• gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Lmao what the fuck? That’s an objectively stupid and unprofitable move, even in a purely capitalistic sense. No sane stockholder should vote to hand any one person that amount of money.

    • stinerman [Ohio]@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      6 months ago

      I’ve read plausible explanations that when your company is a meme stock, you need the thing that makes it a meme to stay around lest the price fall to reasonable levels dictated by market demand.

      In other words they gotta give him the money or else the fanbois will stop pumping up the price.

      • paysrenttobirds@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        6 months ago

        Pretty much:

        switched its vote “given the strong alignment of executive pay with shareholder returns since 2018 and the benefits the board asserted related to the motivational value for the CEO in preserving the original deal.” Vanguard also voted to allow Musk to relocate the company from Delaware (which is the site of a big lawsuit about Musk’s pay) to Texas.

    • psmgx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      6 months ago

      IIRC most of the proxy voting firms like Glass Lewis and ISS tell the ETF types to vote in favor of mgmt. Because reasons, apparently