Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by koolba 877 days ago
Yes and it doesn’t make sense to me. They had what would be considered moonshot goals for a car company, a compensation package attached to them, and he hit the numbers. Pay the man!

How they arrived at those numbers is nowhere near as relevant as coming to an agreement and meeting the targets.

It’s the complete opposite of all the situations where the CEO burns down the office tower and jumps out the window with a golden parachute.

3 comments

> coming to an agreement and meeting the targets.

That’s the crux of the whole lawsuit.

The judge found that the whole process of coming to an agreement in this case was Musk talking to a mirror.

If there were an actual fair process here and it arrived at $55B then the judge wouldn’t have found as she did.

That’s why the shareholder lawsuit was successful.

> It’s the complete opposite of all the situations where the CEO burns down the office tower and jumps out the window with a golden parachute.

Interesting observation. I wonder how we wound up at a place where all of the incentives are the exact opposite of what they should be.

It seems like you disagree with the ruling, which is different than not understanding the problem