
BlackRock voted for proposal to replace Tesla’s Musk with independent chairman - kgwgk
https://reuters.com/article/BigStory12/idUSKCN1LG01R
======
fsniper
Isn't the title misleading? Article says there have been a vote, but the
result was against removing him. Title leads you to believe that motion was
accepted.

~~~
mirimir
Yes. Especially because ...

> More than 86 million shares voted against the proposal at a shareholder
> meeting in June, while fewer than 17 million voted in favor, Tesla said.

... and ...

> BlackRock funds are a top-10 Tesla stockholder, controlling nearly 6.5
> million of Tesla’s 170 million shares, according to Thomson Reuters data
> based on public filings.

So who cares how BlackRock voted?

~~~
pvg
That might make it an uninteresting story but not a misleading title.

~~~
mirimir
OK. But why _do_ we care how BlackRock voted? What makes them newsworthy,
regarding Tesla or whatever? I could google it, but the article doesn't make
it very clear.

~~~
pvg
It's a big shareholder voting for one of those somewhat-off-the-beaten-path
proposals that often get zero support from big shareholders. That's about it.
It's a pretty basic newswire service report. Does it belong on HN? Probably
not. I voted for it not being on the front page!

~~~
mirimir
Thanks. I could have googled that, I know. But I was rather expecting the
article to make some argument. It did quote BlackRock about standing for
"shareholder value", whatever that is. But I was wondering whether it was just
a catfight, or stock manipulation, or whether BlackRock was standing for
something fundamental.

------
rdl
Fuck BlackRock. Aside from their weird anti-2A politics (maybe driven by their
fund managers, maybe driven by LPs), now they are trying to kill Tesla?

(Driving Musk out as chairman might not itself cause serious problems, but it
could also be a prelude to replacing him, which would be the end of Tesla.).
It is pretty telling that their vote was at variance to most of the other
institutions.

------
TangoTrotFox
I was going to say this headline seems geared to mislead. But really it's the
existence of the article itself.

Apparently there was a recent vote about replacing Musk as chairman. The vote
was overwhelmingly defeated with more than 83% voting to keep Musk. Instead of
running an article on this Reuters seemingly chose to run an article
highlighting a seemingly random minority holder voting for the replacement,
with the result mentioned as a numeric aside. This feels like _Spin_.

~~~
dagw
BlackRock is far from a "seemingly random minority holder". They are the
largest asset manager in world, with by all accounts has more assets under
management than the 10 biggest sovereign wealth funds combined.

------
TorKlingberg
As Charmain, not as CEO. Many companies have the Great Leader as CEO and
somebody else as chairman, for all kinds of reasons.

------
cmmartin
Seriously misleading headline. They didn't vote to replace him at all. They
voted to add another executive (A COO). He would have remained CEO. Also, the
vote failed.

------
singularity2001
Look at Apple to see how ousting the (genius) founder worked out in 1984.
Stupid BlackRock, good their proposal was dismissed.

~~~
dagw
The vote had nothing to do with ousting Musk. He would have remained CEO no
matter what.

