4 ms·

Also, speaking of Musk, note that for all his fits of pique over losing in chancery court over his attempt to wriggle out of a terrible contract that he wrote (

Also, speaking of Musk, note that for all his fits of pique over losing in chancery court over his attempt to wriggle out of a terrible contract that he wrote (Twitter) and a pay package that was rubber-stamped by a conflicted-controller BoD, he also notched some notable wins on some non-slam-dunk cases there, such as upholding Tesla's acquisition of his cousins' failing company SolarCity.

kjksf 2y ago
> pay package that was rubber-stamped by a conflicted-controller BoD Pay package was voted on by 75% shareholders, twice, so that's a gross misrepresentation of reality
- jedberg 2y ago
  No, it was voted on by 75% of shares. Musk alone is 12% of that.
  - diogocp 2y ago
    > 72% of all votes cast (...), excluding votes of shares owned, directly or indirectly, by Messrs. Elon and Kimbal Musk. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1318605/000110465924071439/tm2413800d31_8k.htm https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1318605/000110465924...
    - jedberg 2y ago
      That's still shares though, not people. Ok, we've excluded two large shareholders, but there are still plenty other large holders who are friends and associates of the board.
      - diogocp 2y ago
        I'm not sure what your point even is. Large shareholders have large shareholdings. They have a lot of skin in the game. They're going to vote according to what they think is best _for themselves_, not for Musk. You don't fool around when you have billions of dollars at stake. Small shareholders who only own a couple of shares can afford to vote for fun because, at the end of the day, the outcome won't affect them much. And for fun they did vote, 90% in favor. [1] Their support was never really in question. The only doubt was whether the big institutional investors (BlackRock, Vanguard, etc.) would go along with it. Vanguard had actually originally voted against it in 2018, but supported it in 2024. [1] https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/musks-small-investor-army-cheers-apparent-approval-56-billion-tesla-pay-package-2024-06-13/ https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/musks-...

kjksf 2y ago

> pay package that was rubber-stamped by a conflicted-controller BoD Pay package was voted on by 75% shareholders, twice, so that's a gross misrepresentation of reality

jedberg 2y ago
No, it was voted on by 75% of shares. Musk alone is 12% of that.
- diogocp 2y ago
  > 72% of all votes cast (...), excluding votes of shares owned, directly or indirectly, by Messrs. Elon and Kimbal Musk. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1318605/000110465924071439/tm2413800d31_8k.htm https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1318605/000110465924...
  - jedberg 2y ago
    That's still shares though, not people. Ok, we've excluded two large shareholders, but there are still plenty other large holders who are friends and associates of the board.
    - diogocp 2y ago
      I'm not sure what your point even is. Large shareholders have large shareholdings. They have a lot of skin in the game. They're going to vote according to what they think is best _for themselves_, not for Musk. You don't fool around when you have billions of dollars at stake. Small shareholders who only own a couple of shares can afford to vote for fun because, at the end of the day, the outcome won't affect them much. And for fun they did vote, 90% in favor. [1] Their support was never really in question. The only doubt was whether the big institutional investors (BlackRock, Vanguard, etc.) would go along with it. Vanguard had actually originally voted against it in 2018, but supported it in 2024. [1] https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/musks-small-investor-army-cheers-apparent-approval-56-billion-tesla-pay-package-2024-06-13/ https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/musks-...