The best way to test the 'Musk magic premium' may be to give Elon Musk everything he wants | Fortune
Briefly

The best way to test the 'Musk magic premium' may be to give Elon Musk everything he wants | Fortune
"Pope Leo XIV doesn't like Elon Musk's trillion-dollar pay package at Tesla. Nor does Norway's sovereign wealth fund, which owns just over 1% of Tesla shares and plans to vote against the proposal that will be decided today. Still, odds are high that the world's richest man will get his way as shareholders are rightly worried that he will walk if he doesn't. His board has said as much, as has Musk."
"How resilient is this company? When it comes to running Tesla, the board appears to believe that there can be only one person in charge. As Tesla chair Robyn Denholm argued in her note to shareholders: "Elon singularly possesses the leadership characteristics and technical manufacturing know-how" to take Tesla to the next level. But being perceived as indispensable is a double-edged sword for any leader-and board."
"How resilient is this CEO? He started the year as the defiant, chainsaw-wielding man from DOGE, whose "polarizing and partisan actions" may have cost Tesla more than 1 million U.S. EV sales, according to a Yale study. Now, he tells us he's not " comfortable building a robot army here and then being ousted." So he's willing to walk away from everything he's built if he doesn't get everything he wants?"
Norway's sovereign wealth fund plans to oppose Elon Musk's proposed trillion-dollar pay package, while other shareholders worry that rejecting it could prompt Musk to depart. Tesla's board and chair Robyn Denholm portray Musk as uniquely possessing leadership and technical manufacturing expertise needed to advance the company, implying founder indispensability. A Yale study attributes more than one million lost U.S. EV sales to Musk's polarizing, partisan actions. Musk has signaled willingness to leave rather than accept limits, claiming he is uncomfortable building ambitious projects while at risk of being ousted. The episode raises questions about public-company governance and founder-dominated control.
Read at Fortune
Unable to calculate read time
[
|
]