Tesla Stock Plunges After Senior Execs Leave, Musk Smokes Weed During Interview (arstechnica.com) 249
Today, we have learned that two executives have left Tesla. According to a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Tesla's newly hired chief accounting officer Dave Morton decided to resign because "the level of public attention placed on the company as well as the pace within the company have exceeded [his] expectations." He added: "I want to be clear that I believe strongly in Tesla, its mission, and its future prospects, and I have no disagreements with Tesla's leadership or financial reporting." Tesla's human resources chief Gaby Toledano also announced that should would be leaving the company after taking a leave of absence last month. CEO Elon Musk wrote that Toledo "has been on leave for a few months to spend more time with her family and has decided to continue doing so for personal reasons. She's been amazing and I'm very grateful for everything she's done for Tesla."
These departures certainly have had an impact on Tesla's stock, which is down more than six percent to $262, but an interview Elon Musk conducted with Joe Rogan may have caused the most damage. While discussing a wide range of topics including his tweeting behavior, his Boring Company's flamethrowers, and "neuralink" devices, the Tesla CEO openly smoked a mixed tobacco and marijuana cigarette, sending the internet into a frenzy. Ars Technica reports: Morton joined Tesla on August 6, one day before Musk's infamous tweet claiming that he had "funding secured" to take Tesla private. Musk was forced to abandon the plan a couple of weeks later. Not only did Musk not have any kind of written funding deal, many Tesla investors saw little upside in approving a deal that would reduce Tesla's transparency and the liquidity of Tesla stock. Morton didn't explicitly mention last month's buyout saga in his statement explaining his departure. But a lot of the "public attention" Tesla received during Morton's brief tenure was focused on the possibility of Tesla going private. It's safe to assume that members of Tesla's finance team were working overtime on issues related to the proposal during Morton's month at Tesla. It's worth noting that marijuana is legal in California (and several other states) if you are 21 or older, but the federal government still strictly prohibits the Schedule 1 substance.
UPDATE: You can watch/listen to the nearly three-hour-long interview here. Rogan manages to pick Musk's brain in great detail and in a refreshingly laid-back manner. We highly recommend a listen if you want to learn more about Musk's ambitions and thought process.
These departures certainly have had an impact on Tesla's stock, which is down more than six percent to $262, but an interview Elon Musk conducted with Joe Rogan may have caused the most damage. While discussing a wide range of topics including his tweeting behavior, his Boring Company's flamethrowers, and "neuralink" devices, the Tesla CEO openly smoked a mixed tobacco and marijuana cigarette, sending the internet into a frenzy. Ars Technica reports: Morton joined Tesla on August 6, one day before Musk's infamous tweet claiming that he had "funding secured" to take Tesla private. Musk was forced to abandon the plan a couple of weeks later. Not only did Musk not have any kind of written funding deal, many Tesla investors saw little upside in approving a deal that would reduce Tesla's transparency and the liquidity of Tesla stock. Morton didn't explicitly mention last month's buyout saga in his statement explaining his departure. But a lot of the "public attention" Tesla received during Morton's brief tenure was focused on the possibility of Tesla going private. It's safe to assume that members of Tesla's finance team were working overtime on issues related to the proposal during Morton's month at Tesla. It's worth noting that marijuana is legal in California (and several other states) if you are 21 or older, but the federal government still strictly prohibits the Schedule 1 substance.
UPDATE: You can watch/listen to the nearly three-hour-long interview here. Rogan manages to pick Musk's brain in great detail and in a refreshingly laid-back manner. We highly recommend a listen if you want to learn more about Musk's ambitions and thought process.
Still... a good interview. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Still... a good interview. (Score:5, Interesting)
Still a good interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Agreed.
It must be very difficult for Elon to deal with the pressures of the business side of his genius; especially since he seems to be cursed with control issues, making it difficult for him to delegate tasks, including the appointment of another CEO or two at his flagship companies.
Has he made some miscalculations recently? Sure. Can he rebound from this? Certainly. It's simply clear he has to prioritize time for what he's great at (inspiration and innovation) and learn to hand off to others what he can afford to delegate (daily business stress and decisions).
Personally, I hope he gets it together... there is a worldwide scarcity of visionaries who stand to make the earth a better place.
Re:Still... a good interview. (Score:5, Insightful)
--Dude seriously needs to take a couple of weeks vacation somewhere private and calm down from the stress. But he's rich enough that it's difficult for his friends and family to call him on his shit.
Re: (Score:3)
--Dude seriously needs to take a couple of weeks vacation somewhere private and calm down from the stress. But he's rich enough that it's difficult for his friends and family to call him on his shit.
A fine lesson there. No matter how gifted you are, do yourself a gigantic favor, and resist the temptation to surround yourself with yes-men... everyone benefits from a critical viewpoint now and then.
Re:Still... a good interview. (Score:5, Interesting)
"No matter how gifted you are, do yourself a gigantic favor, and resist the temptation to surround yourself with yes-men... everyone benefits from a critical viewpoint now and then."
Well, from a cynical point of view, I'm not so sure it benefits "everyone"...
On one hand, the other "yes-men": they are there usually because they lack other talents, so having someone different on board *and* having the leader listening to him, most probably would end the other ones' career in the company or, at least, their ability to stay with the "grown-ups". Yes, in the long term the company folds, so they go to the unemployment queue, but in the meantime...
On the other hand, the leader himself, he's usually the sociopathic and narcissitic kind that always land on his feet, so he takes pleasure from their current yes-men and will just take the hit and start again with a different idea and a different group of yes-men to support him.
I've been there... twice, specially one of them it was so exemplary it could make into an encyclopedia entry. Both times I was fired because not being "a team guy", both times I went out telling others when exactly the company would fold within a three months margin and both times I was right. The only advantage? Since I was fired relatively early in the going nowhere process, I took all my benefits; the others that stayed to the bitter end, not so much.
Re:Still... a good interview. (Score:5, Insightful)
smoking the weed has nothing to do with being years late from profitability. you can only run a company only on your public image for so long. only tweet extravagant ideas lifted from ancient popular mechanics for so long.
the stock tanked due to persons privvy to the books running out like the house was on fire. the big thing people want and need to know out of those books is if they're getting money into the company from making and selling the model 3's. that they don't sell the cheapo model because it wouldn't make money doesn't really put that much confidence into it.
anyhow, for some funnies you can watch some investment advice youtube channels from few days back.
the cars are good/okay yes - but whats that got to do with the company making money or not?
Re: (Score:2)
Tesla has solved the biggest problems most companies have: people really want to buy its products, and he can sell them at a profit. That's a great place for any company to be.
Tesla really struggled to ramp up production to meet demand, mostly due to arrogance. They didn't start by hiring the best and brightest from other car companies that were good at automated manufacturing, but instead had a Silly Valley startup mentality of "we're smarter, so it's better if we invent everything from scratch" (of cour
Re: (Score:3)
The tech industry has a history of companies which pioneer a field, develop new technologies, and then crash hard. The technology then gets used by later companies who can build on the mistakes. It's quite plausible that in twenty years, Tesla will no longer exist - but all the major automotive manufacturers of today will be churning out mass-produced affordable electric cars, and buried within them will be components designed by Tesla engineers.
Re: (Score:2)
Tesla really struggled to ramp up production to meet demand, mostly due to arrogance
They ramped up faster than any car company in history. They are two years from when other car companies would roll their first car off a new line. It is only compared to Musk's hyper ambitious timeline that they 'struggled' to ramp up production.
Re: (Score:2)
And it's put them on the verge of bankruptcy, whilst producing cars 86% of which need rework, and cars being delivered to customers looking like they've been assembled in the dark by orangutans. Maybe other companies take their time for a reason. Tesla's 'hyper ambitious timeline' seems to be going back in time to British Leyland in the 70s in terms of quality and profitability.
Re: (Score:2)
A few quarters is too far away, they're running out of money today, have some big debts to pay back, have suppliers demanding payment, and now need to find billions and billions to build all the new things Musk has promised (model Y, pickup truck, semi, roadster, solar roofs).
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Still... a good interview. (Score:5, Informative)
It actually was. And anyone criticizing it for the "OMG Elon Is A Pothead Promoting Drug Usage!" notion clearly never watched it. It's practically an anti-pot ad. Musk is offered a joint (which he has to ask if it's a joint), takes one puff, doesn't even inhale, looks at it, shakes his head no, passes it back - then later on they discuss marijuana, and Musk says that he doesn't like it because it inhibits his ability to get things done and have a meaningful effect on the world.
But of course, that doesn't make for a clickbait headline, now does it?
Seriously, this Slashdot "summary" is one of the clickbatiest, most misleading summaries I've seen in ages. Also poorly copyedited - starting to talk about marijuana, then acting like it's going into a summary about pot, but instead going back to Morton. Naturally, their quoting of Morton cuts out before his line, "I want to be clear that I believe strongly in Tesla, its mission, and its future prospects, and I have no disagreements with Tesla’s leadership or its financial reporting." - because, hey, why bother to mention a trivial thing like that when you have a hit piece to right?
And of course, there's no mention of the in-detail reporting on why Morton left [cnbc.com]. Specifically, Morton was brought in because his background was privatizations. But he felt like nobody appreciated his ideas as Tesla and he was being ignored. His ignored ideas included, and I quote, "advice about capitalizing the company through other means rather than going private". Had Morton bothered to listen to a single earnings call, they would have heard the Tesla executive team repeatedly and strongly ruling out capital raises from equity; instead that their capital expenditures going forth are to be from profit and debt. He seems to have misunderstood that privatization wasn't a means, it was a goal: to eliminate short-sellers, and thus the financial incentive to FUD the company - as well as to eliminate the end-of-quarter rush and allow the company to stay more long-term strategically focused.
By the way, as for executives leaving in general: Tesla has 23 people at the VP level or higher - we're not even counting department heads here. The average stay of a high level executive is around 4 years, and less in Silicon Valley. Executive departures will happen. Get used to it.
Of course, Slashdot concludes with a paragraph that is an epic smear, curiously sourced from some random person commenting on some other site's message board (is that a first here?):
Meanwhile, in the universe that we live in, there were multiple entities competing to buy Tesla [nytimes.com]. Including, among others, multiple sovereign wealth funds (not just the Saudis), and Volkswagen. The terms however were more painful to Tesla than staying public, including various combinations of loss of control, requirements to build large local production facilities and so forth. It also became clear that the best their advisers could do for allowing retail investors to remain in (which was part of the plan, to minimize the size of the buyout) was an exotic trust structure that would have had a low chance of being approved by regulators.
But naaaaaah - who cares about actual investigative reporting when you can base articles on "Megatrex from the comment section of Ars Technica"? FUD away everyone! It's a lot more fun!
Re: (Score:2)
** hit piece to write
Re: Still... a good interview. (Score:4, Insightful)
The shitty quality of misleading articles in general is getting worse and worse.
I've been coming to Slashdot daily for 19 years now and the only reason I bother the last few years is because it's like watching a train crash in slow motion, you know it's coming but you can't help but stare.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's everywhere. I used to be a regular reader and commenter on Digg, years ago. It was good back then. I was part of the wave that left following two major scandals*, but when I go back there now I see that it's almost all clickbait. Not that it was completely clickbait-free eight years ago either, but it's a lot worse now.
*The 'Digg Patriots' event which revealed a small group of users had been conspiring to manipulate the site algorithms with a political agenda, and the revamping of the site which saw a
Re: (Score:2)
The posting seems to be better on the weekend though
Seems to be better on weed, too
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for the description on Musk smoking the marijuana. You're right - it was very brief. But he shouldn't have smoked it in the interview; it increases doubts about his judgement. In case anyone wants to see it, it starts at 2:09:30 of this video [youtube.com] (the video that was referenced in an earlier post).
Musk's companies have a lot of potential to help people. Tesla, with its solar roofs [tesla.com] (which are attractive) and powerwalls, might help reduce energy consumption. And Neuralink might develop 'devices to treat ser [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:3)
Best thing for him would be to lay low, play nice and give Twitter - and himself - a bit of a rest. Once he gets Model 3 production fully on track, addresse
Re: (Score:2)
If you want some Tesla stock, now might be the time to buy it on the dip.
There's always a silver lining if you look for it....
Re:Still... a good interview. (Score:5, Insightful)
But of course, that doesn't make for a clickbait headline, now does it?
Human nature is often very nasty.
There are and will always be those who, for a variety of reasons from the psychological;/emotional (envy, jealousy, obsession/fixation, etc) to the political/ideological, will try to bring down & destroy those who are successful and/or visionaries, probably even more-so regarding visionaries. Musk being both paints a double-sized target on his back for "nay-saying nabobs of negativity".
Human nature is why we can't have nice things.
Seriously.
Strat
Re:Still... a good interview. (Score:4, Insightful)
Musk is doing himself in, via his own poor choices with respect to how he behaves in public. It is revealing how you choose to ignore that and instead attempt to claim that "ugly human nature" is somehow to blame for Musk's various problems. No one forced Musk to call someone a pedophile, no one forced Musk to make the various remarks he made about taking Tesla private, no one forced Musk to try smoking that pot in public. It's all Musk . Your ability to reason is called into question if you cannot discern that Musk's behavior is not the fault of some other person.
Re: (Score:2)
I can't quite quote they're exact words, but they said it well when they were talking about chimps and said "This is why we're so fucked up with eachother."
Dude, I agree. (Score:2)
But you need to relax. Here, smoke this.
Re: (Score:2)
Despite the mocking comments here you are exactly right.
Major execs leave, and the stock dips (6% is a plunge?) and people are sure it must be the pot.
Re: (Score:2)
For once I agree with you - the Slashdot story should have more about executives leaving. Which is not a catastrophe - but could have interesting hidden/non-hidden reasons - even from nerd point of view. The whole weed business has been blown out of proportion.
Though without the weed hype, the story does not have enough weight to reach Slashdot main page. We could combine it with fresh developments in the pedo case - that never gets old.
Re: (Score:2)
While you are right that the summary is crap, there is a real story here. Musk is kinda bad at the PR side of being a CEO. Should probably have rejected the blunt outright, but that's nothing compared to accusing someone of being a paedophile on Twitter, or making public promises that don't get delivered.
That last one is going to bite Tesla in court one day, when people are demanding refunds for features they paid for but never received.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's not true at all, that's what Tesla fanboys have been telling themselves because they can't admit how weird is that someone newly appointed jumped ship after looking through the books. This is the second CAO they've lost in a year. This is not normal, and can't be handwaved away by fanboys. This latest one turned down ten million dollars in options. Guess the money isn't worth a spell in federal prison.
Re: (Score:2)
>funding was not fucking "secured."
Sorry, no, we DO NOT know if it was or wasn't.
it's a distraction. he knew what he was doing. (Score:3)
yeah the correct answer is "yeah, so?"
you think he didn't know the brass was leaving? now he can blame the stock drop on this and up play this while the situation cools down.
the real questions are: is model 3 profitable? why nobody wants to sign off on your bookkeeping shenigans? have you learn't anything about using twitter as an official way to communicate news that affect stock price, since you're banning people?
do you know how big of a crock it was to just casually announce all stocks being worth 420 -
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Still... a good interview. (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
well it makes the weed last longer, burn better and hit harder(the tar etc acting as a carrier).
if you smoke anyways, who cares?
Re: Still... a good interview. (Score:2)
Joints of course win in portability, but in recent years the market has been flooded with new kinds of portable vaporizers. Not to mention new kinds of cannabis preparations to use in them.
Locally anyway, smokers who want a slow burning mix with tobacco just reach for a blunt. But with legalization, weed is so cheap and high quality now, I see no reason for me to try adulterating it with a
Re: (Score:2)
It's now obvious that everything Elon tweeted that manipulated the market was a lie. Funding was not secured, the price of $420 was not based in reality, and it was not just a vote away from happening. When you're being investigated by the SEC for a weed joke that you used to manipulate the market it's an idiotic idea to make it even more obvious you manipulated the market by smoking weed publicly broadcasted. People are pulling out of the market because Elon lies to manipulate shareholders and cost them billions and that has become even more obvious. Not because 'omg weed is bad.'"
Re: Still... a good interview. (Score:2)
This should be modded +5 insightful.
Eagerly Awaiting (Score:2)
Next Up: Boring Company-branded spleefs. Wonder how fast those will sell out.
Re:Eagerly Awaiting (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Eagerly Awaiting (Score:4, Informative)
Nobody stepped down over it. Morton left because he was a privatization expert for a company no longer looking at going private, and felt nobody cared about his privatization ideas anyway [cnbc.com]. Toledano has been on a leave of absence for over a month. The fun thing about Toledano is that people got to FUD Tesla twice - once when she went on leave, and again when it was confirmed that she wouldn't be returning. Two for one - what a deal!
Even if you assume that her "personal reasons" and "family" is PR speak (and not literally what it says on the tin), the simple matter is that - as a company which has nearly two dozen people at the VP level or higher (not even counting department heads) - executive departures will happen at regular intervals. Just like they do at all companies (but particularly in Silicon Valley, where average executive stays are shorter than average). The main difference is that people don't have a giant FUD blitz every time, say, some VP in Kraft Foods leaves.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Morton left because he was a privatization expert for a company no longer looking at going private, and felt nobody cared about his privatization ideas anyway [cnbc.com].
Although the above underlined sentence above contains ideas mentioned in the article, the summary doesn't reflect what the author wrote and instead conveys a meaning that is very different from the article.
From the article: "Morton, who left his role as Seagate's CFO to join Tesla, was not flustered by the tweet [about privatization] and met with Musk to go over various details that would make a take-private difficult. He brought up specific details such as equity change of control provisions and potential
Re:Eagerly Awaiting (Score:5, Insightful)
Look dude, it's clear you're a true believer-- I don't know what degree to which the things you're saying are deliberate spin, and what aren't. I am neither long nor short TSLA (am investigating perhaps buying convertible notes & hedging with shorting the stock, but that would be a mostly-long position).
1. David Morton wasn't brought in to take TSLA private-- or shouldn't have been, as that's not his expertise. Sure, he did a transaction like that as a junior financial executive-- 16 years ago, but has been a CFO of a public company for the past 3 years and now went to Anaplan which is working on going public. It's believed that he was being positioned to take the reins as TSLA's CFO before his departure. I can sure understand shitting a brick and polishing your resume if you go somewhere to be a public CFO, and your first day, the chairman/CEO tweets about privatization without talking to you.
2. It's never good, with this degree of scrutiny, to do the kind of stupid shit that has gone down the past month.
3. TSLA needs more capital. It is difficult to fund significant growth from operations, and practically impossible with TSLA's degree of debt loading. While it may be possible to survive Q1's debt payment requirements (or even rally the stock and convert the notes), that doesn't leave extensive funds for capital expansion.
That said, with TSLA's prior capitalization it should have been easy to get funding from a small (in share) equity round-- if stupid shit stops capital markets should open back up.
4. TSLA's valuation is predicated, even now, on making it through this challenging time and significantly growing and maintaining market share. This is never good if you have many market entrants who are willing to sell product at a loss (for regulatory compliance reasons). This is never good if other participants are willing, nay practically required, to enter the market and sell below cost and have greater access to subsidies and favorable trade terms than you.
TSLA has a better product and has an initial lead in share and a positive brand reputation. In a growing market, that's a wonderful position to be in. But success is predicated on strong execution, access to capital, and not doing stupid stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
TSLA's valuation is predicated, even now, on making it through this challenging time and significantly growing and maintaining market share. This is never good if other participants are willing, nay practically required, to enter the market and sell below cost and have greater access to subsidies and favorable trade terms than you.
Who knew poorly-conceived regulation could be a double-edged sword?
Re: (Score:2)
Who cares.. Seriously? (Score:4, Funny)
Besides the stockowners who sold enough stock to make the share price drop 6%+...
The stock will bounce back and those that sold based on their perception will kick themselves eventually, just like those that sold their stock in Nike.
Re: (Score:3)
Yep, he'll bounce back. Word is, he's already looking at a couple of replacements [youtube.com] for those pussy execs who left.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Who cares.. Seriously? (Score:5, Funny)
That's after the 420:1 reverse split.
Re: (Score:2)
I wish you hadn't said that Rei, because now everything you say about Tesla and their cars has a financial motive.
Re: (Score:2)
and it's not like the jobless leftists...
Sounds like someone is willfully ignorant about the economy. LA, NYC, Silicon Valley maybe you've heard of those cities?
so you believe only "virtue signalers" buy nikes? right, history has shown that
Re: (Score:2)
lol
https://www.marketwatch.com/st... [marketwatch.com]
Should would (Score:2, Informative)
Should would be leaving the company.
If you don't read your own stuff why should we?
Security clearance (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Also, if Musk holds an active security clearance (which is likely considering the work SpaceX does) then he violated federal law by smoking marijuana.
So he violated federal law four times that day instead of the usual three times?
Re:Security clearance (Score:5, Informative)
Sometimes I don't know if you shorts get things wrong through deliberate FUD, or just a really bad game of telephone. Because your (incorrect) initial rumour was "The Air Force is considering revoking Musk's security clearance", but that's apparently already morphed to "has just revoked his security clearance and canceled all contracts". The latter BTW having nothing to do with Musk's security clearance regardless.
But for those who actually care? Even the initial claim was wrong. "Reports that Musk security clearance under review are inaccurate: U.S. Air Force" [reuters.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Those silly shorts. They keep using Slashdot to drive down the stock. We all know that investment houses read Slashdot for investment advice!
That would, at least partially, explain the Bitcoin debacle.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Rothschild himself couldn't implement a better investment strategy.
Re: (Score:2)
With all the mud being slung at anyone who questions Tesla on Slashdot, you'd think that 9 out of 10 posters were shorts.
Fucking hell! (Score:5, Insightful)
AstroTurf somewhere else. The “most damaging” thing has nothing to do with pot. We have a “blue chip” stock that is run like a startup.
but it is pot (Score:2)
The problem with pot, and with potheads, is that pot will make you feel like you've written that operating system, composed that magnum opus, painted that masterpiece, or made your electric car company profitable...all while you haven't done a goddamn thing but sit around with your body odor drawing flies.
If you're a 66 year old retired person needing relief from aches and pains, that's fine.
If you're a the executive of a multi-billion dollar company that has year to turn a profit, it's big trouble.
This is
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I suppose you would call Richard Feynman a failure as a physicist as well? I bet you never even tried it. Just because your siblings are losers doesn't automatically imply other people who smoke weed are in the same category. I'd say Musk is doing a pretty fucking amazing job of changing the world around him.
Re: (Score:2)
You're misinformed. Feynman *briefly( experimented with LSD, MJ and ketamine. He's an example of a non-user.
It isn't just my pothead relatives, it's the coworkers, neighbors, friends who are in the same pot rut.
There are some exceptions, but by and large potheads are losers, for the reasons I gave.
Musk is changing the world by pissing away money unprofitably.
everything he's doing will be done better, and and profitably, by other companies. The big car makers will make better electric cars that are more a
Re: (Score:2)
sounds like pothead spew to me.
I'm enjoying my life and am happy with those things I've been able to accomplish
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps you should at least try it once, before making such gross claims.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps I should observe a bunch of users and generalize what is accurate about 80% of them.
Oh wait, I have for many decades.
Sure, some people can use it and achieve things, but for most, 8 out of 10, no.
Re: (Score:2)
We have a âoeblue chipâ stock that is run like a startup.
It's run like the right startup.
Plunges? No (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
They are. But so far, the company has benefited from tax breaks and subsidies and never operated in a competitive environment. It's questionable whether they will actually be able to deliver a competitive product once the subsidies go away and these technologies become mainstream.
Re: (Score:3)
"But so far, the company has benefited from tax breaks and subsidies and never operated in a competitive environment."
The same tax breaks were available to the competition, you know, GM and Nissan? Who have both been producing EVs which compete with Tesla's vehicles? Who in fact have the most-sold EVs in the USA?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, other companies have had the same tax breaks available, but that's not what I'm getting at.
What I'm getting at is that Tesla has never had to produce EVs, batteries, solar, and green energy components that are competitive with traditional technologies in a free market.
Re: (Score:2)
What do you think EVs are powered by? Unicorn farts? The primary power source for EVs is fossil fuels.
Re: (Score:2)
EVs are powered by the grid which contains energy from a mix of sources, and even when it is 100% non-renewables they are still cleaner than ICEs due to efficiency and regeneration. But you knew that, troll.
Re: (Score:2)
So we have dispensed now with your bogus argument that "one source of energy (fossil fuels) gets to ignore all of its externalities", since both EVs and gas powered cars largely use the same source of energy. Since both rely on fossil fuels for their manufacture and operation, they both are subsidized at about the same rate (if a
That would be a European country, not a company (Score:5, Insightful)
$4,000 / would be sixteen times the size of the largest car companies in the world.
Here's the reality:
Volkwagen revenue S$268 billion
Toyota revenue $261 billion
Daimler revenue $164 billion
General Motors revenue $146 billion
Toyota revenue $138 billion
Telsa revenue $11 billion
Tesla would need to grow ten times larger just to become a significant car company (though still not in the top 5). If they are phenemonally successful, it will justify a stock price of $80.
Honda. Second one should be Honda (Score:3)
The second line that says Toyota should say Honda, I believe
This guy has lost it (Score:3)
And seriously so. I do hope Space-X survives, space-tech has been stagnant for far too long.
Let's get it right. (Score:4, Interesting)
People are pulling out of the market because Elon lies to manipulate shareholders and cost them billions and that has become even more obvious.
I don't have any reason to support Musk, but when flaming him let's at least get it right.
What he's being investigated for is not alleged lying to cost stockholders billions.
What he's being investigated for is alleged lying to cost stock traders - possibly stock manipulators, billions. Stock traders and hypothetical manipulators who DIDN'T own any stock, BORROWED and SOLD a bunch in the expectation that it would drop, some of whom apparently hired, through cutouts, a bunch of trolls to talk the stock down.
So when he said (unfortunately for him, without cutouts) that they might be going private and the stock shot up, the people who sold the borrowed stock were stuck having to buy some back at a HIGHER price than they sold it for (which is what you risk if you sell a stock short), but the people who actually owned it were just fine.
So the shorts closed out some short positions and took a big loss. Then, since Musk said that in a way that COULD be traced to him, they were able to sue him for the losses and complain to the SEC, getting it to start an investigation. THEN the stock DID start to tank, and the people who owned it DID take a loss.
But I wonder: Did the shorts actually close out all their short positions? Or are they still net short on Tesla - especially if you count, not just their direct holdings, but also all the investments of the web of companies and financial instruments in which they hold some interest?
Seems to me that, if they still have a short position, getting an SEC investigation going and/or announcing and filing a suit for billions would be just the sort of manipulation that they are claiming Musk was up to. Hold a short, file a suit, talk it up. Maybe switch to long and then settle and announce the settlement. And so on. (Always through cutouts, of course.)
IMHO anybody who sues over stock manipulation should have no net position (outside of a truly blind trust) in the stocks or other financial instruments whose performance might be affected by news of the suit and/or its progress.
A good move for Musk might be to investigate the plaintiffs, see if they might have had a net short position when they filed and/or announced their suit and/or complaint, whether they profited by it, and if so counter-sue, get it on record, and maybe not just get out from under but suck a few more billion out of them and into the company. (This would also establish the precedent of "gotta divest before you sue or you're manipulating", if it isn't there already. I am not a financial type or a lawyer.)
In the interest of full disclosure:
- I have no direct financial position, short, long, bond, etc. in Tesla (or other Musk enterprises).
- I don't know if any of the funds in my retirement plans might have a position ditto.
- As far as I know, neither my company nor any in which I have a financial interest (again, outside of any retirement plan funds), are currently engaged in any business or other relationship with Tesla, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
IMHO anybody who sues over stock manipulation should have no net position (outside of a truly blind trust) in the stocks or other financial instruments whose performance might be affected by news of the suit and/or its progress.
If you think they're jacking up the price through misrepresentation you should have sold already since the stock is overvalued so your pointless.
If you believe the CEO is deliberately tanking the stock price you're asking the plaintiff to take a major loss since they're selling the stock for far less than it's worth so your policy is forcing the plaintiff to take a big loss just to file the suit.
I recognize the conflict of interest... but I don't think your policy is a good idea.
Re: (Score:2)
Are SEC investigations something a trader can start? I thought they were independent and decided to investigate Musk on their own.
Two vacant executive positions already filled (Score:3)
Musk: "I'd like to introduce the two newest members of our Tesla leadership team, Mr. Marin and Mr. Chong."
Mixed with tobacco, didn't really inhale (Score:2)
Story over.
Any weed smoker knows that that toke was pathetic. A non stoner would cough, had they actually inhaled.
Re: (Score:2)
Laid back (Score:2)
Rogan manages to pick Musk's brain in great detail and in a refreshingly laid-back manner
Yeah, I'll bet he was laid back. That's the influence of the pot he's smoking.
Too bad pot has side effects that aren't so good for business.
Re: (Score:2)
More interested in a Tesla (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
He has changed the world, period.
For the better?
Smart People (Score:2)
List of Data Breaches [wikipedia.org] (that do not include Paypal) where customer's personal and credit card information were taken.
Or. Like you might explain it to a 5 year old: "Little Jimmy... You can hide your entire collection of transformers somewhere on the playground, and tell one trusted friend where they are, or the entire class. Which would you choose?"
Re:By Neruos (Score:5, Informative)
Model 3 does not use 18650s ("laptop batteries"), it uses 2170s. And S & X's 18650s, while a standard format, have a chemistry and structure engineered for battery packs, on a line that only produces them for the S & X.
SpaceX has taken over the lion's share of the entire planet's commercial launch industry. But "meh", right?
Re: (Score:2)
It's interesting that Panasonic has stuck with cylindrical cells for Tesla cars. I read that LG is using flat cells like you find in a phone for their automotive batteries, which seems to have resulted in a lower cost and more efficient cooling system.
I'm waiting for a teardown to confirm. Would love to see a BYD pack too.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I know some people think he's a smart guy, but he's been doing some awfully questionable and/or dumb stuff lately.
For every person that's more stupid than three quarters of the population, there's 25% of the population for which it's true that he's smarter than them. That's an awful lot of people.
Re:The end is nigh. (Score:5, Interesting)
Watch the stock sink even quicker for Telsa and go bust by the end of this year?
Or watch the stock dive 'way down, watch Elon buy much of it up with the money he's already cashed out, and end up with a LOT less of the company owned by others.
Is he crazy like The Mad Hatter, or like a fox?
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed.
First thing that came to my mind reading that "Funding was not secured, the price of $420 was not based in reality" anonymous coward quote in the summary was - "What about a price of $240 then? Or about? Is there funding secured for THAT price?"
Cause, thanks to the timeline, he can now just turn around and point his finger at SEC.
"You caused this, with that talk of an investigation, [cnbc.com] not me.
In fact, I think of suing you for devaluing my stock and losing me and my shareholders billions."
Re: (Score:3)
Watch the stock sink even quicker for Telsa and go bust by the end of this year?
Or watch the stock dive 'way down, watch Elon buy much of it up with the money he's already cashed out, and end up with a LOT less of the company owned by others.
Is he crazy like The Mad Hatter, or like a fox?
1. Cash out when the price is high.
2. Start acting erratically and tank the value of the stock.
3. Buy back in at the much lower price.
4. Go to prison because that sounds REALLY sketchy and probably illegal.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, a market-leading company with a high-quality product and robust sales is just about to go bust, right:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/0... [cnbc.com]
Generally, investors aren't stupid enough to think smoking a bit of weed in the context of an informal media interview has any serious implications for the future of the company however, if the stock is under pressure, it's far more shareholders are responding to things like legitimate market news of actual new competition:
https://www.highsnobiety.com/p... [highsnobiety.com]
But of course
Re: (Score:2)
It doesn't matter how high-quality the product is (hint: it isn't, Teslas are famous for poor build quality), or how robust the sales are (hint: they're not, they have unsellable cars parked up in the desert that anyone can walk up and buy), if you can't make money selling them.
Tesla loses money on everything they do, they're low on cash and have big debt repayments coming up. Suppliers are putting liens on them.