Again you're failing reading comprehension. I specifically included the possibility that his personal commitment could be related to Tesla, so your claims about "nothing to do with Tesla" is just strawman.He literally posted it attached to a call for people to apply for the tesla legal team my dude.
Then uses we not I in the sentence about settling.
Trying to claim the commitment has nothing to do with Tesla is.... not a sound reading of anything he wrote. Not remotely.
He can make personal commitment related to Tesla - such as not selling TSLA shares - but it still has nothing to do with the company policy wise.
Where did he said this is "definitive legal policy" for Tesla? No where.How is that the 'real issue'? (or even applicable here at all? tweets about when L5 are speculative, nobody's done that- they're fancy guesses---one should expect those dates to be missed-- But "this is the definitive legal policy going forward" is specific, concrete, and doesn't require inventing new technology to make happen- so have a lot more basis to believe they're accurate from the original claim)
Also, Elon said plenty of other things besides L5, such as "Biden cares a lot more about whether Tesla is unionized than whether Tesla is saving the environment", so you believe this too?
Of course it's possible that the lawsuit against Tesla is just, where did I say it's not possible?Or do you think any possible lawsuit against Tesla is unjust by definition and so you simply MUST come up with whacky theories to deny the simple reading of Elons words?
But it's far more likely that Elon changed his personal legal strategy. Him changing some personal commitment is hardly a "whacky theory", it literally happened multiple times, like his commitment not to sell TSLA shares in early 2022.
Good lawyers don't grow on trees, just because you have money doesn't mean you can get enough good lawyers.Tesla has 25-30 billion dollars in the bank... Far more resources than when Elon made the commitment, so that's an hilariously straw-graspy "example"
Also profit margin has decreased since 2022, and we're facing high interest rate environment and an EV downturn, and there's more Chinese EV competition, plus Tesla needs all the money they can get to build up compute. Should be obvious that current environment is tougher on Tesla than 2022, I'm baffled why this is even a question. Last time I checked everybody here is worried about the lack of growth for this year and next, you included.
That's because the SEC settlement puts a lot of constraints on Elon and Tesla, there's no such constraints being reported for this settlement.When has it not been?
That was the same reason given for the SEC settlement- at a time when Tesla genuinely was in a much more delicate time- And Elon made the commitment NOT to settle unjust cases after that--- In part, because of that-- he having multiple times stated Tesla felt forced into that settlement and never wanting to do that again.
Again with the strawman, where did I say he thinks "the ENTIRE US legal system is corrupt"?The comp package was in a very specific Delaware business court.
The two recent cases Tesla settled were in normal courts in other states.
If he thinks the ENTIRE US legal system is corrupt, not just DE, why would he be moving the company from one state to another in the same country with inferior tax treatment?
Even some courts hand out unfair rulings could prompt a change to one's legal strategy. His original commitment is purely idealistic, but now he knows the reality he's becoming more pragmatic, there's nothing special about this change.