Investor's Corner
Tesla is being ‘anti-subsidized’ in the US, and it’s thriving in spite of it
Ask any TSLAQ believer about one of the biggest reasons for Tesla’s ongoing success, and there’s a good chance that one will hear the word “subsidies.” More often than not, Tesla critics would argue that the electric car maker has only survived because the US government heavily subsidizes it — and without these subsidies, Tesla would fall.
Unfortunately for TSLA bears, this is not an accurate assumption. In fact, if one were to look at what Tesla has had to deal with in the past years (and is still dealing with today), it would actually be more accurate to state that the company had been “anti-subsidized” for the most part, both in its home country and some key territories abroad.
As thoroughly discussed by Tesla investor KarenRei on Twitter, Tesla actually has dealt with a lot of handicaps when selling its cars to consumers. Take the United States, for example. Being a pure electric car company, it was no surprise that Tesla was the first to trigger a phaseout of the $7,500 tax credit given to EV buyers in the country.
Today, Tesla buyers no longer receive tax credits from the United States government, which means that at this point, the company is taking on traditional automakers solely through its vehicles’ own merits. Buyers of pretty much every other car except the Chevy Bolt still receive a $7,500 tax credit, while those who purchase Teslas do not get any incentives. Yet, despite this, the demand for the company’s vehicles has remained healthy.
Another ghost from Tesla’s past that always emerges in the constant bull vs. bear debates online is the loan that the company received during the US financial crisis. Tesla did receive a loan from the Obama administration, but so did other companies, the biggest of which was General Motors, the quintessential American automaker. Tesla would eventually pay back the $465 million loan it received from the US government — 10 years early. GM, in comparison, defaulted on their own loan. This nifty little detail usually gets a bit overlooked whenever Tesla’s loans are discussed among critics.
But what about state incentives that are granted to Tesla for, say, building Giga Nevada? Well, that’s not particularly unique to the electric car maker, either. It should be noted that it is a pretty common practice for states to offer incentives to attract large corporations to invest and build their facilities within their borders. Doing so triggers an influx of jobs, as well as potentially positive effects for local businesses.
And don’t forget that Tesla is still struggling to formally sell its cars in several US states. It’s almost ironic how Tesla was able to secure land, build a factory, and start delivering locally-produced Model 3s in China to consumers before it was able to get permission to sell its cars in parts of its home country, like Texas.
In other territories, Tesla receives anti-incentives as well. This happened to the Model 3 in Canada, whose EV incentives required the base price of qualified vehicles to start below the cost of the Model 3, effectively excluding Tesla’s most affordable vehicle. This reflected a similar strategy adopted in Germany when the Model S was released in the country.
Keeping these in perspective, it almost seems like governments across the globe earnestly want electric cars to succeed. But when it comes to Tesla, the company has not been handled with kid gloves at all. Far from it. In a way, it seems fair to argue at this point that Tesla’s success, as evidenced by its 112,000 vehicle deliveries in the fourth quarter of 2019, is happening in spite of anti-incentives that are consistently thrown its way. Perhaps, just as argued by the company’s supporters, Tesla’s products just happen to be very compelling for buyers.
H/T @enn_Nafnlaus/Twitter
Investor's Corner
Tesla investor Calpers opposes Elon Musk’s 2025 performance award
Musk’s 2025 pay plan will be decided at Tesla’s 2025 Annual Shareholder Meeting, which will be held on November 6 in Giga Texas.
One of the United States’ largest pension funds, the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (Calpers), has stated that it will be voting against Elon Musk’s 2025 Tesla CEO performance award.
Musk’s 2025 pay plan will be decided at Tesla’s 2025 Annual Shareholder Meeting, which will be held on November 6 in Giga Texas. Company executives have stated that the upcoming vote will decide Tesla’s fate in the years to come.
Why Calpers opposes Musk’s 2025 performance award
In a statement shared with Bloomberg News, a Calpers spokesperson criticized the scale of Musk’s proposed deal. Calpers currently holds about 5 million Tesla shares, giving its stance meaningful influence among institutional investors.
“The CEO pay package proposed by Tesla is larger than pay packages for CEOs in comparable companies by many orders of magnitude. It would also further concentrate power in a single shareholder,” the spokesperson stated.
This is not the first time Calpers has opposed a major Musk pay deal. The fund previously voted against a $56 billion package proposed for Musk and criticized the CEO’s 2018 performance-based plan, which was perceived as unrealistic due to its ambitious nature at the time. Musk’s 2018 pay plan was later struck down by a Delaware court, though Tesla is currently appealing the decision.
Musk’s 2025 CEO Performance Award
While Elon Musk’s 2025 performance award will result in him becoming a trillionaire, he would not be able to receive any compensation from Tesla unless aggressive operational and financial targets are met. For Musk to receive his full compensation, for example, he would have to grow Tesla’s market cap from today’s $1.1 trillion to $8.5 trillion, effectively making it the world’s most valuable company by a mile.
Musk has also maintained that his 2025 performance award is not about compensation. It’s about his controlling stake at Tesla. “If I can just get kicked out in the future by activist shareholder advisory firms who don’t even own Tesla shares themselves, I’m not comfortable with that future,” Musk wrote in a post on X.
Investor's Corner
Tesla enters new stability phase, firm upgrades and adjusts outlook
Dmitriy Pozdnyakov of Freedom Capital upgraded his outlook on Tesla shares from “Sell” to “Hold” on Wednesday, and increased the price target from $338 to $406.
Tesla is entering a new phase of stability in terms of vehicle deliveries, one firm wrote in a new note during the final week of October, backing its position with an upgrade and price target increase on the stock.
Dmitriy Pozdnyakov of Freedom Capital upgraded his outlook on Tesla shares from “Sell” to “Hold” on Wednesday, and increased the price target from $338 to $406.
While most firms are interested in highlighting Tesla’s future growth, which will be catalyzed mostly by the advent of self-driving vehicles, autonomy, and the company’s all-in mentality on AI and robotics, Pozdnyakov is solely focusing on vehicle deliveries.
The analyst wrote in a note to investors that he believes Tesla’s updated vehicle lineup, which includes its new affordable “Standard” trims of the Model 3 and Model Y, is going to stabilize the company’s delivery volumes and return the company to annual growth.
Tesla launches two new affordable models with ‘Standard’ Model 3, Y offerings
Tesla launched the new affordable Model 3 and Model Y “Standard” trims on October 7, which introduced two stripped-down, less premium versions of the all-electric sedan and crossover.
They are both priced at under $40,000, with the Model 3 at $37,990 and the Model Y at $39,990, and while these prices may not necessarily be what consumers were expecting, they are well under what Kelley Blue Book said was the average new car transaction price for September, which swelled above $50,000.
Despite the rollout of these two new models, it is interesting to hear that a Wall Street firm would think that Tesla is going to return to more stable delivery figures and potentially enter a new growth phase.
Many Wall Street firms have been more focused on AI, Robotics, and Tesla’s self-driving project, which are the more prevalent things that will drive investor growth over the next few years.
Wedbush’s Dan Ives, for example, tends to focus on the company’s prowess in AI and self-driving. However, he did touch on vehicle deliveries in the coming years in a recent note.
Ives said in a note on October 2:
“While EV demand is expected to fall with the EV tax credit expiration, this was a great bounce-back quarter for TSLA to lay the groundwork for deliveries moving forward, but there is still work to do to gain further ground from a delivery perspective.”
Tesla has some things to figure out before it can truly consider guaranteed stability from a delivery standpoint. Initially, the next two quarters will be a crucial way to determine demand without the $7,500 EV tax credit. It will also begin to figure out if its new affordable models are attractive enough at their current price point to win over consumers.
Investor's Corner
Bank of America raises Tesla PT to $471, citing Robotaxi and Optimus potential
The firm also kept a Neutral rating on the electric vehicle maker, citing strong progress in autonomy and robotics.
Bank of America has raised its Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) price target by 38% to $471, up from $341 per share.
The firm also kept a Neutral rating on the electric vehicle maker, citing strong progress in autonomy and robotics.
Robotaxi and Optimus momentum
Bank of America analyst Federico Merendi noted that the firm’s price target increase reflects Tesla’s growing potential in its Robotaxi and Optimus programs, among other factors. BofA’s updated valuation is based on a sum-of-the-parts (SOTP) model extending through 2040, which shows the Robotaxi platform accounting for 45% of total value. The model also shows Tesla’s humanoid robot Optimus contributing 19%, and Full Self-Driving (FSD) and the Energy segment adding 17% and 6% respectively.
“Overall, we find that TSLA’s core automotive business represents around 12% of the total value while robotaxi is 45%, FSD is 17%, Energy Generation & Storage is around 6% and Optimus is 19%,” the Bank of America analyst noted.
Still a Neutral rating
Despite recognizing long-term potential in AI-driven verticals, Merendi’s team maintained a Neutral rating, suggesting that much of the optimism is already priced into Tesla’s valuation.
“Our PO revision is driven by a lower cost of equity capital, better Robotaxi progress, and a higher valuation for Optimus to account for the potential entrance into international markets,” the analyst stated.
Interestingly enough, Tesla’s core automotive business, which contributes the lion’s share of the company’s operations today, represents just 12% of total value in BofA’s model.
Tesla investor Calpers opposes Elon Musk’s 2025 performance award
Tesla Cybercab is heading to China’s import expo
Tesla Semi factory looks nearly complete
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoSpaceX posts Starship booster feat that’s so nutty, it doesn’t even look real
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoTesla Full Self-Driving gets an offer to be insured for ‘almost free’
-
News2 weeks agoElon Musk confirms Tesla FSD V14.2 will see widespread rollout
-
News2 weeks agoTesla is adding an interesting feature to its centerscreen in a coming update
-
News2 weeks agoTesla launches new interior option for Model Y
-
News2 weeks agoTesla widens rollout of new Full Self-Driving suite to more owners
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoTesla CEO Elon Musk’s $1 trillion pay package hits first adversity from proxy firm
-
News2 weeks agoTesla might be doing away with a long-included feature with its vehicles