Tesla Model X Detroit 2013
  • Tesla Model X Detroit 2013
  • Tesla Model X Detroit 2013

  • Tesla Model X
  • Tesla Model X

  • Tesla Model X
  • Tesla Model X

  • OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA
  • Tesla Model X
  • Tesla Model X

  • Tesla Model X
  • Tesla Model X

  • Tesla Model X
  • Tesla Model X

  • Tesla Model X
  • Tesla Model X

  • Tesla Model X
  • Tesla Model X

  • Tesla Model X
  • Tesla Model X

  • Tesla Model X
  • Tesla Model X

  • Tesla Model X
  • Tesla Model X

  • Tesla Model X
  • Tesla Model X

  • Tesla Model X
  • Tesla Model X

  • Tesla Model X
  • Tesla Model X

  • Tesla Model X
  • Tesla Model X

  • Tesla Model X
  • Tesla Model X

  • Tesla Model X
  • Tesla Model X

  • Tesla Model X
  • Tesla Model X

  • Tesla Model X
  • Tesla Model X

  • Tesla Model X
  • Tesla Model X

  • Tesla Model X
  • Tesla Model X

  • Tesla Model X
  • Tesla Model X

Tesla CEO Elon Musk doesn't get paid much directly from Tesla Motors, just a $1 annual salary, but he's still raking in the dough from his work with the electric car company. Last quarter, he earned $4.3 million in stock-based pay because work on the Model X was reported as "considered probable of being met" in the company's latest SEC filing.

Tesla's next EV is due late next year and Musk said during a conference call about the filing last week that the Model X will become a bigger priority for his company at the end of this year. Currently, Tesla is focused on getting the Model S ready for sale in more markets but Tesla confirmed to Bloomberg it is "currently working on prototype [Model X] vehicles."

Bloomberg says Musk is currently the 162nd-richest person in the world, with a net value of $7.7 billion. This number climbed more than 220 percent this year thanks in part to the increase in TSLA stock value, which is currently at around $148.

Tesla reported that it had a $30.5 million net loss last quarter, but there were $16 million worth of adjustments (including the $4.3 million for Musk) that Tesla says help get the company to its actual number: a $26.3 million profit. From its adjusted profit figure, Bloomberg says, the company also excluded $16 million for its early DOE loan repayment and "$19.3 million related to the start of its leasing program." Math like this is apparently common in Silicon Valley, where Tesla is based, but unusual in the automotive industry as a whole, Bloomberg says.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 40 Comments
      benjamin_braddock
      • 1 Year Ago
      Working on prototypes. I was obviously expecting this far too soon. Get a move on!
      SCMatty
      • 1 Year Ago
      It's good to know that the Pontiac Aztec Designer has again found employment. Was that also a party of the deal with NUMMI.
        m_2012
        • 1 Year Ago
        @SCMatty
        Are you on crack? That looks nothing like an Aztec.
        cloroxbb
        • 1 Year Ago
        @SCMatty
        Haha, the Pontiac Aztec must be a great looking car then, since the Model X looks pretty much just like a taller Model S.
        ravenosa
        • 1 Year Ago
        @SCMatty
        With an eye like yours, how do you differentiate ANY BMW from a Pontiac, considering the endless similarities???
      BraveLil'Toaster
      • 1 Year Ago
      "Last quarter, he earned $4.3 million in stock-based pay" Uh, Sebastian, what actually happened is that his assets increased by $4.3 million because of the increase in the value of the stocks he owned, he was not actually *paid* $4.3 million. Until he actually sells the Tesla shares he owns, this is only a theoretical value, and he can't actually buy things with that "money".
      purrpullberra
      • 1 Year Ago
      Considering the wealth Tesla and Elon have created this is a reasonable amount of 'pay' for his work. The company is being run even better than 'experts' thought possible. He deserves a decent amount of yearly compensation and as long as it doesn't get to the gross levels of the truly greedy CEO pay I'm happy with things as they are. I think $4.6 million a year is a GREAT DEAL for the company and shareholders! I just don't want to see him run himself into the ground. I'm glad he seems to be dropping the hyperloop stuff which he has NO business doing, IMO. He is too busy and important to have a large family with lots time with them AND be CEO of two companies, both incredibly intense positions AND have a hobby like the hyperloop. Something has to give and the only one he should consider dropping is the silly hobby. Hobbies like this are for 'retirement' Elon, I'm sorry to say.
        Marco Polo
        • 1 Year Ago
        @purrpullberra
        @ purrpullberra I agree. Elon Musk is a hugely valuable asset to Tesla shareholders, and $4.5 million is a very modest fee. A CEO of a corporation is never "greedy" ! All CEO's sell their time and skills for the highest price they can command from shareholders. If a CEO asks for too much, or performs badly, then like any product, that failure damages his market value. All he has to sell, is his reputation. If a CEO receives only a modest recompense, then it's a good chance the corporation has become moribund, and has reached a plateau from which the only way is downhill ! Shareholders, must be vigilant and astute when it comes to senior management's value. Better to pay a CEO $100 million if he adds $1000 million in profit, than pay a CEO $ 1 million to add $100 million ! A few years ago, as a director of a fund, I voted to pay the CEO a substantial bonus, despite the fund having lost money that year. This bonus was in recognition that all other competitors had far more disastrous results, and the CEO's astute crisis management placed the fund in a perfect position to take advantages of the market rebound. I certainly didn't want to lose such a valuable asset ! Elon is a dreamer. (But a dreamer with billions of dollars) IMHO, it's impossible to place restrictions on such creative souls ! If he was the sort of person who played it safe, and had "hobbies", we wouldn't be writing about him ! You are quite right, there is always a danger of such people 'burning out" . OTOH, if Janis Joplin, Jim Morrison, Lord Byron, William Pitt, RFK, and all the other astonishing achievers had led 'safe' no risk, lives, the world would be a poorer place.
        Technoir
        • 1 Year Ago
        @purrpullberra
        Funny how newbies can be much better than "experts". I worked for several firms so far, and the single one company that was doing it right and was growing well, was managed by a guy who had never been in the business before. It's interesting to see what common sense and managerial skills can do. Companies driven by ideas seem to be doing much better than those driven by hierarchy.
      thenewrick
      • 1 Year Ago
      This car looks so great. I really want one.
      npooty
      • 1 Year Ago
      Jebus that's uglier than the S.... instead of a mutated Mercury Cougar with a botched Aston Martin grill, it looks like a mutated C-Max with a botched Aston Martin grill... I honestly didn't think anything could be uglier or more disproportionate than the Ford C-Max, but Musk has proved me wrong.
      John Blaze
      • 1 Year Ago
      I love the ego's of people who decide to pay themselves $1 a year. It's always a certain kind of person that does it. Elon fits that stereotype perfectly.
        ravenosa
        • 1 Year Ago
        @John Blaze
        I love the low esteem of poor people who resent successful people. Makes me NOT feel like a whiny victim.
        Jake
        • 1 Year Ago
        @John Blaze
        It's BS. They love to do that to crow about it, but then they get tons of equity in stock and dividends.
          ravenosa
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Jake
          Don't let your failures define who you are, Jake. Life's so short.
          KC
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Jake
          Those are all performance based though. I respect CEOs, who put their money where their mouths are. If the company does not perform then they don't get paid. What I don't like is CEOs collecting huge salary and bonuses when their company is doing badly.
          Cayman
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Jake
          You seemed to have a lot of insight on Musk, you two must be very close.
        Eta Carinae
        • 1 Year Ago
        @John Blaze
        steve jobs did this too......and he is one of the most innovative and admired CEO's of our time........so yeah, elon is one of those people.....
          Rob J
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Eta Carinae
          Ugh. I missed a NOT in that last sentence...
          Rob J
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Eta Carinae
          He was also a pretty major douchebag to be around. I would call him clever and intelligent, I would call him an admirable person.
        2 wheeled menace
        • 1 Year Ago
        @John Blaze
        It has to do with tax laws, not egos.
      m_2012
      • 1 Year Ago
      Performance based salary, just like it should be. His salary is only what the stock is worth. Too bad we are still paying that loser Ackerson and the other hack execs at GM that drove it into the ground much more than that every year.
        Drakkon
        • 1 Year Ago
        @m_2012
        Pay for merit sounds great, but the merit needs to be something other than stock price. Think of the late 1990s. You're an exec for a big IT firm. Not an internet startup, the incumbents. Big hardware manufacturers. They would announce 2400 layoffs, we're going to do more with less. Wall Street loves layoffs and doing more with less. The stock price jumps. Just in time for stock performing bonuses and options to be announced. Stock prices get more manipulated than that a MLB pitcher's jock strap. Boo for stock based pay. Hu-rah for actual merits like profit and cash.
        Marco Polo
        • 1 Year Ago
        @m_2012
        @ m_2012 What the hell is the matter with you GM haters ? Dan Akerson, (at least spell his name right !), is no "loser" ! Dan Akerson graduated as a BSc (engineering) from the United States Naval Academy, and MSc (economics) from the LSE. He is a director of many major corporations, and has a long history of commercial success. Akerson was hired to accomplish one of the most difficult corporate assignments in the world. He done a remarkable job, achieving success under almost impossible circumstances. GM is one of the most important US industrial corporations. GM directly employs hundreds of thousands world wide, and indirectly millions. It's a very important US industrial and economic asset. It's men like Dan Akerson that are leading the US in it's trade war with the PRC and other competitors for America's place in the sun. But it seems there is always, a certain type of misanthrope who must hate anything successful in his own country, and enviously hopes that US institutions (and it's people ) will fail. What Dan Akerson decides tomorrow, affects the lives and future of millions of people internationally, as well as the economic future of the US. This is a huge responsibility. In contrast, how many lives are affected by the decisions you make ?
          miles
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Marco Polo
          Marco, I've been reading for years and I respect the reality your opinion is (usually) grounded in, but you might want to rethink your defense of Dan. I know many people working at the Detroit WHQ and the Warren tech center, and they are almost universally lacking in respect for this man and "his" accomplishments at GM. He is really not much of a leader in this industry.
          EZEE
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Marco Polo
          @brotherkenny You are confusing GOPers with the free market types. Business and government, working hand in hand, is not a free market ideal, but corporatism (as long as business is still in private hands). Corporatism has been popular across a wide range of political spectrums, including fascism, progressivism, etc. if business can get government to do their dirty work, why not? The Obama administration is sick with Goldman Sachs, GE....does this mean Obama is a GOP type? Businesses are interested in the bottom line. Period. How they get it....through hard work and innovation, or through the use of guns held by government, is up to them. Democrats are bought and paid for just as republicans are, socialists, etc. Businesses also know that to cross a progressive, one does at their own peril. Do that once, and the company is racist, hateful, etc. Microsoft kept to themselves and they were evil. Bill Gates woke up and started paying odd the left, creating foundations, money to the UN, and now he is a great guy! No longer is very cutting edge, but a great guy! The media fawns over his accomplishments, and we are all supposed to forget that a few years ago, he was a horrible evil ruthless mean, etc.... When you focus only n one side, the other side laughs and is corrupt.
          Marco Polo
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Marco Polo
          @ miles As I said to brotherkenny4, to judge a man, you must walk a mile in his shoes. Running a company the size of GM, is not just about technology. It's about judging the capacity and capability of the organization to reform, while remaining competitive and returning a level of profit to ensure further access to capital. This is the old argument between the conflicting demands and aspirations of different disciplines within any organization. Most CEO's are like the ring master at a circus, they must continually balance the different needs to keep the circus running. I am a considerable admirer of the ability of Carlos Ghosn to maintain Renault-Nissan's huge investment in EV technology, despite huge losses and disappointments. But it must be remembered that he has the support of the not inconsiderable governments of France and Japan, as well as huge revenue streams from South America to balance against the development costs. Dan Akerson has a far more difficult task. Just staying competitive, and financially healthy is the biggest challenge for the beleaguered Detroit giant. It's also true that Dan Akerson has far more restrictions than Mulally had at Ford. Mulally was able to 'clean house' and restructure Ford Motors with a free hand, thanks to support of the Ford family's control of Ford Motors. Akerson, on the other hand, is hampered with a far more diverse and bureaucratic organization. GM's directors are far less supportive of their CEO, (and more divided among themselves). GM still suffers from not allowing it's subsidiaries enough autonomy, especially in design and shareholder involvement. Dan Akerson argued that distinctive GM brands should be allowed greater design-marketing autonomy, and capital raising, but was defeated by those who wanted a smaller, leaner GM with less models and more control by Detroit. Akerson has argued that GM's problem are not to be found in it's far flung divisions, but at it's heart, in within the Detroit management bureaucracy. Naturally, such views are not popular at WHQ !
          brotherkenny4
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Marco Polo
          Seriously, your on a green car site. I like the Volt and all, but it's roll out has been slow and the price is too high. Also, thus far, GM sells the Spark EV as a compliance car, and in that respect does not differ from Fiat. Traditionally they have also been a very conservative company, as in a republican company, which is more in line with the "Drill Baby Drill" crowd. This alignment with the GOPers is also somewhat confusing since they took the US (socialist) bailout. True free marketers would have gone down in flames before taking taxpayers money. Granted, Akerman came after, but he has said nothing that doesn't sound like the old right-wing GM. So, it's nice that you have a man-crush and everything, but the people who visit here are less interested in that and more interested in cost competitive alternate transportation. We'll all like Dan when the Volt is selling for less than $25K and they sell the Spark EV in markets other than California. We're all just that simple minded really. I don't think we're being confusing though, and we don't have "range anxiety" or any great disease like that. We also don't fear exploding batteries despite the more than abundant concern of our brain content managers (the press).
          Marco Polo
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Marco Polo
          @ brotherkenny4 Being on a green car site doesn't mean losing touch with reality ! Confusing politics and ideology with with commercial reality, is an exercise in futility. GM didn't take a 'socialist' bail out. GM received equity capital and funding from a stakeholder of last resort. There is nothing 'socialist' about governments investing taxpayer funds in concerns of national importance. Nor should business be subject to any 'ideological purity'. A corporation should care where it's equity capital is derived. GM is not unique ! Nearly every car maker in the world is heavily subsidized in some way by national governments. For the US to lose an important national asset just to satisfy a distorted sense of ideology, would be unforgivably irresponsible of any US administration. Attempting to interpret international commerce to the the prism of 19th century political philosophy, is not only unrealistic, but absurd. The protestations of the US crazy-right, are no less irrelevant than those of the extremists of of the green left. Both are totally unrealistic, and irrelevant in the world of international trade. The truth is that GM, like Ford, and Toyota, VW, Renault-Nissan etc must deal with international competition and must make decisions based on resources available, and the best return on investment. COE's of large corporations often have more difficult choices than CEO's of smaller, more specialized concerns. For people who have never been in Dan Akerson's position, it all looks so easy ! But that because it's impossible to understand the complexity of the decisions he required to make, until you've experienced that level of responsibility. Wanting something to be true, believing it "should' be true, and it really being true, are very different things ! The truth is that the vast majority of motorists are not interested in paying a premium for alternate fueled personal transport. Companies like Fiat, who operate outside the US (and California) see the success of vehicles fuel with CNG/LPG and must consider the potential of these fuels in a North America soon to have an abundance of natural gas. Auto-makers have an obligation to make a profit, not 'save the planet' ! That's a simple fact ! California may legislate to artificially encourage one type of fuel or another, but California is rapidly losing importance as an auto market leader. Auto-makers don't really care what sort of fuel the vehicles they produce use, as long as the vehicles sell in profitable numbers. That's not 'wrong' or ' immoral' , just commercial reality !
      Avinash Machado
      • 1 Year Ago
      Worth every penny.
      • 1 Year Ago
      Tesla car batteries have a massive almost 7000 individual Li-ion batteries cells connected in every pack. They too are sensitive to temperature excursions. A UPS cargo plane crashed on Sept. 3, 2010, in the United Arab Emirates, just outside Dubai. Both pilots were killed. Authorities there blamed the crash on its load of between 80,000 to 90,000 lithium batteries, which are sensitive to temperature. Investigators found that a fire on board likely began in the cargo containing the batteries. Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/08/14/ups-cargo-plane-crashes-near-alabama-airport/?cmpid=GoogleNewsEditorsPicks&google_editors_picks=true#ixzz2bx9Y3ozq
        bluepongo1
        • 1 Year Ago
        @ GC Tesla Motors = / = cargo plane ? LOL !!! Try again Elmer F.U.D. , They have thousands of vehicles on the road and thermal failure happens when ?
      Brodz
      • 1 Year Ago
      The Model S is very attractive... but the Model X isn't.
        BraveLil'Toaster
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Brodz
        In pretty much exactly the same way that the Porsche Cayenne is. The problem is that a premium performance car maker is trying to make an SUV. But that's okay, because pretty much all SUVs are ugly anyway. You can only polish a turd so much.
      Feurig
      • 1 Year Ago
      Dude will be the richest man in the world one day.
    • Load More Comments