Forums

Why other companies can't compete

Why other companies can't compete

renwo S alset | April 22, 2016

P.S. I'm sure PD will say it's all smoke and mirrors to distract from EM's money grab.

mbb | April 22, 2016

This just adds to my huge respect for EM. To get his option fully vested, the stock value has to increase by 10X. I can't think of any other CEO to have the balls and conviction to sign up for such a compensation package

nene_MS | April 22, 2016

Prince just recently passed away and he was worth about 300 million. You really can't take any of that with you once you move from this world. And for him I am sure it was never about the money.

True genius and visionaries aren't in it for the money. They make a ton of it in many cases (not all), and deservingly so. Thank you Elon for having the vision and the drive to put it all together. I am a very happy owner and investor.

SbMD | April 22, 2016

More CEOs need to be aligned with their company's goals, like Elon is with Tesla.

Haggy | April 24, 2016

If things weren't bad enough, now we find out that Tesla leaves major decisions to some minimum wage employee.

sklancha | April 24, 2016

@Haggy LOL

sklancha | April 24, 2016

@Haggy LOL

Ross1 | April 25, 2016

GoPro's CEO (GPRO) is the highest paid CEO in USA (world), yet since I bought shares in August they have plummeted from $62 to $10 / $12.

Pity Nick wasn't on this program.

carlk | April 25, 2016

The only reason Elon wants money is he could use it to achieve his goals. We all know the story that he put his last cent into Tesla and SpaceX during the tough time of 08'. He was just this much from being totally broke.

steve.parkinson | April 28, 2016

Planet Money recently did a show about why Executive Compensation has got so crazy:

http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2016/02/05/465747726/-682-when-ceo-pay...

You can even listen to the show in your car.

Red Sage ca us | May 16, 2016

There is another thread, contributed to by Pungoteague_Dave, that very distinctly goes over his opinions regarding Elon Musk's compensation. Here is what I wrote in that thread:

Pungoteague_Dave concluded, "A fair deal all around, but one which is loaded for growth and profitability, and no mention of social objectives."

Yup. Shole iz. You have brought this subject up before, but thanks for reminding us with this update.

Elon Musk was given incentives in 2012 that from the perspective of numerous analysts, pundits, experts, and talking heads were based upon goals that were rather obviously 'impossible' to attain. The incentives give Elon a financial reason to stay with the company, but deferred to the same time frame he had more-or-less committed to remaining there anyway -- through the successful launch of Model ☰. This tells me that the board wanted him around at least ten years. I'm certain that when he signed, he likely hoped to do it all within five years instead. Five-out-of-ten so far ain't bad, and he'll have reached seven-to-nine of them by the end of 2017.

Pungoteague_Dave advised, "It is fairly clear that the fanboi 'we don't need no stinking equity' chorus will be slinking away at this point because there is no question that the equity market will see a lot of new TSLA shares this year - some mandatory, like Elon's tax liability, and some with limited but wider timing optionality - like the gigafactory, 3 engineering, and new 3 production lines."

I have no argument with your point of view here. You have noted the need for this a few times before, and been correct each time, whenever Tesla Motors needed to raise capital. I would much rather there be more stock on the market than have either Elon or Tesla crippled by debt.