Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

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

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Isn't the main advantage the reduction of nuisance lawsuits because the plaintiff has to file in another state so there is a barrier to suing? (assumes both legal systems, tax, etc. are similar)

The advantage to being spread across multiple jurisdictions is that you cannot be as easily targeted with legislation, legal action, tax action, economic action, etc.

Many financial strategies include a foundation of holding a domicile in one jurisdiction, establishing incorporation/trust in another, and holding money in a third. This protects the entity (personal or corporate) by complicating the legal process for anyone wanting to exercise control over them.
 
It really doest matter whether the judge was politically motivated or not. I don't really care.

When someone with 9 shares can overturn the vote of thousands of other shareholders with millions of shares it is just wrong. As investors we are not ignorant to the fact that Musk controls Tesla and the board. In fact Elon was chairman in 2018. If the lawsuit was backed by a large % of shares I would have a different view. How can companies expect to do business when some basic large decisions cannot be put into a contract with all parties in agreement. It's not like now there are a large percentage of shareholders saying this package was flawed. It's 9 shares. To me it is just fundamental to capitalism that contracts can be put in place where all parties agree regardless of the process they used to get to agreement.

From where I sit, it seems entirely plausible that Tesla may have been able to win the case and chose not to for strategic reasons.

What if they let this unfold this way on purpose to take advantage of the court doing something for them that they could not have done themselves?

Once this is considered, and the advantages to Elon and to Tesla are taken into consideration, it doesn't seem far fetched to at least entertain this possibility. Or, at the very least entertain how, despite "losing," this court decision has opened up potential opportunities which did not exist before.

EDIT: As structured, the 2018 compensation package, when exercised, would have only paid Elon about half of its value and would have had a negative effect on the SP.

What if there is a way to get Elon what he wants, 25% voting rights and funding for future projects, without as significant of an impact to the SP and a higher amount left after taxes? If there is, I, as a shareholder, would vote to pass such a plan.
 
Last edited:
Not sure what's so "feelings" based about this.

Seems like a lot of people want to "cancel" this judge because she issued a ruling they didn't like.

Kind of wild to watch, tbh. I didn't realize how many lawyers there were lol.

In her ruling the judge called Musk's compensation an 'unfathomable sum.'.

What bearing does the amount have on if it's a legal agreement or not?

Seems a bit that feelings may have influenced the ruling to some degree.
 
Musk Industries are centered around Austin, TX. Tesla has it's headquarters and lead factory there. SpaceX and The Boring Company have manufacturing facilities at Basrop, just 20 miles East of Austin. Many folks don't know Neuralink has its research faciilty in Austin.

Elon Musk's Neuralink is relocating to Austin | kvue.com (Sep 09, 2022)

Care to bet when/where X.com HQ moves to? Server farms?
Don't forget SpaceX's rocket engine facility in Moody about 60 miles north. You would be surprised how far sound travels.
 
A decision in one state has no bearing in another. Does it?
As I understand it, states do look at other state opinions for guidance and legal reasoning. But decisions of one state are not binding on another.

However, to say it has no bearing probably isn't entirely correct as states don't exist in a vacuum. Each state typically respects the laws of another. For instance if you are legally married in one state, other states accept the marriage as valid.

Any lawyers here who actually know the answer? I'm just shooting from the hip.
 
1706795802401.png

Not sure if this will change Powell's mind (bring forwards to March) but otherwise seems likely that there will be multiple reductions in a row starting May. The price of a car will be a fair bit lower from the summer onwards. Margin increases for Q3 earnings in October. Too bearish?
 
Nice perspective.
Electricity is about 1/5 of total world energy

I periodically do something similar, in terms of worldwide energy consumption discounted by present day clean enerey contribution and CAGR assumptions. I usually end up calculating ~ 20 years for the transition. For context, 10 years is needed to limit planetary warming to 1.5C

Here is some data you may find interesting. The authors report in fossil equivalents. I tend to think that renewables will overall be about 2x as efficient (not more because of industrial heating) which implies present world energy annual consumption of ~ 40,000 TWh = 40 PWh = 40E15 Wh

View attachment 1014107
I think the "source" portion is cut off on the right...
 
  • Like
Reactions: SageBrush
As I understand it, states do look at other state opinions for guidance and legal reasoning. But decisions of one state are not binding on another.

However, to say it has no bearing probably isn't entirely correct as states don't exist in a vacuum. Each state typically respects the laws of another. For instance if you are legally married in one state, other states accept the marriage as valid.

Any lawyers here who actually know the answer? I'm just shooting from the hip.
I object to how you use the word ‘states’ in this context. States aren’t making any decisions. Individual people are making the decisions, and the laws, etc…
 
Last edited:
In her ruling the judge called Musk's compensation an 'unfathomable sum.'.

What bearing does the amount have on if it's a legal agreement or not?

Seems a bit that feelings may have influenced the ruling to some degree.
According to posts here, some of which quoted the decision, the judge freely admitted to that. It’s unimaginable to me that such an arbitrary approach would survive appeal, although as mentioned by others Tesla and Musk may be quite happy with the flexibility they have now to improve his plan. Another point is the eventual value of the package was hardly imagined at the time of writing.
 
Last edited:
Zero need for you to use an ad hominem approach, simply take a nap if you’re tired.

Cash in those pennies while the cashing’s good. Nobody will cry when the steamroller squashes you.
Again, sold 2/3 near the top. Also sold the precovid top and rebought more than double at the bottom of the Covid scare. No tears here. 😂 I’m going to go out and hike up a mountain. Enjoy the important discussions today.