Since your response is a few tweets without your own explanation/commentary, I'll assume you do view Elon as making a threat.
To that I'll point out two things:
- Elon's words, from the tweet you quoted, were: "I am uncomfortable growing Tesla to be a leader in AI & robotics without having ~25% voting control. Enough to be influential, but not so much that I can’t be overturned. Unless that is the case, I would prefer to build products outside of Tesla."
- By my read, "I am uncomfortable" and "I would prefer" are two of the most non-threatening phrases I can imagine.
- From the most recent conference call, the transcript* shows that one of the analysts asked Elon about the 25% thing, and Elon's answer was pretty calming if you actually read it.
- The Analyst asked: "Elon, you've spoken about your desire to obtain 25% voting control of the company. And I understand completely why that would be. So, I'm not necessarily asking about that. I'm asking if you've come up with any mechanism by which you can ensure that you'll obtain that level of voting control. Because if not, then the core part of the thesis could potentially be at risk. So, any additional commentary you might have on that topic?"
- Elon's answer (there may be a few mis-transcriptions here): "Well, I think no matter what Tesla -- even if I get kidnapped by aliens tomorrow, Tesla will solve autonomy, maybe a little slower, but it would solve autonomy for vehicles at least. I don't know if we would win on with respect to Optimus or with respect to future products, but it would that -- that there's enough momentum for Tesla to solve autonomy even if I disappeared for vehicles. Yes, there's a whole range of things we can do in the future beyond that. I'll be more reticent with respect to Optimus, if we have a super-sentient humanoid robot that can follow you indoors and that you can (can't?) escape, we're talking terminator-level risk.
And yes, I'd be uncomfortable with. If there's not some meaningful level of influence over how that is deployed. And there's shareholders have an opportunity to ratify or reratify the sort of competition [[compensation?]] because I can't say that. That is a fact.
They have an opportunity. And yes, we'll see. If the company generates a lot of positive cash flow, we could obviously buy back shares. - Again, by my read/summation I see:
- Elon is saying that, even if he completely disappeared tomorrow, he believes Tesla would still complete FSD for cars and likely succeed in the needed AI for Optimus. There is exactly zero threat to remove either of those....althought Elon does predict it would go slower without him involved. And then he says that at the level of a super advanced Optimus Terminator, that's where there is simultaneously increased risk for humans, and where he would insist on more thoughtful control (not just maximizing profit...cough...OpenAI...cough...Microsoft) of how it is developed and deployed. I find nothing objectionable in these statements.
- At the end, Elon also points out that there are other ways (potential share buybacks if Tesla makes tons of money) to get him to 25%. That looks to imply that two things shareholders normally love -- huge positive cash flow, and share buybacks -- might offer a way for him to get near the 25% he desires.
- Relatedly, I believe in another tweet someplace else, it was hinted that re-incorporating in Texas might also create an avenue to allow some other share or voting class, which could also be used to get Elon to 25%.
* Tesla (TSLA) Q1 2024 Earnings Call Transcript | The Motley Fool