Judge: Musk was overpaid
-
All of which is irrelevant. The bar was set, the compensation defined. He exceeded the requirements. Pay him.
@Mik I agree. If that was the rules/outline to begin with, tough to back out now.
Now, whether he is worth that payment is another question.
-
https://edition.cnn.com/2024/06/09/business/elon-musk-pay-package-shareholder-vote/index.html
The answer will come Thursday, when Tesla holds its annual shareholders meeting and announces results of shareholder votes on two proposals. One would once again approve the package of 303 million split-adjusted stock options, worth $46.9 billion as of Friday’s closing price. That’s down from the $51 billion those options were worth at the time of the decision.
-
Tesla shareholders have approved CEO Elon Musk's record-breaking pay package in a show of approval for the billionaire's management.
The vote is a victory for Mr Musk, who had campaigned fiercely for the payout, which is worth up to $US56 billion ($84 billion) — the exact amount depends on the Tesla share price, according to the BBC.
Shareholders also approved a proposal to move the company's legal home to Texas from Delaware, alongside three other approvals including the re-election of two board members: Mr Musk's brother, Kimbal Musk, and James Murdoch, son of media mogul Rupert Murdoch.
-
Who cares what the owners (shareholders) say. No bonus.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/02/business/elon-musk-tesla-pay-ruling.html
A Delaware judge on Monday affirmed an earlier ruling that rescinded a giant pay package that Tesla had awarded its chief executive, Elon Musk.
The pay, in the form of stock options, was worth more than $50 billion and helped make Mr. Musk the richest person in the world. The package is now worth $100 billion after Tesla’s share price jumped sharply in recent weeks.
The judge, Chancellor Kathaleen St. J. McCormick of the Delaware Court of Chancery, struck down the award in January, ruling that shareholders had not been properly informed of its details and that members of Tesla’s board were not sufficiently independent.
But lawyers for Tesla and Mr. Musk argued that a second shareholder vote in June in favor of the package cleared the way for effectively reinstating it.
The pay comes from a 2018 award that said Mr. Musk would get all the options only if Tesla’s stock price soared and its sales and earnings grew strongly. Few expected Mr. Musk to achieve all of those targets because Tesla was still struggling to sell enough electric cars to become profitable. But Tesla’s business took off and its stock rocketed higher, allowing Mr. Musk to earn all the options. He has to hold them for five years.
The shareholder who brought the suit, Richard J. Tornetta, contended that Tesla’s board had not acted independently of Mr. Musk when devising the package and that the company had provided “materially misleading” information to investors. In her January ruling, after a trial in 2022, Chancellor McCormick said, “The process leading to the approval of Musk’s compensation plan was deeply flawed.”
-
As good a place as any to post this.
Delaware lawmakers on Monday proposed changes to the U.S. state's widely used corporate law that would limit shareholder lawsuits after several high-profile companies said they might move their legal home to another state.
The bill sets out steps that corporate boards could take to insulate directors and controlling shareholders from litigation over alleged conflicts. The bill would also limit the kinds of internal records that shareholders can access, which they need to build their cases. The bill is sponsored by leaders of both parties in both houses of Delaware's state assembly.
