News
Tesla shareholder that has made 11x on its investment votes against Musk pay package
It’s official: The California Public Employees’ Retirement System will vote against Tesla CEO’s $56 billion pay package on Thursday at the company’s annual shareholder meeting, despite making 11x on its investment.
CalPERS says it owned nearly 9.2 million shares of Tesla stock as of June 7, and will not support Musk’s pay package ratification for several reasons:
- The value is approximately $46 billion, accounting for the cost to exercise the options, which is larger than the last four years of Tesla’s aggregate net income of $33.8 billion (2020-2023).
- The award would be highly dilutive to existing shareowners and reduce their ownership proportion.
- While the award does have a five-year holding period, it is concentrated in a single individual.
- Compared with other high-performing companies over the same period, the Tesla option award is nearly 140 times the annual pay opportunity for other high-performing CEOs.
- The payout rewards short-term growth and not sustained profitability. Tesla’s value has fallen by more than half from its peak in 2021.
Its Global Equities Investment Director, Drew Hambly, also said:
“We do not think a payout based on short-term market exuberance is warranted without sustained performance. Additionally, this deal concentrates power in a single shareholder and was negotiated by board members whose independence from Tesla’s CEO is questionable. For these reasons, CalPERS could not support the deal in 2018 and remains opposed today.”
RELATED:
Florida Pension Board votes for Elon Musk’s 2018 CEO Performance Award
CalPERS has seen an 11x growth on its investment since 2018, but believes Musk’s pay package would be “excessive compared to executives at peer companies” and would impact shareholders. It also said the pay package isn’t tied to Tesla’s long-term profitability, as it has already been earned and does not incentivize Musk to perform better in the future.
Marcie Frost, CEO of CalPERS, also said:
“This exorbitant compensation package is at odds with CalPERS’ longstanding views on executive pay. The compensation is excessive when compared to executives at peer companies, highly dilutive to shareholders, and isn’t tied to the long-term profitability of Tesla…While we agree that Mr. Musk is entitled to be well compensated for his work, we also believe that a pay package should be commensurate to a company’s performance with reasonable salary caps. These features are absent in the deal as structured.”
Musk said recently that he was disappointed in CalPERS decision to vote against ratifying his pay package.
“CalPERS broke the deal. Shame on them, they have no honor.”
CalPERS is also doing something else, which is related to the decision in the pay package case. It said it filed an objection against the lawyers who represented the shareholder that first challenged Musk’s pay package, as their requested $5.6 billion in fees taken in the form of Tesla stock is “exorbitant and would dilute shareholders’ interest in Tesla.”
The Shareholder Meeting is scheduled for tomorrow.
I’d love to hear from you! 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.
Tesla’s Supercharger Diner in Los Angeles dominated the company’s global usage rankings after just one year, proving the concept is more than just a one-off novelty location that will fade away.
The performance could incite the company to build more locations, something that CEO Elon Musk has hinted at for some time.
Tesla’s Supercharger Diner delivered 21.2 GWh of energy in its first year of operation, the company’s head of Charging, Max de Zegher, revealed on X. Of the top 10 most utilized Supercharger locations in Tesla’s global infrastructure, the Diner in Los Angeles was the most used by drivers, and it wasn’t particularly close:
Tesla Diner opened exactly 1 year ago. Inspiring that futuristic places like this exist.
It’s our highest usage Supercharger in the world: 21.2 GWh delivered in a year, 1.6k sessions/day.
Top 10 Superchargers by energy delivered: https://t.co/9YvJ8lw696 pic.twitter.com/koB3AUJHws
— Max (@MdeZegher) July 21, 2026
On its launch day one year ago, nobody was too sure what the Tesla Diner would be about. It seemed like an interesting concept, and considering it had been in the works for years, it was a highly anticipated launch that many were looking forward to.
Based on its success, we could see additional Diners with Superchargers built throughout the United States, and potentially beyond. Musk has said on several occasions that the company would be willing to bring the Diner idea to more markets.
Tesla makes major change at Supercharger Diner amid epic demand
Of the markets that Musk has mentioned, both Palo Alto and Austin have come to be perceived as ideal selections. However, there are no concrete plans as of now to build new Supercharger Diners anywhere; the location on Santa Monica Boulevard will remain the exclusive spot to pick up Tesla-inspired eats, at least for the time being.
Tesla short sellers won big following the company’s massive fall on Wall Street after it reported subpar Earnings on Wednesday.
Tesla short sellers collected about $4.12 billion in single-day profits on Thursday, according to Bloomberg. Shares fell as much as 15 percent during Thursday’s session. It closed as one of the worst days for Tesla on Wall Street in the past three years.
Investors sold off the stock after Tesla said it would aggressively direct its spending toward AI and its Optimus robot project. The company had record revenues, which were driven by one of the strongest quarters in terms of vehicle deliveries in company history.
However, it missed EPS estimates by reporting just $0.33, a far cry from the $0.53 analysts expected.
S3 Partners reported that about 3 percent of Tesla’s outstanding stock is sold short. Managing Director at S3, Ihor Dusaniwsky, provided the short seller’s potential profit, as well as another figure: shorts have likely had paper gains of $8.92 billion this year, as Tesla shares are down 30 percent in 2026.
Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue
Tesla has burned short sellers many times in the past, but the company’s latest Earnings Call was a chance for those skeptics to taste some payback. Although the company gave some very transparent information regarding future projects, the rollout of Robotaxi, Optimus, and Semi, many investors took their profits on Thursday.
Notable short sellers like Michael Burry have been transparent about their skepticism around Tesla shares. Burry just revealed three weeks ago that he had opened up a new short on the stock, stating he shorted Tesla shares at $416.22. “Happy it jumped back to this level,” he said in a blog post.
At the time of publication, Tesla shares were down about 3 percent and the stock was trading at $309.92.
Tesla’s long-standing saga regarding its door handles and a manual release has entered its latest chapter, and as a result, a big change is coming.
On Friday, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) denied Tesla’s petition that was seeking a defect investigation into roughly 180,000 Model 3 vehicles for an issue involving the emergency mechanical door release.
🚨 The NHTSA denied a petition from Tesla that would have thrown out concerns regarding its door handles.
NHTSA said Tesla’s petition did not present evidence of a safety-related defect warranting an investigation. The agency said a rulemaking process would be a better strategy. pic.twitter.com/j6PzUBM1mT
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 24, 2026
NHTSA said that Tesla’s petition did not present evidence of a safety-related defect in the door handles or their emergency releases. Instead, the agency determined that it would rather solve the issue of the lack of labeling or location of emergency mechanical door releases and the federal safety rules that govern them.
Essentially, the NHTSA wants to create and enforce rules that would require automakers to make emergency door latch releases more clearly labeled in a car. Despite a Tesla having manual door releases on all four passenger doors, many people do not know they exist or how they work.
Tesla addresses door handle complaints with simple engineering fix
In recent times, Tesla has faced some criticism involving its door handles, specifically because some occupants have reported that they are unable to exit their vehicles after losing power. The door handles on a Tesla are electronically operated, but in the event that the 12V battery dies, there is a manual release that can be used.
The NHTSA only identified a single complaint involving the mechanical door releases: a 2022 Model 3 owner said the release was concealed and unlabeled after the vehicle lost power after a front-end collision. It has also already started to create a separate rulemaking process to make emergency door-egress systems more obvious.
It should be noted that all Teslas have mechanical emergency door releases, but they are placed in various locations as the vehicles have aged and been redesigned from year to year. Refer to the safety manual for your vehicle if you have any confusion about where the emergency releases are and how they work.
Tesla’s Supercharger Diner probably just secured more locations
Tesla short sellers win big after shares fall after earnings
