Connect with us
elon musk elon musk

News

Firm that Elon Musk once called ‘ISIS’ calls for Tesla shareholders to ditch $56b pay package

Credit: @Gf4Tesla/Twitter

Published

on

The advisory firm ISS, also known as Institutional Shareholder Services, was once called “ISIS” by Tesla CEO Elon Musk. The firm is now calling for Tesla shareholders to ditch the $56 billion pay package that Musk once won but now is set to be voted on for ratification.

ISS has routinely recommended things for Tesla shareholders that do not necessarily align with the company’s most loyal supporters. In 2021, the firm suggested the EV maker ditch Kimbal Musk and James Murdoch from the company’s board.

Elon Musk replied to our coverage of the suggestions by calling the firm “ISIS,” in reference to the radical Salafi-jihadist terrorist group:

Advertisement

It is now 2024, and the implications of this Tesla Shareholder meeting are bigger than ever before. Musk was due a $56 billion payday due to tranches reached as Tesla’s frontman but had it denied by a Delaware Chancery Judge.

It is the biggest issue on this year’s agenda, and it could end up being the end of his reign at the electric automaker, the end of Tesla’s incorporation in Delaware, and perhaps a farewell to the company as many know it.

ISS believes Musk’s pay package is “excessive, even given the company’s success.”

The firm wrote in its report:

“In addition, the grant, in many ways, failed to achieve the board’s other original objectives of focusing CEO Musk on the interests of Tesla shareholders, as opposed to other business endeavors, and aligning his financial interests more closely with those of Tesla stockholders.”

Advertisement

It also noted a “lack of clarity” regarding Musk’s future pay.

Other firms, like Glass Lewis, have also suggested shareholders vote against Musk’s pay plan. Meanwhile, there are plenty of others who believe Musk is owed this sum of money, and the sizing of it is irrelevant: he was already awarded this paycheck before it was taken away.

“Egan-Jones believes the continuation of this compensation plan is critical for maintaining Musk’s leadership and motivation, which are essential for Tesla’s sustained growth and innovation. The firm acknowledges the high compensation level but emphasizes the exceptional performance and unique contributions of Musk to Tesla’s success,” Egan-Jones said in its suggestion.

Do you agree with this move? If you have any comments, concerns, or questions, please email me at joey@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @KlenderJoey, or if you have news tips, you can email us at tips@teslarati.com.

Advertisement

Joey has been a journalist covering electric mobility at TESLARATI since August 2019. In his spare time, Joey is playing golf, watching MMA, or cheering on any of his favorite sports teams, including the Baltimore Ravens and Orioles, Miami Heat, Washington Capitals, and Penn State Nittany Lions. You can get in touch with joey at joey@teslarati.com. He is also on X @KlenderJoey. If you're looking for great Tesla accessories, check out shop.teslarati.com

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

Rivian is suing Ohio for a direct sales ban, and it lists Tesla as getting favoritism

“…the Legislature enacted a special provision for Tesla that not only permitted Tesla to continue selling vehicles from two dealerships it already had in the state, but also to sell vehicles from an additional dealership. This special provision does not apply to Rivian.”

Published

on

Credit: Teslarati

Rivian is suing the State of Ohio’s Bureau of Motor Vehicles because it will not allow the automaker to sell vehicles directly to customers.

Direct sales are enabled for Tesla in the state, however, and Rivian, a rival of the Musk-headed company, says the EV leader is getting favoritism because it is allowed to use direct sales.

Calling the direct sales ban “irrational in the extreme,” according to the Verge, which first reported on the lawsuit, Rivian claims Ohio is putting money ahead of what is best for car buyers:

“Ohio’s prohibition is pure economic protectionism for the benefit of Ohio’s existing auto dealers, putting their profits ahead of consumers.”

Direct sales are used to sell vehicles at a fixed price to consumers without using the traditional dealership model. Tesla does not allow dealerships to be bought like franchises.

Advertisement

The company owns all of its showrooms, and it has set prices on its cars. Consumers traditionally cite car negotiations as one of the most stressful activities; Tesla has always avoided it.

In Ohio, it is allowed to sell directly to customers who want to buy its products, but Rivian is not allowed as of now. This suit aims to change that.

It said:

“In 2014, the Ohio Legislature enacted a bill providing that the Ohio Registrar of Motor Vehicles shall deny a motor vehicle dealers’ license—which is required to sell vehicles in Ohio—to anyone who is “a manufacturer, or a parent company, subsidiary, or affiliated entity of a manufacturer, applying for a license to sell or lease new or used motor vehicles at retail.” R.C. 4517.12(A)(11). At the same time, the Legislature enacted a special provision for Tesla that not only permitted Tesla to continue selling vehicles from two dealerships it already had in the state, but also to sell vehicles from an additional dealership. This special provision does not apply to Rivian. As a result, Ohioans seeking to purchase Rivian vehicles must do so through Rivian’s dealer-licensed locations in other states.”

Rivian said in the complaint that it does not claim that Ohio’s provision for Tesla is unconstitutional. However, it does argue that the prohibition of direct sales is unconstitutional as applied to Rivian.

Advertisement

Therefore, it believes it should be able to sell directly to consumers in Ohio as Tesla can.

The case is Case No. 2:25-cv-858, Rivian, LLC, vs. Charles L Norman, Registrar of Motor Vehicles of the Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla engineer explains why Elon Musk deserves new pay package

“When Elon is motivated, it also motivates us, especially in this fork of humanity. I would not be staying in Tesla this long unless he is still leading.”

Published

on

Elon Musk giving YouTube tech reviewer Marques Brownlee a tour of the Fremont factory. (Credit: MKBHD/YouTube)

A Tesla engineer took to X to explain why he believes Elon Musk deserved the new 96 million share, $29 billion pay package that the company awarded to him yesterday.

Yun-Ta Tsai, a Senior Staff Engineer in the Autopilot program at Tesla, has worked at the company for five years. He has been in his current position for two years and three months.

Tesla rewards CEO Elon Musk with massive, restricted stock package

Tsai posted a lengthy statement in response to Tesla announcing its new pay package for Musk, which the company’s Board of Directors announced yesterday. He was fully in support of his boss getting paid, especially considering Musk “came to work every day” without being paid for eight years.

Tsai said:

Advertisement

“8 years without pay, but Elon still came to work everyday despite hitting all the milestones.

Most founders, even being paid much better, would simply abandon ships or being “zucked”.

I often joked my annual comp was higher than Elon but it was true.

When Elon is motivated, it also motivates us, especially in this fork of humanity. I would not be staying in Tesla this long unless he is still leading.

Hopefully Elon gets his first paycheck soon after 8 years of grinding in hell. It is time.”

Advertisement

It’s no secret that Musk has the reputation of someone who is incredibly driven, motivated, and determined to come through on his personal and professional goals. In times of need at the company, Musk sleeps at the office and works seven days a week.

Recently, it came to the surface that he nearly missed his brother’s wedding years ago because of work.

Musk’s attitude toward work is what has made Tesla, SpaceX, Neuralink, and other entities so successful.

Musk’s new pay package

Tesla announced the new pay package for Musk yesterday, under the following terms:

  • 96 million restricted shares of stock, subject to Elon paying a purchase price upon meeting a two-year vesting term, to be delivered after receipt of antitrust regulatory approval
  • The purchase price will be equal to the split-adjusted exercise price of the stock options awarded to Elon under the 2018 CEO Performance Award ($23.34 per share)
  • A requirement that Elon serve continuously in a senior leadership role at Tesla during the two-year vesting term
  • A pledging allowance to cover tax payments or the purchase price
  • A mandatory holding period of five years from the grant date, except to cover tax payments or the purchase price (with any sales for such purposes to be conducted through an orderly disposition in coordination with Tesla); and
  • If the Delaware courts fully reinstate the 2018 CEO Performance Award, this interim award will be forfeited or returned or a portion of the 2018 CEO Performance Award will be forfeited. To put it simply, there cannot be any “double dip.” Elon will not be able to keep this new award in addition to the options he will be awarded under the 2018 CEO Performance Award, should the courts rule in our favor

The board added a statement that said it believed now would be an ideal time “to take decisive action to recognize the extraordinary value that Elon created for Tesla shareholders.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Tesla Cybertruck leftovers are the main course at the Supercharger Diner

Tesla is using recycled steel from Cybertruck manufacturing for the Supercharger Diner in Los Angeles.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla Cybertruck panels that are leftover from manufacturing became the main course at the Supercharger Diner, contributing to the futuristic restaurant’s unique exterior design.

The Supercharger Diner was an idea of Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s in 2018, and in July 2025, it officially opened for business, serving a variety of interesting dishes in a futuristic setting that pays homage to the 1950s restaurant experience.

The design of the Diner is what truly sets it apart: it is reminiscent of the stainless exterior that Tesla used for the Cybertruck. It turns out that’s exactly what it is.

tesla diner supercharger in los angeles california at night

Credit: Tesla

Tesla Chief Designer Franz von Holzhausen revealed in an interview with Tesla Owners Club Austria that the company used recycled panels from Cybertruck manufacturing as siding on the epic diner.

Here’s what he said:

Tesla sourced its stainless steel for the exoskeleton of the Cybertruck from Steel Dynamics Inc. and its plant in Sinton, Texas. The company confirmed this through various outlets, including exhibit descriptions at the Petersen Automotive Museum. The steel is refined through a third party before it is used.

Credit: Cybertruck Owners Club

It also uses the same steel for SpaceX Starship.

It’s pretty interesting that Tesla chose to use the stainless steel for the exterior of the diner in Los Angeles, but it also makes sense considering how durable it has proven to be.

Continue Reading

Trending