Investor's Corner
Ex-Goldman CIO slams Tesla coverage that cited TSLAQ points on S&P 500 inclusion
After four profitable quarters, expectations are high that Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) will be included in the S&P 500. The electric car maker posted four profitable quarters as of Q2 2020, effectively meeting the requirements to be included in the esteemed index. Yet if a recent article on Bloomberg was any indication, there are allegedly doubts about Tesla’s eligibility to be included in the S&P 500.
Citing points from DataTrek Research, Bloomberg noted that there are doubts about whether Tesla has really qualified for the index. According to the article, doubts are likely present due to the company’s profits being tied to the sale of regulatory credits. Nicholas Colas, DataTrek’s co-founder, argued that if these credits were not counted, then Tesla would not be able to post its profitable quarters, since the money the company earns from its core business is simply too “skimpy” or “volatile.”
“This puts the S&P committee in charge of adding names to the 500 in a real bind, because while to the letter of their ‘law’ Tesla qualifies for inclusion this is purely due to regulatory arbitrage — not fundamental profitability from designing, manufacturing and selling cars,” Colas argued.
I told the reporter her article presents a fringe view of what S&P may or may not be thinking, painted by the $TSLAQ community. The view is not supported by any research. Had the Fremont plant not been shut down for 8 weeks, $tsla would have made a profit w/o reg credits.— Gary Black (@garyblack00) August 25, 2020
The points outlined in the recent Bloomberg piece were called out by former Equities Goldman Sachs Asset Mgmt CIO Gary Black, who penned a letter explaining how the article misses a number of key points behind Tesla’s profitable quarters. Black, who has also served as the CEO of Aegon Asset Mgmt US, the Co-CIO of Calamos, and the CEO/CIO of Janus Capital Group, admonished the publication for essentially parroting TSLAQ talking points. According to Black, doubts about the electric car maker’s regulatory credit earnings only represent a niche view, especially this relation to the electric car maker’s possible inclusion into the S&P 500.
“Your Tesla story and headline today is at best one-sided and at worst, irresponsible. It presents a fringe view of what S&P is likely thinking, painted by the TSLAQ short community that has been trying to get a journalist to champion this view for weeks. You could have at least offered the mainstream view of what investors are thinking, consistent with the sharp rise in the Tesla stock price over the past two weeks.
“Tesla delivered a profitable 2Q in the midst of the worst economic downturn in 70 years, even with its main factory in Fremont, CA shut down for 8 of the 13 weeks of the quarter because of COVID19. If the Fremont Factory had been allowed to stay open, Tesla would have easily turned a profit without any regulatory credits. The rest of the auto industry lost $10B in 2Q. That Tesla was able to eke out a profit despite this backdrop is likely a feat S&P will find extraordinary. To say that this issue puts the S&P in a real bind in deciding on whether Tesla should be included in the S&P 500 is unsupported by research, and is almost certainly false.”
Please see attached email I sent to the Bloomberg reporter, who is severely misinformed. $tsla $tslaq https://t.co/4DjTYEr2aU pic.twitter.com/BBpyitfhaN— Gary Black (@garyblack00) August 25, 2020
Tesla Chief Finance Officer Zachary Kirkhorn has noted that he expects revenue from regulatory credits to roughly double this year. That being said, the company is also well aware that earnings from regulatory credits will only last as long as other automakers refuse to go all-in on zero-emissions transportation. As for the S&P itself, the index has been quite silent about Tesla, with S&P Dow Jones spokesman Ray McConville declining to issue a comment on Bloomberg’s article. Tesla has also remained quite silent about the subject.
Disclosure: I have no ownership in shares of TSLA and have no plans to initiate any positions within 72 hours.
Elon Musk
SpaceX just filed for the IPO everyone was waiting for
SpaceX filed its public S-1, revealing $18.7 billion in revenue and billions in losses.
SpaceX publicly filed its S-1 registration statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 20, 2026, making its financial details available to the public for the first time ahead of what could be the largest IPO in history.
An S-1 is the formal document a company must submit to the SEC before going public. It includes audited financials, risk factors, business descriptions, and how the company plans to use the money it raises. Companies are required to file one before selling shares to the public, and it must be published at least 15 days before the investor roadshow begins. SpaceX had already submitted a confidential draft to the SEC in April, which allowed regulators to review the filing privately before it went public.
The S-1 reveals that SpaceX generated $18.7 billion in consolidated revenue in 2025, driven largely by its Starlink satellite internet division, which posted $11.4 billion in revenue, growing nearly 50% year over year. Despite that growth, the company lost about $4.9 billion in 2025 and has burned through more than $37 billion since its founding.
SpaceX just forced Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile to team up for the first time in history
A significant portion of those losses trace back to xAI, Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence company, which was recently merged into SpaceX. SpaceX directed roughly 60% of its capital spending in 2025 to its AI division, totaling around $20 billion, yet that division lost billions and grew revenue by only about 22%.
SpaceX plans to list its Class A common stock on Nasdaq under the ticker SPCX, with Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and Bank of America leading the offering. The dual-class share structure means going public will not meaningfully reduce Musk’s control, as Class B shares he holds carry 10 votes per share compared to one vote for public Class A shares.
The company is targeting a raise of around $75 billion at a valuation of roughly $1.75 trillion, which would make it the largest IPO ever. The investor roadshow is reportedly planned for June 5.
Elon Musk
Tesla ditches India after years of broken promises
Tesla has ditched its plans to build a factory in India after years of failed negotiations.
Tesla’s long-running effort to establish a manufacturing presence in India is officially over. India’s Minister of Heavy Industries H.D. Kumaraswamy confirmed on May 19, 2026 that Tesla has informed authorities it will not proceed with a manufacturing facility in the country.
Tesla first signaled serious interest in India around 2021, when it began hiring local staff and lobbying the Indian government for lower import tariffs. The ask was straightforward: reduce duties enough for Tesla to test the market with imported vehicles before committing capital to a local factory. India’s position was equally firm, with an ask of Tesla to commit to manufacturing first, then receive tariff relief. Neither side moved, and the talks quietly collapsed.
Tesla to open first India experience center in Mumbai on July 15
India had offered a policy that would reduce import duties from 110% down to 15% on EVs priced above $35,000, provided companies committed at least $500 million toward local manufacturing investment within three years. Tesla declined to participate. The tariff standoff was only part of the problem. Analysts pointed to significant gaps in India’s local supply chain, inadequate industrial infrastructure, and a mismatch between Tesla’s premium pricing and the purchasing power of India’s automotive market as additional factors that made the investment difficult to justify.
First signs of an unraveling relationship came in April 2024, when Musk abruptly cancelled a planned trip to India where he was set to meet Prime Minister Modi and announce Tesla’s market entry. By July 2024, Fortune reported that Tesla executives had stopped contacting Indian government officials entirely. The government at that point understood Tesla had capital constraints and no plans to invest.
The more fundamental issue is that Tesla’s existing factories are currently operating at approximately 60% capacity, making a commitment to building new manufacturing capacity in a new market difficult to defend to investors. Tesla will continue selling imported Model Y vehicles through its existing showrooms in Mumbai, Delhi, Gurugram, and Bengaluru, but local production is no longer part of the plan.
Elon Musk
SpaceX just forced Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile to team up for the first time in history
AT&T, T-Mobile, and Verizon just joined forces for one reason: Starlink is winning.
America’s three largest wireless carriers, AT&T, T-Mobile, and Verizon, announced on On May 14, 2026 that they had agreed in principle to form a joint venture aimed at pooling their spectrum resources to expand satellite-based direct-to-device (D2D) connectivity across the United States in what can be seen as a direct response to SpaceX’s Starlink initiative. D2D, in plain terms, is technology that lets a standard smartphone connect directly to a satellite in orbit, the same way it connects to a cell tower, with no extra hardware required.
The alliance is widely seen as a means to slow Starlink’s rapid expansion in the satellite internet and mobile markets. SpaceX’s Starlink Mobile service launched commercially in July 2025 through a partnership with T-Mobile, starting with messaging before expanding to broadband data. SpaceX secured access to valuable wireless spectrum through its $17 billion deal with EchoStar, paving the way for significantly faster satellite-to-phone speeds.
SpaceX was not shy about its reaction. SpaceX president and COO Gwynne Shotwell responded on X: “Weeeelllll, I guess Starlink Mobile is doing something right! It’s David and Goliath (X3) all over again — I’m bettin’ on David.” SpaceX’s VP of Satellite Policy David Goldman went further, flagging potential antitrust concerns and asking whether the DOJ would even allow three dominant competitors to coordinate in a market where a new rival is actively entering.
Weeeelllll, I guess @Starlink Mobile is doing something right! It’s David and Goliath (X3) all over again — I’m bettin’ on David 🙂 https://t.co/5GzS752mxL
— Gwynne Shotwell (@Gwynne_Shotwell) May 14, 2026
Financial analysts at LightShed Partners were blunt, saying the announcement showed the three carriers are “nervous,” and pointed to the timing: “You announce an agreement in principle when the point is the announcement, not the deal. The timing, weeks ahead of the SpaceX roadshow, was the point.”
As Teslarati reported, SpaceX’s next generation Starlink V2 satellites will deliver up to 100 times the data density of the current system, with custom silicon and phased array antennas enabling around 20 times the throughput of the first generation. The carriers’ JV, which has no definitive agreement, no financial structure, and no deployment timeline yet, will need to move quickly to matter.
Elon Musk’s SpaceX is targeting a Nasdaq listing as early as June 12, aiming for what would be the largest IPO in history. With Starlink now serving over 9 million subscribers across 155 countries, holding 59 carrier partnerships globally, and now powering Air Force One, the carriers’ joint venture announcement landed at exactly the wrong time to look like anything other than a defensive move.
Zuckerberg’s Meta taps Musk’s Tesla for massive clean energy project
SpaceX reveals reason for Starship v3 stand down, announces next launch date
