Blog Shareholders Approve Musk’s Compensation Package

Tesla Chief Executive Elon Musk’s proposed multibillion-dollar compensation plan was approved Wednesday by shareholders, according to multiple outlets.

The plan is unique in that it is contingent on achieving market cap and operational milestones that would make Tesla one of the most valuable companies in the world. In order for Musk to fully vest, Tesla’s market cap would have to grow to $650 billion and important revenue and profitability goals would also have to be achieved.

The package will keep Musk at the company for the next 10 years and is a 100% at-risk performance award. Musk will not be compensated unless shareholders do well. That said, Musk could ultimately earn up to $55.8 billion in stock and awards if Tesla’s market cap grows from its current $52 billion to $650 billion.

Musk and his brother Kimbal, both on the Tesla board of directors, recused themselves from the vote.

 

[SO16]

And this is why I jump to the fanboy argument. Your bias is showing. Who said I was going to vote "no"?

I just wanted more information than "everyone else is doing it."

The first response of any fanboy to any distention among the ranks is "well, just sell the stock". What a moronic thing to say.

If you want to intelligently discuss the pros and cons of his compensation package, than please do that. But don't just tell me how to handle my own investments just because I'm seeking more information than the leemings who just blindly go along with whatever they're told to do.

You wrote: “they pretty much hung up on me before I could cast a "no" vote”

Unless I misunderstood, you had already decided a no vote.

Let’s see. You call me a fanboy. A moronic commenter. Infer me as a lemming. And then you want to discuss “intelligently”?

No thanks. And frankly, I really don’t care what you do with your investments. Just pointed out the hypocrisy of it.

 

[HankLloydRight]

You wrote: “they pretty much hung up on me before I could cast a "no" vote”

You misinterpreted what I meant. Let me rephrase: "They pretty much hung up on me assuming I was going to cast a 'no' vote".

I hadn't, and still haven't decided which way I would have voted (not that it matters).

And nothing I've said is hypocritical. Nothing. Since when is asking for more information to make a more informed decision, "hypocritical"?

 

[SO16]

You misinterpreted what I meant. Let me rephrase: "They pretty much hung up on me assuming I was going to cast a 'no' vote".

I hadn't, and still haven't decided which way I would have voted (not that it matters).

More accurately, you miswrote it.

 

[SO16]

And nothing I've said is hypocritical. Nothing. Since when is asking for more information to make a more informed decision, "hypocritical"?

Voting no and then reaping the rewards of said compensation seems hypocritical. Amazing how few people put their money where their mouth is. But whatever. The initial premise is wrong since you didn’t accurately convey what you meant. So just forget it.

 

[HankLloydRight]

More accurately, you miswrote it.

If I wanted to cast a 'no' vote, I could have proxyvoted online, sent in the mail forms, or just told the callers 'no'. I didn't do any of those things. But the second I started asking them for more information on the issue, they decided for me that their time wasn't worth it because I wasn't an immediate 'yes' vote. That's not the same as a 'no' vote no matter how you try to spin it.

Voting no and then reaping the rewards of said compensation seems hypocritical. Amazing how few people put their money where their mouth is.

Since I didn't vote 'no', where's the hypocrisy? Again, you're assuming that's how I would vote just because I'm not voting yes like everyone else. Like I said, your bias is showing.

 

[SO16]

If I wanted to cast a 'no' vote, I could have proxyvoted online, sent in the mail forms, or just told the callers 'no'. I didn't do any of those things. But the second I started asking them for more information on the issue, they decided for me that their time wasn't worth it because I wasn't an immediate 'yes' vote. That's not the same as a 'no' vote no matter how you try to spin it.



Since I didn't vote 'no', where's the hypocrisy? Again, you're assuming that's how I would vote just because I'm not voting yes like everyone else. Like I said, your bias is showing.

Perhaps you should take your own advice. You assume too much. And I didn’t “spin” anything. By stating how you wrote it, it sounded like you were going to be a “no” vote....period. So don’t spin what you originally stated.

Also reread my last post.

“The initial premise is wrong since you didn’t accurately convey what you meant. So just forget it.”

Next time, refrain from name calling. It doesn’t help the discussion ....at all.

 

[HankLloydRight]

Next time refrain from telling people how to invest their own money just because they are critical thinkers who don't happen to agree with you.

I guess the only solution to your problem is to sell the stock.

Really? That's my only solution?

 

[SO16]

Next time refrain from telling people how to invest their own money just because they are critical thinkers who don't happen to agree with you.



Really? That's my only solution?

You are giving yourself too much credit.

Yes. That’s the only true solution. Anything else is just lip-service. Talk is cheap.

 

[HankLloydRight]

. That’s the only true solution.

True solution to what problem, exactly?

 

[SO16]

True solution to what problem, exactly?

Never mind. You just can’t seem to comprehend.

Good day.

 

[HankLloydRight]

And look who's calling names now?

All I did as a stockholder was request additional information. That's it. That is the ONLY thing I did.

What's the problem? What hypocritical about being an informed investor?

I guess anytime an investor long in a stock who seeks out additional information to vote all of a sudden is a "big problem" and the only solution to that is selling the stock? Seriously? Can you even hear what you're saying?

And what's this about 'talk is cheap' and 'put your money where my mouth is'?

It's somehow a big problem for you if all I did was ask for more information?

It's only a big problem for you because I'm not falling in line with you and I might have a different perspective on the issue.

Maybe you should sell the stock so you don't have to worry about dealing with other investors that actually like to be educated about their investments.

 

[SO16]

And look who's calling names now?

All I did as a stockholder was request additional information. That's it. That is the ONLY thing I did.

What's the problem? What hypocritical about being an informed investor?

I guess anytime an investor long in a stock who seeks out additional information to vote all of a sudden is a "big problem" and the only solution to that is selling the stock? Seriously? Can you even hear what you're saying?

And what's this about 'talk is cheap' and 'put your money where my mouth is'?

It's somehow a big problem for you if all I did was ask for more information?

It's only a big problem for you because I'm not falling in line with you and I might have a different perspective on the issue.

Maybe you should sell the stock so you don't have to worry about dealing with other investors that actually like to be educated about their investments.

1. I didn’t call you names. I said you can’t comprehend [to what I’m saying in response to your question], seeing as how you asked the same thing more than once and I explained myself more than once.

2. You do have every right to ask questions. I went off from your initial post which was poorly worded. You made it sound like you were a “no” vote at the time of the phone call. You then corrected it and then I said to forget it in post 24.

3. I don’t have a problem. See number 1 and number 2 above again.

4. I should sell my shares? You may want to reread your “advice” you gave me.

Anyway...this whole thing is just stupid. Especially when it all stems from an initial misunderstanding. Good day.