Tesla's $2.6B Musk Award Too Costly, Glass Lewis Says • Hacker News Board

Re: Tesla's $2.6B Musk Award Too Costly, Glass Lewis Says

#51

Post by RangerScience » Tue, Mar 06, 2018, 9:15 AM UTC

thisisit wrote: post #44

feniv wrote: post #9

The article doesn't go into much details of the stock award. Musk is proposing not taking a salary for the next 10 years and receiving a 1% stock award each time he meets some insanely aggressive milestones: https://cdn.teslarati.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Tesla-C... http://ir.tesla.com/releasedetail.cfm?releaseid=1054948 I'm not a TSLA shareholder, but tying CEO performance to company performance rather than an…

Is tying CEO performance to company performance really a good idea? Just 3 days ago we had a story about how shareholding affects the company and CEO: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16502607 So, it begs the question - What do shareholders do if something like this happens? Additionally, > But the success has also underscored the company’s dependence on its CEO -- a risk factor that’s routinely spelled out in re…

Slopes are only slippery when they change the methods by which you make the decision. Otherwise they're just linear gradients.

AFAIK, a big part of Musk's success is not forgetting this: What people build (which is probably everything you've ever interacted with) people can build differently; _especially_ things of contracts and concepts like compensation packages.

To put it another way; if the stockholders and board of Tesla decide to do something unusual like this, they could also easily decide to do another unusual thing and not repeat it.

Re: Tesla's $2.6B Musk Award Too Costly, Glass Lewis Says

#52

Post by tbabb » Tue, Mar 06, 2018, 9:26 AM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #30

tbabb wrote: post #22

They should probably be spending that money on building cars. I doubt that "more money" would make much of a dent on what Elon's motivations really are.

> They should probably be spending that money on building cars It's a performance-triggered stock award in lieu of cash salary.

They should still be spending that on cars.

Re: Tesla's $2.6B Musk Award Too Costly, Glass Lewis Says

#53

Post by Roverlord » Tue, Mar 06, 2018, 11:24 AM UTC

IntronExon wrote: post #43

wirelessest wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the cost to his ego for not meeting a milestone which receives even more publicity because of the big price tag is a big motivator (or at least one could argue) So even if the utility of the funds isn't consequential, a package like this might be one if the few ways to further incentivize a CEO like Musk.

If he’s not incentivized by all of the high ideals he claims, plus $20 billion, then he’s broken.

Maybe some people are infinitely incentivizable, because they can always figure out a way to do something useful with the money.

Bill Gates for instance, although his model seems to be give it all away to good causes he believes can accomplish good. Elon still seems to believe more in his own capabilities to accomplish worthwhile things with it.

I expect he too has a little txt file somewhere on his desktop, with various amounts as milestones to unlock the next project.

Maybe at $22 billion he can afford to start asteroid mining and in orbit construction or something that would top his current accomplishments.

Re: Tesla's $2.6B Musk Award Too Costly, Glass Lewis Says

#54

Post by frgtpsswrdlame » Tue, Mar 06, 2018, 11:49 AM UTC

toomuchtodo wrote: post #46

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes!

Luckily they have helped stoke the electrification of transportation despite your protest. My condolences.

Yeah they've stoked CEO payouts and golden parachutes and stock dividends just as much as they've stoked transportation. If corporations need government money to be forward-looking then I want some of that profit coming back to the government, not just going out to the investor class.

Re: Tesla's $2.6B Musk Award Too Costly, Glass Lewis Says

#55

Post by frgtpsswrdlame » Tue, Mar 06, 2018, 1:04 PM UTC

alakin wrote: post #49

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The subsidies are directly funding Musk's wallet as much or more than they are funding battery research.

I get that you have strong feelings. But this is just uninformed. If you took a sec to understand Musk's comp structure you'd see that its paper wealth, as in he doesn't take cash out of the company. Instead he puts cash in the company. Also he only sold stock to pay taxes. I'd guess its likely he paid more in taxes than you, if you're an average earner.

>If you took a sec to understand Musk's comp structure you'd see that its paper wealth, as in he doesn't take cash out of the company.

So far, the obvious implication is that at some point in the future Musk will become even more rich, mainly off converting his paper wealth to cash wealth. I cannot get behind the idea of taxpayer wealth being used to make billions of dollars for a few wealthy individuals.

>I'd guess its likely he paid more in taxes than you, if you're an average earner.

Yeah and? I'm talking about 5 bil in subsidies.

Re: Tesla's $2.6B Musk Award Too Costly, Glass Lewis Says

#56

Post by thisisit » Tue, Mar 06, 2018, 1:25 PM UTC

RangerScience wrote: post #51

thisisit wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is tying CEO performance to company performance really a good idea? Just 3 days ago we had a story about how shareholding affects the company and CEO: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16502607 So, it begs the question - What do shareholders do if something like this happens? Additionally, > But the success has also underscored the company’s dependence on its CEO -- a risk factor that’s routinely spelled out in re…

Slopes are only slippery when they change the methods by which you make the decision. Otherwise they're just linear gradients. AFAIK, a big part of Musk's success is not forgetting this: What people build (which is probably everything you've ever interacted with) people can build differently; _especially_ things of contracts and concepts like compensation packages. To put it another way; if the stockholders and board…

So, you are saying stockholders and board of Tesla should change the method for Musk. And when it comes time to choosing a successor they should again change the method and take a vow to never change the method again.

Re: Tesla's $2.6B Musk Award Too Costly, Glass Lewis Says

#57

Post by IntronExon » Tue, Mar 06, 2018, 8:18 PM UTC

Roverlord wrote: post #53

IntronExon wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If he’s not incentivized by all of the high ideals he claims, plus $20 billion, then he’s broken.

Maybe some people are infinitely incentivizable, because they can always figure out a way to do something useful with the money. Bill Gates for instance, although his model seems to be give it all away to good causes he believes can accomplish good. Elon still seems to believe more in his own capabilities to accomplish worthwhile things with it. I expect he too has a little txt file somewhere on his desktop, with var…

Asteroid mining and orbital construction would require trillions in investment, and years of focused work by a number of institutions. As far as I can tell, Musk uses that rhetoric for PR, and it works. So far an electric car company and rockets suited for LEO don’t add up to grand space adventures.

Re: Tesla's $2.6B Musk Award Too Costly, Glass Lewis Says

#58

Post by RangerScience » Tue, Mar 13, 2018, 11:58 PM UTC

thisisit wrote: post #56

RangerScience wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Slopes are only slippery when they change the methods by which you make the decision. Otherwise they're just linear gradients. AFAIK, a big part of Musk's success is not forgetting this: What people build (which is probably everything you've ever interacted with) people can build differently; _especially_ things of contracts and concepts like compensation packages. To put it another way; if the stockholders and board…

So, you are saying stockholders and board of Tesla should change the method for Musk. And when it comes time to choosing a successor they should again change the method and take a vow to never change the method again.

Yes, yes, and then no. They are under no obligation or requirement to maintain a given system, and, I would argue, it's unreasonable to try to do so given how powerfully unique each aspect of the situation is (or must be).

Not just anyone can lead a company; not just anyone could (I presume) lead a company like Tesla. Any process by which you would select that level of uniqueness, it seems to me, must necessarily be unique itself.