this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2025
515 points (98.5% liked)

World News

39609 readers
3080 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Dutch pension fund Stichting Pensioenfonds ABP sold its $585 million Tesla stake over concerns about Elon Musk's "controversial and exceptionally high" pay package and unspecified labor conditions.

ABP previously voted against Musk's performance-based compensation, which has faced shareholder lawsuits and judicial scrutiny.

A Delaware judge recently invalidated the pay package, citing insufficient shareholder approval.

While Tesla's Model Y remains popular in the Netherlands, European sales fell 15% in 2024.

ABP stated the divestment was not politically motivated despite Musk's ties to the Trump administration.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Paying someone a billion dollars or more at a company should require unanimous shareholder approval. One nay should strike it down. It's egregious and unnecessary.

A billion dollars can buy you a hundred people at 10 million a piece, that's gonna get you a shitload of celebrity involvement and endorsement. The value of the shares in this asshole's pay package is over 100 billion as of early December.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

The shareholders chose to do it, it's their company, they can do whatever they want with it (as long as they weren't misled as the judge has ruled they were).

Trying to control what the shareholders do with their company like that is not the way to solve a problem. And if you don't own any voting shares, then you have no reason to complain about what they decide to do.

The payment comes out of their pocket, by the devaluation of their stock, when the options are issued and vested. They went into it knowing they'd make a shit load of money if he pulled it off, and he'd make a shit load of money too. The stock has 25x'd since the package was created.

Edit: Just to be clear here - A better way would be through a high tax bracket that would eat the vast majority of that away forcing him to sell most of the shares (or I guess alternatively sell SpaceX shares, it'd be his choice), but keep in mind it'd be at the rate when each set vests, so it's not a tax bill on 55b, it's a series of tax bills on smaller amounts.