Investor's Corner

“We Need To Be Evangelists,” Tesla Tells FTC

Tesla general counsel Todd Maron told the FTC this week that traditional auto dealers have a basic conflict of interest with selling electric cars.

Published

10 years ago

January 21, 2016

Steve Hanley

At the Federal Trade Commission panel discussion on Wednesday, Tesla general counsel Todd Maron made this opening statement:

“Any discussion of why Tesla sells directly comes back to our mission. Our mission is quite specific. It is to accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable transportation. You can say we’re true believers and it wouldn’t be an unfair characterization. That’s our mission because we fervently believe that transitioning to electric vehicles is critical to the health of our planet and simply because we believe that electric vehicles are superior vehicles to their gas-powered counterparts. They’re higher-performing, they’re more efficient and they’re safer than gas-powered cars.”

The FTC has indicated it favors direct sales, despite determined opposition from franchise dealers in several states. Maron used the panel discussion to expand on why Tesla does not think dealers are the best way to get the message about electric cars out to potential customers. It takes a lot of effort to explain new technology to people, he said. Dealers are interested in moving as many cars as possible in the shortest possible time.

Usually, most of the discussion that takes place between a dealer and customer revolves around price, not educating the consumer. You can’t expect a dealer to do your evangelizing for you, Maron said. Tesla doesn’t want or need sprawling sales lots brimming with hundreds of cars. Tesla builds each car for a specific customer. It doesn’t stockpile inventory the way traditional dealers do. It also doesn’t play pricing games with its customers. Maron thinks most dealers would have no idea how to do business the Tesla way.

With margins on new cars razor thin, most dealers are focused on making money from repairs and service. “We can’t offer that to any franchised dealer, because we only profit in one way: new car sales and new car sales alone. We can’t make money from service, because our cars have far less parts than gas-powered cars. There are no regular service visits for engine tune-ups and oil changes. We don’t have an engine. We don’t have oil.”

Maron indicated dealers have a basic conflict of interest with the Tesla mission, according to Autoblog. Tesla believes that gas-powered vehicles should “be replaced entirely” by electric vehicles. “Even if you wanted to outsource the responsibility of communicating this message, it would be impossible for traditional dealers to convey this adequately,” he said. “This isn’t a knock on them. Dealers are not fundamentally convinced of the mission of EVs as we are. They make 99 percent of their revenue off gas-powered cars.”

Maron is not the only one who thinks traditional dealers are road blocks on the pathway to electric cars. The Institute of Transportation Studies at UC Davis also claims most dealers don’t want to be bothered with selling EVs. People who go to a dealer to buy an electric car report that sales representatives are poorly trained and often try to switch them to conventional cars rather than take the time to educate them about the advantages of electric cars.

At the hearing in Washington, FTC chair Edith Ramirez said that, “The automobile marketplace may be on the precipice of dramatic change.” Was that a hint that regulators may be considering new rules that would permit direct sales of motor vehicles to consumers? So far, the FTC has tried to stay above the fray, but there was a sense at these hearings that changes are coming and may be imminent.

Investor's Corner

Shareholder group urges Nasdaq probe into Elon Musk’s Tesla 2025 CEO Interim Award

The SOC Investment Group represents pension funds tied to more than two million union members, many of whom hold shares in TSLA.

Published

18 hours ago

August 22, 2025

Simon Alvarez

Credit: xAI/X

An investment group is urging Nasdaq to investigate Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) over its recent $29 billion equity award for CEO Elon Musk.

The SOC Investment Group, which represents pension funds tied to more than two million union members—many of whom hold shares in TSLA—sent a letter to the exchange citing “serious concerns” that the package sidestepped shareholder approval and violated compensation rules.

Concerns over Tesla’s 2025 CEO Interim Award

In its August 19 letter to Nasdaq enforcement chief Erik Wittman, SOC alleged that Tesla’s board improperly granted Musk a “2025 CEO Interim Award” under the company’s 2019 Equity Incentive Plan. That plan, the group noted, explicitly excluded Musk when it was approved by shareholders. SOC argued that the new equity grant effectively expanded the plan to cover Musk, a material change that should have required a shareholder vote under Nasdaq rules.

The $29 billion package was designed to replace Musk’s overturned $56 billion award from 2018, which the Delaware Chancery Court struck down, prompting Tesla to file an appeal to the Delaware Supreme Court. The interim award contains restrictions: Musk must remain in a leadership role until August 2027, and vested shares cannot be sold until 2030, as per a Yahoo Finance report.

Even so, critics such as SOC have argued that the plan does not have of performance targets, calling it a “fog-the-mirror” award. This means that “If you’re around and have enough breath left in you to fog the mirror, you get them,” stated Brian Dunn, the director of the Institute for Comprehension Studies at Cornell University.

They don’t even HAVE an investment with Tesla. They are just a political activist group using a loose relationship with a “coalition of unions” to write letters to advance an agenda that IS NOT making Tesla and AI, robotics and energy leader. Their letter does not include any…— Amy (@_SFTahoe) August 21, 2025

SOC’s Tesla concerns beyond Elon Musk

SOC’s concerns extend beyond the mechanics of Musk’s pay. The group has long questioned the independence of Tesla’s board, opposing the reelection of directors such as Kimbal Musk and James Murdoch. It has also urged regulators to review Tesla’s governance practices, including past proposals to shrink the board.

SOC has also joined initiatives calling for Tesla to adopt comprehensive labor rights policies, including noninterference with worker organizing and compliance with global labor standards. The investment group has also been involved in webinars and resolutions highlighting the risks related to Tesla’s approach to unions, as well as labor issues across several countries.

Tesla has not yet publicly responded to SOC’s latest letter, nor to requests for comment.

The SOC’s letter can be viewed below.

Nasdaq+Letter Tsla Socig Final by Simon Alvarez

Investor's Corner

Tesla investors may be in for a big surprise

All signs point toward a strong quarter for Tesla in terms of deliveries. Investors could be in for a surprise.

Published

1 week ago

August 14, 2025

Joey Klender

(Credit: Tesla)

Tesla investors have plenty of things to be ecstatic about, considering the company’s confidence in autonomy, AI, robotics, cars, and energy. However, many of them may be in for a big surprise as the end of the $7,500 EV tax credit nears. On September 30, it will be gone for good.

This has put some skepticism in the minds of some investors: the lack of a $7,500 discount for buying a clean energy vehicle may deter many people from affording Tesla’s industry-leading EVs.

Tesla warns consumers of huge, time-sensitive change coming soon

The focus on quarterly deliveries, while potentially waning in terms of importance to the future, is still a big indicator of demand, at least as of now. Of course, there are other factors, most of them economic.

The big push to make the most of the final quarter of the EV tax credit is evident, as Tesla is reminding consumers on social media platforms and through email communications that the $7,500 discount will not be here forever. It will be gone sooner rather than later.

It appears the push to maximize sales this quarter before having to assess how much they will be impacted by the tax credit’s removal is working.

Delivery Wait Time Increases

Wait times for Tesla vehicles are increasing due to what appears to be increased demand for the company’s vehicles. Recently, Model Y delivery wait times were increased from 1-3 weeks to 4-6 weeks.

This puts extra pressure on consumers to pull the trigger on an order, as delivery must be completed by the cutoff date of September 30.

Delivery wait times may have gone up due to an increase in demand as consumers push to make a purchase before losing that $7,500 discount.

More People are Ordering

A post on X by notable Tesla influencer Sawyer Merritt anecdotally shows he has been receiving more DMs than normal from people stating that they’re ordering vehicles before the end of the tax credit:

Anecdotally, I’ve been getting more DMs from people ordering Teslas in the past few days than I have in the last couple of years. As expected, the end of the U.S. EV credit next month is driving a big surge in orders.

Lease prices are rising for the 3/Y, delivery wait times are… pic.twitter.com/Y6JN3w2Gmr

— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) August 13, 2025

It’s not necessarily a confirmation of more orders, but it could be an indication that things are certainly looking that way.

Why Investors Could Be Surprised

Tesla investors could see some positive movement in stock price following the release of the Q3 delivery report, especially if all signs point to increased demand this quarter.

We reported previously that this could end up being a very strong rebounding quarter for Tesla, with so many people taking advantage of the tax credit.

Whether the delivery figures will be higher than normal remains to be seen. But all indications seem to point to Q3 being a very strong quarter for Tesla.

Elon Musk

Tesla bear Guggenheim sees nearly 50% drop off in stock price in new note

Tesla bear Guggenheim does not see any upside in Robotaxi.

Published

1 week ago

August 14, 2025

Joey Klender

Credit: Tesla

Tesla bear Guggenheim is still among the biggest non-believers in the company’s overall mission and its devotion to solving self-driving.

In a new note to investors on Thursday, analyst Ronald Jewsikow reiterated his price target of $175, a nearly 50 percent drop off, with a ‘Sell’ rating, all based on skepticism regarding Tesla’s execution of the Robotaxi platform.

A few days ago, Tesla CEO Elon Musk said the company’s Robotaxi platform would open to the public in September, offering driverless rides to anyone in the Austin area within its geofence, which is roughly 90 square miles large.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk confirms Robotaxi is opening to the public: here’s when

However, Jewsikow’s skepticism regarding this timeline has to do with what’s going on inside of the vehicles. The analyst was willing to give props to Robotaxi, saying that Musk’s estimation of a September public launch would be a “key step” in offering the service to a broader population.

Where Jewsikow’s real issue lies is with Tesla’s lack of transparency on the Safety Monitors, and how bulls are willing to overlook their importance.

Much of this bullish mentality comes from the fact that the Monitors are not sitting in the driver’s seat, and they don’t have anything to do with the overall operation of the vehicle.

Musk also said last month that reducing Safety Monitors could come “in a month or two.”

Instead, they’re just there to make sure everything runs smoothly.

Jewsikow said:

“While safety drivers will remain, and no timeline has been provided for their removal, bulls have been willing to overlook the optics of safety drivers in TSLA vehicles, and we see no reason why that would change now.”

He also commented on Musk’s recent indication that Tesla was working on a 10x parameter count that could help make Full Self-Driving even more accurate. It could be one of the pieces to Tesla solving autonomy.

Jewsikow added:

“Perhaps most importantly for investors bullish on TSLA for the fleet of potential FSD-enabled vehicles today, the 10x higher parameter count will be able to run on the current generation of FSD hardware and inference compute.”