this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2025
523 points (100.0% liked)

World News

44649 readers
3890 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Dutch pension fund Stichting Pensioenfonds ABP sold its $585 million Tesla stake over concerns about Elon Musk's "controversial and exceptionally high" pay package and unspecified labor conditions.

ABP previously voted against Musk's performance-based compensation, which has faced shareholder lawsuits and judicial scrutiny.

A Delaware judge recently invalidated the pay package, citing insufficient shareholder approval.

While Tesla's Model Y remains popular in the Netherlands, European sales fell 15% in 2024.

ABP stated the divestment was not politically motivated despite Musk's ties to the Trump administration.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 202 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Because it's massively over-valued, the board is a bunch of Musky Bro-hoes (also sometimes family...) signing off whatever the fuck Musk says; while it's being led by a Ketamine-addled Nazis with the emotional development of a child.

Why anyone still holds Tesla, is beyond me.

[–] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 72 points 2 months ago (5 children)

Some people truly believe in Musk and the brand. Those people are dipshits, but if you excluded dipshits from your market predictions, you would always be wrong.

But pension funds have a responsibility to go long, and while Tesla may rise or fall on Musk's digital bowel movements, volatility is the problem.

[–] Boxscape@lemmy.sdf.org 41 points 2 months ago

Musk's digital bowel movements

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 months ago

Even taking them into account, long term likely would never pay off. It's valued way over what they'd be worth if they took over the entire vehicle industry, and that's not going to happen. Sure, for gambling maybe it's worth it to speculate on, but for a long-term investment it's horrible.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Tattorack@lemmy.world 19 points 2 months ago (2 children)

There are people like my younger brother who believe that Musk is a pure genius, likes Bezos a lot, and is entirely sold on the idea that billionaire philanthropy is somehow a good and positive thing for regular people.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago (2 children)

christians in particular like to imagine that god blesses those who are "good" with wealth, and that therefore wealthy people must be "good" because otherwise they wouldn't be wealthy.

This then gets absorbed into more secular thought with "well they're successful so they must be skilled".

Truth is, his daughter-grooming daddy owned an emerald mine in Apartheid South Africa and got his seed-money from that. So he's neither "good" nor particularly "skilled."

[–] Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

That's funny, because prosperity gospel is just there to indiscriminately wrench away money from the most desperately impoverished people imaginable. To think, it's doing double work by lionizing oligarchs. It's the purest form of evil, if you ask me.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

it's not even prosperity gospel- that isn't about being good. Just that god will make you rich if you make Joel Osteen and his ilk rich.

Funny how that doesn't work. (and yes... it's fucking evil.)

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Enkrod@feddit.org 3 points 2 months ago (3 children)

christians in particular like to imagine that god blesses those who are "good" with wealth, and that therefore wealthy people must be "good" because otherwise they wouldn't be wealthy.

It's just Calvinism (if you are rich, that means god loves you), and Calvinism is baked into most protestant denominations.

Really Calvin and his beloved "Protestant work ethic" are behind the rise of capitalism. Look it up. Max Weber wrote about it in "The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism"

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 months ago

sold on the idea that billionaire philanthropy is somehow a good and positive thing for regular people.

He's not wrong, but he's judging occasional donations to particular issues as neither ineffective, incomplete, nor completely toxic to direction of research, because he judges them in a vacuum and/or against a fake goal-post of 'no research funding' instead of 'broad research funding based on income tax that rich fucks would have paid in a world before Reagan dropped the bottom out '.

The mating habits of cannabis-injected left-handed greater eastern blue potter's snails will get no money from rich fucks, DESPITE its follow-on application to cancer cure research based on the secretion rate inprovement and or testing options derived from massive population explosions with a kill switch.

[–] x00z@lemmy.world 11 points 2 months ago (2 children)

I don't understand why people mention the ketamine. If he truly did a lot of ketamine he'd be far nicer. It gives a dreamy feeling where your opinions on matters are much more down to earth. You don't overthink and live more in the moment. If anything, Muskyboi should do a lot more ketamine.

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 26 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Drugs don't change people. Plenty of murderers smoke weed, and no sane person arguing in good faith would say weed makes you violent.

[–] x00z@lemmy.world 13 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

I know hundreds of ketamine users. I have been in legal drug education and have a lot of personal experience too.

Drugs do not change behavior, but perspective does. Psychedelics and dissociatives alter perspective, and it's a fact that people alter their behavior depending on their perspective.

Muskyboi has a huge ego, most likely because of some grandeur perspective. But that's the opposite of the perspective one has on ketamine.

[–] Mrkawfee@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yes psychedelics change perspective but you can still be a cunt. It's not a silver bullet unfortunately otherwise we'd have been in utopia after the 1960s.

[–] Pringles@lemm.ee 9 points 2 months ago

As Bron so eloquently stated in Game of Thrones: "There's no cure for being a cunt."

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

So do you just not believe all of the various people who have watched or done Ketamine with him?

His own friends say that he microdoses Ketamine daily and macrodoses at parties.

[–] x00z@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago (2 children)

I'm saying mentioning ketamine is useless and its impact on Musk is meaningless. The amounts he's taking are either too small to be mentioned, or not high enough to drop that stupid nazi perspective.

I think ketamine is an absolutely amazing substance with a lot of positive psychological effects, but mentioning it when talking about Muskyboi and Nazis is useless. It doesn't change the man. He just likes to do it, who cares?

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 months ago

Oh. I get you know, and I agree. He would be the same racist prick with or without substances.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Zink@programming.dev 4 points 2 months ago (2 children)

This seems like a massive and ultimately incorrect generalization.

Weed doesn’t have to reliably turn the worst murderers in society into community serving pacifists every single time in order to be effective and worthwhile. That’s just perfect being the enemy of good.

Like another reply said, drugs can change perspective which is how people change themselves. It certainly worked for me with both weed and ketamine (both legally sourced with medical providers involved, and only several times total with the ketamine).

[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The problem is generalizations. I've seen people get extremely paranoid on weed. Everyone is different.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Treetrimmer@sh.itjust.works 24 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That is complete nonsense, ket can make you a enraged, confused dumbass after chronic use, I've seen it happen.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] chakan2@lemmy.world 40 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

The only reason to hold Tesla right now is political. Do you believe Musk can continue sucking Trump's dick to profits? It's plausible...

Their cars are trash in the global market. China is owning everyone in the EV market. Domestically, they're not a bad buy used, but for their sticker price there's much more compelling options out there. The cybertruck is one of the worst products in automotive history. It'll be mentioned with the Pinto as far as engineering failures go.

[–] brlemworld@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Their cars are trash in the global market.

Not true

[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Ok their cars are trash no matter where they are. They have so many QC issues.

[–] aim_at_me@lemmy.nz 3 points 2 months ago

Ironically, the international versions, made in China, are of a higher quality.

[–] rational_lib@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

It's not necessarily political, wall street can be very clueless about technology. They all seem to believe they can judge the potential of just about any company, no matter how complex the industry, by merely watching a video of the CEO speaking and judging how smart they sound. Perceived potential can also be self-reinforcing because the more prominent a business figure gets, the more wall street reporters and influencers want to be associated with them - so they're careful to only praise them and not piss them off. So they can easily be duped by an Elizabeth Holmes/Adam Neumann type who has a strong voice and even stronger connections and promises the moon for a small investment.

Musk's key innovation was taking that a step further and promising them Mars.

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 months ago

Musk opposed Biden’s EV incentives because he wants to move everything to China

Them being ahead is a reason to invest in Tesla

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 34 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

A Delaware judge recently invalidated the pay package, citing insufficient shareholder approval.

I don't know if this is the article (its pay walled), or AI since it's a summary, or maybe OP, but this is a terrible reporting of what happened.

The pay package was supposed to be independently created by the board, but it was found out that Elon had a heavy hand in proposing it, including the people helping him craft it. Now, I don't think this is bad per say, but then the board was supposed to independently vet it, but the board wasn't really deemed independent, and who they used had ties to Musk. Further, it wasn't properly disclosed what involvement Musk had in crafting the package in the first place.

The failure to properly disclose all of this made the shareholder vote void. Had they disclosed it, and had it been approved, it would have been okay.

It had nothing to do with not having insufficient shareholder approval.

[–] potustheplant@feddit.nl 10 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

TIL, thanks.

[–] prodigalsorcerer@lemmy.ca 8 points 2 months ago (2 children)

One more problem was that the various milestones had projections for likelihood and time to completion, but what they presented to the shareholders was different than their internal projections.

So not only did they think some of these milestones were likely, they lied to shareholders about how likely they were to make the package seem more difficult to achieve.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Critical_Thinker@lemm.ee 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Paying someone a billion dollars or more at a company should require unanimous shareholder approval. One nay should strike it down. It's egregious and unnecessary.

A billion dollars can buy you a hundred people at 10 million a piece, that's gonna get you a shitload of celebrity involvement and endorsement. The value of the shares in this asshole's pay package is over 100 billion as of early December.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

The shareholders chose to do it, it's their company, they can do whatever they want with it (as long as they weren't misled as the judge has ruled they were).

Trying to control what the shareholders do with their company like that is not the way to solve a problem. And if you don't own any voting shares, then you have no reason to complain about what they decide to do.

The payment comes out of their pocket, by the devaluation of their stock, when the options are issued and vested. They went into it knowing they'd make a shit load of money if he pulled it off, and he'd make a shit load of money too. The stock has 25x'd since the package was created.

Edit: Just to be clear here - A better way would be through a high tax bracket that would eat the vast majority of that away forcing him to sell most of the shares (or I guess alternatively sell SpaceX shares, it'd be his choice), but keep in mind it'd be at the rate when each set vests, so it's not a tax bill on 55b, it's a series of tax bills on smaller amounts.

[–] horse_battery_staple@lemmy.world 27 points 2 months ago (2 children)
[–] 9point6@lemmy.world 28 points 2 months ago (1 children)

At the end of the day Tesla is a bubble that will pop at some point, Musk's latest antics are only going to accelerate that.

A pension fund typically avoids risky investments, so this plus the shorting increase is a pretty strong signal that investors think the pop is imminent.

[–] OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml 13 points 2 months ago (2 children)

You might be right, but as someone who used to short, the odds are stacked against you.

First, inflation is always pushing stocks up. Second, it gives TSLA an opportunity to short squeeze. Third, you're tying up your money that could instead go into an always-increasing market.

People have been trying to short Tesla for half a decade. Eventually someone will make money, but it's far from worth it

[–] someacnt@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago (3 children)

True, indeed. Although, in terms of whole stock market, the recent ralley has run out of steam. I think it might be a good short opportunity once this downtrend gets confirmation. Dunno about tesla specifically, though.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] kn0wmad1c@programming.dev 5 points 2 months ago

Can you help me understand the link you posted? Because when I load it it shows a 16% decrease in sold shorts.

[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 25 points 2 months ago

I sold all my shares 3-4 years ago.

There are just better ways to invest that money.

[–] thefatfrog@lemmy.world 21 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I am, in my complete nativity, hoping Tesla would fire Musk and just become a normal car manufacturer. But suppose this is a far cry. But one can hope

[–] Prior_Industry@lemmy.world 11 points 2 months ago

Board of directors is not going to tank their Tesla stock by removing him. There is a reason Musk appointed people who are indebted to him.

[–] SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world 13 points 2 months ago (1 children)

It’s just time to cash. Remember when he bought twitter and the Tesla stock crashed. Yeah they are afraid it will happen again because he’s too busy fucking up the US government.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Valmond@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago (4 children)
[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 19 points 2 months ago

Of course someone bought it... it wouldn't be worth anything if there weren't any buyers.

[–] skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de 11 points 2 months ago

maybe it's someone like saudi sovereign fund, they like burning piles of cash on overhyped failures like when they gave money to softbank

[–] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

Likely sock-puppets for oligarchs trying to prop up the stock value under the weight of sell-offs.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago

Go on Europe!

[–] Toto@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago

The opposite of this is exactly what Meta and big tech companies depend on: as long as we are raking in money, the process doesn’t matter.

[–] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

The Dutch see the writing on the wall. Scroll down...the topic went from Tesla, Musk Digital Bowel Movement to Ketamine...

[–] IndustryStandard@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago
load more comments