Investor's Corner
Investor group urges Tesla to seek board members independent of Elon Musk
Five institutional investors, including the California State Teachers’ Retirement System (Calstrs), the Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds, and CtW Investment Group, have signed a letter to Tesla director Antonio Gracias urging the company to seek board members that are independent of Elon Musk.
In addition to expanding the size of the Tesla board to include two new members that do not have ties with Musk, the group which manages a combined $721 billion in assets – Caslstrs is the second largest pension fund in America – is also advocating for annual elections for all board members. Presently, only one third of the directors are elected each year. Calstrs is one of the founders of Investor Stewardship Group, which includes several other major investors such as BlackRock Inc., State Street Corp., Vanguard Group, and T. Rowe Price Group. In January, that group formulated a new policy position that supports annual elections for all board members as a way of increasing the accountability of directors to shareholders.
The influential group of investors argue that “Directors should be held to a higher standard of independence given the conflicts of interest that permeate this board.”, according to a report by Bloomberg. “A thoroughly independent board would provide a critical check on possible dysfunctional group dynamics, such as groupthink.”
Less than 11% of S&P 500 companies have staggered board elections today. In 2011, almost a third of them did according to governance data provider Equilar. Last year, 10 proposals seeking declassified boards received approval from 80% support from shareholders according to data compiled by Fundvotes.com.
“As companies grow up and mature, they need to have governance practices that reflect that,” Philip Larrieu, an associate portfolio manager for Calstrs, said in a phone interview via Bloomberg. “When the stock is doing well, the argument is ’we don’t need to make changes, we are doing well.’ But we will push for these changes regardless of the stock price.” The statement by Calstrs comes at a time when Tesla stock continues to reach all-time highs, surging to over 40% gains in this year alone. Tesla has become the largest U.S. automaker, beating General Motors in market capitalization.
Today, Tesla’s board is made up of Musk; his brother, Kimball; Gracias, who is the founder of a private equity firm and a director at SpaceX; Ira Ehrenpreis, a venture capitalist and SpaceX investor; Brad Buss, a former SolarCity chief financial officer; Steve Jurvetson, a venture investor and SpaceX director; and Robyn Denholm, the chief operating officer of Telstra Corp., Australia’s largest telecommunications company.
Musk is the largest Tesla shareholder and holds a stake worth approximately 21% of the company, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Gracias is the sixth largest shareholder with a 3.75% stake.
A Tesla spokesperson has responded to the letter send to the company, citing “We are actively engaged in a search process for independent board members, which is something we committed to do several months ago, and expect to announce new additions fairly soon”. The Silicon Valley-based electric car maker and energy company added, “We regularly engage with our shareholders and value their feedback.”
“Getting independent people on the board is important in terms of holding management accountable,” Etelvina Martinez, the corporate governance manager at CtW Investment Group, which also signed the letter, said in a phone interview. “Shareholders need to be able to hold management accountable. While the stock price is doing extremely well, there are still concerns about corporate governance.”
Some of the concerns raised in the letter go back to last year’s acquisition of SolarCity by Tesla. Despite Musk’s assurances that the merger was good for both companies, there was concern over the financial health of such an acquisition. “If Tesla truly wants to be forward thinking, then it needs to embrace accountability and it needs to welcome diverse, independent opinions into its boardroom,” New York City Comptroller Scott Stringer told Bloomberg. “Strong performance doesn’t insulate Tesla from accountability.”
Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) is set to hold its Earnings Call for the first quarter of 2026 on Wednesday, and there are a lot of interesting things that are swirling around in terms of speculation from investors.
With the company’s executives, including CEO Elon Musk, answering a handful of questions that investors submit through the Say platform, fans want to know a lot of things about a lot of things.
These five questions come from Retail Investors, who are normal, everyday shareholders:
- When will we have the Optimus v3 reveal? When will Optimus production start, since we ended the Model S and Model X production earlier than mid-year? What’s the expected Optimus production rate exiting this year? What are the initial targeted skills?
- What milestones are you targeting for unsupervised FSD and Robotaxi expansion beyond Austin this year, and how will that drive recurring revenue?
- How will Hardware 3 cars reach Unsupervised Full Self-Driving?
- When do you expect Unsupervised Full Self-Driving to reach customer cars?
- When will Robotaxi expand past its current limited rollout?
Additionally, these are currently the three questions that are slated to be answered by Institutional Firms, which also answer a handful of questions during the call:
- Now that FSD has been approved in the Netherlands and is expected to launch across Europe this summer, can you discuss your Robotaxi strategy for the region?
- What enabled you to finish the AI5 tapeout early and were there any changes to the original vision? Last week, Elon said AI5 will go into Optimus and the Supercomputer, but one month ago said it would go into the Robotaxi. Has AI5 been dropped from the vehicle roadmap?
- Given the recent NHTSA incident filings, can you update us on the Robotaxi safety data? If safety validation remains the primary bottleneck, why not deploy thousands of vehicles to accelerate the removal of the safety driver?
The questions range through every current Tesla project, including FSD expansion and Optimus. However, many of the answers we will get will likely be repetitive answers we’ve heard in the past.
This is especially pertinent when the questions about when Unsupervised FSD will reach customer cars: we know Musk will say that it will happen this year. Is Tesla capable of that? Maybe. But a more transparent answer that is more revealing of a true timeline would be appreciated.
Hardware 3 owners are anxiously awaiting the arrival of FSD v14 Lite, which was promised to them last year for a release sometime this year.
The Earnings Call is set to take place on Wednesday at market close.
Elon Musk
Tesla FSD in Europe vs. US: It’s not what you think
Tesla FSD is approved in the Netherlands, but the European version differs from what US drivers use.
On April 10, 2026, the Dutch vehicle authority RDW granted Tesla the first European type approval for Full Self-Driving Supervised, making the Netherlands the first country on the continent to authorize Tesla’s semi-autonomous system for customer use on public roads.
As Teslarati reported, the RDW approval followed 18 months of testing, more than 1.6 million kilometers driven on EU roads, 13,000 customer ride-alongs, and documentation covering over 400 compliance requirements. Tesla Europe had been running public demo drives through cities like Amsterdam and Eindhoven since early 2026, giving passengers their first experience of the system on European streets.
The European version of FSD is not the same software US drivers use. The RDW’s own statement is direct, noting that the software versions and functionalities in the US and Europe “are therefore not comparable one-to-one.” We’ve compile a table below that captures the most significant differences between US-based Tesla FSD vs. European Tesla FSD that’s based on what regulators and Tesla have publicly confirmed.
| Feature | FSD US | FSD Europe (Netherlands) |
| Regulatory framework | Self-certification, post-market oversight | Pre-market type approval required (UN R-171 + Article 39) |
| Hands requirement | Hands-off permitted on highway | Hands must be available to take over immediately |
| Auto turning from stop lights | Available — navigates intersections, turns, and traffic signals autonomously | Available in EU build — confirmed in Amsterdam demo footage handling unprotected turns and signalized intersections |
| Driving modes | Multiple profiles including a more aggressive “Mad Max” mode | EU build is more conservative by default and errs on the side of restraint when it cannot confirm the limit |
| Summon | Available — Smart Summon navigates parking lots to driver | Status unclear — not confirmed as part of the RDW-approved feature set; urban FSD approval targeted separately for 2027 |
| Driver monitoring | Camera-based eye tracking | Stricter continuous monitoring with more frequent intervention alerts |
| Software version | FSD v14.3 | EU-specific builds that must be separately validated by RDW |
| Geographic restriction | US, Canada, China, Mexico, Australia, NZ, South Korea | Netherlands only; EU-wide vote pending summer 2026 |
| Subscription price | $99/month | €99/month |
| Full urban FSD scope | Available | Partial — separate urban application planned for 2027 |
The approval comes as Tesla is under real pressure to grow FSD subscriptions globally. Musk’s 2025 CEO compensation package, approved by shareholders, includes a milestone requiring 10 million active FSD subscriptions as one condition for his stock awards to vest. Tesla hit one million subscriptions during its Q4 2025 earnings call, which is a meaningful start, but still a long way from the target. Opening Europe as a market for subscriptions, rather than just hardware sales, directly accelerates that number.
Tesla has said it anticipates EU-wide recognition of the Dutch approval during summer 2026, which would extend FSD access to Germany, France, and other major markets through a mutual recognition process without each country repeating the full 18-month review. That timeline is Tesla’s projection, not a confirmed regulatory outcome. As Musk acknowledged at Davos in January 2026, “We hope to get Supervised Full Self-Driving approval in Europe, hopefully next month.”
Elon Musk
Tesla Supercharger for Business exposes jaw-dropping ROI gap between best and worst locations
Tesla’s new Supercharger for Business calculator reveals an eye-opening all-in cost and location-based ROI projections.
Tesla has launched an online calculator for its Supercharger for Business program, giving property owners their first transparent look at what it really costs to install Superchargers on site and what kind of return they can expect.
The program itself launched in September 2025, allowing businesses to purchase and operate Supercharger hardware on their own property while Tesla handles installation, maintenance, software, and 24/7 driver support. As Teslarati reported at launch, hosts also get their logo placed on the chargers and their location integrated into Tesla’s in-car navigation, meaning drivers are actively routed there. The stalls are open to all EVs, not just Teslas.
We launched Supercharger for Business in 2025 to help companies get charging right. We found simplicity and transparency to be a problem in this industry.
We’re now sharing pricing and a financial calculator to help make informed decisions. The goal is to accelerate investments,…
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) April 8, 2026
The new online calculator, announced by Tesla on Wednesday with the note that “simplicity and transparency” have been a problem in the industry, lets any business enter a U.S. address and get a real cost and revenue model. A standard 8-stall V4 Supercharger site runs approximately $500,000 in hardware and $55,000 per post for installation, bringing an all-in price just shy of $1 million. Tesla charges a flat $0.10 per kWh fee to cover software, billing, and network operations. Businesses set their own retail price and keep the margin above that fee.
Taking a look at Tesla’s Supercharger for Business online calculator, we can see that ROI is not uniform, and the gap between a strong location and a poor one can stretch the breakeven point by several years.
The biggest driver is foot traffic and how long people stay. A busy rest station, hotel, or outlet mall brings in repeat visitors who need to charge while they’re already stopped, pushing utilization numbers higher and shortening payback time.
Tesla Supercharger for Business ROI calculator
Local electricity rates matter just as much on the cost side. Markets like California carry some of the highest commercial electricity rates in the country, which eats into the margin between what a host pays per kWh and what they charge drivers. At the same time, dense urban areas with high EV adoption tend to support higher retail charging prices, which can offset that cost if demand is strong enough. Weather also plays a role. Cold climates reduce battery efficiency and increase charging frequency, but they can also suppress utilization in winter months if drivers avoid stopping in exposed outdoor locations. Suburban and rural sites face a different problem: lower baseline EV traffic, which means a site with cheaper power and lower operating costs can still take longer to pay back simply because the stalls sit idle more often. Tesla’s calculator uses real fleet data to pre-fill utilization estimates by ZIP code, so businesses can run their specific address against these variables rather than relying on averages.
The program has seen real adoption. Wawa, already the largest host of Tesla Superchargers with over 2,100 stalls across 223 locations, opened its first fully owned and branded site in Alachua, Florida earlier this year. Francis Energy of Oklahoma and the city of Alpharetta, Georgia have also deployed branded stations through the program, as Teslarati covered in January.
Tesla now exceeds 80,000 Supercharger stalls worldwide, and the calculator makes the economic case for accelerating that number through private investment rather than company-owned sites alone.
ARK’s SpaceX IPO Guide makes a compelling case on why $1.75T may not be the ceiling
Ford CEO Farley says Tesla is not who to look at for EV expertise
