Connect with us

Investor's Corner

Dissecting Jim Chanos’ short seller arguments about Tesla

Published

on

All innovative companies attract negative press coverage, but the tide of anti-Tesla scare stories and misinformation has reached such preposterous proportions that it has become a story in itself (remember, colleagues, we’re supposed to report the news, not make it). It’s widely believed that much of the mud, especially the articles that focus on financial and stock-market topics, originates with short sellers, who have collectively bet some $12 billion against the California carmaker.

Perhaps the best-known and most articulate of the short sellers is Jim Chanos, a hedge fund operator who distinguished himself by calling attention to Enron’s shenanigans back in 2000. Chanos has made no secret of his disdain for Tesla, or his interest in profiting from its demise. Chanos figures prominently in Matt Taibbi’s 2014 book, The Divide: American Injustice in the Age of the Wealth Gap. A recent series of posts on the Tesla Motors Club forum argues that Chanos and other shorts are following a tried-and-true playbook that they’ve used to attack other companies in the past.

Enter Galileo Russell, a young independent stock analyst, who became something of a hero among Teslaphiles when Elon Musk granted him a lot of quality time on a now-famous conference call. In a new video, Russell answers Chanos’s bearish arguments about Tesla point by point.

Above: Galileo Russell takes on infamous Tesla short Jim Chanos (Youtube: HyperChange TV)

Advertisement

Chanos is no mindless naysayer or anonymous comment-section troll. “He has a reputation for being one of Wall Street’s best and sharpest short sellers and for good reason,” says Galileo. “His hedge fund Kynikos Associates [the name comes from the Greek for “cynic”] has a track record that has crushed the market.” Furthermore, Chanos has been “very vocal and public and transparent about his short of Tesla for years – he’s done a ton of interviews on CNBC and Bloomberg explaining his short rationale, so this gives me a ton of material to really understand what his thinking is.”

Galileo has “a ton of respect” for Chanos, but thinks “he is wrong on this trade.” In this video, which is worth watching all the way through, the exuberant young pundit answers the diehard bear’s long list of anti-Tesla arguments one by one.

Chanos and others have made much of Tesla’s supposedly high rate of executive departures (“rats leaving a sinking ship”). However, according to Galileo, “He has cherry-picked the names of 39 Tesla executives who’ve left over the past two years.” Tesla has 37,000 employees. The average tenure of departing execs has been about 4.6 years – not far off the 5.3-year average term of execs at the largest US companies. Mr. Russell also reminds us of a certain group of leaders who haven’t jumped ship, and don’t seem likely to: CEO Elon Musk (15 years with the company); CTO JB Straubel (14 years); CFO Deepak Ahuja (10 years) and Senior Design Director Franz von Holzhausen (8 years).

Is Tesla “structurally unprofitable,” as Chanos claims? Maybe, but so was a certain other growing tech company called Amazon. Is Tesla indulging in creative accounting by not including its R&D expenses in gross margins? Nope – unlike legacy OEMs, most of Tesla’s R&D goes for future products. Tesla’s accounting isn’t deceptive, says Galileo – it’s just more like that of a tech company than a traditional automaker.

Galileo goes on to address several more of Chanos’s anti-Tesla points: coming competition from the legacy automakers (almost no one in the EV industry takes this threat seriously – Big Auto has made it abundantly clear that its main agenda is to hold back the tide of electrification, not join it); delays in rolling out Autopilot, the Semi and the Roadster; and even a far-fetched notion that Elon Musk is planning to step down as CEO.

Advertisement

In every case, Mr. Russell marshals detailed facts and figures to support his rebuttals. Even if you’re a Tesla skeptic, you’ll be forced to admit that this is a virtuoso performance by an extremely well-informed and insightful analyst.

===

Note: Article originally published on evannex.com by Charles Morris; Source: HyperChange TV

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.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla China

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.

Advertisement

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.

Continue Reading

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.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla China

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.

Continue Reading

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.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

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. 

Advertisement

“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.

Continue Reading

Trending