You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Elon tweeted a fantastic article that eloquently makes a few points relevant to this thread. A couple highlights:
"Tesla and Elon Musk are having a terrible time getting basic, neutral, balanced press coverage. They’ve achieved enormous results in ramping up the Tesla Model 3 production faster than almost any new model car in history, they are outselling their competitors massively in North America and Europe, they still have hundreds of thousands of $1,000 pre-orders for the Tesla Model 3 (more than any car ever anywhere), Teslas continue to win raves from teardown analysts and test drivers, its autonomous features continue to be the best of any production vehicles, its market capitalization is 10 times what it was 5 years ago, and the Model 3 itself is on track to soon be the fifth or sixth best selling car in the USA of any make, model, or price point. In a normal world, this string of successes would lead to incredibly positive coverage."
"As the chart shows, news sentiment is often negative despite the incredibly positive results. It doesn’t take much reading of Musk’s actual tweets or Tesla’s actual results to see the massive disparity between how Tesla and Musk are portrayed and what they are actually doing."
"So, [shorts] have a ton of money invested and they keep losing it. But what does this have to do with why media outlets keep saying bad things about Tesla? Well, the report What to Do When Short-Sellers Attack from an organization devoted to the PR industry has some good insights.
“‘Short sellers have historically been some of the savviest media folk around,’ says Elliot Sloane, president of New York’s Sloane & Company. ‘They are always willing to speak to the press and will be very clear about their convictions on a certain company. This is quite different from the traditional large-cap buy side players like Fidelity, which have rules about not promoting their portfolio holdings. The shorts understand the demands of the press and know how to work the system.’ […]“Adds Ferris, ‘Certain members of the media have made a heyday with professional shorts, and have been used by certain short selling firms to help them feather their nests. The pros are most adept at working their perspectives into stories, or generating stories. After all, they know that a negative story, or one with negative or questioning overtones, often has a deleterious effect on market price, and properly timed, can create a windfall for the short seller.’
Recently, Elon Musk pointed out the links between one of the most aggressive of Tesla muck-raking journalists, Linette Lopez of the Business Insider, and Jim Chanos, one of the most aggressive of Tesla shorts. Business Insider and Seeking Alpha are both business- and investment-oriented sites which have a strong anti-Tesla bias in their reporting. And one of the most prominent Tesla-bashers at Business Insider h"as been clear about her relationship with one of the strongest of the Tesla-shorters. As another Twitter user recently highlighted, 100% of Business Insider’s many Tesla articles from reporter Linette Lopez since November 2017 have had negative headlines. They are often dramatic in language, sensationalistic, and insinuate poor morals and even criminal intent."
Musk and Tesla are doing much better than headlines suggest
Short sellers have more than a passing impact. They seek to attack Tesla's brand, image and reputation to do lasting damage. A quick glance at active shorters' twitter feeds shows they try to promote the ideas that Teslas are dangerous (fire! autopilot crash!) and unreliable (never mind Model S has an above average reliability rating from Consumer Reports), that Elon is a crook, that Tesla is on the verge of bankruptcy, and basically pound a steady drumbeat highlighting every possible negative report about the company. They infest social media and blanket the press with constant negativity. This hurts the brand, interferes with demand and interferes with recruiting.
It is also an enormous source of stress and distraction for a very talented CEO, whose creativity and skills could be better utilized developing a new feature for the Model Y or Semi, solving a challenging Gigafactory production problem, dreaming up the next product or basically doing anything other than neutralizing the latest FUD from shorts.
Tesla clearly would be much better off without the army of short sellers constantly throwing dirt and trying to undermine everything the company does and has accomplished. Judging from press reports, you would never realize that Tesla is actually doing great -- Model 3 is a home run (grand slam, actually), its quarterly revenues are about to triple in only two years and it has an incredible product pipeline. Instead, due in significant part to media savvy short sellers, the press coverage gives exactly the opposite impression. Going private would wipe out short sellers and eliminate an enormous negative overhang on the business.
YouTube Channel SpaceX almost 2 million subscribers
YouTube First Private Passenger on Lunar BFR Mission almost 1 million views (48:1 positive)
Joe Rogan/Elon Musk 15 million views (46:1 positive)
Can you find anything close by any other auto company or business exec.?
side note: good news - Jeff going to raise wages?? <1 min.
(For the record, I think Elon belongs at SpaceX and to have only a minor supporting role at Tesla.)
But you’re short Tesla
But there is a problem. Shortsellers, the financial press, impatient and shortsighted investors. And now the SEC. The main risks to Tesla's mission are not operational, but a direct result of being a U.S. listed public company.
And let's be honest, Elon's personality is better suited for a private company than a public one. Yes it would be better if he stopped tweeting about pedos, the SEC, etc. but that's been obvious for a while and it hasn't happened. If Tesla were private, most of these issues would disappear, Elon's stress level would drop like a rock and the focus could return to Tesla's products, which are amazing.
Elon: please reconsider and take Tesla private.
I will suggest a slightly different option: voluntarily delist from the stock markets; buy out anyone who is not permitted to remain in the company after that (such as Canadian retirement accounts and funds which are only allowed to invest in listed companies); and institute a first-right-of-refusal for Tesla to buy back any stock being sold (as with SpaceX)
By officially remaining a "public company" and filing quarterly reports, you can have as many investors as you like. Also, I believe all existing individual investors can stay (though only accredited investors would be allowed to buy new shares).
But taking it off the stock markets will eliminate short-sellers, eliminate short-term traders, and, by eliminating the stock price, will eliminate the motivation to manipulate the stock price.
There is no legal requirement to list on the stock market, even if you're a "public company" (defined as having a lot of investors). The SEC could still harass Elon Musk, but they couldn't very well accuse him of market manipulation if there was no public market for the stock.
How confident are you this would work as you describe, especially the part about existing unaccredited investors being allowed to stay in?
If they *already own it*, however, you can't force them to sell it -- that's just not how the law works. They own it, they have the right to keep it.
Yeah, the company could offer SpaceX style buyback events.Biggest issue is how to create a market when/if those investors want/need to sell.
...In exchange for this progress, the markets have given Tesla mostly grief...
Tesla should not add ammunition to short sellers by a scary e-mail that Tesla's running out of cash in 10 months! I know Elon Musk meant well but it just sounds really bad.
I agree that Tesla should go private if it can't handle short sellers.