Elon Musk's $56 billion Tesla pay package is up for vote at the company's annual meeting on Thursday.
Musk has expressed intention to move Tesla's headquarters from Delaware to Texas as a result of the court ruling.
Norges Bank Investment Management, one of Tesla's largest shareholders with a stake worth $7.72 billion, has announced intention to vote against the package due to concerns about its size and lack of mitigation of key person risk.
Robyn Denholm, Tesla's chair, and Ron Baron, a major shareholder, have voiced support for ratification.
Tesla's shares have been down 28% this year due in part to slower sales growth in China and a recall of a latest product.
The package was initially approved in 2018 but deemed invalid by a Delaware judge in January due to governance failings.
Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla, is facing a significant vote on his $56 billion pay package at the company's annual meeting on Thursday. The package was initially approved in 2018 but was deemed invalid by a Delaware judge in January due to governance failings. Musk has also expressed his intention to move Tesla's headquarters from Delaware to Texas as a result of the court ruling.
The high stakes have mobilized both loyalists and critics. Robyn Denholm, Tesla's chair, and Ron Baron, a major shareholder, have voiced their support for ratification. However, failure to do so could force the board to negotiate fresh terms which could prove prohibitively expensive for investors.
Norges Bank Investment Management, one of Tesla's largest shareholders with a stake worth $7.72 billion, has announced its intention to vote against the package due to concerns about its size, structure, dilution, and lack of mitigation of key person risk.
Tesla's shares have been down 28% this year due in part to slower sales growth in China and a recall of a latest product. The company has warned of
The author makes an appeal to emotion by using phrases like 'extraordinary surges', 'world's most highly valued carmaker', and 'significant growth and stockholder value'. The author also uses a dichotomous depiction by contrasting the large pay package with Tesla's current struggles, such as falling sales in China, a defected product recall, and slower growth. However, the author fails to provide any evidence that these current struggles directly relate to Musk's performance or ability to lead Tesla.
]Elon has not been paid for any of his work for Tesla for the past six years that has helped to generate significant growth and stockholder value[
Tesla was not prepared to take that decision in its stride.
If Tesla is to retain Elon’s attention and motivate him to continue to devote his time, energy, ambition and vision to deliver comparable results in the future, we must stand by our deal.
Bias
(95%)
The author expresses a clear bias towards Elon Musk and Tesla in the article. The author uses language that depicts Musk as a necessary figure for Tesla's success and portrays his pay package as justly deserved despite its size. The author also quotes Robyn Denholm, Tesla's chair, who expresses her support for Musk and the pay package.
Elon has not been paid for any of his work for Tesla for the past six years that has helped to generate significant growth and stockholder value.
Many shareholders in the company Understand the biggest asset of Tesla is Elon Musk.
Without his relentless drive and uncompromising standards, there would be no Tesla.
Elon Musk’s record $56 billion 2018 pay package was deemed invalid in January due to governance failings.
Musk is pushing for a change of legal domicile to Texas as a result of the court ruling.
The high stakes have mobilized loyalists, such as Robyn Denholm and Ron Baron, to voice their support for ratification.
If the vote fails, the board may be forced to negotiate fresh terms which could prove prohibitively expensive for investors.
Failure to ratify could also undermine Musk and Denholm’s authority.
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(30%)
The article contains selective reporting as it only reports details that support the author's position. The author states that Musk's backers are pulling out all stops to mobilize every last vote and quotes several individuals voicing their support for Musk. However, the article fails to mention or even acknowledge the opposition to Musk's pay deal, such as proxy advisors like Glass Lewis and Institutional Shareholder Services recommending asset managers and index funds vote against approving his pay. This selective reporting skews the information presented in the article towards supporting Musk's position.
Tesla claims some 6,000 small stockholders owning over 23 million shares flooded the board with unsolicited letters of support.
Many fear the stock price, which has already been down nearly 30% since January, will tumble further if speculation that he might resign from Tesla isn’t swiftly put to bed.
Despite being notorious for not advertising, the EV maker has bought spots to promote Musk’s pay package.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several informal fallacies and an appeal to fairness. The author uses inflammatory language in describing Musk's actions as a 'gamble' and a 'last stand,' implying that he is taking unnecessary risks that could harm the company. This is an example of emotional appeals, which can sway readers without providing any logical reasoning. Additionally, the author quotes experts warning of potential consequences if shareholders vote against Musk's pay deal, which is an appeal to authority fallacy as it relies on the opinions of external sources rather than objective evidence or logical reasoning. The article also contains several dichotomous depictions, such as describing Musk's actions as a 'last stand' or a 'rebuke that you have to leave.' These statements oversimplify complex situations and can be misleading. Lastly, the author argues that Musk deserves his pay package because he achieved all of the milestones in his contract, which is an appeal to fairness fallacy as it assumes that past performance justifies current compensation without considering other factors such as market conditions or shareholder interests.
Elon Musk may be mounting his last stand as CEO of Tesla...
The gamble doesn’t end there, however, as Musk is also pushing for a change of legal domicile to Texas...
That would be such a rebuke that you have to leave, because if you don’t, then everybody called your bluff...
Despite being notorious for not advertising, the EV maker has bought spots to promote Musk’s pay package...
Tesla is not leaving the vote to chance...
After all, he achieved every single one of the 16 milestone targets laid out in his contract...
Bias
(95%)
The author expresses a clear bias towards Elon Musk and his position as CEO of Tesla. The author uses language that depicts Musk's situation as a 'last stand' and describes the shareholder meeting vote as 'one of the most important votes in the history of our extraordinary company'. The author also quotes experts who express support for Musk and his pay deal, while dismissing those who criticize it. There is no disproportionate number of quotations reflecting a specific position, but the tone and language used throughout the article clearly favor Musk.
He also appears to be back to making big promises, proclaiming this week he was on the cusp of reaching his number one goal – solving full autonomy. He promised that once bugs were ironed out, it would be more than a year between driver interventions.
Many fear the stock price, which has already been down nearly 30% since January, will tumble further if speculation that he might resign from Tesla isn’t swiftly put to bed.
Tesla claims some 6,000 small stockholders owning over 23 million shares flooded the board with unsolicited letters of support.
That would be such a rebuke that you have to leave, because if you don’t, then everybody called your bluff.
The problem with the package for investors is that rewarding past performance with that amount of stock priced at an 87% discount could be litigated as a case of corporate waste. However, Denholm argues the restoration of Musk’s deep-in-the-money call options on 304 million shares is only fair.
Tesla shareholders are voting on Elon Musk’s pay package worth about $56 billion at the annual meeting on Thursday.
If Tesla wins shareholder approval for Musk’s pay, they will argue that it makes the matter moot and take it to Chancellor Kathaleen McCormick in Delaware’s Court of Chancery.
Plaintiffs who initially sued over the pay package are likely to appeal to Delaware’s Supreme Court if McCormick declares the plan acceptable.
Accuracy
Elon Musk is the CEO of Tesla.
Musk is pushing for a change of legal domicile to Texas as a result of the court ruling.
Norway’s sovereign wealth fund managed by Norges Bank Investment Management will vote against Elon Musk’s CEO compensation package during Tesla’s annual meeting on Thursday.
The fund operated by Norges Bank Investment Management expressed concerns about the total size of the award, its structure, dilution, and lack of mitigation of key person risk.
Norges Bank Investment Management held a .98% stake in Tesla worth $7.72 billion.
The Government Pension Fund Global plans to vote for several shareholder policies that management has recommended shareholders vote against, including a proposal to adopt a noninterference policy respecting freedom of association and collective bargaining; adopting a simple majority vote; declassifying the board of directors; and publishing reports on harassment and discrimination prevention efforts.
Accuracy
Norway's sovereign wealth fund managed by Norges Bank Investment Management will vote against Elon Musk’s CEO compensation package during Tesla’s annual meeting on Thursday.
Elon Musk is the CEO of Tesla.
Deception
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains a few informal fallacies and appeals to authority. It does not contain any formal logical fallacies according to the analysis rules.
. . . it is the latest pushback over the size of the pay package . . .
