TSLA Market Action: 2018 Investor Roundtable

[SO16]

Doesn't compromise integrity can sometimss be code for not being humble. Musk did screw up with the tweet, if the settlement was as light as it sounds like it was (slap on the wrist), it seems he should have accepted it if simply to benefit the shareholders and Tesla. Don't know what the lawyers are advising him, and my hope is that there is some other reason they turned it down. Like it opens them up to more litigation or something. Overall, my worst fear is that Musk was simply too arrogant to accept the deal and in his childish behavior he is screwing the shareholders yet again, just like the $420 tweet when I thought he surely would not send that without having a real deal.... I would love to see the exact settlement offer or have the lawyers for Musk comment on this to get clarity as to why it was rejected. Do they think they can just defeat the case easily, etc.....this overhang is very bad for me and I have several call options. Dscl long tsla via stock and short term and long term options.

The settlement was NOT a slap on the wrist. He would have had to leave the “fraud” accusation in place rather than just “reckless” which would have possibly jeopardized his other companies and government contracts like with NASA.

 

[Open Interest]

Tesla is fine. Demand is insane. Backlog is huge. If some people are turned off by the news reporting, that just means others get their cars sooner.

I don’t dispute that there is huge demand. But Tesla’s reputation has been damaged, and reputation is important in business as in life. Why not get out there with a strong message saying this is who we are, this is what we’re about?

 

[Fact Checking]

Think how many hearts and minds could be reached by a few awesome, well placed ads during a major sports event, or a widely viewed TV show, or even, gulp, on CNBC.

I do think Tesla would benefit tremendously from a Superbowl ad or two, once they have the money to spend and are able to make enough cars to sell.

Right now they need one thing to change the narrative: success - and that means, in the current twisted framing of Tesla, profitability.

Once that is achieved - be it Q3 or Q4, while the FUDsters won't go away overnight, but the collusion of the rest of the media in this unprecedented group mobbing of Elon and Tesla is going to wind down and maybe even reverse.

This is what happened with SpaceX after the Falcon Heavy launch, and I think this is going to happen with Tesla too. It might take some time, but it's going to happen.

 

[aubreymcfato]

Just out:
Exclusive: Read 147 pages of complaints about Elon Musk from Tesla investors

I replied on twitter to the editor Joshua Topolwki, it seems nuts to publish these mails as "legit":
Joshua Topolsky on Twitter

 

[SO16]

I know this. If Elon Musk tweeted he wanted his followers to jump off a cliff as a sign of loyalty, half the people on this board would be gone.

I would if you would. You go first and then I’ll do the same. I promise. /s

 

[Xpert]

It's written by Nikkey staff writer, so obviously it is a negative "hit piece", because he would get criticized too much otherwise, if not by americans then by Toyota fanboys, but it is written by a Japanese writer so instead of fantasies painted as "opinions" he is spinning facts.
More of it such "communications" have very specific and simple structure. The real message is always at the end

The message is obviously not for Musk, and not for you. It is a warning that if Musk goes, Panasonic goes.

Disagreed. It’s actually simple regardless of Elon - If Profit comes, Panasonic stays. Profit goes, Panasonic goes.

 

[ZachF]

WSJ OP-ed from the Editorial board titled "SEC overkill on Elon Musk"- Opinion | SEC Overkill on Elon Musk

“while Mr. Musk deserves some SEC sanction, barring him from serving as a director or officer of a public company is excessive.”

I'm very surprised to see the WSJ come out so strongly in support of Elon. I'm reminded of the show Billions and how many of these prosecutions have to deal with optics and how Giamatti's Prosecutor character only begins to go after a hedge fund guy after he buys a big flashy house. They hate going after people that are popular with the public. The SEC definitely thought this was a good time to go after Elon because right now his popularity is very low after the "pedo" stuff in particular. However I think they will be surprised at the amount of goodwill that Elon still has and are not ready for the backlash. Besides the WSJ piece there was an excellent Wired article as well titled "The Case Against Elon Musk Will Chill Innovation" (The Case Against Elon Musk Will Chill Innovation).

Similarly I've seen the Gorman video posted over and over in this thread and while I shared it myself further, its important to not fall to group think and recognize that plenty of people besides Gorman view the case as more 50/50. However one thing that almost everyone agrees on is that an officer/director ban seems fully inappropriate given the charge.

"The Case Against Elon Musk Will Chill Innovation" is an especially good one.

The last thing the US needs is more of it's best and brightest mathematical minds going to Wall Street to figure out how to produce more zero-sum rent seeking games for the financial elite.

 

[CuriousSunbird]

Remember, this is a Japanese CEO... "Unimaginable" when spoken in the context of Japanese language may mean something completely different than implied, like the Chinese for "Interesting".

It seems that the precise word used was ありえない (それでもテスラか　パナソニック、電池巡り関係見極め) which translates more as "impossible" [to believe/comprehend/imagine] or "cannot be/exist".

 

[Krugerrand]

Lutz can say whatever he wants no matter how idiotic it sounds because we all know he’s an idiot.

He can. My problem is that nobody corrected him. As the on air reporter I’d have challenged his statement. Course that’s probably why that’s not my profession.

 

[Fact Checking]

I'm very surprised to see the WSJ come out so strongly in support of Elon.

I was hoping this would happen: the SEC's unprecedented planned sanction against the billionaire CEO-owner of Tesla effectively dispossesses Elon of control of hugely valuable property, just because Elon tweeted the truth in a format the SEC disapproves of?

That must be unacceptable regulatory overreach to many other billionaires and other businessmen. Political appointees like the SEC chairman should not have such power.

 

[azaz]

btw another thing to consider with regards to why Elon dropped the settlement, perhaps he secured (pun intended) testimony from the Saudis to bolster his case?

 

[Open Interest]

Right now they need one thing to change the narrative: success - and that means, in the current twisted framing of Tesla, profitability.

.

I do agree that profitability is the best revenge! But, as often discussed here, it is a tremendously disruptive company to a lot of big money interests. FUD is not going away. And it’s possible that increased success will cause big oil and other interests to increase, not decrease attacks, by whatever means possible.

Also, unlike Space X, Tesla is publicly traded and sells to the general public, so it’s in their best interest to win hearts and minds with all available approaches and strategies.

 

[riverFox]

WSJ OP-ed from the Editorial board titled "SEC overkill on Elon Musk"- Opinion | SEC Overkill on Elon Musk

“while Mr. Musk deserves some SEC sanction, barring him from serving as a director or officer of a public company is excessive.”

I'm very surprised to see the WSJ come out so strongly in support of Elon. I'm reminded of the show Billions and how many of these prosecutions have to deal with optics and how Giamatti's Prosecutor character only begins to go after a hedge fund guy after he buys a big flashy house. They hate going after people that are popular with the public. The SEC definitely thought this was a good time to go after Elon because right now his popularity is very low after the "pedo" stuff in particular. However I think they will be surprised at the amount of goodwill that Elon still has and are not ready for the backlash. Besides the WSJ piece there was an excellent Wired article as well titled "The Case Against Elon Musk Will Chill Innovation" (The Case Against Elon Musk Will Chill Innovation).

Similarly I've seen the Gorman video posted over and over in this thread and while I shared it myself further, its important to not fall to group think and recognize that plenty of people besides Gorman view the case as more 50/50. However one thing that almost everyone agrees on is that an officer/director ban seems fully inappropriate given the charge.

Maybe Having James Murdoch on the Board is finally paying dividends.

 

[HG Wells]

Ugh, you guys and your bloody calls, puts and LEAPS

I realise SP needs to get to around $1950 before I become a millionaire, but on the other hand it needs to drop below $185 before "lose" money, and then only if I panic and sell. Needs to drop to $50 and have me sell in order to lose $48k

So I won't get rich quick, but I won't lose any money either.

Just sayin'

Lets see $1,000,000 / $1950= 513 shares.

513 shares $43 drop yesterday = You lost yesterday on paper $22,059

I think you will make that back (and more) by October 2nd.

 

[CuriousSunbird]

Disagreed. It’s actually simple regardless of Elon - If Profit comes, Panasonic stays. Profit goes, Panasonic goes.

Not sure what you mean by "Panasonic goes", but I wouldn't overstate this. Tesla provides about half the revenues of Panasonic's automotive division. That division is about 6-8% of Panasonic' total revenues, So losing the Tesla business would be painful for Panasonic, but not fatal.

These numbers are from memory - I am feeling too lazy to dig out the annual report today, but you can find it online, and I think there is an English version or summary.

 

[MP3Mike]

There is one mistake he made - not forewarning the NASDAQ of the tweet. He will be rightfully fined for that and gladly pay. Then we will put this all behind.

I thought that only applied to the company making an announcement. In this case he was personally announcing something, and I don't think that anybody that is going to say that they are thinking about buying a company has to notify the NASDAQ ahead of time...

 

[ZachF]

Not sure what you mean by "Panasonic goes", but I wouldn't overstate this. Tesla provides about half the revenues of Panasonic's automotive division. That division is about 6-8% of Panasonic' total revenues, So losing the Tesla business would be painful for Panasonic, but not fatal.

These numbers are from memory - I am feeling too lazy to dig out the annual report today, but you can find it online, and I think there is an English version or summary.

Panasonic's revenue has been flat for the last decade.
Panasonic - revenue 2018 | Statistic

Even if they're only a few percentage points of revenue, getting rid of a customer that is growing orders by 30-100% per year is stupid when revenue growth is essentially flat.

 

[brian45011]

CNBC just reported Feb 1, 2019 date for SEC court date VS Musk. Don't know the details, but should surface soon in more detail I'm sure.

I am not familiar with federal practice in NY, but many jurisdictions require some form of alternate dispute resolution (often mediation) before the parties are allowed to proceed to trial.

 

[Xpert]

Here we go...Autopilot V9 is rolling out to the public. This dashcam looks awesome!

Check uour tesla, folks.

 

[gringotuanis]

The settlement was NOT a slap on the wrist. He would have had to leave the “fraud” accusation in place rather than just “reckless” which would have possibly jeopardized his other companies and government contracts like with NASA.

Supposedly he didn't have to admit or deny anything in the settlement so that is not "leaving a fraud" accusation in place ( what does that even mean??? Never heard that in legal terms before). They've already accused him of fraud, no matter what happens next if he wins or loses in court. I'm sure it doesn't endanger other contracts. I am thinking maybe this is all a bargaining trip we're on where the SEC and Musk lawyers are now going back and forth and it puts more pressure on the SEC to settle. This is probably wishful thinking though.