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

[Artful Dodger]

I not only cannot come up with any good reason to vote for any action that would provide Mr Musk a 25% control

I agree. He has yet to make the case for 25% -- what will he do if he has that but is still outvoted by elements he considers illegitimate? I know S&P doesn't want majority control in the hands of single owners, but how does 25% work for him?

Further, it's not clear yet how this affects the Mission, which is to 'accelerate' the transition. Recently he said that EVs are 'inevitable' but that's not the Mission. It's to get the switch done before its too late to be helpful. It may do, but first he has to make that case. Nearly every other automaker is scaling back their EV ambitions, that's 'deceleration'.

Finally, how's he going to sell his shares when the time comes? Donate to Mars charitable foundation? Or sell on the open market? Having those criminals goons over at Morgan Stanley front-running his sales again harms retail investors. Both he and the Board need to tell us in detail how that multi-trillion dollar hole gets plugged.

I suppose he could watch with his hands in his pockets while Delaware/$EC/NHTSA/CNBC gives him his price, so he can execute tax-free. Then his cash goes to Tesla, not the Gummit. But what happens in 10 years when he needs a few trillion in cash? Another fire sale?

I want to know all of the above before I'd vote 'Yes'.

 

[AudubonB]

For Musk, I think he sees it as:

welfare of his company = his personal beliefs ≠ share price

We must have learned logic from different sources

 

[hobbes]

Ship carrying Tesla electric cars to Australia turned back to China

Australian authorities have sent a ship carrying Teslas back to China for processing of what are believed to be biosecurity hazards.

www.drive.com.au

Please read the date when posting news... I thought I remembered hearing this before, was in fact in December:

 

[SOULPEDL]

When FSD is "ready", does anyone also think Tesla will stop selling the vehicles and just launch the TN to produce and distribute according to need? Consider that this might also accelerate cashflow and margins.

Should Tesla announced this, it would be fun to watch the remaining consumers grasping for their last chance to drive their own cars. Meanwhile, I'd likely be watching the value return on ours, likely above cost.

Before you disagree, consider this. Why would Tesla waste more batteries to get parked in the garage vs displace 5 ICE Uber vehicles on each FSD Tesla sold?And why wait for the unboxed version in 2 yrs, if FSD is ready sooner?

Mission-wise, it would be stupid not to do this. Am I missing anything? Sure, the robotaxi is exactly for this need. But what about the other vehicles, assuming FSD capable? And are there any larger robotaxis planned for the family?

Chew on them mushrooms!

 

[hobbes]

Final numbers for New Zealand EV 2023 sales now available.

Yes it is a small market, but Tesla sales actually decreased substantially vs 2022 (5k in 2023, down from 7k in 2022):

View attachment 1017863

I think this is (at least in part) an effect of a new market - 2022 was the first year for Model Y so a log of pent-up demand.
That doesn´t explain the drop for Model 3 though... When did/will NZ get Highland?

 

[Stretch2727]

Autoline video with a drive of the CT truck with the head of a company that bought one for teardown. Ex GM truck head that has a ranch where he uses the CT as a real truck.

At one point John M asks if he thinks real truck guys will ever convert. He says probably not now but uses his experience with battery powered tools to point out eventually they will.

Not a lot new but an interesting watch. Some interesting insights.

 

[MP3Mike]

Please read the date when posting news... I thought I remembered hearing this before, was in fact in December:

View attachment 1017926

What does the date of the news article have to do with anything? It doesn't change when the event actually happened. The ship arrived at Australia on October 22nd, and circled off-shore for ~65 days before being sent back at the end of the year. So had it not had a bug infestation the vehicles would have been available to be delivered in 2023.

This article has the additional details:

MSN

 

[mongo]

I admit my post was provocative on purpose: I really think the Semi is underappreciated as a product and is one of the mightiest levers of the transition (yes, I know the meaning of the word). In this thread we recently spent several pages talking about the Superbowl ads - which Tesla never does and never did. We often speak about topics that are just tangential to Tesla. The Semi is at the core of Tesla mission. Probably even more important than the Cybertruck, mission-wise (it has a global market, the CT doesn't).

Now, on topic: Tesla delivered the first Semi to Pepsi on the 1st December 2022. It's February 13th 2024, and allegedly not even 100 have been produced.
If I recall correctly, this is is the first time a Tesla vehicle has been subject to this amount of testing. It's more than a year!
I'm not even talking about a ramp up of tens of thousands Semis per year, but at this point I was sure Tesla would have produced tens per week, maybe a 100. Didn't you expect to see a few thousands of Semis on the road, by 2024?
Of course my layman's estimates are worthless, but this is exactly why I asked to the better minds here: what do we know? why the delay - or at least, why so much testing, if the range is good enough (@Artful Dodger kindly provided a source)?
I think these are reasonable questions to ask ourselves as investors, in a forum like this, for a product like this.
I'm quite baffled by the absence of curiosity about the Semis, to be honest.

Tesla has been testing Semi and using it internally far, far longer than the Pepsi delivery event. Huge cost savings for internal use.
@AudubonB was dropping crumbs back in 2017...

 

[Drumheller]

On topic but without extensive elaboration.
I not only cannot come up with any good reason to vote for any action that would provide Mr Musk a 25% control - either by owning outright one-quarter of its outstanding shares or by possessing by any other means that number of votes….except by the same method that I use: purchasing such shares in the open market.

Never in my very long history of stock market investing have I ever heard of a CEO who does not prioritize the welfare of his company and its share price over his personal beliefs.

Completely separate from the above is his enigmatic announced position: that his current ownership position does not adequately provide him the amount of control he considers necessary to thwart any others’ actions contrary to his desiderata.

First, my reaction to that is of bewilderment toward that unabashedly anti-capitalist approach….unfortunately, it is difficult to parse it as other than “capital markets for you but not for me”.

Second, whence 25%? Why not 15%? Or 26%?
I’ll suggest a number: 50%+1 share.

Whatever the number, the extent to which I will vote for any action that provides him more shares is going to be a function of how well he demonstrates the extent to which he devotes his time and his energy to this company. How much of that he spends at SpaceX, at BoringCo, at Neuralink, at any other company in which he may have an interest; with his family, …..none of that matters with respect to this vote (what he does at SpaceX I need separate wrt my own interests there).

This point of view seems 100% logical from a shareholder view and interests. I think that would be my point of view in most cases.

My background is software development. I am of the opinion that Musk will help safeguard humanity from A.I. dangers better than any other influential person I'm aware of. For that reason, I will vote to give him 25% control.

I do not like how he leveraged for it.

 

[GhostSkater]

I don’t think tesla is doing poorly. I think it’s CEO taking hardcore political stances will, in the future, cause customers to choose products from other companies. This is already happening. Or at least in my little part of the world.

I have nothing against Elon Musk. He is a gifted man who has done much good in the world. But I prefer he not be the CEO of a company I am invested in. He has become too unstable.

That is my opinion.

I will take the counter argument, and why I think it’s import for the future of Tesla

As I said before, at least in my own personal point of view, the USA imagine has taken a dive in the last few years, way more than Elon image (if it changed at all) because he says something people don’t like

Why this is important? Tesla is engineering talent limited, and although its development centers are located in more places than the USA, there still is the center of it all

But what if the engineering talent don’t want to go where they are needed? Tesla suffers, even more

If someone from Tesla called me and said I was selected to work for them in the US five or ten years ago, I would have my bag packed before they even hang up the phone. Today? While I likely would say yes still, I would need some time to reflect about it

Won’t get into the reason because this thread isn’t the place, but I think anyone can guess (vaguely gestures at everything)

Continuing the talent view, if we were to ever get a Tesla plane, ships, etc, they need the best of the best (not saying I’m that btw, I’m not), but the best of the best don’t want to be somewhere with huge downsides

Sorry for not getting into specifics since that isn’t the point

 

[Artful Dodger]

That doesn´t explain the drop for Model 3 though

The end of Gov't incentives for EVs on Dec 31st pulled demand forward into Q4 from Q1.

 

[Linkmeup]

Hi Folks, back again after months off - this is the same person as goinfraftw and betstarship.

Boy howdy, has TSLA dropped down a bit in recent months. With that said, I've grown to realize and appreciate just how much TSLA really improved my life over the past 12 years and how much I've been able to give back as a result of it too. The rest of my life hasn't been easy, but grateful for this community, the stock, company, team, and Elon Musk.

Looking forward to providing any good commentary and analysis as well as links. Personally, things might be wild with the stock right now (and in society with driverless taxis...), but that latest Q4 2023 earnings report was stellar and exciting.

- Starlink is ~5000 operating satellites in the constellation
- Eagerly waiting for the 1st update post-surgery of Neuralink's human recipient
- TSLA building out many, many gigafactories (I believe 1/2 of what Elon said would be needed btw)
- Next Starship launch in ~3 weeks
- Las Vegas continued buildout of Tesla Loop
- Non-Tesla charging in Superchargers
- Supercharger buildout

I'm hoping to get another 1-2 roadtrips in this year with my 2020 Model 3 and I'm ~50k miles driven in since 10/2020 when I got delivery.

 

[SO16]

Please read the date when posting news... I thought I remembered hearing this before, was in fact in December:

View attachment 1017926

Yes I know that. It was in response to what the previous poster was referring to. That’s why the shipments were lower than expected last year.

 

[AudubonB]

Final numbers for New Zealand EV 2023 sales now available.

Yes it is a small market, but Tesla sales actually decreased substantially vs 2022 (5k in 2023, down from 7k in 2022):

View attachment 1017863

Anecdotum of one:
My Kiwi sister has had one of the first Teslas, a Model S, on the South Island. She has been quite happy with proselytizing the cause and the brand, despite a chip on her shoulder regarding the paucity of SIsland SpCs vs the fine distribution of them in the North (nothing like my chip vis-a-vis Alaska! ).

But….last year her husband bought a BYD Seal.
Not the best of visuals, that.

 

[2daMoon]

On topic but without extensive elaboration.
I not only cannot come up with any good reason to vote for any action that would provide Mr Musk a 25% control - either by owning outright one-quarter of its outstanding shares or by possessing by any other means that number of votes….except by the same method that I use: purchasing such shares in the open market.

Never in my very long history of stock market investing have I ever heard of a CEO who does not prioritize the welfare of his company and its share price over his personal beliefs.

Completely separate from the above is his enigmatic announced position: that his current ownership position does not adequately provide him the amount of control he considers necessary to thwart any others’ actions contrary to his desiderata.

First, my reaction to that is of bewilderment toward that unabashedly anti-capitalist approach….unfortunately, it is difficult to parse it as other than “capital markets for you but not for me”.

Second, whence 25%? Why not 15%? Or 26%?
I’ll suggest a number: 50%+1 share.

Whatever the number, the extent to which I will vote for any action that provides him more shares is going to be a function of how well he demonstrates the extent to which he devotes his time and his energy to this company. How much of that he spends at SpaceX, at BoringCo, at Neuralink, at any other company in which he may have an interest; with his family, …..none of that matters with respect to this vote (what he does at SpaceX I need separate wrt my own interests there).

Some time back I did proffer how the board could offer Elon the most ridiculous salary ever known from the well-bolstered coffers, with incentives for astounding increases as milestones are reached. He could use such abundance to accumulate shares from the open market the same way everyone else does.

I'm thinking along the lines of ever-increasing Billions of dollars per year as a salary, contingent upon specific performance levels being attained along the way.

Likewise, he could take salaries from SpaceX, and X.com, similarly justified by his influence upon their growth and the availability from expanding cash reserves over time, in order to further assist with additional purchase of TSLA chairs for his dining room.

 

[UkNorthampton]

On topic but without extensive elaboration.
I not only cannot come up with any good reason to vote for any action that would provide Mr Musk a 25% control - either by owning outright one-quarter of its outstanding shares or by possessing by any other means that number of votes….except by the same method that I use: purchasing such shares in the open market.

Never in my very long history of stock market investing have I ever heard of a CEO who does not prioritize the welfare of his company and its share price over his personal beliefs.

Completely separate from the above is his enigmatic announced position: that his current ownership position does not adequately provide him the amount of control he considers necessary to thwart any others’ actions contrary to his desiderata.

First, my reaction to that is of bewilderment toward that unabashedly anti-capitalist approach….unfortunately, it is difficult to parse it as other than “capital markets for you but not for me”.

Second, whence 25%? Why not 15%? Or 26%?
I’ll suggest a number: 50%+1 share.

Whatever the number, the extent to which I will vote for any action that provides him more shares is going to be a function of how well he demonstrates the extent to which he devotes his time and his energy to this company. How much of that he spends at SpaceX, at BoringCo, at Neuralink, at any other company in which he may have an interest; with his family, …..none of that matters with respect to this vote (what he does at SpaceX I need separate wrt my own

Presenteeism shouldn't be rewarded.

Results or effective contributions should be.

 

[Blue horseshoe]

On topic but without extensive elaboration.
I not only cannot come up with any good reason to vote for any action that would provide Mr Musk a 25% control - either by owning outright one-quarter of its outstanding shares or by possessing by any other means that number of votes….except by the same method that I use: purchasing such shares in the open market.

Never in my very long history of stock market investing have I ever heard of a CEO who does not prioritize the welfare of his company and its share price over his personal beliefs.

Completely separate from the above is his enigmatic announced position: that his current ownership position does not adequately provide him the amount of control he considers necessary to thwart any others’ actions contrary to his desiderata.

First, my reaction to that is of bewilderment toward that unabashedly anti-capitalist approach….unfortunately, it is difficult to parse it as other than “capital markets for you but not for me”.

Second, whence 25%? Why not 15%? Or 26%?
I’ll suggest a number: 50%+1 share.

Whatever the number, the extent to which I will vote for any action that provides him more shares is going to be a function of how well he demonstrates the extent to which he devotes his time and his energy to this company. How much of that he spends at SpaceX, at BoringCo, at Neuralink, at any other company in which he may have an interest; with his family, …..none of that matters with respect to this vote (what he does at SpaceX I need separate wrt my own interests there).

I cannot disagree more. Without going off on tangents, were the board to propose something similar to the 2018 compensation plan that provided Elon with shares if he pushed the company to higher valuations up to and beyond $10 trillion in market cap over the next five years I would gladly vote yes.

 

[Electroman]

Presenteeism shouldn't be rewarded.

Results or effective contributions should be.

Exactly !!!

As long as he takes the right decisions that delivers results, I really don't care how much time he spends thinking about Tesla... which I think he has been doing great so far

 

[SOULPEDL]

Exactly !!!

As long as he takes the right decisions that delivers results, I really don't care how much time he spends thinking about Tesla.

... as long as he comes into the office when he does.

 

[aubreymcfato]

Tesla has been testing Semi and using it internally far, far longer than the Pepsi delivery event. Huge cost savings for internal use.
@AudubonB was dropping crumbs back in 2017...

Other posters reassured me about the Semi timeline and I am more pacified, but let me ask you specifically: if you think there are already huge cost savings, why isn't Tesla building more even for it's own fleet? Megachargers are less of a problem if you know where to put them for your convenience (like one in every GF plus a few strategic locations in the middle).
Indeed, my worries stem on the fact that we don't see even hand-build Semis in the hundreds.