-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Elon Compensation Package
- Thread starter Buckminster
- Start date
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
Completely agree. I'll add that the Judge hangs her opinion on the notion that investors weren't sufficiently informed that 'the Board was controlled by Elon'. I challenge the Plaintiff and the Judge to show that that 80% of shareholders who voted in favor of the 2018 CEO comp plan weren't also aware of these 3 simple facts:
- Elon Musk was both CEO and Chairman of the Board of Directors at Tesla throughout this process,
- The Board's Chairman controls the Board in any Corporations, and
- All Investors knew this.
This type of causality doesn't work in the actual Universe, thus this Judge failed to create a correctly supported Opinion. It will be overturned upon appeal (which will be concluded after Tesla moves its domicile out of Delaware to Texas).
No mention either that the Compensation Committee hired outside consultants to formulate the details of the comp. plan, which was demonstrated to be fair and acceptable to both parties, and which is what shareholders actually voted upon.
Or, that the Judge's "truly independant Directors" objection is a classic "No True Scotsman" fallacy: the legal defination of an "Independant Director" is defined** by the NASDAQ stock exchange, and the Proxy sent to Shareholders correctly describing them as such.
Investors are legal adults, and are responsible (but not required) to do their own due dilligence as to the meaning of legal terms used in the Proxy statement. There was no intent to deceive shareholders, the Judge's Opinion should be struck down upon appeal.
Regards,
Lodger
** NASDAQ: “Independent director” is one who is not an executive officer or employee of the company and who, in the board's opinion, has no relationship which would “interfere with the exercise of independent judgment” in carrying out director responsibilities.”
Last edited:
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
Matt digs into Biden / Delaware Chancery Court 'conflict of interest' issues (9 min segment)
... plus a few other perspectives on the court case -- well worth the watch, IMO.
... plus a few other perspectives on the court case -- well worth the watch, IMO.
10 shares is at least more than 9 I suppose. Oh wait 10 million...
I've tried to collect some numbers for Elon's Comp Package and related issues. I am not a lawyer nor a CPA just a hobbyist Tesla Fan Girl so please help me out with the missing numbers and any errors I probably made:
Challenges with giving Elon a new identical deal:
Code:
55.0 B Approximate value of Elon's Compensation Package today
7.1 B Exercise cost for Elon
29.2 B Taxes Elon must pay on exercising
18.7 B Net value left for Elon after exercising
2.3 B Taxes Tesla must pay when Elon exercises
~301 M The number of shares in TSLA in question
0.00 $ Amount earned by the 9-shares guy who won the court case
8.3 B Amount earned by the class action law firm (15% of value in play)Challenges with giving Elon a new identical deal:
- Elon would have to pay taxes immidiately since option deal already well In The Money
- Elon AFAIK does not have money to pay those huge taxes 20+ Billions
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
The Chairman of the Board controls the Agenda. Literally, this office is responsible for drafting the business meeting agendas. In accordance with Robert's Rules of Order, any Membee of the Board can also bring up New Business. Literally, what would have happened in this case is that CEO comp. would have come up on the regular Agenda, then was tabled to a Committee to devise a Comp plan. Which they did.
But the notion that the Judge can simply IGNORE that Elon was Chairman of the Board while simultaneously complaining that he "controlled the Board" is not a plausible arguement. That's what the Chairman does, that's their responsibility. And ALL SHAREHOLDERS knew that Elon was Chairman of the Board. Because it involved his comp. the task was sent to a Committee, as it should be, and why the Committee hired outside compensation consultants to help draft the plan (to ensure it was fair and effective), which took 9 months (not rushed under 'undue control')
Elon's or Robyn's Chairmanship status at the present time isn't relevant here. This issue is about the validity of the shareholder's vote held on Mar 31, 2018 (unless you are mesmerized by the 'Delaware Time Machine' -- where history can be cancelled or ignored if it doesn't fit the Judge's desired outcome).
Last edited:
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
New Details on Tesla's Court Drama: What's Next for Musk? | Brighter with Herbert (w.Larry Goldberg)
Pissed Larry: "she voided a transaction because of an unseemly relationship and SHE has an unseemly relationship. OMG. You can not get more ironic than that." -- epic. rant begins @ 6:45
Pissed Larry: "she voided a transaction because of an unseemly relationship and SHE has an unseemly relationship. OMG. You can not get more ironic than that." -- epic. rant begins @ 6:45
Last edited:
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
"Imagine being rewarded a bonus that is more than an entire company's profits have ever been."
— Tesla Economist (@teslaeconomist) February 5, 2024
... of course, what Lee conveniently ignores is future profits from the money-printer which Tesla has now built. At least $100B in profit in Tesla coffers before Elon can sell the first one of his not-yet-excuted shares (minimum 5 years waiting period, income taxes doen't count). All in accordance with his brilliantly crafted 2018 Comp plan.
Some *sugar* you just can't cover up with a priggish public school accent, Lee.
Lee is Laughably pwned. Wonder if he has a patreon... oh wait. He always said "you can follow me on twitter, and talk to me on patreon". Those are the real victims here!
Last edited:
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
Elon Musk Tesla Compensation Plan Was Unfair - To Whom? Not the Shareholders! | Randy Kirk (2024-02-05)
|
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
Did you miss this from ARK Invest CEO Cathie Wood a week ago?
Write-up from Bezinga, too:
Cathie Wood Blasts Delaware Court's Move To Rescind Elon Musk's $56B Tesla Pay As 'Un-American,' Tells How Billionaire 'Shocked And Delighted' Shareholders | Nasdaq
Cathie Wood on X: "I believe the Delaware court decision, forcing #Tesla to void the March 2018 vote on Elon Musk's performance-based pay package, is un-American, an assault on investor rights, and an insult to the Board of Directors of one of the most stunningly successful companies in US history." /X
Write-up from Bezinga, too:
Cathie Wood Blasts Delaware Court's Move To Rescind Elon Musk's $56B Tesla Pay As 'Un-American,' Tells How Billionaire 'Shocked And Delighted' Shareholders | Nasdaq
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
Only the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has the authority to block a purchase, typically on non-competitive grounds. Hard to see how they'd make that stick since Elon owns no other media.
The $EC only has the power to issue fines, and even that is being challenged in the SCOTUS as being unconstitional due to not providing a day in court. The San Francisco Office of the SEC being the best example of runaway regulators abusing their authority (just ask Elon).
Similar threads
