Tesla's New Strategy of 'Not Paying' Elon Musk Costs $2.6 Billion

Matt Posky
by Matt Posky

Tesla Motors previously announced that its CEO, Elon Musk, wouldn’t be paid unless its already high stock valuation continued to climb. His compensation package — valued at roughly $2.6 billion — is tied to a dozen operational milestones, all of them primarily linked to the company’s share price. However, the board has left the strategy’s fate in the hands of its shareholders, who will vote on the motion come March 21st.

In addition to Musk’s existing stock options, that bonus could result in a total payday of more than $55.8 billion over the next decade. That’s too much, according to proxy advisor Glass Lewis & Co. With the CEO already so finically invested in the company, Glass Lewis doesn’t believe any fee would have a meaningful impact on Musks’ involvement. He already owns at least 20 percent of Tesla’s stock, so any improvement in its valuation would already benefit him immensely.

“Any relative comparison of the grant’s size would be akin to stacking nickels against dollars,” Glass Lewis & Co. said in a report from February.

Still, there’s plenty of support for the pay package among shareholders. Baillie Gifford & Co. and T. Rowe Price Group Inc, who collectively own about 14 percent of Tesla stock, told Bloomberg they both back the plan to get Elon paid.

“We think what Tesla has achieved so far is pretty remarkable, but there’s more they can do in not just automotive, but the energy markets,” Tom Slater, a Baillie Gifford partner and fund manager, said on Wednesday. “Elon Musk — his drive and his vision — has been a really important part of getting us to this point. Tesla still needs that drive and that vision to push the business.”

Musks’ compensation package consists of 20.3 million stock options that will be vested in 12 increments, assuming market-value thresholds and financial targets are met. Each grouping equals about 1 percent of Tesla’s outstanding shares. However Tesla’s market capitalization has to reach $650 billion for the award to be granted in full. The company’s current market cap is around $55 billion.

If that sounds like a lot for a company still having trouble meeting production quotas, it is. However, Musk’s vision has helped Tesla become a darling for investors — garnering a ten-fold increase in its share price since 2013. The aim here is to dangle the bonus in the hopes it will keep the CEO invested in the automaker and steal his attention away from SpaceX and The Boring Company.

“The package was designed to retain him, and we are on board with the intention,” Joel Grant, an automotive and industrial analyst at T. Rowe Price, said in an interview. “We want to make sure that Elon stays and uses Tesla as a vehicle for a lot of growth.”

So far, Musk hasn’t indicated he plans to leave Tesla anytime soon. He even stated as much during last month’s earnings conference when he said he would stay on as CEO for the “foreseeable future.” But many investors don’t want to risk it.

“Think about Elon Musk and what he’s had to overcome to achieve what he has achieved. Everyone is aligned against him,” Ron Baron, chairman and founder of Baron Capital Inc., said via a phone interview. “The only reason why Tesla is successful is because of this guy.”

[Image: Tesla Motors]

Matt Posky
Matt Posky

Consumer advocate tracking industry trends and regulations. Before joining TTAC, Matt spent a decade working for marketing and research firms based in NYC. Clients included several of the world’s largest automakers, global tire brands, and aftermarket part suppliers. Dissatisfied, he pivoted to writing about cars. Since then, he has become an ardent supporter of the right-to-repair movement, been interviewed about the automotive sector by national broadcasts, participated in a few amateur rallying events, and driven more rental cars than anyone ever should. Handy with a wrench, Matt grew up surrounded by Detroit auto workers and learned to drive by twelve. A contrarian, Matt claims to prefer understeer and motorcycles.

More by Matt Posky

Comments
Join the conversation
4 of 12 comments
  • Sub-600 Sub-600 on Mar 08, 2018

    “The only reason why Tesla is successful is because of this guy.”...successful at what, raising money? It’s certainly not successful producing fiscally viable numbers of cars.

    • Brandloyalty Brandloyalty on Mar 08, 2018

      At minimum Tesla is successful as having improved on the marketing done by car manufacturers. That marketing has shaped many important aspects of our lives and yet few people are even aware of that. Musk's marketing skill is so adept that yesterday ttac had an article about Porsche building a Tesla-fighter.

  • RRocket RRocket on Mar 08, 2018

    $2.6 billion?? That's the approximate loss Tesla will have in financial year 2018.

    • EBFlex EBFlex on Mar 09, 2018

      You'd think they'd know what they are doing. 15 years of building cars and they still can't figure out how to build cars or build them with any sort of quality.

  • EBFlex Garbage but for less!
  • FreedMike I actually had a deal in place for a PHEV - a Mazda CX-90 - but it turned out to be too big to fit comfortably in my garage, thus making too difficult to charge, so I passed. But from that, I learned the Truth About PHEVs - they're a VERY niche product, and probably always be, because their use case is rather nebulous. Yes, you can run on EV power for 25-30 miles, plug it in at home on a slow charger, and the next day, you're ready to go again. Great in theory, but in practice, a) you still need a home charger, b) you paid a LOT more for the car than you would have for a standard hybrid, and c) you discover the nasty secret of PHEVs, which is that when they're on battery power, they're absolute pigs to drive. Meanwhile, to maintain its' piglike battery-only performance, it still needs to be charged, so you're running into all the (overstated) challenges that BEV owners have, with none of the performance that BEV owners like. To quote King George in "Hamilton": " Awesome. Wow." In the Mazda's case, the PHEV tech was used as a performance enhancer - which worked VERY nicely - but it's the only performance-oriented PHEV out there that doesn't have a Mercedes-level pricetag. So who's the ideal owner here? Far as I can tell, it's someone who doesn't mind doing his 25 mile daily commute in a car that's slow as f*ck, but also wants to take the car on long road trips that would be inconvenient in a BEV. Meanwhile, the MPG Uber Alles buyers are VERY cost conscious - thus the MPG Uber Alles thing - and won't be enthusiastic about spending thousands more to get similar mileage to a standard hybrid. That's why the Volt failed. The tech is great for a narrow slice of buyers, but I think the real star of the PHEV revival show is the same tax credits that many BEVs get.
  • RHD The speed limit was raised from 62.1 MPH to 68.3 MPH. It's a slight difference which will, more than anything, lower the fines for the guy caught going 140 KPH.
  • Msquare The argument for unlimited autobahns has historically been that lane discipline is a life-or-death thing instead of a suggestion. That and marketing cars designed for autobahn speeds gives German automakers an advantage even in places where you can't hope to reach such speeds. Not just because of enforcement, but because of road conditions. An old Honda commercial voiced by Burgess Meredith had an Accord going 110 mph. Burgess said, "At 110 miles per hour, we have found the Accord to be quiet and comfortable. At half that speed, you may find it to be twice as quiet and comfortable." That has sold Mercedes, BMW's and even Volkswagens for decades. The Green Party has been pushing for decades for a 100 km/h blanket limit for environmental reasons, with zero success.
  • Varezhka The upcoming mild-hybrid version (aka 500 Ibrida) can't come soon enough. Since the new 500e is based on the old Alfa Mito and Opel Adam platform (now renamed STLA City) you'd have thought they've developed the gas version together.
Next