Musk endeavours

[BobbyD]

Similarly the case or not against Musk by the SEC is all opinion

The opinion of Tesla's lawyer, stated in a letter sent to the SEC is that Tesla haven't vetted any of Musk's tweets in defiance of his deal with the SEC...

[odysseus2000]

Similarly the case or not against Musk by the SEC is all opinion

The opinion of Tesla's lawyer, stated in a letter sent to the SEC is that Tesla haven't vetted any of Musk's tweets in defiance of his deal with the SEC...

The deal as I understand it is that any potentially market moving communication from Elon Musk needs to be vetted, but he still retains his freedom of speech as in the first amendment for communications that are not market moving.

So as I understand it, the discussion would be did Musk tweet something that was new & market moving.

Imho he didn't, but a judge would have to decide & what happens if the SEC pursue this & lose?

Regards,

[BobbyD]

As a result of the settlement, Elon Musk will no longer be Chairman of Tesla, Tesla’s board will adopt important reforms —including an obligation to oversee Musk’s communications with investors—and both will pay financial penalties,” added Steven Peikin, Co-Director of the SEC’s Enforcement Division. “The resolution is intended to prevent further market disruption and harm to Tesla’s shareholders.

- https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2018-226

[odysseus2000]

As a result of the settlement, Elon Musk will no longer be Chairman of Tesla, Tesla’s board will adopt important reforms —including an obligation to oversee Musk’s communications with investors—and both will pay financial penalties,” added Steven Peikin, Co-Director of the SEC’s Enforcement Division. “The resolution is intended to prevent further market disruption and harm to Tesla’s shareholders.

- https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2018-226

The question is:"Did Musk's tweet cause market disruption and harm to Tesla's shareholders?"

Difficult to argue imho that it did.

Regards,

[BobbyD]

As a result of the settlement, Elon Musk will no longer be Chairman of Tesla, Tesla’s board will adopt important reforms —including an obligation to oversee Musk’s communications with investors—and both will pay financial penalties,” added Steven Peikin, Co-Director of the SEC’s Enforcement Division. “The resolution is intended to prevent further market disruption and harm to Tesla’s shareholders.

- https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2018-226

The question is:"Did Musk's tweet cause market disruption and harm to Tesla's shareholders?"

Difficult to argue imho that it did.

Regards,

No it isn't.

The question is have Tesla been overseeing Musk's communication with investors.

Tesla's lawyers are of the opinion that they haven't.

[odysseus2000]

- https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2018-226

The question is:"Did Musk's tweet cause market disruption and harm to Tesla's shareholders?"

Difficult to argue imho that it did.

Regards,

No it isn't.

The question is have Tesla been overseeing Musk's communication with investors.

Tesla's lawyers are of the opinion that they haven't.

IMHO, no as to have the lawyers oversee all of Musk's tweets would violate his 1st amendment rights to free speech.

His ability to have free speech would not extend to violations of the "market disruption and harm" aspects of the earlier judgement, but I do not see how he has done this.

Given how the US justice system respects the 1st amendment and the lack of market disruption and harm I don't believe the SEC have a case.

Regards,

[GoSeigen]

- https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2018-226

The question is:"Did Musk's tweet cause market disruption and harm to Tesla's shareholders?"

Difficult to argue imho that it did.

Regards,

No it isn't.

The question is have Tesla been overseeing Musk's communication with investors.

Tesla's lawyers are of the opinion that they haven't.

I don't think you've demonstrated this last point. I reckon they will simply argue that Musk has refrained from tweeting anything previously undisclosed and material and likely to cause market disruption and harm and so there has been nothing to oversee so far. I base this on SEC's above release -- hard to be sure without seeing the actual terms of Tesla's agreement with the SEC.

Must be the first time I've ever agreed with Ody!!!!

GS

[Howard]

Surely it's a fact that Elon Musk tweeted that " the company ‘will make around 500k’ cars in 2019 ". And this wasn't a pre-approved statement.

If the SEC doesn't win their case doesn't this open the door for any CEO of a US corporation to tweet statements like "The company will double its profits next year" without any justification and pre-approval.

And the joke is that the likelihood of Tesla making 500k cars in 2019 is looking about as likely as Musk driving on Mars in 2019.

regards

Howard

[BobbyD]

The question is:"Did Musk's tweet cause market disruption and harm to Tesla's shareholders?"

Difficult to argue imho that it did.

Regards,

No it isn't.

The question is have Tesla been overseeing Musk's communication with investors.

Tesla's lawyers are of the opinion that they haven't.

I don't think you've demonstrated this last point. I reckon they will simply argue that Musk has refrained from tweeting anything previously undisclosed and material and likely to cause market disruption and harm and so there has been nothing to oversee so far. I base this on SEC's above release -- hard to be sure without seeing the actual terms of Tesla's agreement with the SEC.

Must be the first time I've ever agreed with Ody!!!!

GS

Tesla’s lawyers acknowledged in a letter to the S.E.C. on Friday that Mr. Musk’s tweets had not been reviewed before they were posted. They argued that he had believed that “the substance” of his post “had already been appropriately vetted, preapproved and publicly disseminated.”

...

But in a motion filed Monday with Federal District Court in Manhattan, the S.E.C. said Mr. Musk had “violated the court’s final judgment by engaging in the very conduct that the preapproval provision of the final judgment was designed to prevent.” It added that Mr. Musk’s tweet about producing 500,000 cars this year “was inaccurate and disseminated to over 24 million people” — the number of followers Mr. Musk had on Twitter at the time.

- https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/25/busi ... tesla.html

The SEC last month asked Nathan to find Musk in contempt of the October 2018 settlement after it confirmed that his February 19 tweet (which Musk corrected four hours later) wasn’t vetted in advance by Tesla lawyers, as terms of the deal require. Attorneys for Musk argued in their March 11 court filing that the tweet didn’t contain material information since the production figures were essentially revealed in Tesla’s fourth-quarter earnings materials and during its January 30 conference call.

...

Musk’s tweet, that “Tesla made 0 cars in 2011, but will make around 500k in 2019,” was inaccurate and was later updated: “Meant to say annualized production rate at end of 2019 probably around 500k, ie 10k cars/week. Deliveries for year still estimated to be about 400k.” And though not as erratic as some past tweets (such as when he accused a critic of being a pedophile), it came after a December interview with CBS' 60 Minutes in which he claimed no one at Tesla was checking his tweets in advance and declared his disdain for the SEC. “I want to be clear. I do not respect the SEC. I do not respect them,” he told interviewer Lesley Stahl.

- https://www.forbes.com/sites/alanohnsma ... 99fc3c74ad

To use an analogy he isn't charged with taking drugs, he is charged with not taking his daily pee test which is a condition of his parole.

[odysseus2000]

is this Musk treating something inaccurate or are Tesla sales strong?

https://twitter.com/Tesla/status/1108007729170255875

Regards,

[BobbyD]

is this Musk treating something inaccurate or are Tesla sales strong?

https://twitter.com/Tesla/status/1108007729170255875

Regards,

Looks like another attempt to push Q1 sales at all costs. Why do you need to keep orders open to process sales already initiated? If the price rises are anything like the price cuts then many of the rises will be far from slight. If there is unprecedented demand then why maintain prices so low that you c an't even take orders quick enough let alone build or deliver the cars, especially when you are already appealing for your staff to work unpaid to deliver the cars you have managed to build so far?

[odysseus2000]

Looking at the offering from competitive manufacturers and the lust that many have for a Tesla, I would not be at all surprised if the sales are better than the estimates and huge in q2.

With the current weakness in Tesla stock, any surprise to the upside even just a small one will likely imho torch off a short conflagration.

The bears have to be right here to keep the share price down.

Regards,

[BobbyD]

Looking at the offering from competitive manufacturers and the lust that many have for a Tesla, I would not be at all surprised if the sales are better than the estimates and huge in q2.

I've asked this question a couple of times and so far not received a response, why do you see Q2 sales improving on Q1 when there was a massive time limited sale in Q1 meaning anything but the base $35k M3 will be significantly more expensive in Q2?

[odysseus2000]

Looking at the offering from competitive manufacturers and the lust that many have for a Tesla, I would not be at all surprised if the sales are better than the estimates and huge in q2.

I've asked this question a couple of times and so far not received a response, why do you see Q2 sales improving on Q1 when there was a massive time limited sale in Q1 meaning anything but the base $35k M3 will be significantly more expensive in Q2?

Because the Tesla range of cars are far better than anything else available in the car market.

They are analogues of iPhones.

Regards,

[BobbyD]

Looking at the offering from competitive manufacturers and the lust that many have for a Tesla, I would not be at all surprised if the sales are better than the estimates and huge in q2.

I've asked this question a couple of times and so far not received a response, why do you see Q2 sales improving on Q1 when there was a massive time limited sale in Q1 meaning anything but the base $35k M3 will be significantly more expensive in Q2?

Because the Tesla range of cars are far better than anything else available in the car market.

They are analogues of iPhones.

Regards,

But if you were going to buy a Tesla and you knew that if you waited until Q2 you would pay substantially, and in some cases very substantially, more why would you wait until the prices went up to buy?

Teslas will be less affordable in Q2 than they were in Q1.

Anybody who had 'funding secured' in Q1 is likely to have bought in Q1 even if they were planning on waiting and buying later in the year, in order to take advantage of the Tesla sale, or when pushed to a decision by the sale to have decided against buying a Tesla.

Anybody who couldn't afford a Tesla during the Q1 Tesla sale is unlikely to be able to afford to pay more for the exact same Tesla they couldn't afford then in Q2.

[odysseus2000]

BobbyD
But if you were going to buy a Tesla and you knew that if you waited until Q2 you would pay substantially, and in some cases very substantially, more why would you wait until the prices went up to buy?

Teslas will be less affordable in Q2 than they were in Q1.

Anybody who had 'funding secured' in Q1 is likely to have bought in Q1 even if they were planning on waiting and buying later in the year, in order to take advantage of the Tesla sale, or when pushed to a decision by the sale to have decided against buying a Tesla.

Anybody who couldn't afford a Tesla during the Q1 Tesla sale is unlikely to be able to afford to pay more for the exact same Tesla they couldn't afford then in Q2.

Some people do think like this, but a substantial number do not.

We are discussing emotional decisions which are for most of the population are how buying decisions are made, few make substantial detailed and logical considerations.

What you or anyone else thinks on this board is just a small number of opinions and not imho that useful for investment/trading.

Regards,

[redsturgeon]

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... -emissions

Interesting long read article in the Guardian d on the dieselgate scandal and the switch to electric cars.

It poses a question that I had wondered about, apparently VW was not even in the worst half of cheating manufacturers but remains the only one sanctioned!

John

[odysseus2000]

Hi John,

Great article, thanks for posting.

What it confirms to me is that the old adage of “Its not what you know, but who you know” that makes all the difference.

Dieselgate illustrates how the regulators and folk who are paid to police and protect the rest of us from dangerous things are predominantly failures on big issues. Although often seen as being of some use for giving injured parties a means to try and get some justice they also seem to fail miserably at that, over and over. It is particularly vexing when you know you have been injured and the regulator ignores you or sides with the folk who have hurt you destroying your faith in justice. Happened to me a few times and its not fun.

It is remarkable that the US ever did prosecute VW and presumably that happened because there was someone of integrity somewhere high enough to be able to push it through. After that it is likely that political pressure has come to stifle other investigations and other fines to protect both the autos and oil suppliers and political reputations.

Feels wrong that criminals are being let off, but it happens to the big guys, less so to the small guy. When I was at Oxford one of my bosses was caught at customs bringing in soft drugs. He pleaded that if they prosecuted him it would destroy his reputation and they let him off with nothing to stain his reputation.

It seems clear to me that diesel cars can be made very clean as with the new urea injection systems and such, but that the profit motivation is so high that the best systems are rarely used although punters get charged as if they were.

Looking at where things are now it seems clear to me that the world will transition to battery electric transportation quickly both by punters lusting after the advantage of battery electric and the political pain via taxes and depreciation likely to come to buyers of new ice vehicles.

The oil economy for ground transportation is coming to an end and I doubt anyone , save the vested interests, will be sad to see it go.

Amazing as it is, this has all been brought about earlier than otherwise by Elon Musk.

Regards,

[redsturgeon]

Hi John,

Great article, thanks for posting.

What it confirms to me is that the old adage of “Its not what you know, but who you know” that makes all the difference.

Dieselgate illustrates how the regulators and folk who are paid to police and protect the rest of us from dangerous things are predominantly failures on big issues. Although often seen as being of some use for giving injured parties a means to try and get some justice they also seem to fail miserably at that, over and over. It is particularly vexing when you know you have been injured and the regulator ignores you or sides with the folk who have hurt you destroying your faith in justice. Happened to me a few times and its not fun.

It is remarkable that the US ever did prosecute VW and presumably that happened because there was someone of integrity somewhere high enough to be able to push it through. After that it is likely that political pressure has come to stifle other investigations and other fines to protect both the autos and oil suppliers and political reputations.

Feels wrong that criminals are being let off, but it happens to the big guys, less so to the small guy. When I was at Oxford one of my bosses was caught at customs bringing in soft drugs. He pleaded that if they prosecuted him it would destroy his reputation and they let him off with nothing to stain his reputation.

It seems clear to me that diesel cars can be made very clean as with the new urea injection systems and such, but that the profit motivation is so high that the best systems are rarely used although punters get charged as if they were.

Looking at where things are now it seems clear to me that the world will transition to battery electric transportation quickly both by punters lusting after the advantage of battery electric and the political pain via taxes and depreciation likely to come to buyers of new ice vehicles.

The oil economy for ground transportation is coming to an end and I doubt anyone , save the vested interests, will be sad to see it go.

Amazing as it is, this has all been brought about earlier than otherwise by Elon Musk.

Regards,

Happy to be of service

As it happens, although I have been critical of Tesla I don't disagree with anything you say, especially your last line. I think he is a flawed genius, great at disrupting and innovating, not so good at day to day organisation and management and lately prone to twitter Tourettes!

I am a great fan of electric cars and the sooner they become mainstream, the better. I fully expect my next car to be an EV and I would never buy a diesel again.

John

[BobbyD]

It is remarkable that the US ever did prosecute VW and presumably that happened because there was someone of integrity somewhere high enough to be able to push it through.

Under a US government which viewed punitive legal action against foreign companies as a risk free source of income to such an extent that they would misname the companies deliberately to make their foreign origin more apparent? Hardly.