SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : ajtj's Post-Lobotomy Market Charts and Thoughts

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Qone0 who wrote (83831)1/30/2024 7:45:03 PM
From: Sun Tzu  Read Replies (1) of 97849
 
We'll what the appeals court has to say. But I still believe the judge is wrong. *Every* executive sees the company as his ATM. Why else would you build a company or work for it if not to get the money to do things that you want.

In fact, you don't even have be an exec to do that. In my early 20s I went to my boss. I said, "I work so I can play. And the amount of work I've been doing lately has seriously gotten in the way of my play. What do you think I should do?" And he went dead silent because those were the internet days and I was his top techie guru. Then I added, "Play, like everything else, has multiple dimensions. If the work is reducing the quantity of my play time, then I need more money so that the quality of my play can compensate for that." And he smiled and gave me a 20% raise.

Fundamentally, what I did and what Musk did were not that different. He just carries a bigger stick and wants more expensive toys.

At the end of the day, Musk slept in the factories and spend more time with his engineers and staff than any other CEO at his level. And he did whatever was necessary to increase the revenue 10x. So he delivered what nobody thought was possible. He deserves his comp as had been agreed upon. If the activists or the judge have a problem with that, they can sue the board, not him.

========

Back when I was in university, I became the president of an association at a politically contentious time. The first thing I did was to change the charter to require a supermajority. Someone "sued" us to the student federation. When they asked me how I justify it, my answer was simple - you elect the governing body for a term and you should let them do their job during their term. If you are unhappy at the end of it, don't reelect them. But while I am the president, the last thing I need is to worry about appeasing every member. Now if what I am doing is truly over the board, then I'm sure there will be enough dissenting voices to oust me.

The logic is sound and I got to keep my charter and position. And I was reelected the next year too.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext