我还是搞不懂Tesla56B pay package case的法理依据
版主: lexian
#1 我还是搞不懂Tesla56B pay package case的法理依据
Tesla, as a company, had a deal with the CEO for certain stock option if he able to achieve certain goal. He did. Tesla should grant him those options.
Now one shareholder don’t like the deal. He can sue to void the deal afterwards? What the basis of that? A deal is a deal. If you don’t like it, sell your shares. Or sue when it was first announced. Even if he want to sue, how can one share holder represent the whole body of share holders?
Now one shareholder don’t like the deal. He can sue to void the deal afterwards? What the basis of that? A deal is a deal. If you don’t like it, sell your shares. Or sue when it was first announced. Even if he want to sue, how can one share holder represent the whole body of share holders?
说你有病就有病
#5 Re: 我还是搞不懂Tesla56B pay package case的法理依据
法官也不能特么胡来。 A要起诉B和C的deal? 那A自己付诉讼费, 怎么会B来付呢? B又没有要起诉。这种法官要被disbar。
说你有病就有病
#6 Re: 我还是搞不懂Tesla56B pay package case的法理依据
没错,这法官纯SB。她一个人就能deny一个公司几十万股东投票做的决定。以后谁还敢在Delaware 开公司?作弊自掘坟墓。
#7 Re: 我还是搞不懂Tesla56B pay package case的法理依据
Tesla CEO Elon Musk has renewed the fight for his $56 billion pay package
Tesla CEO Elon Musk on Wednesday officially filed an appeal with Delaware’s Supreme Court after a state judge rejected his $56 billion compensation package for the second time.
The widely expected move came a little less than a month after Delaware Chancellor Kathaleen McCormick opened the 30-day window for Tesla to appeal her ruling to the state’s highest court. Shortly after McCormick shot down Tesla’s bid to restore Musk’s package, the electric vehicle company confirmed its plans to appeal.
https://qz.com/tesla-elon-musk-compensa ... 1851735330
Tesla CEO Elon Musk on Wednesday officially filed an appeal with Delaware’s Supreme Court after a state judge rejected his $56 billion compensation package for the second time.
The widely expected move came a little less than a month after Delaware Chancellor Kathaleen McCormick opened the 30-day window for Tesla to appeal her ruling to the state’s highest court. Shortly after McCormick shot down Tesla’s bid to restore Musk’s package, the electric vehicle company confirmed its plans to appeal.
https://qz.com/tesla-elon-musk-compensa ... 1851735330
持仓抄底锁利,你钱你定
看牛观猪喊熊,自娱自乐
股市变幻莫测,不作不死
赌途曲折无常,吃枣药丸
看牛观猪喊熊,自娱自乐
股市变幻莫测,不作不死
赌途曲折无常,吃枣药丸
#13 Re: 我还是搞不懂Tesla56B pay package case的法理依据
人家重新投了一次,这一次如果没有误导,应该算数的。
但是左派法官当葫芦法官 胡乱判案。musk已经是右派中的领袖了,不上点眼药不行了。
但是左派法官当葫芦法官 胡乱判案。musk已经是右派中的领袖了,不上点眼药不行了。
#14 Re: 我还是搞不懂Tesla56B pay package case的法理依据
Still can’t explain why Tesla need to foot the bill for one shareholders lawsuit.牛河梁 写了: 2025年 1月 9日 13:01 法官意见:第一次董事会勾结马斯克误导股东。第二次对第一次没有影响。不能改变历史。
如果股东同意可以投票重新确立一份新的56B(现在不止了,100B以上?)的包裹。
说你有病就有病
#17 Re: 我还是搞不懂Tesla56B pay package case的法理依据
如果一个都没有。那就没有受害者,没有原告。有人受害就足够起诉维权了。赢不赢是另一回事。美国法律没说只有一个受害者,或者受害者是少数,受害者就活该不能提告。lexian 写了: 2025年 1月 9日 13:05 Still can’t explain why Tesla need to foot the bill for one shareholders lawsuit.
#20 Re: 我还是搞不懂Tesla56B pay package case的法理依据
可以起诉, 他受了害, 那赔偿他的损失。 别的股东愿意“受这个害”就被忽视了? 为什么要付3亿美金的律师费, 为了受害的9股?牛河梁 写了: 2025年 1月 9日 13:14 如果一个都没有。那就没有受害者,没有原告。有人受害就足够起诉维权了。赢不赢是另一回事。美国法律没说只有一个受害者,或者受害者是少数,受害者就活该不能提告。
说你有病就有病