Let's say you invested in Tesla for your pension and you see that the board give Must 3.5 years of company profits as bonus, nullifying any company profit for that time:
"Tesla ended Q4 2023 with a net income of $7.9 billion and the full year with $15 billion in profits" , that money is more 3 years of profit, meaning that the company , after that compensation, must wait almost 4 years, if the trend remains that one, to generate profit !
Are you happy in that case ? EV market is now more competitive, it's no more the time when Tesla was founded, Mercedes has a better autonomous guidance system, there are plenty of alternative EV brands, moving that kind of money int the pocket of one of the owners a good move or you are crippling the company because you are taking away money could be user for R&D, for example, killing the company in years ?
Or you think they are slowly burning your savings. Maybe you are not a billionaire, that are all your saving.
Let's go further, most lucrative automaker is Toyota, Tesla is 5 position under in that top 10. If I take the CEO of Toyota, giving him double salary, to manage Tesla, without 55 billion bonus, will the company be mismanaged ? I don't think so, Musk isn't the only "genius" able to run a carmaker company and, in fact, there are at least 6 guys are doing a better job. Obviously there is the marketing benefit of the Musk brand associated to Tesla, but, men, 55B$, is it worth ???
IMHO, he did need money for Twitter and used Tesla as his own wallet, ignoring correct management practices and acting not in best interest of the company , de facto crippling its grown. Plus, CEO also owning company big shares percentage, often reduce their salary and benefits because , you know, it's your best interest work to increase company value because that enrich yourself.
So I really don't understand because someone think judge's sentence is unfair : again , I have shares in a company where the same happen, I also call my lawyer. Also, I expect that the judge deliberate to guarantee the rights of all shareholders, independently by the quote they own and in the best interest of the company existence and grown. Think the judge did, IMHO.
I don't think so and , anyway, why are you using the past ? Twitter IS losing money and IS nearly backrupt, not being able to sell , you know, ads, that in a company relying for 75% of its income on ads it's a big problem:
"X generated $4.4 billion revenue in 2022, a 11% decrease on 2021 figures. Revenue is expected to be worse in 2023 due to a loss of advertising revenue"
In fact, now is 1.5 billion verified, 2.1 estimated with a negative trend:
We have half revenue, even if you improved the efficiency of 100%, you have no improvement. Besides there are the interest he have to pay to banks lent him money.
So, "He has since turned it into a profitable company" , it's not true, it's the opposite, demonstrated black on white in the financial documents. Everything else is a delusional dream of Musk's troll army.
The people he fired was the same people help the platform to keep away the scum of the web outside, reason why the ads are declining. You know, you don't want nazis, white suprematist, antisemitic, hamas, near the new shoes model you are trying to advertise.
P.S. Anyway why this article is flagged? The source is a news article for a reputable source and the title is correct. Other demonstration that when you dare commit blasphemy against the Cult of Musk , you have to face an overdose of trolling.
"A Delaware judge on Tuesday voided the $56 billion pay package of Tesla CEO Elon Musk, ruling that the company's board of directors failed to prove "that the compensation plan was fair" or show much evidence that they had even negotiated with him".
And , to be objective :
"Tesla ended Q4 2023 with a net income of $7.9 billion and the full year with $15 billion in profits" , that money is more 3 years of profit, meaning that the company , after that compensation, must wait almost 4 years, if the trend remains that one, to generate profit !
So who can say the judge was unfair ???
Other possible repercussion, Tesla lack of funds for R&D in a sector where the competitors became very aggressive.
- But - he used the money to buy a company , Twitter, that was able to create profit, do lot of questionable choices killing any profit and, worst, firing thousands of employees, people with families, I want to remember. So, at the end, better if he did spend that money in Lambos and Guccis !
"Tesla ended Q4 2023 with a net income of $7.9 billion and the full year with $15 billion in profits" , that money is more 3 years of profit, meaning that the company , after that compensation, must wait almost 4 years, if the trend remains that one, to generate profit !
Are you happy in that case ? EV market is now more competitive, it's no more the time when Tesla was founded, Mercedes has a better autonomous guidance system, there are plenty of alternative EV brands, moving that kind of money int the pocket of one of the owners a good move or you are crippling the company because you are taking away money could be user for R&D, for example, killing the company in years ?
Or you think they are slowly burning your savings. Maybe you are not a billionaire, that are all your saving.
Let's go further, most lucrative automaker is Toyota, Tesla is 5 position under in that top 10. If I take the CEO of Toyota, giving him double salary, to manage Tesla, without 55 billion bonus, will the company be mismanaged ? I don't think so, Musk isn't the only "genius" able to run a carmaker company and, in fact, there are at least 6 guys are doing a better job. Obviously there is the marketing benefit of the Musk brand associated to Tesla, but, men, 55B$, is it worth ???
IMHO, he did need money for Twitter and used Tesla as his own wallet, ignoring correct management practices and acting not in best interest of the company , de facto crippling its grown. Plus, CEO also owning company big shares percentage, often reduce their salary and benefits because , you know, it's your best interest work to increase company value because that enrich yourself.
So I really don't understand because someone think judge's sentence is unfair : again , I have shares in a company where the same happen, I also call my lawyer. Also, I expect that the judge deliberate to guarantee the rights of all shareholders, independently by the quote they own and in the best interest of the company existence and grown. Think the judge did, IMHO.