New Holding Co - X

[Buckminster]

Jordan discusses the possibility halfway through summary. Unlikely on investor day.

 

[Buckminster]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1341801143631028225

1. Elon develops X.ai, X, X.payments
2. Tesla acquires X in an all stock deal at 10% of Tesla's market cap
3. Elon gets 80% of price resulting in ownership of 25% of Tesla
Adjust percentages as desired
Optional:
4. Tesla acquires Starlink
5. Tesla acquires Boring

I was thinking along similar lines with my Tesla-Ai proposal, it makes sense to get Grok inside the Tesla-AI tent, and hopefully retain some of the team. Tesla-AI could merge with X.ai and there would be dilution, but only to Tesla-AI, the process might lift Elon's ownership of Tesla-AI to 25%, and a share class with special voting rights might not be required.

I can see why new classes of shares with different voting rights can't be added to companies after formation, it isn't fair to existing shareholders.

Even my Tesla-AI proposal to create a new company with different share ls classes might be stuck down, because it is a clear attempt to side-step the principle above.

Elon only needs to own 25% of Tesla-AI, not 25% of Tesla.

Why does Elon think this is important? Elon seems to think the team stumbled on the path to AGI when working on FSD and the combination of AGI + Optimus is very powerful. Elon also seems to think that it would not easy for others to replicate that AGI discovery, at least for a while. My guess would be that the difficulty in replicating AGI would be the volume of data, the amount of training required and the model.

I now think that a good trigger for splitting off a separate Tesla-AI would be 10,000 working and profitable Robotaxis. Doing it at that time would ensure that instead of owning one valuable Tesla share, investors would own one valuable Tesla share, and one valuable Tesla-AI share.

Overall I am glad this issue has come up because IMO not being paid might be contributing to Elon being less focused and more distracted, it might be
slowing down progress or having Elon a bit half-hearted about developing AGI.

 

[SOULPEDL]

How about the Test board synthesizes enough shares to give Elon the control he feels he needs and he buys them by paying each TSLS shareholder an appropriate number of shares in X. He gets his control and we are compensated for the dilution. I do not have any idea how legal this would be and I personally don't want to be a shareholder in X but..... Also it would be difficult to agree on a value of X.

Thought I'd reply in this thread... I like your thinking. Heck, I'd loan him some shares if I could. I bet there's a creative way to pull this off without tanking the stock.

The X Holding idea above seems possible, but complicated for certain. Maybe he could lobby each Company CEO for buy-in before a vote...

 

[henderrj]

I would most certainly not want to put all my eggs into one (broken) basket. If we know anything about human nature it is that it needs constant checks and balances. No matter Elon's intelligence, or his lofty goals, he has significant limitations. Arrested development and a Messiah complex come to mind. (And I'm a major fan!)

 

[MC3OZ]

I would most certainly not want to put all my eggs into one (broken) basket. If we know anything about human nature it is that it needs constant checks and balances. No matter Elon's intelligence, or his lofty goals, he has significant limitations. Arrested development and a Messiah complex come to mind. (And I'm a major fan!)

It might not change how we feel about things ... but it seems like it would make Elon happy...

The real question is if it is worth going the extra mile or 2 to keep Elon happy, knowing that we might get 100 miles back in return.

Elon sometimes changes his mind when presented with 100% conclusive and detailed evidence that he is definitely wrong.. For anything that is a matter of opinion, it is hard to assemble that evidence.

So if we are negotiating with Elon we need to understand what he wants.... knowing why he wants it will not necessarily allow us to change his opinion...

As I have suggested, Elon may agree to what we want, in return for giving him what he wants...

If we don't make him happy, he may decide he will be happier somewhere else, and they may develop AGI and robots there... no change to the outcome,.... just our participation in the outcome.

 

[Buckminster]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1747472756005118417

 

[Tiger]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1747472756005118417

Tesla and AI makes sense. Tesla and X or SpaceX does not. Stupid selfish proposal trying to cash in.

 

[Buckminster]

Thinking further about how to get Elon to 25% (yesterday there was discussion about a starlink and/or Xai transaction whereby Tesla purchases all or some of these companies with stock, which would then be under Elon voting control).

One other obvious candidate, which is actually much more aligned with Tesla already is The Boring Company.

Would anyone here object to Tesla buying that from Elon for $10 Billion? If so, what would be a fair price Instead?

Does Elon have a controlling stake in either XAI or Boring Co?

I’d fully support this as I don’t have any exposure to either company myself but I’m guessing investors in those companies might feel like they weren’t getting a good deal.

Good question. I assume he is the majority owner of both, by a large margin. Likely much more in the way of outstanding options for staff incentives at Xai I am guessing though.

 

[Buckminster]

Create Musk Holdings
Transfer his shares from various ventures into it.
Sell shares in Musk Holdings
Use proceeds to buy TSLA and create new companies.

This maintains Elon's control of existing companies, but dilutes ownership. For TESLA it increases ownership and control. Companies that need extra cash can raise it from Musk Holdings rather than having further investment rounds.

This would avoid diluting existing TSLA shareholders and stop short selling dead (as at any time Musk Holdings could buy large amounts of TSLA).

Musk Holdings would have to be a private company, so limited opportunities for retail investors.