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

[riverFox]

Nah I think this is an excuse like Fred thought. Elon has built plenty of websites, it'd be easy for Tesla to fake website crashes. This is what we're trusting for self driving? Kinda scary thought.

Lol, it's not the same development team. Not even close. FUD

 

[Fact Checking]

investors know to ignore these off-the-cuff hypotheticals

I'd like to ask everyone to stop and marvel at the double standard that calls specific numeric guidance "off the cuff hypotheticals" which were given in an official Earnings Call, TWICE, because a different analyst went back and asked about the 350,000-500,000 range which Elon confirmed for a second time - while calling Elon's "Tesla made 0 cars in 2011, but will make around 500k in 2019" celebratory tweet "material information" ...

To quote the controlling precedent:

(“In reviewing forward-looking statements, courts are instructed to consider the total mix of information and are supposed to bear in mind that disclosure requirements are not intended to attribute to investors a child-like simplicity. Rather, investors are presumed to have the ability to be able to digest varying reports and data.”

Plus:

We'll see what the judge says.

I don't think the judge will be nearly as amused about the SEC's flawed, perverse and harmful logic as me...

 

[Doggydogworld]

But how did they process all the preorders for model 3 when they had 400k in like 24 hrs? FYI I've changed sides on Tesla now. Sorry I'm a bear and buying puts.

Reservations are different than orders, you don't choose a configuration, options, etc. They used a different system which only really needed to track your name and credit card number.

 

[gringotuanis]

With this said and in preference to the Moderator's recent warning, no one should be surprised with a guilty (contempt) outcome. Personally I will be (pleasantly) surprised if Musk is NOT found in contempt. I don't have much faith in the system. The media has colored this case so badly, I don't have much faith that the judge won't just go with the flow. I just pray that the penalty will not be too harsh as to significantly pressure the stock further. Life is not fair, and we all know that.

He should be held in contempt, but just because he isn't following the agreement to pre-approve possibly material tweets. Tweets about production rates would be material for sure and the agreement states reasonably could be material. Definitely met that threshold and should have had prior approval. I don't think consequences will be too severe though, maybe a fine and the judge asks for more documentation on ongoing basis showing the review process or something like that.

 

[gringotuanis]

Lol, it's not the same development team. Not even close. FUD

Hehe well I do hold puts as of yesterday so yes. But think about it...don't you think Tesla is just bull_-#&#&#+ing? I mean really... even if I still held my calls I would suspect the same.

 

[lklundin]

What the hell... it lowers my average buy price

And now there's a hitch on the Y and 3... Doom on You industry. We are just one story away from the next pop.View attachment 388230

Yes, lowering my average buying price is also a consolation during this time, where I am in the red...

I hope to be able to hold my Model 3 order until the tow bar becomes an option. Come April I will be on my 18th month of having a bicycle as my daily driver, so I am doing my part for the CO2 pollution. But I would like to get my Model 3 for the summer holidays...

 

[gringotuanis]

Reservations are different than orders, you don't choose a configuration, options, etc. They used a different system which only really needed to track your name and credit card number.

I see

 

[gringotuanis]

Tell that to Apple every time they have a preorder rush. And I know they have state of the art cloud computing, but it still gets overwhelmed. Roads aren't supposed to have potholes either.

Just be careful you're not hearing and seeing what you want to see from Tesla. I'm a bear after Elon's craziness hurt my calls and stock. I've sold out. Traitor.

 

[NicoV]

AGP Group (Peru) invests 60M euro in a new factory in Ghent, for the production of car windows: Peruvianen stoppen 60 miljoen in Gentse autoruitenfabriek

The article states this company makes the panoramic glass roofs of the Model X, but do I remember it correctly that the same company also builds the Model 3 roofs?

Production starts next year, with peak production planned for 2023/2024.
The Ghent factory will produce panoramic roofs.

Prelude to a European gigafactory announcement?

 

[dddaaa0]

 

[oneday]

She already gave both sides until the 26th to agree on whether or not to have an evidentiary hearing. I can't imagine that offer somehow getting "retracted".

Except, the SEC specifically said, “... an evidentiary hearing is unnecessary.”

 

[Fact Checking]

Why would the judge allow the SEC the opportunity for an additional rebuttal? The SEC already received one extra reply that they didn't really deserve since they should have made their case in the original complaint.

So while contempt motions are usually:

• Motion (SEC)
• Order to "Show Cause" (Court)
• Response (Elon)
• Contempt of court hearing

The usual motion rules in civil trials is:

• Motion by the moving party
• Response to Motion
• Reply to Response

Note that the "Reply to Response" brief is strictly required to stay within scope, i.e.:

"A reply must not present matters that do not relate to the response."
​

With a metric ton of case law that specifies what is within scope.

Anyway, the SEC's original request for a reply brief was a bit unusual but generally within the boundaries of motion practice.

But yesterday the SEC basically filed an entirely new first motion, with 60+ pages of exhibits while at the same time arguing against an evidentiary hearing which would validate such exhibits, and not even a fig leaf of excuse of why they did so.

The sur-reply is even more unusual, and maybe the delay is the judge carefully thinking through what procedure would apply best.

 

[Antares Nebula]

I shouldn't have flatly said the judge will find him in contempt. Rulings are unpredictable and judges usually try to find a middle ground.


The question is whether the tweet "reasonably could be material", per the settlement and Tesla's own policy.


Tesla very clearly guided for 360-400k deliveries in 2019. The pre-approved conference call talking points also said 360-400k. Neither the 10-K nor the prepared statements said anything about 360-600k.

During Q4 call Q&A, Musk said "Maybe in the order of 350,000 to 500,000 Model 3s, something like that this year" in partial reply to a question. Conference call Q&A is not pre-vetted (obviously) and is covered by extensive safe harbor statements that give execs leeway to talk imprecisely about possible outcomes which don't constitute official guidance. Musk has said nutty things in calls before (e.g. 100-200k Model 3s in 2H17), investors know to ignore these off-the-cuff hypotheticals when they conflict with official guidance.

We'll see what the judge says.

Maybe, but then can you explain why the stock didn't move on the tweet? Musk's 500k is 100 - 140k above the earnings report guidance. That is significant. You figure that the stock would move up sig on the news.

My explanation: after the conference call, most investors (including myself) viewed the 360-400k guidance in the earnings report as conservative and the 450-600k guidance as implied by the CC as more ambitious, and that there is therefore a wide range of approx 360 - 600k, depending on all the complex variables (as outlined in the CC): China GF timeline, base 35k timeline, tariffs, etc. So Musk's 500k tweet seems about right in the middle and therefore not newsworthy, not material.

 

[MP3Mike]

But how did they process all the preorders for model 3 when they had 400k in like 24 hrs? FYI I've changed sides on Tesla now. Sorry I'm a bear and buying puts.

Those weren't pre-orders those were reservations to place and order at a later time. And a lot of them were done in person one after the other over many hours.

 

[KarenRei]

Except, the SEC specifically said, “... an evidentiary heading is unnecessary.”

Each party has until the 26th to request such a hearing. The SEC can't waive Elon's legal team's right to do so.

 

[MP3Mike]

She already gave both sides until the 26th to agree on whether or not to have an evidentiary hearing. I can't imagine that offer somehow getting "retracted".

Well the SEC already waived their request for the evidentiary hearing, so it she was going to rule in favor of Elon I don't think they would mind having that option taken away from them.

 

[capster]

Has anyone saved screenshots of the various "bear raid" / short-and-distort tactics that keep happening again and again?

Michael on Twitter
View attachment 388236

I should have started a screenshot collection long ago :Þ

If I had any, I’d likely be more inclined to send them to the DoJ. The SEC may be fishing just to understand their own exposure at this juncture, if it’s not too uncharitable to say so.

 

[Causalien]

I am pretty impressed with the Canadian delivery experience. Placed an order after I landed back in Vancouver and car arrived about 4 days later. ( I suspect they just matched me with someone elses's car that couldn't take delivery) I delayed it for another 5 days so I can actually get the cash into my account. It's the end of the quarter so I can understand how pushy they are about getting the cash ready fast, but I don't think other people will be as forgiving.

On the other hand, it's the first time I experienced American level of service and initiative in the whole process inside Canada. Unlike the usual laissez fair Canadian process that gets the business person in me into fits of rage. Now if all Canadian business can be run like this, the whole economy would be better.

 

[EVDRVN]

He isn't. Just clearly here to troll.

It's as good of a guarantee as anything else. They can't sell software for cars without providing the hardware upgrade required to enable it. ​

Well not exactly. You can provide additional features, ones with no set deadline. After long conversations with senior tech people at Tesla It came to my attention that there is no promise of additional fees for new hardware that may be required. This may have to do with the fact that it is not stated on any order page for an upgrade.

 

[Carl Raymond]

Would it be accurate to say that institutional investors, handling other people’s money, would simply not be allowed to buy TSLA while this SEC cloud hangs around? Even if the person who makes the decision feels Tesla are a great buy?

That would explain a lot. It would also mean a fast climb once the case is ruled.