Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable

[Skipdd]

You're taking that out of context. Elon does not want to contribute to products that can constitute an "existential AI risk" at Tesla without more control. None of Tesla's current products pose that risk, so the compensation package doesn't affect Elon's ability to deliver on FSD.

And I agree with Elon that building potentially dangerous AI in a publicly-traded company is a massive risk to humanity. OpenAI is a non-profit, on paper, but they're still pushing the boundaries with little regard for safety in the name of profit.

To your point, I saw over the weekend, that a key exec of OpenAI, Jan Leike resigned because of fears regarding the direction OpenAI is taking wrt “…security, monitoring, preparedness, safety, adversarial robustness, (super)alignment, confidentiality, societal impact, and related topics…”

From X -

https://twitter.com/x/status/1791562072683114549

Elon commented on the post with “!!”

 

[Todd Burch]

Lots of people have financial models for robotaxis.

What about for shipping? If, in a few years, Tesla had autonomous semi trucks, every shipping company in the world would want them. Suddenly you have no driver fatigue time limits, don’t have to pay drivers, don’t have to train them, etc.

What could Tesla charge for a semi truck FSD, and what would the world market be for such trucks?

I could see Tesla charging an annual licensing fee of $100k or more per vehicle per year to license FSD for commercial shipping use. Would make a pretty penny…

 

[Open Interest]

Fire at Tesla Fremont. Apologies if this has been posted.

Tesla Fremont factory fire started in an oven

Firefighters are responding Monday evening to a fire at the Tesla Fremont factory that started in an oven, officials said.

www.ktvu.com

 

[DarkandStormy]

Lots of people have financial models for robotaxis.

What about for shipping? If, in a few years, Tesla had autonomous semi trucks, every shipping company in the world would want them. Suddenly you have no driver fatigue time limits, don’t have to pay drivers, don’t have to train them, etc.

What could Tesla charge for a semi truck FSD, and what would the world market be for such trucks?

I could see Tesla charging an annual licensing fee of $100k or more per vehicle per year to license FSD for commercial shipping use. Would make a pretty penny…

Elon said they could do convoy (autonomous) technology "now" in 2017 at the unveil, so it's a bit surprising they aren't utilizing it with their own Semis.

 

[Chunky Jr.]

Pepsi getting another 50 Tesla Semis...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1792747598404821255

 

[Cosmacelf]

Pepsi getting another 50 Tesla Semis...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1792747598404821255

Deliveries en mass in 2026 when new Reno factory will be ready.

 

[dl003]

I kinda have a problem with the way layoff is being conducted. Its as if Elon just came back from Mars to a mess. So:

1. If Elon was on top of things the whole time, how did he let it get so bloated?
2. If Elon was absent, what did the board do or not do that led to it getting so bloated?

This sort of things is why key man risk has never been successfully addressed. There is not a stream of consistent decisions that speak to management cohesiveness.

Anyone got an explanation that doesnt involve me being a carebear?

 

[Skipdd]

Elon said they could do convoy (autonomous) technology "now" in 2017 at the unveil, so it's a bit surprising they aren't utilizing it with their own Semis.

I am confounded. I scanned all your posts and apologies if I missed one, I didn’t see a single positive one, or one that wasn’t a poke, or even a poke with some insight. I won’t ask your motivation but I will admit I’m curious. But I realized I’m not learning anything from you. I appreciate contrary or negative posts when there is a rationale and something to be learned.

My third ignore..

 

[Jim Holder]

I kinda have a problem with the way layoff is being conducted. Its as if Elon just came back from Mars to a mess. So:

1. If Elon was on top of things the whole time, how did he let it get so bloated?
2. If Elon was absent, what did the board do or not do that led to it getting so bloated?

You hit the nail on the head with the right question! I think we all know the answer though: The BOD was AWOL*. They just know where to find us when they need us.

*May be also hint why Zack threw in the towel and left.

 

[Skipdd]

I kinda have a problem with the way layoff is being conducted. Its as if Elon just came back from Mars to a mess. So:

1. If Elon was on top of things the whole time, how did he let it get so bloated?
2. If Elon was absent, what did the board do or not do that led to it getting so bloated?

This sort of things is why key man risk has never been successfully addressed. There is not a stream of consistent decisions that speak to management cohesiveness.

Anyone got an explanation that doesnt involve me being a carebear?

I will bite, sort of. I’m curious if there is a difference between the management approach here vs at SpaceX. IIRC, SpaceX had a 10% force reduction relatively recently (last year?). Was it handled similarly, and if not, is there a thought that the difference might be due to Gwynne Shotwell’s role. As an fyi, I remain long in TSLA and am a proponent of Elon’s strong engagement and mindshare in Tesla.

 

[dl003]

A board that holds onto their cash in preparation for a possible downturn / recession is incompetent nowadays?
Weird.

as opposed to hope and wishes.

I dont *sugar* on the board unless I have a good reason to. Defend it when appropriate even. Elon is a wartime CEO, I agree with that. He can take over and "resign" even the most senior executives. Fine, if thats what it takes. But, what does Tesla even need a board for? Why r we paying them tens of millions every year, just so they can come out asking for votes? I voted yes on everything except reelection of Kimbal and James. Yeah Im asking what have you done for me lately. I honestly dont know.

 

[dl003]

If they submitted this today, aren't they a little late? A few weeks ago I would have agreed that Elon seemed to prioritize most other things over Tesla, but lately he has seemed very involved in Tesla indeed.

They also do not seem to address the fact that Tesla is likely affected significantly by the current high-interest environment. I don't think we can blame Elon for all of Tesla's underperformance since interest rates started rising at a record rate.

(The filing does make many good points, mind you, and I definitely do not disagree with everything. But in this post I wanted to bring up a couple of points where I feel they could have made a better argument.)

Elon and the board suddenly involved and opening all channels of communication when they need something is not a good gesture, especially after years of staying silent while we have been bombarded with fake news. Id would much prefer they shut the hell up, posted a few good ERs, then brought up another proposal. Or start with a year of publicly defending the company against the likes of Reuter with real information as opposed to some cryptic msgs and memes. Im sick and tired of the people who really are "familiar with the matter" keeping their mouth shut when we need them the most.

Im also sick and tired of being told responding to fake news makes it real. We collectively own Tesla the company. Why cant we know where the company is with respect to the cheaper models, for instance? Why do we have to wait till ER to receive any update at all? If you want to protect the company and its shareholders, maybe start with that. Seems like we shareholders ironically have the least information about the company.

 

[MC3OZ]

I kinda have a problem with the way layoff is being conducted. Its as if Elon just came back from Mars to a mess. So:

1. If Elon was on top of things the whole time, how did he let it get so bloated?
2. If Elon was absent, what did the board do or not do that led to it getting so bloated?

This sort of things is why key man risk has never been successfully addressed. There is not a stream of consistent decisions that speak to management cohesiveness.

Anyone got an explanation that doesnt involve me being a carebear?

What has occurred to me is:-

• Circumstances changed
• Strategy changed.
• Financial pruning was necessary.
• Elon started getting more involved, and then started digging deeper.

When the macro environment was good, interest rates were low, all projects seemed to be on track, there was not an urgent need to dig deeper.

Even now I think the technology pivot is correct, but I am not totally convinced on the staff layoffs., The I don't have all of the data Elon has.

The key takeaway for staff is, manage things well enough so that Elon doesn't need to be closely involved.

 

[hpiv]

According to the Tesla shareholder ballot, "Votes can be changed until the voting deadline."

Sorry, maybe I was a bit unclear. I wasn't referring to the voting itself, but the arguments being used. If this text is this very recent, it doesn't seem to take into account that Elon seems to have become very involved in Tesla lately. They are basically using an outdated argument.

 

[Singuy]

I kinda have a problem with the way layoff is being conducted. Its as if Elon just came back from Mars to a mess. So:

1. If Elon was on top of things the whole time, how did he let it get so bloated?
2. If Elon was absent, what did the board do or not do that led to it getting so bloated?

This sort of things is why key man risk has never been successfully addressed. There is not a stream of consistent decisions that speak to management cohesiveness.

Anyone got an explanation that doesnt involve me being a carebear?

This happened in 2019 when Tesla had major lay offs and 2022. I believe after every major ramp phase when efficiency went out the window, you end with a lot of bloat until your next phase of ramp. Elon pretty much said it in his email.

 

[Buckminster]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1792785899354312895

 

[WattsHappening]

China numbers in.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1792797130635239910

 

[Buckminster]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1792747817670222279

I hope this is just the start, 50k/yr globally seems cautious.

 

[hpiv]

Elon never said it was important to acquire Twitter no matter what the cost or price premium.

He is saying it now. He is saying that if he hadn't acquired Twitter, free speech would be going away. He is saying that he did it to save free speech. But it seems like it's more of an excuse at this point.

Anyway, you are making some good points, regarding both the Twitter acquisition and what might have happened regarding AI safety.

Basically, before the Microsoft deal and all the bad signs of where OpenAI was heading, Elon thought OpenAI was responsible and taking its mission seriously. Then he realized that it was going in a dangerous direction, and could perhaps not be trusted to lead AI development responsibly. He felt he needed to do something himself.

So we have 3 things he claims to consider to be vitally important:

1. Accelerating the transition to sustainable energy
2. AI safety
3. Free speech

He's trying to balance his focus between #1 and #2, while #3 seems like obvious nonsense on his part (especially considering his own eagerness to censor, and to comply with censorship requests from governments he likes).

Now, one thing I will say is that Twitter is a huge source of training input for AI, if I am not mistaken. Didn't Reddit just enter a deal with OpenAI for training data? Sadly, instead of focusing on this aspect, Elon continues to use his nonsensical "free speech" excuse. He is doing great damage to his own and Tesla's reputation.

Anyway, thanks for your detailed thoughts on this.

 

[Silent Ludicrosy]

Has anyone been able to vote IBKR shares? I got emails from my other brokerages but not IBKR...