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

[brian45011]

​

Doesn't Elon own and pay for his own jet, paid for out of his credit line backed by a fraction of his stock?

Company used to pay part:

"In addition to use of commercial airlines and the aircraft that is the subject of the Airplane Agreement with SpaceX, Elon Musk has historically made his private airplane available to expedite Tesla business travel. Where possible, trips also include other Tesla personnel, both executives and non-executives, to maximize efficiency. For approximately the first five years of our existence, Mr. Musk fully paid for these expenses himself at a cumulative cost in excess of $1 million without reimbursement. In mid-2009, our independent board members approved paying a portion of the operating expenses of the plane so that Mr. Musk could commit additional time to Tesla for an extended period. The amount paid by Tesla is well under half the full cost per hour of the aircraft. Tesla expects that future expenses for Mr. Musk’s business travel on his personal airplane will be less significant with the execution of the Airplane Agreement."
...
In February 2014, Tesla and SpaceX entered into an agreement relating to Tesla’s use of an aircraft leased and operated by SpaceX (the “Airplane Agreement”). Pursuant to the Airplane Agreement, Tesla will pay SpaceX for its use of the aircraft at rates to be determined by the parties from time to time, subject to rules of the Federal Aviation Administration governing such arrangements. Tesla incurred approximately $0.7 million of expenses under the Airplane Use Agreement for Tesla’s use of the plane in 2015 and paid $0.5 million during 2015, and anticipate incurring approximately $1.0 million for such use during 2016.

Since 2015, Tesla has reimbursed Jeffrey B. Straubel, Tesla’s Chief Technology Officer, for business expenses incurred for the operating costs of his aircraft when used solely for Tesla-related travel. During 2017, Tesla reimbursed Mr. Straubel $438,900 for such operating costs incurred in 2016 and 2017. During 2018, Tesla has reimbursed Mr. Straubel $1,890 for additional operating costs incurred in 2017.​

 

[ZachF]

Why is The SEC Picking on Elon Musk Instead of Mark Zuckerberg?

"Just consider what we know about Facebook. A consolidated class action suit filed on October 15, 2018, against Facebook and CEO Mark Zuckerberg, COO Sheryl Sandberg, and CFO David Wehner alleges the defendants made "materially false and misleading statements and omissions concerning Facebook's privacy and data protection practices," "employed devices, schemes and artifices to defraud...and engaged in acts, practices, and a course of business that operated as a fraud or deceit," impacting the company's stock price and impacting its investors. Far from puffery, in July 2018, Facebook lost $119 billion in market value in one day -- the single largest drop in the U.S. stock market history, following an earnings call which revealed a decline in Facebook users and a lack of readiness to comply with the EU's General Data Protection Regulation."

Probably because Facebook now has the power of blackmail on a scale unheard of...

 

[winfield100]

​

I am trying to unsubscribe to Elecktrek, looking all over site to do that. Can anyone tell me how to unsubscribe?

if you get emails, use yer spam folder, and delete yer "bookmarks" in Netscape

 

[mongo]

Excuse me @KarenRei, but I really feel it is wrong that some unknown person's abuse of the late Steve Job's name (and photo) is perpetuated here on TMC.

Unless of course your skills include spiritualism...

From a previous side-discussion on this thread, His name really is Steve Jobs (and @KarenRei didn't include the head shot).

 

[lklundin]

Wow, I knew he had a bone to pick, but had no idea he was so vindictive. That's the last time I visit Electrek.

Dan

Would it have any legal effect if every TMC account had to actively disable a small-print message placed after every post saying something to the effect: "This poster holds the copyright to this text and it cannot be quoted outside of TMC without the poster's express permission" ?

With the prospect of violating copyright, Fred will then have to think twice before copy-pasting his stories from TMC.

PS. I have manually an attempt at such a message for my own account.

 

[lklundin]

That's his actual name. He finds the fact that he shares the name with the late Steve Jobs amusing, so plays it up (incl. the photo). But that's all irrelevant. I caught the news through his Twitter account (then cross-referenced it to the original story) - and common courtesy dictates a hat tip to the person who makes you aware of some news. A hat tip is not an endorsement of anything.

I am so sorry. I went ahead and deleted my mistaken post.

Please accept my apologies for the noise.

 

[KarenRei]

Would it have any legal effect if every TMC account had to actively disable a small-print message placed after every post saying something to the effect: "This poster holds the copyright to this text and it cannot be quoted outside of TMC without the poster's express permission" ?

With the prospect of violating copyright, Fred will then have to think twice before copy-pasting his stories from TMC.

Technically, everything you write is automatically copyrighted, with or without a notice, and is illegal to reproduce.

Yes, there's violations en masse every day. Including the very concept of an email forward, for example.

 

[Tslynk67]

CNBC on Jonas' latest garbage downgrade:

Analyst Adam Jonas on Tuesday cut his first-quarter deliveries by 23 percent, reduced his Model 3 average transaction price to $53,000 by the end of the year and slashed his 12-month price target for the stock by more than 8 percent.

He also reduced his 2019 earnings per share estimate to $1.30 from $4.17 and his 2020 estimate to $6.69 from $10.22.

“The company is undergoing multiple transitions with sales momentum slowing, shift to online channels, management changes, setting a foot into China and the early Model Y unveil among other developments,” Jonas wrote. “We continue to see the stock as fundamentally overvalued while potentially strategically undervalued.”

My bold highlight is a complete falsehood - unless you count 1 day as "early"

 

[EVMeister]

What a doofus.

 

[ZachF]

Somebody here called yesterday that we'd get a MS downgrade today. Who wants to claim their prize?

Seriously, Jonas. Try harder.

Adam Jonas is just doing what he can, trying to stop Tesla's AI technology from become self-aware, weaponizing, and taking over the world...

He's really just like John Connor.

 

[KarenRei]

Why is The SEC Picking on Elon Musk Instead of Mark Zuckerberg?

Every word of this article. Seriously. Jody Westby deserves real kudos.

 

[aubreymcfato]

It's the decades old, tried and true method of attacking any global warming opponent via a false narrative of 'double standard' and 'hypocrisy' if they ever rely on existing infrastructure and existing social norms that rely on fossil fuels.

It worked against Al Gore, they are using it against Elon Musk too, not just in the Tesla context, but also via the 'SpaceX is burning a lot of kerosene' talking points - ignoring the fact that there are no electric private jets yet and that are no viable methods at the moment to get off this rock without combusting rocket fuel with oxidant.

But the accuracy of their claims doesn't matter - the slur is part of orchestrated character attacks, and it works by creating a false appearance of hypocrisy and double standard, to the casual observer.

I don't mind him using the jet, but I'd prefer he did offset his (huge) carbon consumption and make it a PR stunt.
Yes, I know it's not rational, but politics is not, PR/communication neither. FFS, even market isn't rational (and this is the reason we are here most of our day).

The mere fact that Elon - as a billionaire - has a carbon footprint that's off the chart is a fact.
It doesn't account that his business with Tesla has a huge negative carbon footprint... but it's still a fact nonetheless. And nevermind his 5 children, his 4 mansions, etc. etc.
Billionaries do have a carbon footprint that is actually thousands times greater than your average American, whose is already 10 times greater than a European's. I bet carbon footprints follow a power law (like income does).

This is why Elon should do something simple like rainforests conservation/reforestation campaigns with his Musk Foundation. Easy, simple, probably cheap, good for envinronment, good for PR.

 

[KarenRei]

I don't mind him using the jet, but I'd prefer he did offset his (huge) carbon consumption and make it a PR stunt.
Yes, I know it's not rational, but politics is not, PR/communication neither. FFS, even market isn't rational (and this is the reason we are here most of our day).

The mere fact that Elon - as a billionaire - has a carbon footprint that's off the chart is a fact.
It doesn't account that his business with Tesla has a huge negative carbon footprint... but it's still a fact nonetheless. And nevermind his 5 children, his 4 mansions, etc. etc.
Billionaries do have a carbon footprint that is actually thousands times greater than your average American, whose is already 10 times greater than a European's. I bet carbon footprints follow a power law (like income does).

This is why Elon should do something simple like rainforests conservation/reforestation campaigns with his Musk Foundation. Easy, simple, probably cheap, good for envinronment, good for PR.

The thing is, unlike most billionaires using a private jet, he actually is trying to create rapid, cheap, clean long-distance transit for everyone (Hyperloop).

 

[brian45011]

Serious q:

But is this still true for 3rd party entities? Say, if analysts inform friends, family etc. of planned, yet unannounced up-/downgrades?

Thanks.

Ask Martha Stewart. She served time for lying about it. The common remedy is disgorgement.

 

[Bobfitz1]

CNBC on Jonas' latest garbage downgrade:

“The company is undergoing multiple transitions with sales momentum slowing, shift to online channels, management changes, setting a foot into China and the early Model Y unveil among other developments,” Jonas wrote. “We continue to see the stock as fundamentally overvalued while potentially strategically undervalued.”

Any analyst who characterizes negotiating, financing and building a Gigafactory in China that will become operational late this year as "setting a foot into China" is a complete imbecile.

 

[Dan Detweiler]

I don't mind him using the jet, but I'd prefer he did offset his (huge) carbon consumption and make it a PR stunt.
Yes, I know it's not rational, but politics is not, PR/communication neither. FFS, even market isn't rational (and this is the reason we are here most of our day).

The mere fact that Elon - as a billionaire - has a carbon footprint that's off the chart is a fact.
It doesn't account that his business with Tesla has a huge negative carbon footprint... but it's still a fact nonetheless. And nevermind his 5 children, his 4 mansions, etc. etc.
Billionaries do have a carbon footprint that is actually thousands times greater than your average American, whose is already 10 times greater than a European's. I bet carbon footprints follow a power law (like income does).

This is why Elon should do something simple like rainforests conservation/reforestation campaigns with his Musk Foundation. Easy, simple, probably cheap, good for envinronment, good for PR.

Really?
This is a thing? Personal carbon footprint?
You're kidding, right?
These are the kinds of arguments that send the global warming doubters away in tears of laughter. This does NOTHING to strengthen your case with the general public...only confirms their belief that the environmental left is nothing but a bunch of nut jobs. Sorry, but it is what it is.

Dan

 

[Curt Renz]

Today at 1:30 pm EDT, ARK Invest will conduct its monthly webinar.

Registration Link: https://register.gotowebinar.com/register/7119127061193927937

Tesla is the #1 overall holding among the ARK ETFs. It is usually discussed either in the main webinar presentations, or in the Q&A portion during which you can submit a question.

 

[Tslynk67]

I don't mind him using the jet, but I'd prefer he did offset his (huge) carbon consumption and make it a PR stunt.

What, something like being CEO of the only viable BEV company? How many tons of CO² was it that Teslas have now not farted into the atmosphere?

Without Elon, Tesla would be bankwupt a long, long time ago.

 

[Unpilot]

Really?
This is a thing? Personal carbon footprint?
You're kidding, right?
These are the kinds of arguments that send the global warming doubters away in tears of laughter. This does NOTHING to strengthen your case with the general public...only confirms their belief that the environmental left is nothing but a bunch of nut jobs. Sorry, but it is what it is.

Dan

We MIGHT be veering way OT here.

 

[Fact Checking]

Technically, everything you write is automatically copyrighted, with or without a notice, and is illegal to reproduce.

Yes, there's violations en masse every day. Including the very concept of an email forward, for example.

That's somewhat but not entirely true, and the example you cited is false as well:

• If you are copying someone else's work then it's not your copyright - his/her copyright remains embedded in whatever other content you added to the text. There's also the thorny issue of "derived works" which keeps thousands of lawyers employed. Your work can still stay derived and be subject to the copyright of the original even if there's not much of the original work present.
  
• Forwarding an email sent to you is generally not a copyright violation in most jurisdictions:
  • Firstly, only "creative works" are awarded copyright protection, a one-liner "LOL" reply is not a creative work (at least not one that most courts would recognize as such).
  • Secondly, copyright violation requires lack of permission by the author, but if you get sent an email then permission to potentially get it forwarded is usually implicit by the author, unless specifically withdrawn or obvious from the context. So forwarding the happy news of a new baby born with other family members is obviously not copyright violation - but forwarding email that was explicitly marked as "not permitted to be shared with anyone else" either formally or informally could be copyright violation,
  • Third, even if there's no permission from the author of the creative work there's important exceptions, such as "public domain" and "fair use" rules - which vary by jurisdiction, line count and the phase of the moon.
• While it is true that most of what you write is automatically copyrighted - there are important exceptions: works of the U.S. government and all agencies thereof are not protected by copyright. So if you are working for NASA and have published a paper for them then it's probably not copyrighted - it enters the public domain automatically on publication. Same goes for all court rulings and even the text of laws. The freely accessible RECAP archive exists exactly because pay-per-page-viewed PACER is not able to claim copyright over U.S. court documents.

The best rule of thumb regarding copyrights: respect the explicit and implicit wishes of authors, cite/quote conservatively but attribute generously. If you don't like their conditions then don't use their work. Use common sense and seek legal advice in case of trouble.