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

[Mars ☰mperor]

People are obviously connecting this with the 500k tweet, which is why they're reacting so strongly. Any actual risk that that mistake would be a violation of his agreement?

The 500K tweet didn’t happen during trading hours. I don’t think it violates the agreement.

 

[JRP3]

Butswinkasis out due to conflict with Elon, I guess. Possibly over the 500k tweet that he had to clarify after? Or am I getting paranoid now?

Now?

 

[Sweft]

People are obviously connecting this with the 500k tweet, which is why they're reacting so strongly. Any actual risk that that mistake would be a violation of his agreement?

I don't think it is the content of that tweet specifically will do so. I think it is one data point that shows the proposed enforcement mechanism is lacking. I know Elon gonna Elon, but OMG why does he have to push the edge so hard? At some point after enough examples like this, the SEC is going to step in.

 

[KarenRei]

The 500K tweet didn’t happen during trading hours. I don’t think it violates the agreement.

I don't think it's that simple; it's certainly a contributing factor whether he does things during trading hours or not, but that's not an excuse to violate an obligation.

I found Elon's obligations re: Twitter:

I know Tesla was supposed to be making some policies regarding this, but I don't know what their obligations are (they'd be covered in a separate agreement with the SEC).

 

[Tslynk67]

Admittedly I am one of the full self driving skepticals. But fully automatically loading/unloading/queuing for supercharging/vallet parking are several easy areas that are actually within reach.

I was also an EAP/FSD sceptic until I bought an AP2 car and now I hate driving on highways without it...

 

[anthonyj]

Bracing for another down day. Butswinkasis out due to conflict with Elon, I guess. Possibly over the 500k tweet that he had to clarify after? Or am I getting paranoid now?

Elon was ordered not to announce market moving information through Twitter. Elon effectively raised guidance last night through Twitter. He “clarified” 4 hours later. It makes sense to make that corellation

 

[KarenRei]

The drop has nothing to do with the tweet. It's news related.

I don't know what you're trying to show with that. The stock fell simultaneous with the announcement that Tesla's general counsel was leaving, which happened on the same day as Elon had made a Twitter mistake - obviously leading people to connect the two.

 

[Sean Wagner]

So this company has been kind of walking the edge in terms of their claims in the past as well when communicating to enthusiasts, but today they launched a media blitz campaign announcing they will be opening the Tesla Store in Budapest very soon and are supported by the DACH area sales team of Tesla.

---
If they don't react, I suggest writing teslamag.de a brief note.
And tweet Elon.

 

[Fact Checking]

The 500K tweet didn’t happen during trading hours. I don’t think it violates the agreement.

The mistake happened while NASDAQ after-hours trading was still open - but the number of shares traded was less than 10K, so even the worst-case exposure should be minimal.

Technically the SEC could consider 'anything' a violation of the settlement agreement, they only need to make a filing to the judge - but it would be ridiculous for the SEC to complain over a quickly corrected mistake that had no real effect on the share price, and they'd have very little standing.

Personally I think the SEC got a lot of flak over their original lawsuit, and they were happy to settle, Elon was fully geared up to litigate it to the end, because Elon was right and the SEC was wrong, even according to an former senior counsel of the SEC:

"former SEC lawyer says the agency shouldn't have sued Elon Musk"​

The SEC's case for the quickly clarified 500k tweet would be much, much weaker.

 

[KarenRei]

This is worse because Elon has a what's basically a cease-and-desist against him; the standards would be much harsher against him than previously.

What I'm wondering is whether there's actually a violation of his agreement. My reading is that his agreement forces him to follow Tesla's policies (or be in violation), but I'm not sure what policy obligations were forced on Tesla. I know there were some.

 

[mrdoubleb]

Interesting - do try to get a statement from Tesla Europe. -> [email protected]
If they don't react, I suggest writing teslamag.de a brief note.

yeah, that`s the email address i used when i asked for a statement earlier today

 

[Reciprocity]

THIS! I've been thinking about this a lot lately myself. Besides the possibility of the Model Y cutting into Model 3 demand and sales, a Tesla Pickup Truck would reach a vastly different segment of the automobile marketplace, and would have the effect of even more eyeballs glued to every Tesla seen on the road than can possibly be imagined. Model Y later. Tesla Pickup Truck NOW!
Come on Elon, BRING IT!!!

It is totally fine if Y cuts into model 3 demand. It will start as AWD/P only. Model X has completely stunted model S growth in part due supply constraints. In part because for most people, yes a superior vehicle. Will model Y be Superior? Hatchback alone says yes even if everything else is identical. Tesla has to add lines for Y no matter what because combined demand is 1.5M or greater for 3 and Y combined regardless of mix.

 

[Fact Checking]

Elon was ordered not to announce market moving information through Twitter.

No, he wasn't ordered to not post material information via Twitter. The settlement called for Tesla to put a mechanism in place to properly control Elon posting market-moving information through Twitter.

It appears some sort of control mechanism was in place, as the tweet was quickly corrected before regular trading opened. Also, while after-market price rose a bit after Elon's tweet, the trading volume was less than 10k shares, which is low even by after-market trading standards.

 

[Reciprocity]

China economy: Slowdown in car sales deepens - CNN

So instead of noting that China EV sales nearly triple digit growth, they warn readers that ICE makers will struggle due to slow China sales.

Can we all see how this hurts our American economy?

The covering for last century’s automakers just hurts the innovation toward better modes of transport that they can’t provide citizens. What happened to the “free market?” Or is this just a hoax in order to monopolize and cartelize the market away from true innovative independent upstarts and entrepreneurs?

We have to make a decision, are we going to close our eyes and defend non innovation as a national policy and propaganda flood our citizens into thinking propping up dying businesses is “winning?” Or, are we going to allow innovative thought and true diverse and disperse entrepreneurship sprout for from our citizenry to meet the demands of a sustainable and prosperous future?

Win through having better ideas, not by defending tired ones.

Lead, follow, or get the F out of the way.

Tesla shows us this everyday.

Every US and EU manufacturer will make cars in China or be crushed by their ZEV program that is 20x larger then California's. You will have to make EVs in China to avoid having to buy Zevs from EVs made in China like Tesla.

 

[Fact Checking]

This is worse because Elon has a what's basically a cease-and-desist against him; the standards would be much harsher against him than previously.

I don't think anything that is "basically a cease-and-desist against him" is in the agreements and the court orders.

Here's the settlement agreements between SEC and Elon and the SEC and Tesla:

Elon:
https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.501755/gov.uscourts.nysd.501755.6.0.pdf

Tesla:
https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.501881/gov.uscourts.nysd.501881.3.1.pdf
​

Can you quote the part of the settlement that you consider a "cease and desist against him"?

The settlement call for Tesla and Elon to pay a $20m fine, which they did, and for Tesla to add two new independent board members, which they added. It also calls for Tesla to implement a mechanism to control Elon's public statements - which I presume happened too.

There's no "gag order" or "cease-and-desist" that I can see, other than Elon must not disparage the SEC or deny the accusations the SEC made - which he didn't.

 

[Chocochip]

My new theory is that this is because dry cathode could be used to enhance 18650 first allowing them to extend the useful life of those pack designs. Less cooling required and higher density cells due to thicker cathode could allow for 110kwh or greater pack capacity and higher sustained charge rates.

This is something I'm actually not clear on. Yes, it would make sense to retain a pack design that's proven while just replacing the cells. However, based on my understanding, the dry electrode manufacturing process improves the gravimetric energy density. But does this directly translate to a higher energy capacity per cell? Or would it simply make the cell lighter while keeping the same energy capacity? Would the cell-level voltage or current change? Because retaining the pack design would mean the number of cells per pack remains constant, so you wouldn't be able to simply jam more cells into the same modules.

Someone with a better understanding of battery cell parameters than me could possibly contribute here...

 

[KarenRei]

Can you quote the part of the settlement that you consider a "cease and desist against him"?

Here's the settlement agreements between SEC and Elon and the SEC and Tesla:

Elon:
https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.501755/gov.uscourts.nysd.501755.6.0.pdf

Tesla:
https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.501881/gov.uscourts.nysd.501881.3.1.pdf​

The settlement itself is basically a cease-and-desist. If you do something that the law considers wrong, you settle via an agreement not to do it again, then you do it again, the law will come down much more harshly on you the second time around.

Thanks for linking the Tesla agreement - the policies are:

Has this policy been put forward?

 

[anthonyj]

292k shares premarket

 

[Todd Burch]

Jeez this thread is getting more dramatic than high school. People are reading too much into everything. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm headed off to yearbook club.

 

[schonelucht]

The SEC's case for the quickly clarified 500k tweet would be much, much weaker.

That the tweet was possible in the first place, raises concerns of the oversight mechanism that was supposedly put in place to prevent a repeat. It is not impossible that a cautious guy would say : "this is not a boat I want to sail on".