According to TheRegister.com, Norway’s Norges Bank Investment Management has voted against Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s proposed $1 trillion share award package ahead of the November 6 shareholder vote. The world’s largest sovereign wealth fund, which manages hundreds of billions in oil and gas profits, expressed concerns about the award’s total size, dilution effects, and failure to address key person risk. Tesla’s stock immediately dropped 4.4% following the announcement, adding pressure to a company whose revenue growth has stalled after climbing from $200 million in 2011 to $95 billion today. Board chair Robyn Denholm warned last week that Musk might leave if the package isn’t approved, while the fund acknowledged Musk’s “visionary role” but maintained its consistent stance against excessive executive compensation.
Market reality check
Here’s the thing: when the world’s largest sovereign wealth fund says your compensation package is too rich, maybe it’s time to listen. NBIM isn’t some activist hedge fund with an axe to grind – this is Norway’s rainy day fund, the kind of investor that typically plays the long game. Their objection carries weight precisely because they’re usually the quiet money in the room.
And let’s talk about that stock drop. A 4.4% decline might not sound catastrophic, but for a company of Tesla’s size, that represents billions in market value vanishing in hours. It suggests that serious investors are starting to question whether Musk’s drama is worth the premium. I mean, when research shows US billionaires collectively gained $698 billion last year alone, does Musk really need another trillion?
The Musk paradox
Now, nobody’s denying Musk’s impact. Taking Tesla from $200 million to $95 billion in revenue is legendary stuff. But there’s a growing sense that we’re watching peak Musk unfold in real time. The political controversies, the Nazi salutes, the Tommy Robinson support – it’s all starting to have real business consequences.
One study claims his political stances cost Tesla one million US EV sales. European sales have tanked. And yet he’s asking for what amounts to the GDP of a small country? Basically, he’s testing how much baggage investors will tolerate before saying “enough.”
The board’s argument that they need to pay up to keep him feels like hostage negotiation rather than sound governance. If your CEO’s retention requires the largest compensation package in human history, maybe that’s a sign the relationship has become unhealthy.
Bigger than Tesla
This vote on November 6 isn’t just about one company or one billionaire. It’s becoming a referendum on executive compensation in the age of extreme wealth concentration. When sovereign wealth funds start pushing back, you know we’ve reached a tipping point.
So what happens if Musk loses this vote? Does he really walk away from the company he built? Or is this another negotiation tactic? Either way, the fact that serious institutional investors are willing to publicly oppose him signals that the billionaire immunity shield might finally be cracking. And honestly, it’s about time someone asked whether any single person is worth 1,000,000,000,000 dollars.
