Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable

[T@oo]

Quite a celebratory mood from this group on Musk's SEC rebuttal letter. To add another data point for everyone, the summary view from a lawyer friend (financial rather than constitutional law) with no financial or emotional skin in the game: It's a nice try but pretty sure he'll be held in contempt. Resorting to the first amendment argument seems a bit desperate.

My advice to all you options players is to tread carefully unless you really know your legal onions.

3 lawyers. 4 opinions. Always.

 

[Leo9]

When can we expect a ruling? Can't wait to have this case behind us.

 

[pnungesser]

Women don't bear children with their hips...

Just conceive.

 

[mrdoubleb]

I have said the same thing already. But unlike Fwed "Whiney" Lambert, I won't accuse you of plagiarism

I am sure Fred said this before any of us.

 

[bhtooefr]

Actually, smaller cars do pollute less because they use less material and energy during construction, and less energy during their useful life.

Not necessarily, re: less energy during their useful life - as you go to smaller size classes, you have to remove length from the car, which reduces your ability to streamline the shape (without compromising rear headroom, anyway). This means that, while city efficiency is improved by the weight reduction, highway efficiency is worsened by increased drag.

The point at which that happens isn't that much smaller than the Model 3 already is.

 

[lklundin]

Man, I hate to jump on the Fred bandwagon, but he's gone kamikaze with his latest article:

Tesla is bringing Autopilot prices ‘back to normal’, Elon Musk admits mistake

It's clear now that if Fred doesn't make peace with Tesla, Musk, and the EV community, that the editors should fire him. Otherwise, this is wound that's just going to keep on festering.

It's just sour grapes for Fred that he didn't get a Model Y invite. LOL

(that's my guess).

 

[KarenRei]

My advice to all you options players is to tread carefully unless you really know your legal onions.

Not really possible to play via options unless one has any clue about the timing of various events in the case...

 

[Carl Raymond]

Not necessarily, re: less energy during their useful life - as you go to smaller size classes, you have to remove length from the car, which reduces your ability to streamline the shape (without compromising rear headroom, anyway). This means that, while city efficiency is improved by the weight reduction, highway efficiency is worsened by increased drag.

The point at which that happens isn't that much smaller than the Model 3 already is.

I also figure that if we’re fair dinkum about fighting the enhanced greenhouse effect, then we’re going 100 percent RE in short order. That means an excess of middle-of-the-day solar. Cars, with their easygoing “fill me anytime” nature, will be the lowest concern. They kind of get filled with the spillage from a system scaled large enough to cater for less flexible uses.

 

[Tslynk67]

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.501755/gov.uscourts.nysd.501755.27.0.pdf

I don't know about anyone else and I realise we're biased, but this looks like a well prepared and very strong defence, the SEC come across as incompetent, petty and not at all exhaustive.

 

[Huskyf]

WTF ! What's going on with $TSLA -2% in pre market ?

 

[Tslynk67]

Audie, sorry to have been off topic, but those guys were talking about my favorite subject (after EV's of course) so I throw myself to the "mercy of the court" (that being you )

In Gene's defence, I'll just add that that womens' hips, and that general area of their anatomy, scores very highly on my list of favourite things.

 

[Tslynk67]

The depth of knowledge on this board is simply amazing: much of the argument shown here has already been proffered...

How the hell do you think they constructed the defence in the first place?

Elon: "OK, let's go to TMC"

 

[Fact Checking]

Quite a celebratory mood from this group on Musk's SEC rebuttal letter. To add another data point for everyone, the summary view from a lawyer friend (financial rather than constitutional law) with no financial or emotional skin in the game: It's a nice try but pretty sure he'll be held in contempt. Resorting to the first amendment argument seems a bit desperate.

My advice to all you options players is to tread carefully unless you really know your legal onions.

Your lawyer friend must not have read the response carefully enough, there's many layers of defenses offered (as you'd fully expect from the very prestigeous law firm that is working for Elon), and substantial First Amendment defenses only start at page 20 of the 25 pages of filing ...

The contempt motion can already be denied by the judge based on just the first paragraph of the legal arguments offered. (Of course she and her clerks will be reading the whole thing, several times.)

The rest is for "defense in depth" and IMO the First Amendment arguments are primarily there for counterattack: I now fully expect Elon to file either a cross motion or a declaratory motion to ask the judge to limit the SEC's broad interpretation of the settlement.

Note how carefully the expert opinion lays out the facts of the significant monetary harm the SEC's erroneous filing has inflicted on Tesla investors: ($298.77-$292.22)*172,721,487 = around 1.1 billion dollars of damage caused to Tesla's valuation by the SEC's motion.

If you connect the dots it appears very clear they don't intend to stop at getting the contempt motion denied...

Also note that even for pure procedural reasons Elon's lawyers had to raise a First Amendment defense in this motion if they later on want to rely on constitutional arguments to counterattack. (It's very difficult to bring in new arguments at later stages.) This is a basic principle they are teaching in the first year of law school ...

I think your lawyer friend is seriously mistaken here. Feel free to quote me to him.

 

[mongo]

Just a heads up:

Per Elon on Twitter regarding EAP/ FSD pricing:

In retrospect, lower price shouldn’t have been offered. Was done so because some simply couldn’t afford it. Prices revert to normal on Monday.

So, if you were thinking of upgrading, do so soon.

Invite to Early Access Program still valid for early adopters

As always: FSD gets you free HW3 upgrade

Much Twittery goodness in last 6 hours. Reccomend reading the threads (Elon's account with view set to tweets and replies)

 

[KarenRei]

Tesla’s Elon Musk Rebuts SEC’s Motion to Hold Him in Contempt

40% of the SEC agrees that the original SEC settlement was BS.

(ht Steve Jobs)

Wonder if it's material to the prior restraint argument that 2 out of the 5 commissioners didn't even think that it was appropriate to demand the vetting Musk's tweets at all in the first place.

 

[jeewee3000]

Your lawyer friend must not have read the response carefully enough, there's many layers of defenses offered, and the First Amendment defenses only start at page 20 of the 25 pages filing ...

The contempt motion can already be denied by the judge based on just 2 pages of reading.

The rest is for "defense in depth" and IMO the First Amendment arguments are primarily there for counterattack: I now fully expect Elon to file either a cross motion or a declaratory motion to ask the judge to limit the SEC's broad interpretation of the settlement.

Note how carefully the expert opinion lays out the facts of the significant monetary harm the SEC's erroneous filing has inflicted on Tesla investors ...

If you connect the dots it appears very clear they don't intend to stop at getting the contempt motion denied.

Also note that even for pure procedural reasons Elon's lawyers had to raise First Amendment defense in this motion if they later on want to rely on constitutional arguments to counterattack. (It's very difficult to bring in new arguments at later stages.)

I think your lawyer friend is seriously mistaken here.

To add to this (as a lawyer myself, be it a European one) I can confirm a written defense is always layered and throws out all the possible arguments you can think of.

Many times 3/4 of the arguments are copy-pasted from other cases, with the names changed. I can imagine any serious Law Firm in the US has a template for "First Amendment defense" (and also "First Amendment attack" if you happen to be on the other side (which is half the time)).

So don't be awed too much by how great this document looks. I read it in about 5 minutes, it just says:
-tweet immaterial;
-didn't harm stock price; (SEC's tweet did!)
-SEC misreads the settlement with Tesla/Musk.

The rest is legal mumbo jumbo and can be skipped. The judge will too.

 

[Carl Raymond]

Tesla’s Elon Musk Rebuts SEC’s Motion to Hold Him in Contempt

40% of the SEC agrees that the original SEC settlement was BS.

(ht Steve Jobs)

And here we were saying the SEC were corrupt. It was only 60% accurate.

 

[CyberDutchie]

WTF ! What's going on with $TSLA -2% in pre market ?

MS downgrade

 

[Carl Raymond]

WTF ! What's going on with $TSLA -2% in pre market ?

My understanding is the pre-market is more easily manipulated than the day market. Somebody feels it’s worth paying to paint some gloom, before people start getting ‘over’ excited by sexy model y pics, fast Superchargers and EVs for the price of a Camry.

 

[Mars ☰mperor]

WTF ! What's going on with $TSLA -2% in pre market ?

stupid Morgan Stanley