Whoa!!! I never thought I would ever agree with 100% of something penned by Nellie Bowles----but she knocked it out of the park here.
In business, in life, you make agreements. Then you fulfill what you agreed to do. Deviations from that, apart from agreed upon renegotiations, are a corrosive force in our society.
It's no surprise that these corrosive deviations seem to always emanate from Marxist/socialist sources.
I personally have no problem with Musk harvesting from his work in such a big way. History shows that he just keeps making big, beneficial things for our Earth society with this capital. It's not like it's his piggy bank, from which he buys all kinds of selfish things. He always reinvests it in things that are designed to benefit large swaths of humanity. So I really don't see it as greed at all. I cannot compare him to anyone else.
I was a little disappointed in Joe's response. There doesn't seem to be any legal or even rational argument there. Just "it's too big!! it's not fair!!"
Yeah, it's too big. Yeah, it's not fair.
But this is America, and a contract is a contract. It is totally irrelevant what the share price has done since he met his lofty goals. If the stock had continued to go up, would Elon be right to demand even more than $56B? From the perspective of 2024, sure maybe the size of the payout doesn't make sense. But you can't judge a 2018 contract by what people think is reasonable in 2024.
“There are plenty of CEOs who can do a better job than Musk”. Yet no other CEO ever made their company EV the top car. No other CEO made space accessible again. There ARE many replaceable Billionaires, Musk just isn’t one of them. In the long run 56B is a small price (and a well earned one too) to pay for keeping Elon on your team.
Nothing Joe Nocera wrote contradicts the arguments Nellie Bowles made. Last years performance is totally irrelevant. Musk didn‘t get the deal because of a compliant board, but because nobody believed he could accomplish the unimaginable feat of driving Teslas value up as far as he did. He won his bet and he and is owed his compensation. And no, the world is not teeming with similarly capable entrepreneurs.
“There are plenty of CEOs who can do a better job than Elon Musk” says Joe Nocera. Easy to say, but harder to name all of those people. I’ll wait.
When did we reach the point of saying a contract is, well, not a contract? Hindsight does not invalidate contracts, only fraud or lack of consideration does. Neither is present here.
I’ll draw an analogy: Think of a major movie actor who works on the set for union scale in exchange for a percentage of the gate. Ticket sales are huge, and he profits bigly. We admire the foresight, the shrewdness. That’s basically what Elon did.
Nocera’s remarks that Elon Mask is not deserving the biggest paycheck, that Tesla shareholders would be better off if Elon left… is another clear sign of tired mediocrity ( at best), something that sadly doesn’t fit the excellence of Nellie and the FP. Move this guy to the mailroom!!
The attacks against Mr. Nocera, himself, are unworthy of such an intelligent audience. I’m embarrassed to be associated with you.
He lost the debate, yes, but he had to build an argument out of whole cloth while Ms. Bowles actually had a foundation of reason on her side. That doesn’t mean Mr. Nocera deserves your ire - hell, I don’t even consider them ad hominem arguments because they don’t present any argument at all. I consider them libel.
Debates are, at heart, thought experiments and, at their best, learning opportunities - especially for those who must research and advocate for the weaker side. Does this side encompass Mr. Nocera’s personal beliefs? I neither know nor care. The same could be said for Ms. Bowles. Did he fail to adequately advocate for his assumed stance? Absolutely and, while that is probably a failure inherent to the position more than a failure in his debate style, it is in no way a failure of his personal character.
Any debate demands a Devil's advocate. It’s a difficult enough job trying to polish a turd without everyone confusing the polisher with the turd itself. Did you appreciate the format of the article? Go ahead, keep shitting on its most critical element.
The fact that no legal action took place in 2018 when this decision was made, with much public spectacle, is the nail in the coffin for Joe's argument. Has new information come to light, other than TESLA's giant bill?
Nellie in a 20 second knockout in the first round! Does Joe understand the deal that Ohtani made with the Dodgers? It was "I will perform and load compensation outside of the normal term of contracts." That is exactly what Musk did. And funny thing, despite all the chatter about Tesla's current problems the company has grown by 9X from the original point of the deal. The board considered the bet and agreed with it. Then almost three quarters of the shareholders agreed. Now a tiny number of corporate agitators want to turn the deal over. Is Tesla better and bigger than it was six years ago? Absolutely. Does past performance guarantee future success? That was not the deal - Musk said I get this puppy to grow with ZERO compensation for a payment in the future.
Also what about the sanctity of contracts? Musk more than lived up to his side of the deal - now some nare-do-wells want to renegotiate.
I also think Delaware, which used to be corporate friendly, has gotten a bit big for its britches. Musk would be smart to move his corporate charter from Delaware. This judge has put her nose where it does not belong.
Is anyone taking a deep dive into this Delaware judge? This is Joe Biden's Delaware after all. Are we sure no one whispered into a her ear? Is she a Democratic contributor? What is her background? Is she qualified to make a judgment about the fiduciary responsibility of the directors of a multi billion dollar company? Has she ever even run a lemonade stand?
And, what about the shareholder who initiated this action? Does he have any connections to Biden or the Democratic national committee? What is his background?
Haters are gonna hate. It's become status quo to resent the most successful. Any success that's perceived to be beyond someone's own success is to be resented. This article perpetuates that chip.
He fulfilled the contract that they agreed too . Business 101 .
Whoa!!! I never thought I would ever agree with 100% of something penned by Nellie Bowles----but she knocked it out of the park here.
In business, in life, you make agreements. Then you fulfill what you agreed to do. Deviations from that, apart from agreed upon renegotiations, are a corrosive force in our society.
It's no surprise that these corrosive deviations seem to always emanate from Marxist/socialist sources.
I personally have no problem with Musk harvesting from his work in such a big way. History shows that he just keeps making big, beneficial things for our Earth society with this capital. It's not like it's his piggy bank, from which he buys all kinds of selfish things. He always reinvests it in things that are designed to benefit large swaths of humanity. So I really don't see it as greed at all. I cannot compare him to anyone else.
I was a little disappointed in Joe's response. There doesn't seem to be any legal or even rational argument there. Just "it's too big!! it's not fair!!"
Yeah, it's too big. Yeah, it's not fair.
But this is America, and a contract is a contract. It is totally irrelevant what the share price has done since he met his lofty goals. If the stock had continued to go up, would Elon be right to demand even more than $56B? From the perspective of 2024, sure maybe the size of the payout doesn't make sense. But you can't judge a 2018 contract by what people think is reasonable in 2024.
A deal is a deal. This is fundamental to proper functioning of capitalism and democracy
“There are plenty of CEOs who can do a better job than Musk”. Yet no other CEO ever made their company EV the top car. No other CEO made space accessible again. There ARE many replaceable Billionaires, Musk just isn’t one of them. In the long run 56B is a small price (and a well earned one too) to pay for keeping Elon on your team.
A deal is a deal. Payoff. Got this one right Nellie, well done.
Nothing Joe Nocera wrote contradicts the arguments Nellie Bowles made. Last years performance is totally irrelevant. Musk didn‘t get the deal because of a compliant board, but because nobody believed he could accomplish the unimaginable feat of driving Teslas value up as far as he did. He won his bet and he and is owed his compensation. And no, the world is not teeming with similarly capable entrepreneurs.
“There are plenty of CEOs who can do a better job than Elon Musk” says Joe Nocera. Easy to say, but harder to name all of those people. I’ll wait.
When did we reach the point of saying a contract is, well, not a contract? Hindsight does not invalidate contracts, only fraud or lack of consideration does. Neither is present here.
I’ll draw an analogy: Think of a major movie actor who works on the set for union scale in exchange for a percentage of the gate. Ticket sales are huge, and he profits bigly. We admire the foresight, the shrewdness. That’s basically what Elon did.
Nocera’s remarks that Elon Mask is not deserving the biggest paycheck, that Tesla shareholders would be better off if Elon left… is another clear sign of tired mediocrity ( at best), something that sadly doesn’t fit the excellence of Nellie and the FP. Move this guy to the mailroom!!
The attacks against Mr. Nocera, himself, are unworthy of such an intelligent audience. I’m embarrassed to be associated with you.
He lost the debate, yes, but he had to build an argument out of whole cloth while Ms. Bowles actually had a foundation of reason on her side. That doesn’t mean Mr. Nocera deserves your ire - hell, I don’t even consider them ad hominem arguments because they don’t present any argument at all. I consider them libel.
Debates are, at heart, thought experiments and, at their best, learning opportunities - especially for those who must research and advocate for the weaker side. Does this side encompass Mr. Nocera’s personal beliefs? I neither know nor care. The same could be said for Ms. Bowles. Did he fail to adequately advocate for his assumed stance? Absolutely and, while that is probably a failure inherent to the position more than a failure in his debate style, it is in no way a failure of his personal character.
Any debate demands a Devil's advocate. It’s a difficult enough job trying to polish a turd without everyone confusing the polisher with the turd itself. Did you appreciate the format of the article? Go ahead, keep shitting on its most critical element.
Nellie and Elon Musk totally win this one. Musk is one of a kind genius and a deal is a deal. Pay up!
Not one of a kind. Penultimate, perhaps.
Nellie wins.
The fact that no legal action took place in 2018 when this decision was made, with much public spectacle, is the nail in the coffin for Joe's argument. Has new information come to light, other than TESLA's giant bill?
Nellie in a 20 second knockout in the first round! Does Joe understand the deal that Ohtani made with the Dodgers? It was "I will perform and load compensation outside of the normal term of contracts." That is exactly what Musk did. And funny thing, despite all the chatter about Tesla's current problems the company has grown by 9X from the original point of the deal. The board considered the bet and agreed with it. Then almost three quarters of the shareholders agreed. Now a tiny number of corporate agitators want to turn the deal over. Is Tesla better and bigger than it was six years ago? Absolutely. Does past performance guarantee future success? That was not the deal - Musk said I get this puppy to grow with ZERO compensation for a payment in the future.
Also what about the sanctity of contracts? Musk more than lived up to his side of the deal - now some nare-do-wells want to renegotiate.
I also think Delaware, which used to be corporate friendly, has gotten a bit big for its britches. Musk would be smart to move his corporate charter from Delaware. This judge has put her nose where it does not belong.
Is anyone taking a deep dive into this Delaware judge? This is Joe Biden's Delaware after all. Are we sure no one whispered into a her ear? Is she a Democratic contributor? What is her background? Is she qualified to make a judgment about the fiduciary responsibility of the directors of a multi billion dollar company? Has she ever even run a lemonade stand?
And, what about the shareholder who initiated this action? Does he have any connections to Biden or the Democratic national committee? What is his background?
Inquiring minds want to know
The lovely and talented Nellie wins in a rout.
Haters are gonna hate. It's become status quo to resent the most successful. Any success that's perceived to be beyond someone's own success is to be resented. This article perpetuates that chip.