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

[TradingInvest]

I feel those people who get tired and suddenly sell all their shares are making a mistake. If I were them, I would at least keep a small number of TSLA shares, never sell these shares. If the FSD and Tesla Network work as planned, the upside is very large. Keep losing money on speculation is also a mistake.

 

[anthonyj]

Larry Ellison's stake in Tesla is worth about $1 billion

"Tesla did not say when Ellison bought the shares, except that it was earlier this year."

Anyone buying today got a better deal than Ellison. FYI.

 

[Fact Checking]

Conference call information appears to be subject to:

production numbers or sales or delivery numbers (whether actual, forecasted, or projected) that have not been previously published via pre-approved written communications issued by the Company (“Official Company Guidance”) or deviate from previously published Official Company Guidance;​

Yes, this is I suspect the bone the SEC got to save face.

Elon and Tesla got the following out of the modified settlement:

• The "reasonably could contain information material to the Company" is gone, is history, is dead and no more.
  
• The long list of benign tweets the SEC complained about in their motions: they are not covered by the new settlement.

Note that Elon can now tweet the broad range of topics he usually tweets about, without worrying about an overzealous SEC considering some detail as potentially material information. The boundaries of information he has to seek approval for is also much better defined.

 

[EVNow]

The problem is that had they implemented that "automated review process" and had the lawyer made any mistake, even a minor one, regarding the extensive list of topics the original settlement required approval for, the SEC could still have sued Tesla for approving "inaccurate" information that "reasonably could contain information material to the Company". They could also have sued Elon for a wide range of topics that are only tangentially related to material information.

Possibly - but less likely.

In anycase, they seem to have got angry that EM is not sending any tweets for approval. Implementing a process like this (and notifying SEC about it and asking for any concerns etc) would have greatly reduced chances of a new lawsuit.

Ofcourse the new settlement is much better. Still, I think EM should implement this simple app/procedure so that if he "slips" like @anthonyj was mentioning, it will be caught. I mean, its a cliché now that Silicon Valley thinks everything can be solve by an app - but in this case it does actually help.

 

[carterm2]

It does matter, Elon was facing some sort of punishment . He received none. Elon won.

he won, yaaaa!

How much did it cost the shareholder...

 

[Cobbler]

he won, yaaaa!

How much did it cost the shareholder...

Long bulls haven't sold? So nothing?

 

[Fact Checking]

Oh, look, they settled and Musk clearly won.

He and Tesla shareholders indeed won, as the "reasonably could contain material information" language is now gone:

It's not that every Tesla tweet has to be reviewed.
No, he can still tweet freely about employees morale, and... Must be some other stuff too...

Actually, the new settlement is much more narrow and much less ambiguously defined than the old one:

• Look at the long list of additional benign tweets about Tesla that the SEC complained about in their motions - none require pre-approval under the new rules AFAICS.
• Look at pretty much any of this month's tweets from Elon about Tesla - almost none require approval under the new settlement AFAICS.

The new settlement also is much less of a danger of being an unconstitutional restraint of speech on Elon.

I would think answering my personal message from Wed (to hash out our differences) would've been better form, but, of course, where is the glory in that?

I generally don't reply to private messages for topics that can be discussed publicly, and no, the message you wrote wasn't conciliatory as you now pretend. If you disagree with me or want to attack me, write a public message.

 

[Fact Checking]

In anycase, they seem to have got angry that EM is not sending any tweets for approval. Implementing a process like this (and notifying SEC about it and asking for any concerns etc) would have greatly reduced chances of a new lawsuit.

The real reason Elon didn't send any tweets for pre-approval is because he instead deleted them, i.e. never wrote them - he made a conscious effort to restrict writing any tweet that could be attacked by the SEC and drastically cut back on his tweeting to comply with the settlement.

This was described by Elon in his sworn affidavit, under oath:

Here is Elon's sworn affidavit:

Affidavit Declaration of Elon R. Musk – #27, Att. #9 in United States Securities and Exchange Commission v. Musk (S.D.N.Y., 1:18-cv-08865) – CourtListener.com

"7. I have taken my obligation to comply with the Order and the Policy seriously. Among other things, I have dramatically decreased the amount that I tweet about Tesla. Compared to the months of May, June, and July 2018, during the three months following the entry of the Order (November and December 2018 and January 2019), I have cut my average monthly Tesla-related tweets nearly in half. This is not because I am concerned about non-compliance, but rather because I want to err on the side of caution to avoid unnecessary disputes with the SEC. I have also taken steps to ensure that, when I do tweet information, I am compliant with the Order and the Policy. The Disclosure Counsel and other members of Tesla’s legal department have reviewed the updated controls and procedures with me on multiple occasions. With my knowledge and approval, Tesla’s General Counsel and Disclosure Counsel have been reviewing all tweets promptly in real time upon publication to double-check compliance with the Policy and to ensure that any errors are caught and rectified quickly. Additionally, since the entry of the Order and the enactment of the Policy, I have not tweeted information that I believe is, or could reasonably be, material."
The suggestion that Elon didn't strive to maximally comply with the settlement is absurd.

The SEC didn't attack Tesla and Elon for "not reviewing tweets", and the accusation that Elon didn't send any tweets for pre-approval because he didn't want to comply was a calculated lie by the SEC, designed to malign Elon. This lie was part of the litigation PR tactics of the SEC, picked up by shorts and the media.

The SEC sued Elon because the settlement gave them a powerful legal tool with ambiguous boundaries to "punish" Tesla and Elon.

This legal tool has now been neutralized to a large degree, the "reasonably could contain material information" Swiss Army Knife of Filing Frivolous Motions Against Tesla and Elon is now gone, is history, is no more.

SEC uncertainty is now much reduced.

 

[Fact Checking]

Ofcourse the new settlement is much better. Still, I think EM should implement this simple app/procedure so that if he "slips" like @anthonyj was mentioning, it will be caught. I mean, its a cliché now that Silicon Valley thinks everything can be solve by an app - but in this case it does actually help.

He uses the official Twitter app on whatever phone or tablet he is using in a given moment, modifying that app is generally not feasible to make it seamless.

Adding extra steps and a new app to approve all messages would remove the casual goofing off nature that turned Elon into Meme Lord of the Internet - which is a major force why Millennials and Gen Z favor Tesla so much, despite the best efforts of shorts and the media to slander him and Tesla.

It's also naive to believe that an "experienced securities lawyer" would approve tweets instantly, or would be around 24/7. The short third update tweet on February 19 took four hours to send.

But, more importantly, the problem wasn't primarily Elon tweeting "without pre-approval", the problem was that the settlement gave the SEC a Swiss Army Knife Legal Tool to sue Elon or Tesla over a broad range of tweets, even if they had been pre-approved. If a tweet had even just some small ambiguity in a broad range of topics the shorts would go complaining to the SEC and the SEC could have sued.

It's clear now that the SEC was collecting tweets for months and was waiting for a chance to pounce - regardless of whether the tweets got pre-approved. Had it been approved by Tesla the SEC could have sued Tesla, not Elon. They even indicated this during oral arguments.

The SEC got bruised in this battle big time, I think they'll be a lot more careful next time. Which is exactly the outcome we were hoping for.

 

[RobStark]

I'm not so sure this is a good idea. There's a lot of pent up demand. In U.S., SR+ mostly starts deliveries this quarter, in Europe/China likely some LR pent up demand left, plus the whole SR+. RHD countries will likely see deliveries in Q3. Therefore, there's likely enough demand for 2 quarters. Anybody who sees ads now and wants to buy, may see increased wait times, which is not a good experience. It feels like these ads should start towards Q4, otherwise they may be a disservice to Tesla and customers.

On the other hand, just NY will prob. not make much difference overall, but could be evaluated on the effectiveness.

Advertise Model S Performance. There is definitely not a long waiting list here.

And maybe Model 3 Performance.

No need to advertise lower trim levels of Model 3 or Model X.

 

[RobStark]

I'm actually hoping for dividends.

Yeah, I know they say they won't have them, but I think they'll be making so much money at some point they won't know what else to do with it.

Seriously.

You could give Elon a Trillion dollars and he would come up with schemes to spend 99% of it effectively and the rest for good laughs.

 

[LJS22]

Good that the SEC stuff can rest for now. Just need to keep checking off these distractions. Get deliveries running smoother, open up the model 3 globally, open better service centers, and start pushing the message you want the consumer to hear.
There are people that think the car is only for the wealthy, they don’t know you order online, they think the car isn’t safe, they don’t think charging at home is practical for them, they don’t know how far on one charge they go. I get that this info is readily available but I get so many questions in regards to these things. It made me realize that Tesla hasn’t done itself justice. Again, the product is incredible, but people need to be fed information.

 

[izemize]

I feel those people who get tired and suddenly sell all their shares are making a mistake. If I were them, I would at least keep a small number of TSLA shares, never sell these shares. If the FSD and Tesla Network work as planned, the upside is very large. Keep losing money on speculation is also a mistake.

I guess... I won't be too popular here, but I'm just a lurking retail investor monitoring the bulls' sentiment. It amazes me how could anyone enter into a trade with NO (up/down) exit strategy. Especially when there is a relatively lot of money at stake. I'd rather donate that money to non-profits.

 

[Fact Checking]

That’s a fairly restrictive list of things Elon has to seek approval for. D

Actually it's a fair list of topics he should seek legal advice for in general.

The big win for Elon, Tesla and Tesla shareholders is that this horribly ambiguous section of the original settlement got removed:

"reasonably could contain material information"​

This was the powerful legal tool the SEC could use as an excuse to sue Elon or Tesla on a broad range of topics that "could" be material.

This legal tool is now gone, and the boundaries of the settlement are now much better defined.

Doesn’t look like the SEC was negotiating from a position of weakness because they know how strong their case was with the 420 tweet.

You must be reading some different settlement, written in an alternative universe, not the one filed by the SEC and Elon in our universe.

The SEC lost the vague material information clause of the settlement their whole current contempt of court case relied on.

The long list of tweets the SEC presented as "problematic"? Few if any require pre-approval under the new settlement.

Factchecking and other super bulls legal analysis fails once again.

TSLAQ sleeper cell found!

Just kidding: I think you are simply wrong and you are being dumb about it.

 

[RobStark]

The idea that solar technology/pricing wouldn't improve markedly during the twenty years of phases 2 and 3 to the extent most property owners, rather than renewing for an additional ten years, would tell SCTY (now Tesla) to "get that antiquated mess off my roof" always seemed like an inevitable outcome --yet lease/PPA extensions between years 20 an 30 were a major component of the financial "no brainer" justification for buying out SCTY. If removals rather than renewals ensue, phase 4 will not be monthly cash flow receipts but a profit/cash drain.

A kWh from an old panel is just as useful as a kWh from a new panel.

Renewals can be repriced at current competitive rates.

If because of degradation customers need a few new panels added to the array to meet current needs Tesla will be in best position to offer that.

 

[Buckminster]

OT FSD
I said this a little while back.

I am more and more convinced that nearly all the Tesla moves can be attributed to the goal of getting Tesla Network running. When seen through that lens, the closure of stores makes perfect sense. Once FSD is legal in let's say China, Tesla Network will launch and local business owners will buy as many SR M3s as they can. Everyone will be printing money.

I have enjoyed the neroden vs the world chit chat following the autonomy event. I think the discussion was missing a number of factors:

1. agile thinking is not just for code
2. China could approve different forms of FSD years ahead of more conservative countries
3. It only takes one area of one country to use FSD for the rest of the world to realise it is coming their way
4. Do not underestimate the millennial mind. They will find a way to deliver pizza whilst watching Netflix.

Potential early phases of FSD:

1. China approves use of FSD for highways only (including highway to highway ramps etc.) in Shanghai district (private use only with no passengers). How many business people will buy knowing that they can work on their laptop on their way to work. Tesla gives a 5 seconds warning to put down the laptop and take over.
2. China and then 1 U.S. state approves 100% FSD taxi but driver must remain in case of emergency. Taxi non-driver could sleep through the night whilst working during the day, Netflix, deliver pizza in-between customers, work throughout - no customer interaction required.

In short, full TN is not required for the world to realise that it is coming. Elon is setting expectations high but he will compromise as governments request what they see as less risky introductions to the new order. Safety and employment being 2 of their concerns. China will positively want to get rid of the driver as they are less worried about unemployment.

 

[Carl Raymond]

he won, yaaaa!

How much did it cost the shareholder...

Zero. The value of shares in y years will be x. Had there been no SEC interference, the value of shares in y years would also have been x.

 

[Singuy]

I guess... I won't be too popular here, but I'm just a lurking retail investor monitoring the bulls' sentiment. It amazes me how could anyone enter into a trade with NO (up/down) exit strategy. Especially when there is a relatively lot of money at stake. I'd rather donate that money to non-profits.

I think most perma bulls already consider Tesla as a non-for profit...kinda backed up by quarterly earnings currently..lol.

 

[Buckminster]

Elon Musk on Twitter

 

[schonelucht]

A kWh from an old panel is just as useful as a kWh from a new panel.

Renewals can be repriced at current competitive rates.

If because of degradation customers need a few new panels added to the array to meet current needs Tesla will be in best position to offer that.

If the needs can be met with one or two panels extra. Given the energy hungry nature of society, we’ll likely just want a full roof of new, higher performance, panels on our roofs 20 year down the line.