|
Thanks for reading The Briefing, our nightly column where we break down the day’s news. If you like what you see, I encourage you to subscribe to our reporting here.
Greetings! Here’s a question: When was the last time anyone paid attention to a company’s annual shareholder meeting? More to the point, perhaps, when was the last time a company’s annual meeting really mattered? The answer to the first one (and maybe the second) is when a company drags its feet scheduling the meeting, as Tesla did—until today. On Wednesday, both The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal reported about a group of Tesla shareholders complaining that the automaker hadn’t yet scheduled its 2025 annual meeting. This morning, Tesla set the date, Nov. 6, which is 17 months after the last meeting. Those shareholders should be pleased their complaints sparked quick action. But what did they really achieve? After all, whether Tesla holds its meeting on time won’t have an impact on its recent sales decline or persuade Musk to give up his extracurricular activities. For most companies, including Tesla, annual meetings are usually exercises in bureaucratic rule-following. (This isn’t the first time a Tesla meeting has been held late in the year, by the way—its 2021 annual meeting was in October, and in 2022, it was held in August.) True, shareholder meetings are an opportunity for investors to hold a board accountable. They certainly should matter when activist investors nominate slates of candidates to join company boards, for election at the annual meeting. But activists and companies frequently settle their differences ahead of time. And company boards can ignore shareholder votes otherwise. For instance, when Netflix shareholders voted a director off the board last month, the company simply ignored the vote and reappointed the director!. There are other occasions when annual shareholder meetings are important—such as Tesla’s 2024 meeting, where shareholders were asked to approve the company moving its incorporation to Texas and to reaffirm a multibillion-dollar pay package for Musk that a judge had voided. Now that meeting was on time. But shareholders simply followed the board’s recommendation on both counts. That’s despite what Delaware judge Kathaleen McCormick’s 2024 ruling voiding Musk’s pay package revealed about the history of the package—and despite the possibility that shareholder rights in Texas aren’t as strong as in Delaware. Tesla demonstrates the flaws with shareholder meetings. Musk’s followers focus on the results he (usually) achieves, not on whether he follows the rulebook. Others simply sell their stock, so they’re not there to vote. Even Musk’s supporters might regret their stance in the future—possibly the very near future, judging by Tesla’s recent results—but don’t try to change their minds! You won’t succeed. The Brad Pitt–starring movie “F1” has turned into a hit for its main financier, Apple. But you’d be forgiven, after watching the film, for thinking it’s really about Expensify. The expense software firm is a sponsor of the fictional F1 team, and its name shows up prominently and repeatedly. In fact, it’s not possible to overstate how much Expensify’s name features in the movie. Whether the company earns a return on its promotional investment is a question. One thing is for sure—a lot of people are likely asking right now: “What’s Expensify?” (Here’s a detailed Forbes story about the effort that went into lining up the companies whose brands appear as fictional sponsors in the movie.) • Elon Musk’s xAI has launched Grok 4, the latest generation of its AI models, intensifying its competition with rivals OpenAI, Google and Anthropic. • Revolut is attempting to raise $1 billion in a new funding round that would give the U.K.-based fintech startup a valuation of $65 billion, the Financial Times first reported. • Andreessen Horowitz is changing its incorporation from Delaware, where it has been incorporated since its founding in 2009, to Nevada. In a blog post on Wednesday, the firm wrote that the Delaware Court of Chancery has an “unprecedented level of subjectivity into judicial decisions,” while Nevada has taken measures to be more fair and balanced. • Nvidia closed with a market capitalization above $4 trillion for the first time. More here. Introducing: Applied AI. This new newsletter explores how businesses and leaders are using AI to innovate, improve efficiency, and foster collaboration. Stay ahead with insights and stories on the transformative power of AI. Sign up here. | 
