News
MyTeslaWeekend & James Stephenson debunk a lot of nonsense surrounding Tesla
MyTeslaWeekend and James Stephenson shared a deep dive into the nonsense and misinformation surrounding Tesla. And they debunked each one. There always seems to be Tesla critics who take things a bit too far. MyTeslaWeekend didn’t hold back. In the video’s description, he said,
“These guys use some really dishonest math. They deduct from one side without accounting for the other. They count something for GM or Stellantis, but not Tesla. They move numbers between columns as if that’s how accounting works. They’re lying liars. Not James’ words, but mine.”
Some of the topics they covered included zero-emissions vehicles (ZEV) credits not being taxpayer money, General Motors (GM) only selling 26 Evs in the last quarter of 2021, Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s actual compensation accounting, the pump and dump myth, and so much more.
ZEV Credits Are Not Taxpayer Money
James pointed out that some people seem to think ZEV credits are taxpayer money when this is not the case.
“Some people get the wrong-headed notion that regulatory credits are a stipend from the government; that governments are giving you taxpayer money. And that is not what’s going on at all. The money you’re making is from selling to your competitors who did not produce enough electric vehicles to comply with applicable law.”
The money, he added is for competitors who don’t want to pay fines to the government for non-compliance.
GM Only Sold 26 Evs In Q4 2021
Despite President Biden’s claim that GM is the EV leader, the automaker only sold 26 EVs in Q4 2021.
“In Q4 of 2021, General Motors sold 26 electric vehicles. They sold 25 Volts and they sold one electric Hummer, I believe, to Mary Barra. I think she was the buyer of the one electric Hummer.”
Tesla, he added, sold over 300,000 electric vehicles.
Elon Musk’s Compensation
Elon Musk as CEO of Tesla doesn’t take a salary and James added that he doesn’t get any cash bonus.
“Most CEOs do have either or both of those as part of their compensation package.”
“What Elon said was, ‘hey if I can’t grow the revenue and the market capitalization of this company, the value of people’s investments in this company by tremendous amounts, you don’t owe me anything. I’ll make zero dollars if I can’t do those things.”
James further explained how the gap accounting treatment works.
“As Elon made progress towards achieving those aggressive goals that I just outlined, Tesla had to record expense relative to the proportion to the twelves tranches that Elon was making progress towards achieving.”
“This is not widely understood. So, another thing that we saw in Q1 of 2022, the most recently reported quarter was ‘Tslaq’ crying foul over the reduction in SG&A year-over-year”
He pointed out that this group, ‘Tslaq’ which is mostly responsible for a lot of the misinformation against Tesla, said that last year, the number was larger than this year. So by the logic of this group, Tesla must be committing fraud.
“‘It has to be fraud. There’s no way your SG&A could have come down by that much year-over-year.’ Well, it’s because a year ago, Elon was still making tons of progress towards achieving these market cap and revenue and even milestones. And this year, the work’s done already. It was almost completely achieved by the end of 2021. So there’s almost nothing left to pay against it.”
‘Elon Musk is a Pump and Dump’ Myth
MyTeslaWeekend shared his biggest pet peeve that he sees all the time which is the constant claim that Elon Musk is nothing but a pump and dump. James shared his thoughts.
“He owns more shares now than he did a year ago or two years ago. And he’s probably going to buy more shares if he can extricate himself from the Twitter situation. So, he still owns more Twitter stock than anybody else does right now. Far more than the people on Twitter’s board combined.”
Elon Musk is also often accused of pumping and dumping Dogecoin however he hasn’t sold his Doge. In fact, he’s recently reaffirmed his support of Doge. In addition to Doge, and Tesla, some critics have claimed Elon has pumped and dumped SpaceX stock and MyTeslaWeekend pointed out that this isn’t a publicly traded stock.
Debunking the nonsense is something that is done on a regular basis and the video, I think is a gem in the treasure box. You can watch the full video below.
Investor's Corner
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
Tesla and SpaceX sue a small Illinois firm after cease and desist letters over Terafab.
Tesla and SpaceX are asking a federal judge to rule that their planned Terafab chip factory does not infringe a small Illinois company’s trademark, a request that arrives only after months of quiet negotiation broke down this summer.
The dispute traces to May 18, when Tesla filed three U.S. trademark applications for “Terafab” and “Tesla Terafab,” covering semiconductor chips and related chip making services. TERA-print LLC, a nanotechnology company that has held a federal trademark for “Tera-Fab” since 2021, responded five days later with a cease and desist letter. According to the lawsuit, first reported by Reuters, TERA-print argued that Tesla and SpaceX’s use of “Terafab” would confuse consumers familiar with its own trademark, which covers a desktop photolithography printer sold to researchers for sensor and bioengineering work.
What stands out in the filing is the timing of TERA-print’s own paperwork. One day before sending that cease and desist letter, on May 22, TERA-print applied to expand its existing registration to cover semiconductor materials, silicon chips, nanoelectronic devices and AI design services, categories it had not previously claimed. Tesla and SpaceX call that filing opportunistic in their complaint, noting it arrived two months after Tesla’s public Terafab announcement and just days after Tesla’s own trademark applications went in.
Elon Musk launches TERAFAB: The $25B Tesla-SpaceXAI chip factory that will rewire the AI industry
By June 10, TERA-print was threatening to sue for federal trademark infringement, false designation of origin and unfair competition, the complaint states. Rather than wait to be sued, Tesla, SpaceX and SpaceXAI met with TERA-print six separate times between June and August trying to resolve the dispute directly. Those talks collapsed, and the companies filed for declaratory judgment this week in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, asking a judge to find that “Terafab” does not infringe TERA-print’s mark before TERA-print can file a claim of its own.
TERA-print isn’t backing down. The company told PCMag it discussed a settlement with Tesla as recently as September 2 and feels misled by what it called Tesla’s professed interest in settling. Its CTO, Andrey Ivankin, said TERA-print holds a Defense Department contract to fabricate semiconductors and partially owns Mattiq Inc., an AI company built on TERA-print’s products, and that the company will vigorously defend its rights.
Tesla and SpaceX argue the overlap is superficial. Terafab is planned as a $16.8 billion complex spanning roughly 100 million square feet at the Grimes County site SpaceX confirmed last month, built to produce chips for Optimus robots, Tesla’s AI computing needs and SpaceX’s orbital data center ambitions, a scale and purpose the companies say no reasonable consumer would confuse with a tabletop lab printer. TERA-print’s product line has stayed focused on lithography tools for biological and sensor research since it registered its mark in 2021.
The trademark fight is the second legal dispute tied to the Terafab project in the past week, following a separate SpaceX suit aimed at keeping company records about the facility out of public view, as KBTX reported. Whether construction proceeds under the Terafab name now depends on a federal judge in Austin.
News
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
NHTSA escalated its Cybercab audit into a sworn Special Order with a September 30 deadline.
Federal regulators have moved from asking Tesla questions about its Cybercab to demanding sworn answers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a Special Order that requires a Tesla officer to sign an affidavit attesting to the completeness of the company’s responses, with a deadline of September 30.
The order builds on Audit Query AQ26002, which NHTSA opened on September 3, the same day Tesla began commercial Cybercab service in Austin. Teslarati covered that initial inquiry when it surfaced, noting the agency wanted to understand how Tesla certified a vehicle with no permanently attached steering wheel, pedals, or mirrors as compliant with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. A Special Order is a different tool and converts a fact finding review into a legally enforceable demand, the same mechanism NHTSA used against Tesla in 2023 during its Autopilot investigation.
Several of the 21 requests target a specific gap in Cybercab’s design. One asks whether Tesla used temporarily attached human controls at any point to help certify the vehicle, and if so, which standards depended on that equipment being present. Another quotes an existing rule directly: “The service brakes shall be activated by means of a foot control.” Cybercab has no foot pedal. NHTSA wants a detailed explanation of how the vehicle satisfies that requirement, and how it complies without the kind of exemption granted to Zoox in July under Part 555, the regulatory pathway built for steering wheel free vehicles.
The order does not claim Cybercab is unsafe or that Tesla broke a rule. It requires Tesla to explain, under oath, the reasoning behind decisions the company already made when it self-certified the vehicle. That distinction matters, but so does the exposure. Motor1’s reporting, summarized here, put potential civil penalty exposure as high as $139 million if NHTSA later finds the certification was flawed, on top of whatever criminal risk comes with a false sworn statement.
Tesla has not said publicly how it plans to respond. Cybercab is still carrying passengers in Austin through the Robotaxi app while the September 30 deadline approaches, and the company has continued expanding the vehicle’s footprint even as the regulatory question remains open. The Special Order does not pause any of that and just sets a date by which Tesla has to put its certification logic on the record, with a company officer’s name attached to it.
In a new interview on Wednesday, Tesla uber bull Ron Baron said that anyone looking to buy the company’s stock should do so as soon as they can.
Baron, founder and CEO of Baron Capital and one of Tesla’s most persistent institutional bulls, used a CNBC Squawk Box appearance on Wednesday to deliver a familiar message with fresh urgency: In his opinion, Tesla stock is a buy:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.”
The Baron Capital frontman’s case is built around Full Self-Driving. Tesla reported 1.48 million active FSD subscriptions in the second quarter, up 56 percent year over year, and company officials have said roughly 55 percent of new North American deliveries left with a subscription enabled.
Baron framed that attach rate as proof the product is moving from enthusiast extra to default expectation, and as a reason software, not just vehicle volume, should drive the next phase of value.
His conviction on Tesla shares is not theoretical, as Baron Capital made its first Tesla investment in 2014, after years of meetings that began around the 2010 IPO roadshow. The firm later built a large SpaceX position starting in 2017.
Ron Baron today in new interview on Tesla:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.” pic.twitter.com/Rv5PB0bVZ2
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) September 16, 2026
Baron said those Musk-led bets have generated about $30 billion of the $71 billion in profits Baron Capital has produced for clients. He put the firm’s current exposure at roughly $25 billion in SpaceX and $5 billion in Tesla. Personally, he described SpaceX as his largest holding, at about $5 billion, with about $1.5 billion in Tesla and additional Tesla exposure through the firm’s funds.
That concentration is also a statement of loyalty. Asked about talk of a SpaceX-Tesla combination, Baron said he had already walked Elon Musk through arguments for and against a deal, then declined to repeat them on air. His public position was simpler: “Whatever you decide is better is what I’m going to support,” he said to Musk.
Baron also said that he picked up the farewell edition of the Model S after Tesla decided to sunset the vehicle earlier this year, calling it his favorite car he’s ever driven.
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
