Don’t worry about that my shares will cancel it out.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable
- Thread starter AudubonB
- Start date
On the brighter side, it is about 126,000 inches between interventions.
(By the way, METRIC SYSTEM for the love of the God you yanks worship.)
what is this *************** thinking? That his shares will be worth MORE if Elon quits?
I guess it’s his way of making a point. Just like how Elon tried making a point about paying the highest taxes possible and dumping shares in the process . All for naught .
Elon had to sell to cover the basis and taxes on the execution of his 2012 compensation plan.
This might be why the board is advertising and pushing so hard for all shareholders to vote yes. Leo's 27m shares for NO are going to have an impact and it will take a bit to offset them.
Sunlight
Member
What I think would be interesting would be to run two Teslas on FSD over the same route a small distance apart and see how differently they behave if at all.
Are there differences between cars and, if so, why?
Maybe it's all dependent on the 'driver'!?
philw1776
Member
Agreed. Thread on FB about Tesla service center coming to town. Brought out the EV haters. It was easy fun refuting their ignorant claims. 256 replies and NOT ONE mentioned Elon Musk or Twitter/X. People are indifferent. It's the EV vs My gas car issue, not I hate Tesla because of tweets.
At the meeting (unofficial tally based on most votes being cast ahead of time)
So June 13th.
Are they?
Try getting a response from the board/shareholder relations (Contacts - Tesla) when you have thousands shares, want to vote, but can't because brokers say only Tesla can provide proxy materials. AFAIK, only a few brokers will allow shareholders to vote.
Note that I did vote all previous meetings. Something's broken this time, and yet, crickets from Tesla IR.
They may do different things. My MYLR does. For example, at the same intersection with a lane merging in, sometimes it will stay to the left and merge right and other times it will quickly move to the right and merge left (this is the less preferred behavior, but always happened on v11). Could be lighting, weather, who knows why the nets do what they do?
stef
Member
Controversial post, so feel free to downvote.
To be perfectly clear, I find Leo's behaviour completely wrong and pathetic, worth a spoiled 5 year old kid.
However, I think he is a smart guy (unlike Gerber...) and has been very vocal for months that the whole tesla management is not looking after and listening to shareholders.
He's now taking advantage of this re-vote to make his point... just in a very dumb and deplorable way.
I have the feeling that more transparency from the top to is all he wants, and frankly he may have a point there.
On the other hand, if there's one thing the board should do in general, is show they are doing some work for shareholders and earn some likability. Ultimately, we hear about them almost only when they are selling shares.
I know this will not go down well with many, but I would welcome anyone from the board to reach out and have a quiet chat with Leo.
I can see both sides coming out from that with a smile, and this might be a good move for everyone.
I don't disagree. They can't be 'transparent' some folks want them to be because the entire world of morons is against Tesla and Elon.
'The everybody against Tesla' cult would use that transparency to hurt Tesla even more.
/rant on
I think the only votes that should count are for those shares that have been held since the original vote. Those of us who watched our $20 shares go up to what it is today are the only ones who could hypothetically have a beef with Elon's compensation package.
Anyone who bought the stock later bought it knowing what the compensation plan was and either counted on him making the numbers (and knew it would be profitable to ride the stock up), or saw that he'd made those milestones and the compensation was a fait accompli.
/rant off
Sorry if this is off-topic, but this vote makes no sense to me.
I think the only votes that should count are for those shares that have been held since the original vote. Those of us who watched our $20 shares go up to what it is today are the only ones who could hypothetically have a beef with Elon's compensation package.
Anyone who bought the stock later bought it knowing what the compensation plan was and either counted on him making the numbers (and knew it would be profitable to ride the stock up), or saw that he'd made those milestones and the compensation was a fait accompli.
/rant off
Sorry if this is off-topic, but this vote makes no sense to me.
2daMoon
Mostly Harmless
Another aspect of Uncle Leo is that he has reached out to Elon once or twice to meet, and didn't get a response. This could be a factor influencing his vote if he harbors any feeling of loss of face over this.
But, yeah, this vote isn't the place for him to make a stand against Elon. I hope Leo might embrace changing his strategy before the election.
Trying to encourage shareholders who weren't in the game when the original vote occurred is a longer shot than it was back then. If it were the same shareholders voting who originally voted it would be an easy win.
(nod to @CatB above, seen after writing this)
It seems like the board is wanting to prove a point to the Delaware court prior to the appeal. The court moving up the date of the decision on payment to the attorneys indicated how they are aware of how this might shine on the judge's decisions in this matter.
Trying to accomplish this with a different mix of shareholders in a period where Tesla is perceived by some as struggling, what motivates a person to choose the best outcome may be quite a bit different from what they were in the first vote on this matter. Add in how a marked increase in MSM FUD and unrelenting shorting of the stock in this period leading up to the vote is curiously coincidental, at best. This brings influencing factors bearing upon some clay hands casting a vote with fear in their hearts.
With all of this in mind, the timing for voting on Elon's pay being made right might not be optimal for a number of reasons. Elon may not be the only one who plays 3D chess.
I'm keeping my fingers crossed that enough shares will be counted in support of this measure to pass.
But, yeah, this vote isn't the place for him to make a stand against Elon. I hope Leo might embrace changing his strategy before the election.
Trying to encourage shareholders who weren't in the game when the original vote occurred is a longer shot than it was back then. If it were the same shareholders voting who originally voted it would be an easy win.
(nod to @CatB above, seen after writing this)
It seems like the board is wanting to prove a point to the Delaware court prior to the appeal. The court moving up the date of the decision on payment to the attorneys indicated how they are aware of how this might shine on the judge's decisions in this matter.
Trying to accomplish this with a different mix of shareholders in a period where Tesla is perceived by some as struggling, what motivates a person to choose the best outcome may be quite a bit different from what they were in the first vote on this matter. Add in how a marked increase in MSM FUD and unrelenting shorting of the stock in this period leading up to the vote is curiously coincidental, at best. This brings influencing factors bearing upon some clay hands casting a vote with fear in their hearts.
With all of this in mind, the timing for voting on Elon's pay being made right might not be optimal for a number of reasons. Elon may not be the only one who plays 3D chess.
I'm keeping my fingers crossed that enough shares will be counted in support of this measure to pass.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
