News
Tesla again urges investors to vote in favor of Musk pay plan, Texas move
Tesla has shared a new video ahead of its upcoming Annual Shareholders Meeting next month, urging voters once again to vote in favor of two proposals: CEO Elon Musk’s recently struck-down compensation plan from 2018 and the company’s re-incorporation in Texas.
As the latest in Tesla’s efforts to get shareholders to vote in favor of the re-incorporation plan and Musk’s previously approved pay package, the company’s main account on X shared a new video on Monday, once again encouraging investors to vote in favor of the proposals. The votes on moving incorporation from Delaware to Texas and the Musk compensation plan re-vote, which are numbered three and four, respectively, follow Judge Kathaleen McCormick’s decision in January to void the CEO’s 2018 pay plan.
In the post, Tesla calls the proposals “especially important,” saying that voting in favor of them will “protect your rights as stockholders & protect the value of your investment.”
The video also includes a past speech from Musk, in which he reiterates the company’s mission to help the world transition to a global, sustainable economy. It also highlights the company’s development of multiple technologies, including its electric vehicles (EVs) and their eventual autonomy, energy storage, and the Optimus humanoid robot.
“Tesla stockholders, YOU have the ability to enhance the future of the company,” writes Tesla near the video’s end. “For the past six years, under Elon Musk’s leadership, you’ve seen the value of your investment increase ~1,100 percent.
“The present and future value creation that Tesla is poised to deliver for all of you is at risk. We need your vote. Protect Tesla.”
You can see the full video below.
We have put forward two especially important proposals for our Annual Meeting of Stockholders—and we need your vote.
Protect your rights as stockholders & protect the value of your investment by voting FOR the ratification of the 2018 CEO Performance Award & FOR Reincorporating… pic.twitter.com/ONmB7oZfyM
— Tesla (@Tesla) May 20, 2024
“The Tesla team put this together of their own volition (I did not ask for it),” Musk wrote in a repost of the video on X. “Thanks!”
The Board of Directors has consistently also voiced their support for the proposals, with Board Chair Robyn Denholm recently sharing her thoughts on the judge’s decision and Musk’s pay package in general.
“Elon has not been paid for any of his work for Tesla for the past six years… That strikes us, and the many stockholders from whom we already have heard, as fundamentally unfair,” Denholm said last month. “We do not think that what the Delaware Court said is how corporate law should or does work. If it is legally advisable, we suggest simply subjecting the original 2018 package to a new shareholder vote.”
Tesla also recently launched a website both encouraging shareholders to vote yes on three and four, and detailing how they can vote through various brokerage platforms. According to a report from Bloomberg, Tesla also hired a strategic adviser to “bolster the campaign,” though shareholders have been divided on how to vote on the proposals.
One of Tesla’s largest individual shareholders, for example, has recently been blasting Musk on X in recent weeks, even going on to describe Musk as a “magician,” and the pay package ratification vote as a “robbery attempt.” Many have criticized Musk specifically for recent, widespread layoffs at the company—especially including the Supercharging team, which was let go before Tesla later re-hired a few people.
Others have voiced strong support for the pay package, saying they voted with the board’s recommendations on both proposals. At the time of writing, about 66 percent of those who have responded to recent Teslarati stories about ratifying Musk’s 2018 pay package said they voted in favor of the proposal, while the remaining 34 percent said they voted against it. Respondents ranged from having just a few Tesla shares to over 7,000, while the vast majority of those who reached out didn’t include how many shares they owned.
The vote is being held between now and Tesla’s Annual Shareholders Meeting, which is scheduled for June 13.
Tesla’s largest retail shareholder continues push against Elon Musk’s $56B pay package
What are your thoughts? How did you vote on these proposals? Let me know at zach@teslarati.com, find me on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send us tips at tips@teslarati.com.
News
Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are trying to shut Starlink out before FCC vote
AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile want 290 MHz cut from an FCC satellite plan before Thursday.
AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile are asking the Federal Communications Commission to pull nearly 300 MHz of spectrum out of a proposal that would let satellite companies like SpaceX offer cell service directly to ordinary phones. The request lands one day before the agency votes on it.
The FCC will vote Thursday, October 29, on a notice of proposed rulemaking that would make an additional 482 MHz available for direct to device service, expanding the number of eligible bands from five to 13, according to the FCC fact sheet. It would also scrap the rule requiring a satellite operator to lease spectrum from carriers, replacing it with a certification that the operator has coexistence agreements in place or holds the terrestrial license itself.
That second path matters for SpaceX. As Teslarati reported earlier this month, SpaceX agreed to buy Grain Management’s nationwide 800 MHz portfolio to turn Starlink Mobile into a full US carrier, adding to the spectrum it already bought from EchoStar.
The carriers want two bands removed, 2.5 GHz and 3.45 GHz, which make up 290 MHz of the 482 MHz on the table. Through industry group CTIA, they argued that about 300 million users depend on those bands and that satellite operations in them are not technically feasible. T-Mobile, which calls 2.5 GHz the foundation of its Ultra Capacity 5G network, said in its own filing that satellite interference could wipe out up to 96% of a cell site’s uplink coverage area and cut uplink speeds by 88% to 99%.
Executives from all three carriers met with FCC staff on October 20, and T-Mobile CEO Srini Gopalan met separately with FCC Chairman Brendan Carr. T-Mobile’s role stands out because it is still SpaceX’s US launch partner for Starlink Mobile. The three carriers have also teamed up on their own satellite joint venture to pool spectrum, a move widely seen as a response to Starlink.
SpaceX is asking for the opposite. In an October 23 filing after meetings with FCC staff and commissioners’ offices, the company asked regulators to add the 902 to 928 MHz band to the proposal. “Doing so now saves time later,” SpaceX wrote. The company also asked the FCC to modernize interference rules and align satellite deployment requirements with those for terrestrial cell networks, saying the goal is to let satellite and ground networks work together so Americans stay connected wherever they are.
The carriers have not been shy about how they view SpaceX as a competitor. On Verizon’s third quarter earnings call Monday, its chief executive said Starlink Mobile “just can’t compete with a terrestrial network” and estimated SpaceX would need four to six years and $300 billion to $500 billion to build a full US carrier network.
Thursday’s vote will not settle which bands survive. Adopting the notice opens a public comment period, with final rules to come later in the proceeding. The FCC already considered and rejected 2.5 GHz for satellite coverage once, in 2024. SpaceX also is not the only satellite player watching: the FCC approved Amazon’s $11.6 billion acquisition of Globalstar on October 27, giving its planned direct to device fleet its own mobile satellite spectrum.
A Tesla Semi caught fire in Hayward, California, which caused both directions of traffic to shut down for hours before being completely reopened early on Wednesday, the California Highway Patrol said.
The fire occurred just after 5:30 local time in Hayward on Tuesday, as the Semi caught fire in the southbound lanes of I-880 before CHP officials made the decision to shut down both lanes of traffic due to potential risks from hazardous chemical smoke.
There were no injuries reported.
🚨 A Tesla Semi reportedly caught fire, with California Highway Patrol confirming. The Semi was on I-880 SB
An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 28, 2026
The cause of the fire is currently unknown, as neither Tesla nor the CHP have not determined a cause.
However, some images taken before the Semi was completely destroyed by the fire seem to indicate this might have been an older unit, as it appears to be one of the designs that Tesla shipped as part of its pilot program, before revising it and starting mass production just a month ago.
@Tslachan From on of the videos looks like it’s an old Semi (not the refresh version that recently started production) https://t.co/KzwmR2kXow
— Area Under The Curve 🎗️ (@AreaUnderCurve) October 28, 2026
At the time of publication, CHP had not returned our request for a comment for additional details, including the Semi involved and any potential collaboration on an investigation between the CHP and Tesla. We will update this story when we hear back from them.
The southbound lanes were reopened at 3:30 a.m. on Wednesday, with the northbound lanes opening last night a few hours after the fire began. The CHP did state that the lithium batteries were “incredibly difficult to extinguish,” according to NBC Bay Area.
The truck’s driver said that the Semi caught fire, but he did not have an explanation.
An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year.
Tesla’s launch of the “Emergency Drive Away” function a few months back offered owners a safe option to evacuate an area if they were in reasonable danger. The function finally got its first use in the real world, but it appears it was by mistake.
A video shared by u/Joshalander in the r/TeslaLounge subreddit recorded the instance from his vehicle and said the incident took place in Austin this past weekend during the city’s F1 Race.
“Was charging around 6 AM this past Sunday in Austin before heading to the F1 race and heard a pop. Looked over and saw the new emergency drive-away feature in action. Genuinely felt bad for the dude when he got out and realized what happened, since he looked exhausted and only seemed to half-read the prompts.”
🚨 Here’s the first look at Tesla’s Emergency Drive Away function in action:
Apparently this driver accidentally enabled it and drove forward; you can see the Supercharger pull with the car.
Tesla said previously this would cost up to $25k if not used properly. https://t.co/B4qQRrsO6B
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 28, 2026
Emergency Drive Away unlatches the Supercharger connector from the vehicle, but still causes damage to both the car and the Supercharger. Tesla has said that it will cost up to $25,000 in repairs to have everything fixed back to normal.
Additionally, the company said that if it were not used in an emergency situation, the driver of the vehicle who activated the Emergency Drive Away feature would be responsible for all repair costs.
Tesla constitutes the following situations as reasonable justifications for activating the feature:
- You face an immediate threat to your life or personal safety.
- You must leave the area immediately.
- Exiting the vehicle is unsafe.
- Unplugging the charge connector would unreasonably delay your departure or expose you to a risk to your personal safety.
After using the feature, Tesla requires the driver to schedule Service so the car can be inspected.
Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are trying to shut Starlink out before FCC vote
Tesla Semi catches fire in California: what we know
