Judge Rules Against Elon's Pay Package [⚠️ ADMIN WARNING: NO POLITICS]

[BannedByTMC]

I tried, maybe it's a language barrier.

Sponsored

 

[BannedByTMC]

Nash proving he doesn't understand the issue either.

 

[Bill W.]

As with all legal situations, this may take awhile to settle out. Therefore, I am offering my services to assist. Specifically, I am willing to hold all of the subject funds in an interest-bearing account, until such time that a final ruling is rendered. At that time, I will release said funds as directed by the court's decision. The interest accrued, of course, will remain with me.

 

[JBee]

I tried, maybe it's a language barrier.

Easy way out.

Dictionary says:

threat;
a statement of an intention to inflict pain, injury, damage, or other hostile action on someone in retribution for something done or not done.

Is it a threat to take my golden parachute and retire?

Is it a threat that I retire because of old age?

Is it a threat because I quit because of health?

Is it a threat because I want to do something else with my time?

Is it a threat if my goals in life are no longer the same?

Is it a threat when I personally will suffer significant loss and sacrifice as a consequence, for doing what I believe in, to achieve my goals?

No.

The rest is just a one sided perspective skewed by dogma. What time is your service on Sunday? I think I might need to come by to highlight the err of your ways. Is that a threat? In your book it might be because you can't see the other side, nor the particulars that don't fit your warped perception.

Once again, EM'S primary goal is Mars.

He is not a government, doing nation sized things, but is doing it as a private citizen with private funds.

That means he needs a) the funds of a nation b) the manufacturing resources of a nation 3) the technological Innovation of a nation.

Optimus is wave one of Mars settlement. The comms time delay between Mars and earth excludes real time remote control of them. So FSD and AI is key to running a population of autobots there to build things. Optimus is humanoid so humans can be used interchangeably as required. All only possible with Starlink for comms, which also is big business to fund the expedition, Boring tunnel for shielded habitation, batteries and solar for power, methane for fuel out of a CO2 atmosphere, Stainless Steel for corrosion resistant building materials (Mars is red because it's largely iron ore), their own material sciences, Starship for getting people and things there and back, trying to save "the light of consciousness" and stuff...

And here's you having a whine about how he's supposedly "threatening" Tesla to achieve those goals, all of which the board are acutely aware of, as are most people who listen to and understand what EM says.

Tesla is just a fictional legal entity being used as a carriage of resources, for the purpose of constructing and manufacturing products and services FOR A PURPOSE.

That purpose is not to make more money to retire on, it's to make Mars habitable.

The disconnect here is not a language barrier, but rather your inability to see the big picture, so whilst you roam the alleys of ignorance for scraps of relevance, you fail to see the purpose and intent of Teslas existence in the first place.

The guiding principle here is simply "if" life is to be multi-planetary, then it must use systems that are sustainable everywhere. Including on earth.

So given the above, give me one good reason EM should backbdown from this endeavour to Mars, for the sake of one company that could potentially stand in the way, because of a bad actor forfeiting his influence?

I say again. I would do the exact same because it makes sense.

It does not make sense to risk Mars by leaving the door open for a takeover of essential products required to get there.

Tesla is but one of the industries required to achieve this. They either contribute and benefit by cross pollination of IP and products, or they don't.

The board, as most dominant shareholders know this. This is not new, neither a threat, just a statement of how it is in reality.

 

[cvalue13]

I pretty much agree with Tom Nash on this issue:

Pls reconsider

that dude real ignorant

 

[BannedByTMC]

threat;
a statement of an intention to inflict pain, injury, damage, or other hostile action on someone in retribution for something done or not done.

Exactly, Elon threatened to stop AI and robotics at Tesla, i.e. damage the company, if he doesn't get more control, i.e. for something not done. None of the many words you kept typing after that have any relevance what so ever.

 

[JBee]

Exactly, Elon threatened to stop AI and robotics at Tesla, i.e. damage the company, if he doesn't get more control, i.e. for something not done. None of the many words you kept typing after that have any relevance what so ever.

Lol.

You didn't bother reading it.

It is interesting how people respond to negative feedback loops.

I suppose the easiest way to justify not changing, or learning something new, is to ignore anyone that doesn't share the same opinion.

So in your view then, it is EMs only option to continue as is, and eventually lose control of an essential part of the supply chain to get to Mars in his lifetime?

Please explain why do you think this is the best thing for him to do?

 

[BannedByTMC]

You still cant seem to grasp the simple fact that what he should or should not do or wants to do or anything you have written about has nothing to do with the actual threat he made to stop developing AI and robotics at Tesla. There is no rational way to interpret his very clear wording in any other way. It doesn't matter in the least bit why he made the threat, it was still a threat. The only one here unable to take in new information is the person obviously so infatuated with Elon they can't handle even the slightest criticism of him. He's just a person not a deity.

 

[JBee]

You still cant seem to grasp the simple fact that what he should or should not do or wants to do or anything you have written about has nothing to do with the actual threat he made to stop developing AI and robotics at Tesla. There is no rational way to interpret his very clear wording in any other way. It doesn't matter in the least bit why he made the threat, it was still a threat. The only one here unable to take in new information is the person obviously so infatuated with Elon they can't handle even the slightest criticism of him. He's just a person not a deity.

So you think I'm a fan?

And because of that, aren't worthy of your explanation?

It's becoming clear you don't have a good explanation, because this is like the fifth time I've asked you what "you would do" if you were in his shoes and had his goals.

Shall I repost what he said to justify it?

Have you heard of a thing called motive?

Happy to be persuaded otherwise, if you had something tangible on offer as a counter argument. Repeating the same claim adds no substance or evidence to the contrary.

What would you do?

 

[BannedByTMC]

Everything you keep writing is still irrelevant to the fact that Elon made a threat. What you or I would, should, or could to is also irrelevant, that's why I'm not wasting anyone's time playing your games. Elon made a threat, end of story. If you think he had a good reason to make that threat that's fine, but also irrelevant to the fact that he made the threat. You seem incapable of understanding this.

 

[JBee]

Everything you keep writing is still irrelevant to the fact that Elon made a threat. What you or I would, should, or could to is also irrelevant, that's why I'm not wasting anyone's time playing your games. Elon made a threat, end of story. If you think he had a good reason to make that threat that's fine, but also irrelevant to the fact that he made the threat. You seem incapable of understanding this.

He didn't make a threat, he said he would do something everybody who knows a bit about him, would fully expect him to do anyway.

Even without him saying it out loud so you could hear it.

How would that surprise anyone?

He also famously once said Tesla will stop selling cars to people.

You'd think some context would matter, when saying that about a company that makes cars?

Or are you really saying he has no option other than to wait until he loses control and then he can leave Tesla in a "non-threatening" but morally expedient manner?

If so, why?

 

[BannedByTMC]

I'm of the opinion that a CEO should not act or speak in ways that damage the company. He also has plenty of control already, not to mention the fact that he willingly gave up a greater amount of control he already had by selling his shares, which also damaged the company. That was his choice.

 

[JBee]

I'm of the opinion that a CEO should not act or speak in ways that damage the company. He also has plenty of control already, not to mention the fact that he willingly gave up a greater amount of control he already had by selling his shares, which also damaged the company. That was his choice.

Right so you would of preferred he wasn't forced to sell stock to buy twitter in the end?

Or that he had to beg steal and borrow to pay the inflated price? Granted I agree he paid way to much for that pile of bot infested rubbish.

Good job the Chinese block twitter there though where he makes and sells so many Teslas. Could of been really bad otherwise. USA isn't the whole world as some might believe.

Shame he had to sell stock to pay all those billions in tax too I suppose?

I do sometimes wonder how much Tesla would crash if EM wouldn’t be around anymore.

Maybe half?

He must have "some" value then.

But back on subject though, without having access to a timemachine, to go back in time and change history, what would you do now in his position, given his goals? How could he do it in a "non-threatening" way without risking it?

 

[HaulingAss]

Let's remember that Elon and Tesla are not synonymous. Tesla existed before Elon, and it will continue to exist after Elon (whenever that point in time may come).

Tesla did not exist in any meaningful way before Elon Musk. Sure, two co-founders had registered the name "Tesla" but the company had no car design, no production facilities, no business plan, no employees and no money.

So how exactly did Tesla exist before Elon Musk? Not in any way that mattered.

 

[HaulingAss]

I am taking it as an insult but I think the wrong term is being used then. I was not misinformed. plaintiff are saying the proxy statement lied. It said directors were independent when they allegedly were not. I was / am under no illusion about who Musk knows or doesn’t outside the office. It’s impossible to know. But ok I’ll go with this “they lied” interpretation. It’s still lame that independency is a requirement when shareholders voted by majority but that’s another argument.

It's misleading of the plaintiffs to claim those directors were not "independent" since the SECs own definition of an "independent director" is a director who is not an employee of the company.

It's like they just made up the idea that an "independent" director is someone who doesn't socialize with the CEO - it has never meant that. The plantiffs are twisting the definition of the term "independent director" into something it has never been.

Sponsored