Started By
Message

Cathy Wood Rips the Delaware Court Finding Voiding Musk's $56B TSLA Compensation

Posted on 2/5/24 at 5:40 am
Posted by NC_Tigah
Carolinas
Member since Sep 2003
124667 posts
Posted on 2/5/24 at 5:40 am
quote:

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.
...

Working with @ARKInvest’s General Counsel, who analyzed the 200+ page Delaware Court decision, I have concluded that legal nuances and the controversial interpretation of them have missed the forest for the trees, spectacularly and unfairly.

Tesla’s Board incentivized @elonmusk with a Herculean task that most analysts and auto manufacturers did not believe possible....

Agreeing to no salary during those five years, Elon also would have received much less performance-related compensation if he had achieved less than the lofty milestones associated with our bull case. Instead, he shocked and delighted shareholders.

Thanks to Elon’s ingenuity and dogged determination, Tesla hit our bull case target price in 2021, two years earlier than we anticipated. Since then, many shareholders have shared stories with us about how our research inspired their investment in $TSLA and changed their lives.

Compiled X thread / Standard X Link
Posted by Bard
Definitely NOT an admin
Member since Oct 2008
52030 posts
Posted on 2/5/24 at 5:46 am to
Elon is a Nazi-fascist-racist-homophobic-shitlord because he forced a popular social media platform to stop the partisan squelching of free speech. He must pay.
Posted by udtiger
Over your left shoulder
Member since Nov 2006
99779 posts
Posted on 2/5/24 at 6:53 am to
quote:

Agreeing to no salary during those five years


Dude bet on himself, and gave his company the chance to do so as well (and to nick him if he failed).

frick this judge.
This post was edited on 2/5/24 at 6:54 am
Posted by Nosevens
Member since Apr 2019
10710 posts
Posted on 2/5/24 at 7:03 am to
This ruling while not inside of a reorganization of the company seems fascist in nature. How can a government decide what is acceptable in a private business pay
Posted by M. A. Ryland
silver spring, MD
Member since Dec 2005
2051 posts
Posted on 2/5/24 at 7:18 am to
The Judge ruled that Tesla wasn't completely open with the shareholders about what they thought Musk's chances were of reaching the various compensation goals. A pretty ridiculous ruling on its face.
But since you can't go back in time to see if shareholders would have voted against the compensation package given extra information (I seriously doubt they would have), that leaves Tesla and Musk without any kind of reasonable remedy.

So I propose a remedy: Tesla estimates the hypothetical currrent share price if they had replaced Musk with a more mundane CEO by assuming Tesla stock would have performed the same as other auto manufacturers. Offer stock holders a one-time stock buyback opportunity at that price. Since the calculated alternate history price will likely be 25% of actual current stock price (or lower), nobody will accept the offer. Tesla then pays Musk per agreements, and everybody is happy.
This post was edited on 2/5/24 at 7:19 am
Posted by cwill
Member since Jan 2005
54754 posts
Posted on 2/5/24 at 9:33 am to
On the one hand why does a guy that owns nearly a quarter of the company need more incentives to increase value? On the other, it seems the package was board approved and mostly shareholder approved, so the lone shareholder suit the court took up seems insufficient to overrule the board.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram