It matters because, as I calculated in the other article, that $50 billion in options ends up around $13 billion after accounting for options exercise cost/federal taxes/historic price drops from his previous sales, which lowers the amount of estimated base model 3s he can buy to around 300k or less than a quarter’s…

Beating expectations even by that little amount is important because it means the layoffs didn’t impact sales as much as some predicted.

You are missing the point. Those registration numbers have nothing to do with the EV sales numbers we see reported by automakers. Their numbers are based on deliveries to dealers, not actual vehicles that are sold to an end user. That gives a lot of room for inflating actual demand vs actual consumer sales, which is…

Putting aside the stock options he has are not actually money (there is a long discussion there, basically he has to spend money to exercise them, pay a ton of tax; long story short look up how he paid for Twitter), if he got his other companies to buy Teslas, those are actual sales!

It’s much harder for Tesla to fake delivery numbers, because they are based on actual delivery to customers. There are multiple Tesla sales trackers out there that track the numbers via registrations and they have always matched well, with predictions also matching well. Heck there are even drones flying above Tesla…

Tesla did better than expected even with reduced percentage of sales and with mass layoffs. Also if the layoffs gets the costs down, they may have a decent quarter, despite lower volume. The other thing the market is excited for is the 8/8 robotaxi unveiling.

I thought it was bricked, seems like it is just like the typical case however of an overconfident new owner of a SUV or pickup that decides to show off when they don’t know what they are doing, where they ended up getting rescued.

But they don’t typically do stuff like add random unrelated hyperlinks to text, but rather they put them in some footer in the article or they add a paragraph where they can tangentially add a link. It’s quite shameless to just sprinkle in random links completely unrelated to the text.

Jalopnik have been doing that for a while now (putting hyperlinks that don’t lead to what it implies it is leading to).

That seems like a good idea, most of the solutions out there are missing gaskets, which is what separates them from trunks in terms of weatherproofing.

My understanding is tonneau covers are “mostly waterproof” meaning they keep most of the rain out, but some may still leak in (especially when pressure washing), especially at the ends and corners. At least that is the experience with my relatives with Tacomas or GM trucks.

I don’t think any system out doesn’t have an independent drive computer (which makes it possible to reboot the infotainment screen without affecting driving functions). Even Tesla models with its single screen can drive perfectly fine while the screen is rebooting. Not sure if it’s required by federal safety…

Yeah, from comments by former writers in that article about YouTubers leaving major channels, I can totally believe this may be forced on them. Basically instead of writing interesting articles, the management is forcing them to write only "news," which generally gets less clicks. I guess the clickbait titles are…

They’ve been doing this for a while, where if you point it out, they would justify it by explaining how the title is technically correct or how to interpret it to be correct, even though it is obviously misleading to anyone reading it.

His contribution to the “world” is irrelevant, as the compensation wasn’t provided by the “world”. Rather it’s the shareholders that decide on it and are providing it based on his contribution to Tesla. The logic is that he was able to generate $590 billion in shareholder value over that time period, and $56 billion…

Well, the article attempts to give an illusion of depth by including vehicle taxes, and all the small like item fees in it and coming up with a fairly exact number of vehicles. If you are going to bother, then factors that change the amount massively should be pointed out.

Yep, that is what most billionaires do (including Musk). I’m just entertaining the idea however of the premise of the article (which is cashing out on all the shares).

The logic behind it is because the market cap at time of award was $59B, and the award was based on him achieving a max $650B market cap (which seemed impossible at the time), giving him a roughly 10% cut of the shareholder value he delivered. He ended up achieving the impossible.

I think there are a few fairly significant flaws in this analysis:

Yeah, I’ve seen way too many “journalists” make the same claim when that very much isn’t the case. There are legit criticisms out there for Boeing, but in this case people are getting it dead wrong.