Hiltzik: That $1-trillion Tesla pay package for Elon Musk isn't as bad as you think. It's worse

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses Elon Musk's new pay package from Tesla, which is seen as potentially achievable due to its lenient benchmarks, despite being presented as a challenging performance-based compensation plan [3][4][5]. Group 1: Pay Package Details - Musk's current share ownership is 19.7%, but achieving all benchmarks could increase his stake by an additional 12% [1] - The pay package requires Musk to deliver 20 million vehicles, operate 1 million robotaxis, achieve 10 million active subscriptions for Full Self Driving (FSD), and increase EBITDA to $400 billion annually, along with a market value of $8.5 trillion by 2035 [11][12][18] - The benchmarks are criticized for being "watered-down" versions of Musk's previous promises, making them appear more daunting than they actually are [4][5] Group 2: Market Performance and Challenges - Tesla's automotive sales have been declining, and the company is losing market share to competitors, with the Cybertruck underperforming significantly [7] - Tesla's profits per share and revenue have not met investor expectations, with the share price down about 2% this year compared to a 12% gain in the S&P 500 [8] - Despite Musk's $1 billion purchase of Tesla shares post-pay deal announcement, the stock remains approximately 12.8% below its peak closing price from the previous year [8] Group 3: Board Dynamics and Independence - The Tesla board, which includes Musk's brother and personal friends, is criticized for lacking independence in approving the pay package [9][10] - The board's unanimous approval of the deal raises questions about whether it truly reflects the interests of Tesla shareholders [10] Group 4: Achievability of Goals - The goal of delivering 20 million vehicles includes approximately 8 million already delivered, suggesting that the remaining target is less challenging than it appears [13] - The definition of "robotaxi" is broad, allowing for flexibility in meeting the goal of 1 million operational vehicles [15] - The redefinition of FSD and the vague criteria for achieving subscription goals further complicate the assessment of whether these targets are genuinely ambitious [16][12]