Tesla: Pigeon CEO, Overcompensated Captive & Useless Board, Failed Targets

Last Updated on: 11th July 2025, 12:02 am

By all accounts, I was categorized as a Tesla superfan for about a decade. I defended Tesla, and the face of Tesla himself, Elon Musk, countless times. The company and its CEO were often misunderstood from what I saw. I stand by those defenses — most of them. And Tesla did also achieve amazing things in that decade. However, there were also clear seeds of problems, and notable problems under the surface, that I surely didn’t pay enough attention to until this decade, and especially recent years. In the past few years, though, huge problems have formed and little problems have grown.

In recent months, a couple of reader comments really jumped out at me about core, notable problems at the company. I didn’t really know what to do with them for a while, but reading the news today about Tesla’s concerningly delayed annual shareholder meeting, those two comments came to mind again and it seemed like it was time to highlight and discuss them.

The first comment is a simple one, but something I hadn’t heard before. “I’ve heard from a few ex-employees (so take it for what it’s worth) that Elon is a ‘Pigeon CEO’. Flys in randomly for a few minutes, craps all over everything, then flys away for another month,” one reader wrote. That certainly sounds like what I’d expect, given how much time Musk spends tweeting, at political events, and at big events and parties (the Super Bowl, the World Cup, Fashion Week, and many other events). Now, this is something that must have changed over time, though. It seems he used to spend almost all of his time working at Tesla and SpaceX, mostly Tesla. However, in recent years, he’s been heavily distracted by other matters and it has seemed unbelievable that he’s working full time at Tesla. So, it’s not that surprising to hear that he’s been classified by staff as a “pigeon CEO.”

Oh yeah, and let’s not forget that he has at least 12 kids.

Anyway, with Tesla sales floundering for the past couple of years, minimal new product launches and vehicle upgrades, and the competition increasingly eating Tesla’s lunch in China and Europe, it’s hard not to think that Musk’s intermittent and erratic work at Tesla is not sufficient for the role of CEO.

That said … problem #2 is the people who should be making sure the CEO is up for the job. That would be the board of directors.

The second reader comment, from “Marc GP,” stated: “It’s not just that Musk has so much voting power (22% stake) at Tesla, but that the board is very well paid and bought for. They earn 100x what board members on similar companies earn at their position (hundreds of millions, so much that a Delaware court just forced them to return one billion back for excessive emoluments). Would they ever put that at risk?” Marc linked to this article to back that up. Before I get to that article, though, 100x what board members at similar companies earn?! That’s wild. No wonder they aren’t doing anything. They are getting away with robbery — insane robbery. As Marc said, why risk that?

The article referenced the now famous/infamous Delaware court case regarding Musk’s compensation, which also covered the board’s compensation. Here’s more: “The lawsuit, led by the Police and Fire Retirement System of the City of Detroit on behalf of Tesla shareholders, alleged that Tesla board members awarded themselves excessive compensation. While the average annual compensation for an S&P 500 board member is slightly over $300,000, Tesla’s board members were accused of receiving hundreds of millions of dollars during the period in question.

Under the terms of the settlement, the board members agreed to:

• Return $277 million in cash to Tesla.
• Surrender $459 million worth of stock options.
• Forgo $184 million in stock options granted from 2021 to 2023.”

Insane.

And keep in mind that the company’s sales, revenue, and profits have gone down in the past couples of years.

Tesla keeps missing its targets. But what can you expect from a pigeon CEO and a captive, vastly overcompensated board?