You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Thank you for the response. I figured as much, but wasn't sure what part of the Law restricts this.
Given the number of times I've been showing off my Model S or Model 3 and been asked "Do you work for Tesla?" this made me smile.
Imagine getting *paid* for Tesla time...
I spoke with Fidelity today. I have a further appointment on next Monday. But point being, given the amount of individual shareholders interested, it's likely Fidelity would do something to try and accomodate those owners going private. Depends on the trading volumes. Also, they said for private equity, there is no fees. This isn't an advertisement for Fidelity, but i think we should be okay. If anybody has questions, add it here and I'll ask them on Monday.
I spoke with Fidelity today. I have a further appointment on next Monday. But point being, given the amount of individual shareholders interested, it's likely Fidelity would do something to try and accomodate those owners going private. Depends on the trading volumes. Also, they said for private equity, there is no fees. This isn't an advertisement for Fidelity, but i think we should be okay. If anybody has questions, add it here and I'll ask them on Monday.
All of my shares are in retirement accounts. I do qualify as an accredited investor, IF retirement funds are included, but even so, with only 330 shares, I doubt I would be one of the 2000 investors allowed by law.
See, I understand all this, but the real question is whether the SEC will frown on existing Tesla holders who are financially unsophisticated lay people *ending up* with unlisted, illiquid stock, even if it's not actually being sold or transferred to them (because they already own it).
If the SEC frowns on that, then all non-accredited investors in Tesla will be forced out before the stock is delisted.
Basically, all they do is ask you to sign a form saying you're an accredited investor. No-one checks. It's a CYA move to prevent unsophisticated investors from suing them later.So exactly where do you see a requirement that there can be only 35 non accredited investors? That there can be no small investors? I've taught this concept for Series 7 for almost 20 years and I know of nothing like this. I've stated this before and I'll try to do this once more. The accredited investor concept is a primary offering thing. It was created to limit the number of uninformed (unknowledgeable, inexperienced) regular folks from getting taken when a company sells stock. Typically this is pre IPO but it applies to all primary offerings. Once you're in I know of no requirements to get rid of individual investors. NOTHING. At least none to my knowledge. Would be great to learn something new if there is a requirement to divest of small investors in private companies. There are techniques to force investors to do things e.g. forced conversions designed to push convertible bond holders into common stock but this is at the company's discretion. Not a FINRA, NASD, SEC requirement.
The logistics to figure out who and who does not satisfy the $200k income and $1million net worth would be pretty difficult. Tons of individual investors to vet. Also folks make it seem like there are serious documentation requirements to prove you are worthy. NOT true. There is nothing that gets turned into any SEC/NASD office. This is not like getting a loan to buy a house. I did not work in compliance or legal but I have been a part of SEC/NASD inspections and they look for bad things and generally required documentation. Like a tax audit they do randomly grab customer files but typically they spend more time on your customer complaints logs. They do not go thru and verify that Cal has x amount of $'s or that he proved his net worth. Margin and option accounts do require much more but then again they do a credit check before they let you do things. No one is going to loan you $ to buy stock without checking to see if you are good for the $.
There is much less regulation that requires a company to do something than you might think. They don't have to let you vote, send you dividends. There are tons of different types/classes of corporate stock. Your Tesla 401K shares are common shares but a non voting class. You won't get a proxy statement asking you to vote on anything.
The fact that you're limited on information, have much reduced liquidity etc is nothing new. This is exactly what happens when you buy a limited partnership. You have even more limited options to sell. I've had horrible experiences with them in the 80's after they legislatively changed the rules regarding these tax shelters. I couldn't give them away and there was no place on any exchange for bids or asks. You did have initial capital requirements to get buy directly from the general partners but after that you were on your own. And the buy you sell it to even more so.
I think we should worry more about Telsa deciding we are too much trouble to keep around instead of wondering if the SEC or FINRA is going to force the company to get rid of us.
Just look back at the Solar City proposal. Passed pretty easily. Hard to say if this will be as much a slam dunk.
Depends on the IRA. I'd follow this thread if I were in your shoes: Self Directed IRA discussionwill IRA retirement accounts be able to invest in the new private Tesla?
It doesn't look like IRA accounts can currently invest in SpaceX unless they invest through GOOG or a couple Fidelity funds that have small posiitons.
I'm guessing the answer is no but would appreciate any feedback.
Thx,
Peter
Depends on the IRA. I'd follow this thread if I were in your shoes: Self Directed IRA discussion