Tesla Shareholders Confirm Musk's Money

Matt Posky
by Matt Posky

Tesla investors approved an incentive package on Wednesday that could ultimately net CEO Elon Musk around $56 billion. There is a catch, however. He has to elevate the company’s share price to almost comically high levels. Having already covered the deal, we noted some opposition from analysts, but not shareholders — all of whom seem overwhelmingly happy to oblige Musk if he improves their wealth, as well.

Investment advisor Glass Lewis & Co. said offering the CEO an additional 12 percent in stock options (currently valued at around $2.6 billion) was unnecessary since he is already a major shareholder and the move could dilute value for other investors. But most agreed Musk was too important to risk losing and agreed to the package to keep him in charge of the company, despite Musk stating this was his intent all along.

Whether or not Musk sees the big $55.8-billion payday is up to him and chance, however. He doesn’t reap the rewards of the package until Tesla nearly doubles its present market cap. After it hits the $100 billion mark, he becomes eligible for the stock options — which are split into 12 tranches separated by $50 billion. If Musk manages to elevate the market cap to the astronomical goal of $650 billion, he gets the whole hog. If he doesn’t break the initial barrier of $100 billion, he gets nothing.

According to Reuters, shareholders approved the compensation package on Wednesday during a special shareholder’s meeting in Fremont, California. As the final tally is not yet official, the source did not specify the number of votes for or against. But Tesla should make an announcement soon.

Is it a smart plan? We’re not day traders or market analysts, so we cannot say anything with supreme authority. But Musk has certainly been good for the company’s share price thus far. Under his leadership, its valuation has increased tenfold since 2013 and investors hope he can do the same over the next ten years. Still, a market cap of $650 billion would make Tesla one of the highest-valued companies in existence and might be unrealistic.

Ideally, Musk’s reward would be linked to a handful of reasonable production goals, too. Tesla is still having trouble meeting Model 3 volume targets and, while the automaker promises production will be on track before the end of the month, it’d be nice to have some assurance that it was a priority. Tesla is an innovative organization and great at grabbing attention, but its productivity (or lack thereof) will eventually influence its share price. The Model 3 has to nudge the company into profitability if Tesla wants 10 years of unbridled gains on Wall Street.

Then again, there are plenty of tech companies with ludicrously high stock valuations that only occasionally operate in the black (like Amazon) or hardly ever left the red (like Twitter). Furthermore, while overall profitability remains important for automakers, it isn’t like the old days. Making money isn’t enough; there’s also an increasing emphasis on bolstering a company’s share price.

If you don’t believe us, just ask Elon Musk or Mark Fields. The former runs a currently unprofitable business with a perpetually rising stock valuation while the latter oversaw a profitable automaker for three years and was fired because investors weren’t happy with the company’s declining share price.

[Image: OnInnovation/ Flickr ( CC BY-ND 2.0)]

Matt Posky
Matt Posky

A staunch consumer advocate tracking industry trends and regulation. 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 with the corporate world and resentful of having to wear suits everyday, he pivoted to writing about cars. Since then, that man has become an ardent supporter of the right-to-repair movement, been interviewed on the auto industry by national radio broadcasts, driven more rental cars than anyone ever should, participated in amateur rallying events, and received the requisite minimum training as sanctioned by the SCCA. Handy with a wrench, Matt grew up surrounded by Detroit auto workers and managed to get a pizza delivery job before he was legally eligible. He later found himself driving box trucks through Manhattan, guaranteeing future sympathy for actual truckers. He continues to conduct research pertaining to the automotive sector as an independent contractor and has since moved back to his native Michigan, closer to where the cars are born. A contrarian, Matt claims to prefer understeer — stating that front and all-wheel drive vehicles cater best to his driving style.

More by Matt Posky

Comments
Join the conversation
4 of 19 comments
  • Stuki Stuki on Mar 22, 2018

    Simpletonian hero worship is a common feature of all late stage financialized dystopias. As the ratio of money chasing paper to money chasing product get ever more lopsided, productivity related metrics, along with ability and competence in general, largely ceases to matter. To be replaced by familiar, well hyped faces. Which those whose sole qualification is closeness to the money printers, have been told are "good investments." Musk may well be a genius at auto making. Or he may be a dolt. Most likely he is, like most people, somewhere in the middle. None of which matters one whit. Like the Kardashians, he is famous for being famous. Only with a group of people who get their entertainment from buying and comparing paper, rather than booty and petty intrigues.

  • Ultraviolet Thunder Ultraviolet Thunder on Mar 22, 2018

    For someone who has taken $500 million in taxpayer money and has repeatedly promised the moon (or is that Mars) and delivered virtually nothing of note, this guy should be making $1 until he gets his company to produce. Right now his products are shoddy, expensive, and you can't buy what he promises.

    • See 1 previous
    • Highdesertcat Highdesertcat on Mar 23, 2018

      UT, money is fungible. Once he got it there's no tellin' where and how it was used, like maybe on other projects not involving EVs. Maybe all that cash was used to bolster more research on reusable rocketry. To me it would seem that the US gov't is more interested in what Space X can do for them than what EVs can do to drain the Treasury at $7500 a pop.

  • Theflyersfan OK, I'm going to stretch the words "positive change" to the breaking point here, but there might be some positive change going on with the beaver grille here. This picture was at Car and Driver. You'll notice that the grille now dives into a larger lower air intake instead of really standing out in a sea of plastic. In darker colors like this blue, it somewhat conceals the absolute obscene amount of real estate this unneeded monstrosity of a failed styling attempt takes up. The Euro front plate might be hiding some sins as well. You be the judge.
  • Theflyersfan I know given the body style they'll sell dozens, but for those of us who grew up wanting a nice Prelude Si with 4WS but our student budgets said no way, it'd be interesting to see if Honda can persuade GenX-ers to open their wallets for one. Civic Type-R powertrain in a coupe body style? Mild hybrid if they have to? The holy grail will still be if Honda gives the ultimate middle finger towards all things EV and hybrid, hides a few engineers in the basement away from spy cameras and leaks, comes up with a limited run of 9,000 rpm engines and gives us the last gasp of the S2000 once again. A send off to remind us of when once they screamed before everything sounds like a whirring appliance.
  • Jeff Nice concept car. One can only dream.
  • Funky D The problem is not exclusively the cost of the vehicle. The problem is that there are too few use cases for BEVs that couldn't be done by a plug-in hybrid, with the latter having the ability to do long-range trips without requiring lengthy recharging and being better able to function in really cold climates.In our particular case, a plug-in hybrid would run in all electric mode for the vast majority of the miles we would drive on a regular basis. It would also charge faster and the battery replacement should be less expensive than its BEV counterpart.So the answer for me is a polite, but firm NO.
  • 3SpeedAutomatic 2012 Ford Escape V6 FWD at 147k miles:Just went thru a heavy maintenance cycle: full brake job with rotors and drums, replace top & bottom radiator hoses, radiator flush, transmission flush, replace valve cover gaskets (still leaks oil, but not as bad as before), & fan belt. Also, #4 fuel injector locked up. About $4.5k spread over 19 months. Sole means of transportation, so don't mind spending the money for reliability. Was going to replace prior to the above maintenance cycle, but COVID screwed up the market ( $4k markup over sticker including $400 for nitrogen in the tires), so bit the bullet. Now serious about replacing, but waiting for used and/or new car prices to fall a bit more. Have my eye on a particular SUV. Last I checked, had a $2.5k discount with great interest rate (better than my CU) for financing. Will keep on driving Escape as long as A/C works. 🚗🚗🚗
Next