Connect with us

Published

on

I think Elon Musk deserved his $55 billion Tesla CEO compensation plan, and I voted for him to get it, but it doesn’t mean he should get it.

I would probably vote for it again. Hear me out.

There’s a lot of confusion among the reactions to the judge’s decision to rescind Elon’s $55 billion CEO compensation plan from Tesla.

The main arguments I hear from Tesla shareholders are that “I voted for the plan”, “the plan was successful for Elon, Tesla, and shareholders”, and “I don’t feel like I was misled by Tesla or Elon about this compensation plan”.

These arguments can appear valid, and Musk is currently amplifying them on X right now as he goes full propaganda mode to redirect the narrative amid the judge’s decision. He is pushing the narrative that the judge is taking away the shareholders’ right to decide for themselves, but it’s not as simple as that. Hear me out.

I can see how this argument is attractive; I sympathize. I voted for the plan myself back in 2018. And I think there might be an outcome to this that could make most people happy. So before you dismiss me as an Elon hater, please hear me out.

It’s a complicated situation, and I think that most people who are simply jumping to Elon’s defense have simply not read the judge’s decision. I know it’s long, but if you have any interest in this, and especially if you want to comment on this situation, I suggest you read it first. It includes a full chronology of the “negotiation” of the plan with an in-depth background based on testimonies and depositions from everyone involved. It’s undoubtedly a great look at how the biggest CEO compensation plan of all time came to be, and while I see Elon coming down hard on the judge or Delaware, Tesla’s state of incorporation and where the lawsuit was filed, I don’t see him disputing the facts in it.

To summarize, it’s not as simple as answering the questions: “is the package fair or unfair?” or even “did Elon deserve the package?”. He very well might have. Tesla achieved incredible things under Elon’s leadership. I’m the first to admit it, and despite all the hate McCormick is getting from Elon fans today, she also admits it in the decision. The problems that led to this litigation are more about governance, and I know this is a controversial issue at Tesla. There’s no hiding it. Elon didn’t want Tesla to be a public company. He said it several times and he is saying it again now. He would prefer it to be private, but it’s not. For better or worse, it’s a public company and it has to be governed as such.

Elon saved Tesla from death several times, but Tesla shareholders also saved Tesla. Tesla would have been dead without its strong base of shareholders, and they are due proper governance at the company. Proper governance is the basis of a modern public company, and Tesla has always played fast and loose with the relationships between its shareholders, boards of directors, and executives. Now, it’s biting them in the ass.

How does it relate to this lawsuit? Yes, Tesla shareholders voted 80% for this $55 billion comp package. 20% of shareholders voted against it. Many people, including Elon, want to stop the issue there. I know it’s tempting, but it’s missing the point of this lawsuit and the judge’s decision completely.

Tesla shareholders made that decision based on the recommendation of “the Independent Members of Tesla’s Board of Directors” in this proxy statement.

The proxy accurately explained how the compensation package worked, but make no mistake, Tesla’s board also was trying to sell the plan to shareholders in that proxy statement. They said things like:

“In crafting this award, we were mindful of Elon’s existing stock ownership levels and the strong belief that the best outcome for our stockholders is for Elon to continue leading the company over the long-term. We created the award after more than six months of careful analysis with a leading independent compensation consultant as well as discussions with Elon, who along with Kimbal otherwise recused themselves from the Board process.”

At the core of the case, the judge had to decide whether or not those shareholders had all the correct information about this plan. If they hadn’t, they would have been misled and would have potentially voted differently.

Now, you might be Elon’s biggest fan right now and might be thinking: “I don’t care if the information wasn’t perfectly accurate, I don’t feel like I was misled, and I would have voted for it anyway.”

That’s fine. I don’t mind that. I don’t wan’t to speak for her, but Judge McCormick probably doesn’t care either. The thing is that maybe other shareholders would have felt differently about it, and you don’t speak for them. It could have changed their vote. It’s as simple as that. You cannot mislead or lie to your investors in a public company. It’s as simple as that.

Now, what was misleading? At the core of it, the judge deemed the board members not to be independent. In short, that would make the entire proxy statement misleading as it is presented as coming from the independent members of the board. After testimonies and depositions from everyone involved, the judge described the problematic relationships like this:

“The process leading to the approval of Musk’s compensation plan was deeply flawed. Musk had extensive ties with the persons tasked with negotiating on Tesla’s behalf. He had a 15-year relationship with the compensation committee chair, Ira Ehrenpreis. The other compensation committee member placed on the working group, Antonio Gracias, had business relationships with Musk dating back over 20 years, as well as the sort of personal relationship that had him vacationing with Musk’s family on a regular basis. The working group included management members who were beholden to Musk, such as General Counsel Todd Maron who was Musk’s former divorce attorney and whose admiration for Musk moved him to tears during his deposition. In fact, Maron was a primary gobetween Musk and the committee, and it is unclear on whose side Maron viewed himself. Yet many of the documents cited by the defendants as proof of a fair process were drafted by Maron.”

Again, for more details, I strongly suggest you read the entire decision. It includes a full chronology of the “negotiations”. It clearly shows that the board operated as a proxy for Elon. The only correct governance guideline they followed was for Elon and his brother to recuse from the board meetings when discussing the compensation package, but they completely overlooked the fact that the chair of the compensation committee was a close friend of both Elon and Kimbal, same for Gracias, who was also on the committee, and they all had personal financial dealings together outside of Tesla.

They clearly were not independent. The only person on the compensation committee who can be considered independent was Denholm, but she was also getting a nice compensation package that made her a very rich woman. So she played ball. Now she is Tesla’s chairwoman and just signed a new deal to sell up to $50 million in shares.

Now, in any decent public company, these conflicts should have never existed in the first place, but at the very least, it should have been communicated to shareholders. They failed to do that. Again, I know that maybe none of that changes anything for you. Maybe you would have voted the same way knowing that Elon and his representative were instrumental in crafting the whole comp plan and he was “negotiating” not with “independent board members” but with friends that he had long-time business dealings with even outside of Tesla.

Personally, I knew most of that, and I voted for it. I didn’t know the depth in which Elon and his lawyer Todd Maron were involved in the process, but I knew that Tesla’s board was far from independent. But regardless, I have to be aware that maybe some of that information would have affected other shareholders, and they would have voted differently.

Based on that, I have to agree with the judge. The vote was not valid because the proxy presenting it to the shareholder wasn’t accurate. It was tainted by Tesla’s governance issues.

What now? Maybe Elon could still get his package? The guy already wasted most of it on a way overpriced Twitter. It would be a shame for him to have to give it back.

Jokes aside, now that the information is out there, I would be fine with Tesla making sure that this information gets distributed to the shareholders and have them vote on it again. I’d be curious to see the results. It might even pass again. I wouldn’t be shocked. I would probably even for it again myself.

I think that Elon did great things for Tesla in the next few years following the adoption of that plan. He gave a lot of time, sweat, and tears to successfully lead Tesla to develop, produce, and distribute the first electric car to become the best-selling vehicle in the world. It undoubtedly changed the auto industry for the better, forever. Is it worth $55 billion? Maybe. Probably. It’s hard to say. But I’m not against it. It’s not like shareholders didn’t get rich along with him – albeit to a much smaller degree.

I don’t think there’s a lot of negative to Elon getting the package, but it needs to be properly presented to shareholders in accordance with the rules of a public company, and it wasn’t. That’s it. But it’s important.

Being successful and getting yourself and your shareholders rich doesn’t make you above the law.

Now, if we talk about Elon getting a new CEO compensation plan at Tesla for his future work at the company. I think that’s different. I would approach that very carefully, as he has proven in the last few years to have a different relationship with Tesla. He is now leading 6 different companies. It’s insane. No matter how you look at this, Tesla has a part-time CEO.

The bigger thing to come out of this situation is that Tesla has a governance problem. It needs an independent board that believes in Tesla’s mission but who are not an old friend or business partner of Elon. We need people who can rein him in when needed.

Like Leo KoGuan, Tesla’s third largest shareholder, said, Elon is running Tesla like a family business. While that might be appealing to some, you simply cannot do that in a public company. Elon’s own reaction to the judgment makes it clear:

There are problems with comments like that because Tesla is a public company whether he likes it or not. Elon’s reality distortion field is powerful but not enough to make that go away.

If Elon couldn’t take Tesla private in 2018, he certainly can’t in 2024. He could barely take Twitter private, and it was worth a fraction of Tesla.

I know that some shareholders are OK with Elon doing whatever he wants with Tesla. It’s sort of like the benevolent dictator theory. Maybe a benevolent dictator would be more efficient than a democracy. It could be, but it’s clear not all shareholders are OK with that and thankfully for them, the rules of public companies are there to save them for dictators.

If Elon thinks he is above the rules of a public company, he shouldn’t be an officer at Tesla. Learn to live with it, play by the rules, or move on.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

EcoFlow members can save up to 65% on power stations while supporting disaster relief during the 2025 Member’s Festival

Published

on

By

EcoFlow members can save up to 65% on power stations while supporting disaster relief during the 2025 Member's Festival

Portable power station specialist EcoFlow is kicking off its third annual Member’s Festival this month and is offering a unique new rewards program to those who become EcoFlow members. The 2025 EcoFlow Member’s Festival will offer savings of up to 65% for its participating customers, and a portion of those funds will be allocated toward rescue power solutions for communities around the globe through the company’s “Power for All” fund.

EcoFlow remains one of the industry leaders in portable power solutions and continues to trek forward in its vision to power a new tech-driven, eco-conscious future. Per its website:

Our mission from day one is to provide smart and eco-friendly energy solutions for individuals, families, and society at large. We are, were, and will continue to be a reliable and trusted energy companion for users around the world.

To achieve such goals, EcoFlow has continued to expand its portfolio of sustainable energy solutions to its community members, including portable power stations, solar generators, and mountable solar panels. While EcoFlow is doing plenty to support its growing customer base, it has expanded its reach by giving back to disaster-affected communities by helping bolster global disaster response efforts the best way it knows how– with portable power solutions.

EcoFlow Member
Source: EcoFlow

EcoFlow and its members look to provide “Power for All”

Since 2023, EcoFlow has collaborated with organizations worldwide as part of its “Power for All” mission. This initiative aims to ensure access to reliable and timely power to disaster-affected communities across the globe, including rescue agencies, affected hospitals, and shelters, to support rescue and recovery efforts.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

This fund most recently provided aid for communities affected by the recent Los Angeles wildfires, assistance to the Special Forces Charitable Trust (SFCT) in North Carolina following severe hurricanes, and support for non-profits engaged in hurricane preparedness in Florida and the Gulf Coast. Per Jodi Burns, CEO of the Special Forces Charitable Trust:

In the wake of devastating storms in Western North Carolina, reliable power was a critical need for the families we serve. Thanks to EcoFlow’s generous donation of generators, we were able to provide immediate relief, ensuring these families and their communities had access to power when they needed it most. We are so impressed with EcoFlow’s commitment to disaster response through their ‘Power for All’ program. It has made a tangible impact, and we are deeply grateful for their support and partnership in helping these families recover and rebuild.

In 2024, the US experienced 27 weather and climate events, each causing losses exceeding $1 billion, marking the second-highest annual total on record, according to National Centers for Environmental Information. The increasing frequency and severity of natural disasters underscore the critical need for reliable and timely power solutions during emergencies, much like EcoFlow and its members are helping provide through the “Power For All” initiative.

To support new and existing EcoFlow members, the company is celebrating its third annual Member’s Festival throughout April to offer a do-not-miss discount on its products and donate a portion of all sales to the “Power for All” fund to provide rescue power to those in need in the future. Learn how it all works below.

Source: EcoFlow

Save big and give back during the 2025 Member’s Festival

As of April 1st, you can now sign up to become an EcoFlow member to participate in the company’s exclusive 2025 Member Festival.

As a member, you can earn “EcoFlow Power Points” by completing tasks like registration, referrals, and product purchases and tracking your individual efforts toward disaster preparedness and recovery.

Beginning April 4, EcoFlow members will also be able to take advantage of exclusive discounts of up to 65% off select portable power stations, including the DELTA Pro Ultra, DELTA Pro 3, DELTA 2 Max, DELTA 3 Plus, RIVER 3 Plus, and more. However, these sale prices only last through April 25, so you’ll want to move quickly!

Click here to learn more about EcoFlow’s “Power for All” campaign. To register for EcoFlow’s 2025 Member Festival in the US, visit the EcoFlow website. To register as a member in Canada, visit here.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Tesla loses another top talent: its long-time head of software

Published

on

By

Tesla loses another top talent: its long-time head of software

Tesla is losing another top talent: its long-time head of software, David Lau, has reportedly told co-workers that he is exiting the automaker.

Tesla changed how the entire auto industry looks at software.

Before Tesla, it was an afterthought; user interfaces were rudimentary, and you had to go to a dealership to get a software update on your systems.

When Tesla launched the Model S in 2012, it all changed. Your car would get better through software updates like your phone, the large center display was responsive with a UI that actually made sense and was closer to an iPad experience than a car.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

Tesla also integrated its software into its retail experience, service, and manufacturing.

David Lau deserves a lot of the credit for that.

He joined Tesla in 2012 as a senior manager of firmware engineering and quickly rose through the ranks. By 2014, he was promoted to director of firmware engineering and system integration, and in 2017, he became Vice President of software.

Lau listed the responsibilities of his team on his LinkedIn:

  • Vehicle Software:
    • Firmware for the powertrain, traction/stability control, HV electronics, battery management, and body control systems
    • UI software and underlying Embedded Linux platforms
    • Navigation and routing
    • iOS and Android Mobile apps
  • Distributed Systems:
    • Server-side software and infrastructure that provides telemetry, diagnostics, over-the-air updates, and configuration/lifecycle management
    • Data engineering and analytics platforms that power technical and business insights for an increasingly diverse set of customers across the company
    • Diagnostic tools and fleet management, Manufacturing and Automation:
  • Automation controls (PLC, robot)
    • Server-side manufacturing execution systems that power all of Tesla’s production operations
  • Product Security and Red Team for software, services, and systems across Tesla

Bloomberg reported today that Lau told his team he is leaving Tesla. The report didn’t include reasons for his stepping down.

Electrek’s Take

Twelve years at any company is a great run. At Tesla, it’s heroic. Congrats, David, on a great run. You undoubtedly had a significant impact on Tesla and software advancements in the broader auto industry.

He is another significant loss for Tesla, which has been losing a lot of top talent following a big wave of layoffs around this time last year.

I wonder who will take over. Michael Rizkalla, senior director of software engineering and vehicle firmware, is one of the most senior software engineers after Lau. He has been at Tesla for 7 years, and Tesla likes to promote within rather than hire outsiders.

There are also a lot of senior software execs working on AI at Tesla. Musk has been favoring them lately and he could fold Lau’s responsibilities under them.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Kia’s EV3 is the best-selling retail EV in the UK right now

Published

on

By

Kia's EV3 is the best-selling retail EV in the UK right now

Kia’s electric SUVs are taking over. The EV3 is the best-selling retail EV in the UK this year, giving Kia its strongest sales start since it arrived 34 years ago. And it’s not just in the UK. Kia just had its best first quarter globally since it started selling cars in 1962.

Kia EV3 is the best-selling EV in the UK through March

In March, Kia sold a record nearly 20,000 vehicles in the UK, making it the fourth best-selling brand. It was also the second top-seller of electrified vehicles (EVs, PHEVs, and HEVs), accounting for over 55% of sales.

The EV3 remained the best-selling retail EV in the UK last month. Including the EV6, three-row EV9, and Niro EV, electric vehicles represented 21% of Kia’s UK sales in March.

Kia said the EV3 “started with a bang” in January, darting out as the UK’s most popular EV in retail sales. Through March, Kia’s electric SUV has held on to the crown. With the EV3 rolling out, Kia sold over 7,000 electric cars through March, nearly 50% more than in Q1 2024.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

The EV3 was the best-selling retail EV in the UK in the first quarter and the fourth best-selling EV overall, including commercial vehicles.

Kia-EV3-best-selling-EV
Kia EV3 Air 91.48 kWh in Frost Blue (Source: Kia UK)

Starting at £33,005 ($42,500), Kia said it’s the “brand’s most affordable EV yet.” It’s available with two battery packs, 58.3 kWh or 81.48 kWh, good for 430 km (270 miles) and 599 km (375 miles) of WLTP range, respectively.

Kia-EV3-best-selling-EV
From left to right: Kia EV6, EV3, and EV9 (Source: Kia UK)

With new EVs on the way, this could be just the start. Kia is launching several new EVs in the UK this year, including the EV4 sedan (and hatchback) and EV5 SUV. It also confirmed that the first PV5 electric vans will be delivered to customers by the end of the year.

Electrek’s Take

Globally, Kia sold a record 772,351 vehicles in the first quarter, its best since it started selling cars in 1962. With the new EV4, the brand’s first electric sedan and hatchback, launching this year, Kia looks to build on its momentum in 2025.

Kia has also made it very clear that it wants to be a global leader in the electric van market with its new Platform Beyond Vehicle (PBV) business, starting with the PV5 later this year.

Earlier today, we learned Kia’s midsize electric SUV, the EV5, is the fourth best-selling EV in Australia through March, outselling every BYD vehicle (at least for now). The EV5 is rolling out to new markets this year, including Canada, the UK, South Korea, and Mexico. However, it will not arrive in the US.

For those in the US, there are still a few Kia EVs to look forward to. Kia is launching the EV4 globally, including in the US, later this year. Although no date has been set, Kia confirmed the EV3 is also coming. It’s expected to arrive in mid-2026.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Trending