←back to thread

188 points zfg | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.214s | source
Show context
snapcaster ◴[] No.43470829[source]
This is so weird, did he miscalculate how intense the backlash would be? or he truly doesn't care?
replies(22): >>43470855 #>>43470861 #>>43470867 #>>43470874 #>>43470876 #>>43470879 #>>43470883 #>>43470896 #>>43470914 #>>43470920 #>>43470931 #>>43470986 #>>43470993 #>>43471010 #>>43471051 #>>43471161 #>>43471431 #>>43471589 #>>43473279 #>>43473806 #>>43474158 #>>43476959 #
dartos ◴[] No.43470861[source]
He doesn’t care. Spacex is more important for him, personally. He has a larger stake (percentage wise) in spacex.

Also, Tesla just jumped bc Musk said that there’s going to be full sell driving in china…. Next year…

We’re back to 2017-era strategies but in china this time.

replies(8): >>43470952 #>>43470978 #>>43470979 #>>43470989 #>>43471007 #>>43471009 #>>43471018 #>>43473480 #
gcr ◴[] No.43471007[source]
Idc about him, but I’m curious about the board. Why don’t investors care? Doesn’t the CEO have fiduciary responsibility to not tank the company in a worldwide market?

If Sundar or Tim reduced market penetration across EU by 43% they’d get recalled in a quarter.

replies(5): >>43471097 #>>43471145 #>>43471190 #>>43473223 #>>43473452 #
1. dartos ◴[] No.43471190[source]
The board for Tesla?

It’s because musk is the Tesla stock price. The entire valuation of that company is based of the force of personality that musk has.

If they ousted musk, the Tesla shares would be worth less than any other auto maker instead of more than all of them combined.

> Doesn’t the CEO have fiduciary responsibility to not tank the company in a worldwide market?

I don’t think this is necessarily true in a legal sense