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

[Knightshade]

Regarding Elon's pay, what surprised me is the absence of any pay package going forward from where the previous one left off. Will this mean waiting for the next AGM to work that out? Could there be a special meeting once Tesla incorporates elsewhere?

As someone who wasn't a shareholder when the last package was voted on it still makes sense to me to pay the guy for his work.

However, there are good reasons not to expect some later shareholders to feel any obligation to vote for a pay package regarding past performance. There is less motivation for more recent shareholders to do so than there was for the original voters.

Yup-- I've spoken to a few friends who bought post-2018 and that was their exact reason for voting no.... I tried to present the "we need to insure Tesla honors its contract with Elon for previous work" and their explanation was they (as shareholders) never voted for any such deal in the first place, and they certainly wouldn't vote for it now.

I don't agree with them, but I think it's not an unfair argument for them to make.

It could have been combined into a vote for a new pay package going forward, which if passed, enabled the prior package again. That might have found more support overall. But, there may be a perspective I'm unaware for why any new package is absent from this year's AGM.

I suspect Tesla is reluctant to take ANY significant, new, corporate action at all until their incorporation is moved elsewhere-- lest such action be subject to Delaware courts jurisdiction.

On top of that, any future deal would look vastly different if the 2018 deal doesn't get reinstated-- so it doesn't make a ton of sense to vote on a new thing that might have to be entirely changed anyway.

 

[Linkmeup]

can we rename this the dark and stormy thread ? seems like many posters are just dropping out it was a good run here while it lasted
the trolls have won... shame

Legitimately, there isn't much to talk about other than Q2 P&D, Annual Shareholder's Meeting, Q2 Earnings, and the Robotaxi Event.

 

[dl003]

I voted my shares in 2018 because I thought it was a good contract for me as an investor. If the company was impossibly successful, then he and I'd do wonderfully. That was the deal. That deal was changed without my input or approval. I also have some shares purchased in the 200's and even a few in the 300's. Those were purchased knowing full well about the past contract with Elon Musk. I'm not about to dishonor the contract I made because the share price is in the black or red and Elon did this or that. The Board needs to evaluate those items for future contracts. For me there is very little nuance.

I did not vote in 2018 and will vote yes this time. Maybe you mistook my post for an attempt to convince people to vote against it. I merely presented the headwinds that would exist with or without your support.

 

[alexxs88]

It's not correct to compare Tesla with the other manufacturers. Their valuation has tens of percent of yearly growth rate built-in.

Unless you have a million connected vehicles with identical camera placements in the hands of people driving them every day, and the infrastructure to collect, sort, sift and train on that data, then no, you do not have the same capability for training AI based self-driving as Tesla.

That's a very naive thing to say and believe when:
1. The companies actually operating autonomous systems managed to do so without "millions of cars".
2. There are algorithms that can compose individual 2D images into 3D ones, which makes it obvious you have no idea what you're talking about when "demanding" to have the cameras in the same positions on all test vehicles. You can find parts of those algorithms on any car that has 360* views.
3. Unless you're an absolute expert in the field (which you obviously aren't, going by #2 above), then it's really ignorant to make definitive claims like the ones you made about the impossibility for actual teams of engineers to achieve something. Especially as they already are achieving it!

 

[dl003]

1. The companies actually operating autonomous systems managed to do so without "millions of cars".

The question is how well they operate and how adaptable they are. The answer is not very. If they were that good their stock would have mooned. My old 1995 Camry was autonomous on a straight line; zero intervention with the exception of the occasional tow truck.

 

[insaneoctane]

Ironic that people can see Tesla has a "key-man" risk, yet don't want to vote to honor his previously agreed to compensation package....

 

[replicant]

This doesn’t look good. Elon has probably told the board he’s leaving if the vote doesn’t pass.

View attachment 1046856

This annoys me a great deal.

I cannot vote my 15,000+ shares because my broker (Boursorama) says the proxy materials should come from Tesla but I'm not receiving anything from Tesla.

I've asked Tesla (IR) about this weeks ago but IR does not answer.

Why paying ads when you ignore the people who pay attention and want to vote?!

 

[EQC_]

Ironic that people can see Tesla has a "key-man" risk, yet don't want to vote to honor his previously agreed to compensation package....

Similarly perplexing that apparently many people simultaneously believe Elon is doing more harm than good at Tesla, but also that it would do major harm to the company if he departed.

 

[Thekiwi]

China weekly registrations: 9,800

Just a slight dip from same week a year ago (which was 9,990).

Photo from TSLA CHAN on X:

 

[rentierparasit]

I don’t recall any of the other companies I have invested in paying money to advertise an upcoming shareholder vote. Has anyone else ever seen that? This is a weird move.

Hi, TheKiwi --

Spending money on a proxy contest is completely standard, but this is not a proxy contest, so I'm also scratching my head to find a direct precedent.

Yours,
RP

 

[MD70]

This annoys me a great deal.

I cannot vote my 15,000+ shares because my broker (Boursorama) says the proxy materials should come from Tesla but I'm not receiving anything from Tesla.

I've asked Tesla (IR) about this weeks ago but IR does not answer.

Why paying ads when you ignore the people who pay attention and want to vote?!

Because unfortunately as tesla has grown parts of it are run in a very amateurish manner.

 

[NicoV]

Unece/EU countries may get less restrictive Autopilot according to some proposed changes:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1790138348712886499

“
One of the proposed amendments is to stop hands on requests on highways unless a system boundary is detected. To me this reads as a step in the right direction to get rid of the nag.

The other is about the system initiated manoeuvres, or SILC in UNECE terminology, which stands for system initiated lane changes. The proposed amendments and comments by different countries are IMO a really good step in the right direction. Because there are a lot of proposed situations where SI manoeuvres will possibly be possible under DCAS, i.e. positive news regarding FSD supervised!!
“

 

[alexxs88]

The question is how well they operate and how adaptable they are. The answer is not very.

Waymo objectively operates better than the Tesla since it's actually autonomous. People will say Tesla's approach is universal, but at the moment is not autonomous, As I said, IF Tesla can pull it off, given how cheap their technological solution is, they'll have a significant MOAT at least for half a decade, maybe even more. If the market is truly what some economic models believe it is, then it will be impossible for them to take the whole market. We've seen this in other fields where technological advancements are the key to having a MOAT, unless you move forward as well, the rest will catch up. If Tesla, with limited funding (until 2020) will have been able to achieve in around a decade, the competitors, with virtually unlimited funding, access to the brains that found the solution for Tesla and a clear path to take will probably get it done much sooner.

If they were that good their stock would have mooned.

I hope this bit was missing a /s at the end. The last 4 years showed us there's anything but a direct correlation between stock hype and actual achievements (not talking about Tesla here)

 

[raffiniert]

Yup-- I've spoken to a few friends who bought post-2018 and that was their exact reason for voting no.... I tried to present the "we need to insure Tesla honors its contract with Elon for previous work" and their explanation was they (as shareholders) never voted for any such deal in the first place, and they certainly wouldn't vote for it now.

I don't agree with them, but I think it's not an unfair argument for them to make.

How is that a fair argument for you?
The point is that Elon delivered what was in the agreement, and any right-minded person honors an agreement, even if things outside of that agreement (e.g. things that happen AFTER the timeframe) don't go exactly according to their wishes.

 

[SPadival]

Unece/EU countries may get less restrictive Autopilot according to some proposed changes:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1790138348712886499

“
One of the proposed amendments is to stop hands on requests on highways unless a system boundary is detected. To me this reads as a step in the right direction to get rid of the nag.

The other is about the system initiated manoeuvres, or SILC in UNECE terminology, which stands for system initiated lane changes. The proposed amendments and comments by different countries are IMO a really good step in the right direction. Because there are a lot of proposed situations where SI manoeuvres will possibly be possible under DCAS, i.e. positive news regarding FSD supervised!!
“

Great news! Something I posted on the FSD thread. Rohan has done some great things for Tesla (like hacking through the German bureaucratic delays with a machete ), but I felt this particular case was an exception.

Just before Rohan Patel quit, he posted that UNECE changes that will be implemented in November 2024 will not allow FSD V12 implementation in the EU region. Maybe Elon saw that post, went into one of his demon mode and fired Patel

https://twitter.com/x/status/1775856099473695164

There is some differing opinions on whether the updated regulations allow system initiated actions without driver approval. Maybe an EU lawyer here can read the updated regulations and determine what’s what.

When Patel posted that, I immediately thought it was improper of him to post this in public.

There is always room for interpretation of the regulations and there should be negotiations with regulators on the correct interpretation. Patel should not have negotiated in public and showed his hand.

Anyway, water under the bridge and they seem to have taken the right approach now by giving FSD demos to regulators. Marc Van Impe is now the man to watch for!!


View attachment 1042217


View attachment 1042218

 

[CorneliusXX]

How is that a fair argument for you?
The point is that Elon delivered what was in the agreement, and any right-minded person honors an agreement, even if things outside of that agreement (e.g. things that happen AFTER the timeframe) don't go exactly according to their wishes.

Agree. Moreover, the deal was in place when they bought the shares so there’s no excuse if they didn't know what they were purchasing.

 

[Stormy24]

It doesn't really look "bad" either. This large push to get people to vote their shares is likely largely about achieving a quorum at the annual shareholder meeting.

Note that both Elon and Kimbal have recused themselves from the compensation vote. Together they represent something like 21.5% of voting shares. In order to achieve a quorum (a majority of all voting shares), more than 63% of all of the other shareholders need to vote their shares for the outcome to be binding either way.

Just PAID for the right to vote for my few shares. Some of the EU brokers are not very helpful.

 

[cliff harris]

Investors now want to know what Elon is thinking

If you have been holding TSLA for a long time (about 9 years for me I think), and obsessively follow Elon, its actually really clear and simple. He says exactly what he thinks and what he is planning to do, and then he does it.
Its often late, and people spend a huge amount of time reading horoscopes trying to infer depth in every slight nuance of every tweet and every meme, and every report of who he meets of what every employee ever says.

CEOs are full of such BS in general, and are so short term in their thinking, that the idea of a CEO with a 10 or even 20 year plan seems laughable, and mainstream media and most investors therefor flat out ignore Elon when he says what he thinks and what he will do.

Elon genuinely believes that in the future, all cars will be autonomous. In that world, a manual car is like a horse or a typewriter. Of nothing but curiosity and value in a museum. He does not want Tesla's to end up that way. Thus the company is 100% focused on autonomy. Maybe that means a totally different approach to charging (Your car could sneak off at night to find a wireless supercharger location, then return), maybe it means Mexico is not needed, maybe it means they need so much data that they simply don't care about making a profit on 3/Y sales.

I recently discovered the original price I paid for TSMC stock about 5 years ago, before selling it 4.5 years ago. I did well, but what an idiot. I should have held my nerve and HODl. I'm not making the same mistake with my TSLA. We are at a serious inflection point for the auto industry, centered around autonomy. I'm not going to sell until this becomes clear to wall st.

 

[aubreymcfato]

The FUD is getting to me about the victory of the "No" for the comp plan.
What do we think it will happen, if this is the case? I don't see Elon quitting - why would he, with all his stocks?
I tho see the SP suffer quite a lot for a while.

But, again, each and everyone of my short-term prediction has been proven wrong: I'd make a killing if I just trade on the contrary of what I think or feel.
Still, morale is low and I don't really think the "yes" is in the bag. I just worry about the consequences.

 

[Mengy]

How is that a fair argument for you?
The point is that Elon delivered what was in the agreement, and any right-minded person honors an agreement, even if things outside of that agreement (e.g. things that happen AFTER the timeframe) don't go exactly according to their wishes.

Unfortunately there are a LOT of people in this world who are not in their right minds.