AMIRZA786

I agree 100 percent. Maybe he's looking to give shareholders a reason to vote against his compensation package 😂

swajames

The crazy thing is that the team leader he fired was demonstrably doing an excellent job, and if defending her team is what got her fired then hats off to her and best wishes at her undoubtedly lucrative next job - because California automatically voids pretty much any non-competes as a matter of law.

So here, there are a couple of possibilities. Either Musk is playing some 4D chess game with supercharging that us mere mortals can't possibly comprehend and there's actually some real method to this madness and a long game is just getting started, or he got pissed and reacted like a child when Rebecca Tinucci wouldn't do what he wanted so he fired the lot of them because it makes him feel better.

Could be either, but you can bet your bottom dollar my money on on the latter. This is twitter Musk, not SpaceX Musk in action.

And that's why my few thousand TLSA shares are voting NO.

LeX2K

If the comp package is rejected your shares are going to fall off a cliff. Also you making an emotional decision based on one action (and zero inside knowledge) rather than long term performance is highly questionable IMO. But if you hate money....

AMIRZA786

I work with an engineer here who was part of the Model S electric motor design team, and we were talking about the firing of the SC team yesterday. He knew Musk personally and worked with him closely, and he said he wouldn't be surprised if Elon fired the SC team throwing a temper tantrum. His words, not mine. We talk about Tesla a lot and this is the first negative thing he's said about Elon to me

LeX2K

Or maybe Musk had good reason. Nah can't be that.

Knowing better than Elon disease is real.
Things worked out pretty well since then don't you think? But THIS time it's different.

swajames

Well I already acknowledged that this is indeed a possibility. Maybe he did. The weight of evidence, though, has me thinking differently, but you are right we don't know for sure either way.

LeX2K

Remember when Tesla removed radar and ultrasonic sensors? Elon was accused of being stupid, cheap, dumb, penny pincher, stubborn and a bunch of other names. Experts said he had zero idea what he was doing his decision was irrational like a child. Since then FSD has advanced dramatically turns out autonomy is indeed a software problem much more than hardware.

Let's put it this way, if you own TSLA and want Elon gone (that is what a no vote means) then why would you own Tesla stock at all? Elon is Tesla there is no separating them. Voting no means you don't want to own Tesla stock.

AMIRZA786

Why are you targeting me? I didn't say it...someone who worked with him did

AMIRZA786

I've never had an issue with Tesla removing sensors, the exception being Rain sensing sensors. Still doesn't work. And I still stand by removing stalks was unnecessary. I've driven both with and without stalks, and removing stalks tolerable, but not ideal. My sister in law said straight out no to a Model X after trying to test drive one purely because of no stalks and having to shift using the screen

Margate330

I really think they did screw themselves a little on that one.

Hell, at least make stalks and gear shifter an option so as not to scare people away.
​​​​​

LeX2K

Going by your other posts it seems you are of the same mind, hence the targeting if you want to use that word. If not apologies.

If the 2018 comp package is nuked I admit it will be entertaining watching the bad holders justify their vote as the stock tanks.
Been thinking about this, don't know what a few thousand is exactly so let's say 2500. That means you are holding $452,975 worth of stock in a company where you want the CEO gone. I can't understand that, could easily lose $250,000 in value in a few weeks or even days. Why would you hold the stock at all? Sell while you can.

AMIRZA786

Apology accepted

swajames

Not that it matters, but it would be a mistake to assume that a no vote on the package must mean that I want Musk out.

I do not. I don't want Musk or his influence gone. What I do want:

• Musk to give up the CEO role, and to revert to Chairman (under the settlement, he can't have both, but he can have one of them)
• Tesla to appoint a CEO with a more measured approach to operational, manufacturing and organizational matters (he is not good at this)
• Musk to support the new CEO by driving vision, innovation and excellence (he is good at this) but leave everything else to the CEO and their team
• Denholm to get fired, along with board members like Kimbal and others directly connected to Musk ensuring that Tesla's board is more independent going forward (Tesla's governance is appallingly weak)

To the pay package, I plan to vote NO because 56bn is totally disproportionate to the value Musk has created and his prior delivered performance.

He lags reasonable peers who have delivered far more shareholder value and wealth than he has and who have created companies with far greater market value than he has, yet make a fraction of the plan that Tesla's board is recommending for Musk.

The entire issue is disproportionality relative to actual past performance and actual past results. No other package in history has come even close to this one.

I (and I suspect many other NO votes) would vote for a pay package that was greater than but not in a different universe to his reasonable peers. I have no interest in debating what might be a reasonable number, but whatever that number may be, based on actual prior performance he is absolutely not worth the package $56bn Tesla is proposing.

As for why a no vote on the package must mean I should sell my holding, that's a non-sequitur. One is unconnected to the other. I plan to hold because I think Tesla has plenty of growth ahead. I also happen to think that as we saw at Apple and others, a quietly competent CEO following a visionary but flawed founder/leader is likely the key to unlocking growth and gains.

LeX2K

Musk is the greatest allocator of capital in history. Your wish list is not only hilarious but will never ever happen. Ever.

Now I actually want the vote to go no just for the lulz.
Then your shares can be at the value TSLA was in 2018 that is 100% fair.

AMIRZA786

Here is a copy of the email that went out to it's suppliers regarding Super Chargers:


"To all concerned:

You may be aware that there has been a recent adjustment with the Supercharger organization which is presently undergoing a sudden and thorough restructuring. If you have already received this email, please disregard it as we are attempting to connect with our suppliers and contractors. As part of this process, we are in the midst of establishing new leadership roles, prioritizing projects, and streamlining our payment procedures. Due to the transitional nature of this phase, we are asking for your patience with our response time.

I understand that this period of change may be challenging and that patience is not easy when expecting to be paid, however, I want to express my sincere appreciation for your understanding and support as we navigate through this transition. At this time, please hold on breaking ground on any newly awarded construction projects and planned pre-construction walks. If currently working on an active Supercharging construction site, please continue. Contact [email redacted] for further questions, comments, and concerns. Additionally, hold on working on any new material orders. Contact [email redacted] for further questions, comments, and concerns. If waiting on delayed payment, please contact [email redacted] for a status update. Thank you for your cooperation and patience"

https://electrek.co/2024/05/03/read-...charger-chaos/

IMO, completely unacceptable and unprofessional. Wow, I would have never expected this from Tesla, especially with all the chaos that would be caused by abandoning multiple projects already in play. I'm going to really have to make some hard considerations when casting my proxy vote...