Imriel

Just so everybody gets a clear image about this. ​If the board removes him as CEO, several clear boundaries apply: • Every share Jensen Huang already owns outright is his legal property. He retains full voting rights for those shares and can hold them, borrow against them, or dump them on the open market whenever he chooses (subject only to standard SEC insider trading blackout windows if he remains on the board, or Rule 144 volume limits if he steps down completely). • The only shares a board can claw back or cancel upon termination are unvested performance stock units (PSUs) or restricted stock units (RSUs) that have not yet met their time or performance milestones. Given that Jensen co-founded Nvidia in 1993 and holds roughly 3.5% of the company outright, the vast majority of his multi-billion-dollar stake is long since vested. • Because he is Nvidia's largest individual shareholder, firing him against his will creates an immediate existential headache for the board. As an outside shareholder, he could launch a proxy fight to replace the board directors at the next annual meeting, start a rival silicon venture and poach Nvidia's top CUDA and architecture leads, or threaten to liquidate tens of billions of dollars in stock, cratering the share price for institutional investors. In short, firing a founder who owns over $100 billion in vested stock does not strip him of power; it just turns him into an activist shareholder with infinite capital and zero fiduciary obligations to protect the board.