A man named Gary Black thinks that Tesla's big boss, Elon Musk, will get a lot of money approved by the people who own the company. He believes this will be very good for Tesla and make its stock go up. This decision is important because it can change how the company grows in the future. Right now, some people are worried about how much money Tesla is spending and how many cars they are selling, so the stock price is not as high as Gary Black thinks it should be. Read from source...

1. The article title is misleading and sensationalized, as it implies that Gary Black's opinion is the only one that matters or that his prediction of the shareholder meeting outcome is certain or definitive. A more accurate title would be "Tesla Bull Gary Black Shares His Opinion on Elon Musk's $56B Pay Package Approval and Its Impact on Tesla".
2. The article relies heavily on quotes from Gary Black, without providing any context or background information about him, his credentials, or his past predictions or performance as an analyst. This creates a one-sided narrative that favors Black's perspective and does not give the reader a balanced view of the topic.
3. The article does not mention any potential conflicts of interest that Gary Black may have in making these statements, such as his affiliation with Tesla or his ownership of Tesla shares. This could influence his judgment and make him biased towards a positive outcome for Tesla and Elon Musk's pay package.
4. The article does not address any counterarguments or alternative viewpoints on the issue of Elon Musk's $56B pay package, such as the concerns raised by shareholder activists or the legal challenges that have been mounted against it. This leaves the reader with an incomplete and unbalanced understanding of the topic and its implications for Tesla and its stakeholders.
5. The article uses emotional language and phrases, such as "huge positive", "unfathomable sum", and "trying to have it reinstated" to convey a sense of urgency and drama around the issue, which may appeal to some readers but also detract from the objectivity and credibility of the reporting. A more neutral and factual tone would be more appropriate for an informative article like this one.