@political_aya__ there's no point trying to convince these people, they will always question you one way or another, while they do nothing better than being traitors to their own.
@martye15@Thomashornall Norwegians simply can't take any criticism. They have too much blind trust in their socialist government and they don't dare to question anything.
@AustinTobitt Not by diluting shareholders by x5 and having CEO compensation tied to market cap and EBITDA and not share price. He can unlock his compensation while shareholders are down -50%.
@foxenflask Also, hurdles adjust for dilution. But adjustments protect the hurdle math, not your share value. M&A adds adjusted EBITDA AND market cap together, both hurdles cleared, you still own a smaller slice. EBITDA up, stock flat, it's already been proven.
@foxenflask Read it. The EBITDA hurdle doesn't fix the problem, it enables it. An acquisition adds EBITDA AND shares simultaneously, both hurdles cleared in one move. The 2.5B authorization exists precisely for this. And EBITDA grew this past year with zero stock price response.
@philip14771893@foxenflask True he pays the strike, but he gets the *option*, not the obligation. He only exercises if it's already a win. You're stuck holding through any dilution he uses to get there. He profits, you eat the dilution. That's the misalignment. And remember the option dividend to us at 32$
@foxenflask RCs pay vests on market cap, not share price. He hits $20B/$100B targets either by stock going up (you win) OR by issuing tons of new shares (you lose). At $20B mkt cap post-dilution, GME could be $13 and his award vests, you're down 50%.
@AustinTobitt RCs pay vests on market cap, not share price. He hits $20B/$100B targets either by stock going up (you win) OR by issuing tons of new shares (you lose). At $20B mkt cap post-dilution, GME could be $13 and his award vests, you're down 50%.
Per-share targets is needed.