Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

New board appointees discussion thread

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
I need to amend my prior post in an important way. In writing "...the institutional investor" I do not mean the ultimate owner of the fund's shares (you, me and the pension fund behind that tree). I mean the managers of the funds, inasmuch as their own compensation also is tied to how their funds performed.

Short term will kill you every time.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: neroden and Brando
You must have missed my post wherein I lamented that Larry got the nod rather than me.

At any rate....on edit....

It seems Mr Musk is either reading this thread or channeling it. Which of those options is weirder? Which more likely?
=====>
Screen Shot 2019-01-03 at 5.23.23 PM.png
 
Last edited:
Historically, having institutional investors on corporate boards has not worked out very well: there are inherent conflicts of interest between what's good for a fund and what's good for the long-term health of the corporation. The saddest, most egregious and frustratingly common example that instantly comes to mind are share buybacks. They prop up the stock price - Yay! says fund management - at the expense of hobbling the company's balance sheet.

Now, normally these also are disgustingly tied to the purse of senior management. In that share price is a compensation determinant in too many situations, a share buyback helps the institutional investor and senior management. We know that Mr Musk's package is quite innovative and honest in this regard, but Tesla is very much the exception here.

Agreed, but I think *Bailie Gifford is also an exception*. They're very long-term in their approach, unlike normal mutual fund management.