Connect with us
US Treasury Sec & CFIUS chair sees "no basis" for investigating Elon Musk Twitter takeover US Treasury Sec & CFIUS chair sees "no basis" for investigating Elon Musk Twitter takeover

News

Elon Musk: SBF “certainly does not own shares in Twitter as a private company.”

Credit: TED

Published

on

Elon Musk once again confirmed that Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) has no private shares in Twitter’s stock. On Wednesday morning, he denied a report that SBF owned a $100 million stake. Although he denied the reports early Wednesday morning, he provided additional details later in the day.

When NBC’s David Ingram asked if SBF or his company, FTX owned Twitter shares, Elon Musk said, “No. He may have owned shares in Twitter as a public company, but he certainly does not own shares in Twitter as a private company.”

Advertisement

Despite Elon Musk’s statement, many in the media are still convinced that Elon Musk took money from SBF. “Of course, Elon took the $ and then dunked on SBF, because it is all a game that you all aren’t supposed to see: Sam Bankman-Fried, Eon and a secret text | Semafor,Kara Swisher tweeted.

The article shared by Swisher claims that Elon Musk sent SBF a text inviting him to “roll the $100 million stake he had owned for a few months into a privately held Twitter.”

Semafor said that it confirmed the to spoke on the phone, and SBF opted not to invest $5 billion or even an amount up to $10 billion. However, it claimed that SBF contributed his $100 million in stock toward Twitter, which is now private.

Elon Musk responded to Semafor’s article stating that it was a lie. “As I said, neither I nor Twitter have taken any investment from SBF/FTX. Your article is a lie. Now, I’m asking again, how much of you does SBF own?”

Advertisement

In his initial response to the publication, Elon Musk called out Semafor’s conflict of interest in its reporting, which paints Elon Musk in a worse light than SBF.

In November, Teddy Schleifer, a journalist with Puck News, pointed out that there was a question of whether SBF would be able to continue funding the media. Grants, he pointed out, have gone to several publications, including Semafor. Schleifer included a tweet by Semefor’s own Max Tani, who reported that the grants from SBF’s foundation to ProPublica were on hold.

Schleifer noted that Vox, The Intercept, The Law and Justice Journalism Project, and ProPublica were also funded by SBF. Elon Musk has also called into question the coverage of SBF by the mainstream media.

Your feedback is welcome. If you have any comments or concerns or see a typo, you can email me at johnna@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter at @JohnnaCrider1.

Advertisement

Teslarati is now on TikTok. Follow us for interactive news & more. Teslarati is now on TikTok. Follow us for interactive news & more. You can also follow Teslarati on LinkedInTwitter, Instagram, and Facebook.

Johnna Crider is a Baton Rouge writer covering Tesla, Elon Musk, EVs, and clean energy & supports Tesla's mission. Johnna also interviewed Elon Musk and you can listen here

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

Elon Musk tops Forbes’ list of America’s 250 greatest innovators

The ranking places Musk at the top of modern American innovation.

Published

on

Gage Skidmore, CC BY-SA 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

Elon Musk has been ranked No. 1 on Forbes’ inaugural list of America’s 250 Greatest Innovators. The ranking places Musk at the top of modern American innovation as the publication kicks off a series celebrating the nation’s 250th anniversary.

Forbes described innovation as “the grease in the economic engine” and the force that transforms industries and creates new ones. The publication highlighted that its honorees are not just inventors, but business leaders who successfully bring breakthroughs to market.

Musk, 54, was ranked No. 1 in this year’s list. Forbes noted that he is “the only person in history to have founded (or grown from nearly nothing) five companies, each with multibillion-dollar valuations, each in a different industry.” Those companies include Tesla, SpaceX, Neuralink, xAI, and The Boring Company.

Forbes’ methodology began with nearly 1,000 nominees submitted by its reporters. A panel of judges, including venture capitalist Jim Breyer, journalist Kara Swisher, and strategy expert Rita McGrath, ranked candidates based on creativity, breadth, engagement, disruption, and commercial impact. Artificial intelligence tools, including ChatGPT and Gemini, were also used to assess candidates before editors finalized the rankings.

Advertisement

The publication noted that more than one-third of the list consists of women and people of color, reflecting shifts in innovation and entrepreneurship over time. All individuals listed are also American citizens, though many were born abroad, including Musk himself. Musk was born in Pretoria, South Africa.

Ranked No. 2 is Jeff Bezos, 61, who Forbes credited with upending America’s $7.4 trillion retail industry through Amazon before pioneering cloud computing with Amazon Web Services. The publication highlighted that Bezos now focuses on space exploration through Blue Origin and artificial intelligence manufacturing systems at Prometheus.

At No. 3 is Bill Gates, 70, who helped launch the personal computing revolution and built Microsoft into the dominant force in workplace software. Forbes also highlighted Gates’ reinvention at age 50 as a data-driven philanthropist, including his role in helping eradicate polio from India.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla Model Y tops California vehicle sales despite Elon Musk backlash

Data from the California New Car Dealers Association (CNCDA) showed the Model Y outsold its nearest competitor by more than 50,000 units.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

The Tesla Model Y was California’s best-selling new vehicle in 2025 for the fourth straight year, despite protests against CEO Elon Musk and a changeover to the Model Y’s updated variant that caused a pause in production and deliveries early in the year.

Data from the California New Car Dealers Association (CNCDA) showed the Model Y outsold its nearest competitor by more than 50,000 units, according to KRON4.

The Model Y recorded 110,120 registrations in California in 2025. The second-best-selling vehicle, the Toyota RAV4, posted 65,604 units, followed by the Toyota Camry at 62,324. The Tesla Model 3 ranked fourth with 53,989 sales, ahead of the Honda Civic at 53,085 units.

Despite leading the state, Model Y sales have trended downward year-over-year. Registrations fell from 132,636 in 2023 to 128,923 in 2024, and then to 110,120 in 2025. Overall Tesla sales in California also declined, dropping from 238,589 in 2023 to 202,865 in 2024 and 179,656 in 2025.

Advertisement

The slowdown comes as the federal $7,500 EV tax credit ended, removing a key incentive that had supported electric vehicle demand for years.

“Tesla has a few advantages. Tesla, as a brand, has a status, cache, so I think folks in certain parts of the Bay. Owning a Tesla is a thing. I think that’s breaking down over time, especially given the political controversies surrounding Mr. Musk,” CNCDA President Brian Maas said.

California saw multiple anti-Musk protests in 2025, along with notable reports of consumer-owned Teslas being vandalized and attacked by protesters and activists. The fact that the Model Y and Model 3 remained strong performers in California is then a testament to the quality and value of the two vehicles. 

Tesla’s sales of the Model Y and Model 3 might see an increase this year, as the company has announced that it is sunsetting its two more expensive cars, the Model S and Model X. With the Model S and Model X retired, more consumers will likely go for the Model Y and Model 3. 

Advertisement

“Maybe the Model S has outlived its usefulness in terms of attracting customers. It’s no surprise the ones they kept are the Model Y and Model 3,” Maas noted.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Supercharger left offline as Swedish court backs union strike

The completed Supercharger has been stalled for nearly two years amid Tesla’s conflict with the IF Metall union in Sweden.

Published

on

Credit: NicklasNilsso14/X

Tesla’s Supercharger station in Ljungby, Sweden will remain without power after a Swedish administrative court rejected the company’s appeal to force a grid connection to the site. The completed Supercharger has been stalled for nearly two years amid Tesla’s conflict with the IF Metall union in Sweden.

The court ruled that the ongoing union strike against Tesla Sweden is valid grounds for the Supercharger’s connection delay, as noted in an Allt Om Elbil report. 

The Ljungby Supercharger was one of the first charging stations that were denied grid access after IF Metall launched its strike against Tesla Sweden in late 2023. Electricians at local grid operator Ljungby Energinät were pulled into a sympathy strike by the Seko union, preventing the site’s connection.

Tesla reported both Ljungby Energinät and Gävle Energi Elnät AB to the Swedish Energy Market Inspectorate, arguing that grid operators failed to meet their legal obligation to provide connection to the location within a reasonable time frame.

Advertisement

The regulator ruled that the strike represented a valid exception under Swedish law, however, citing constitutional protections for industrial actions.

Tesla responded by appealing to the Administrative Court in Linköping, claiming it had the right to connection within a reasonable period, generally no more than two years. Tesla Sweden also argued that the country’s Electricity Act conflicts with EU law. The court rejected those arguments.

“The Administrative Court today finds that granting the company’s request in practice applies to the same thing as the blockade and that it would mean that the blockade would be ineffective. 

“Such a decision would contradict the principle that labor market conflicts should be resolved to the greatest extent possible by the labor market parties, not by the state. The industrial action is also constitutionally protected,” Chief Councilor Ronny Idstrand stated.

Advertisement

The court also concluded that the Electricity Act does not conflict with EU regulations and that special reasons justified the extended delay.

While the ruling was unanimous, Tesla Sweden may appeal the decision to a higher administrative court.

Advertisement
Continue Reading