, and I believe based on this vote the shareholders fear losing him.
  - jauntywundrkind 2y ago
    If he illegally appoints a board of yes men who remain faithful to him, then it doesn't matter how the board votes: it's not a legal & legitimate board looking out for the company as a whole. That case has already been decided. And the board re-voting doesn't change that outcome.

fabiofzero 2y ago

Tesla shareholders are part of the "one is born every minute" category, it seems.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

ryandvm 2y ago

It's reductive, but the great thing about democracy is that the voters get exactly what they deserve.

Ajay-p 2y ago

I think Musk should get the pay package. It's an obscene amount of money, but the shareholders voted for it, and it would be wrong for the court to stand in the way going forward.