Investor's Corner
Tesla shorts drive Pulitzer-winning journalist off Twitter after glowing review of Model 3 Performance
The Tesla Model 3 recently got its first professional review from a veteran auto journalist. In an article published in the Wall Street Journal, Pulitzer-winning journalist Dan Neil gave the Model 3 performance a glowing review, stating that the car is a “magnificent” piece of automotive engineering that is “representative of the next step in the history of autos.”
Tesla is currently offering test drives for the Model 3 Performance in selected showrooms across the United States. Key publications such as CNET‘s Roadshow also posted teasers about an upcoming review of the vehicle. Based on Neil’s report, the Model 3 Performance is being touted as one of the electric car company’s best vehicles as of date — one that can push Tesla to new heights.
Dan Neil’s review of the Model 3 Performance was largely positive. Though he stated that the car would have performed better had it been equipped with better tires, and he likened the vehicle’s 15-inch touchscreen as the “broken flower pot on Mona Lisa’s head,” Neil was nonetheless impressed by the electric sedan. Neil noted in his WSJ article that while Tesla as a company has its own fair share of issues, including those fueled by CEO Elon Musk’s actions on Twitter, the Model 3 Performance is a star, considering its speed, raw power, and handling. Neil’s observations about the car’s performance mirrored some of the conclusions of Sandy Munro, who conducted a teardown of the Long Range RWD Model 3. Just like Neil, Munro gave a positive review of the vehicle’s capabilities, even stating that whoever designed and tuned the Model 3’s suspension could easily be an “F1 Prince.”
Thanks Dan, you are a tough reviewer, so this means a lot coming from you. Please lmk even smallest nuance that can be improved. https://t.co/eRuPyN1p7I
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 19, 2018
Neil’s positive review did not sit well with Tesla’s staunchest critics. His Twitter feed, for one, was quickly filled with vitriol. The comments section of his Model 3 Performance review in the Wall Street Journal were filled with much of the same criticism as well. Neil defended himself on both places, and on Twitter, he ended up crossing tweets with some notable Tesla short-sellers, including Mark Spiegel and the vocal MontanaSkeptic1, who recently debated Tesla bull Galileo Russell on the Quoth the Raven podcast. Over the weekend, and amidst what appeared to be an overwhelming amount of negativity from Tesla shorts, Neil opted to delete his Twitter account. Fellow automotive reporter Urvaksh Karkaria posted a tweet later on claiming that Neil decided to let his Twitter account go because of the responses to his Model 3 Performance review.
so #teslatwitter ran @Danneilwsj off Twitter. humans are so overrated. a damn shame, really.
— Urvaksh (@Urvaksh) July 20, 2018
Screenshots of Neil’s final hours on Twitter were captured by members of the Tesla Motors Club, and from what could be seen in the images, the Pulitzer-winning journalist was engaging Spiegel and the MontanaSkeptic1 before he deleted his account. Both Tesla shorts seemed to have taken issue about why Neil has not reviewed the Jaguar I-PACE yet, as well as the $35,000 Standard Range RWD Model 3. One of Neil’s responses to Spiegel also gave the impression that the Tesla short was suggesting the vehicle given to the journalist was “prepped” especially for him (a notion that Neil described as having “no possibility”).
Dan Neil’s Twitter feed, filled with responses to Tesla shorts, before he deleted his account. [Source: Twitter]
Overall, it is unfortunate to see journalists of Dan Neil’s caliber be subjected to criticism simply because he wrote down his opinions about the Tesla Model 3 Performance. Neil, after all, might be friendly with Musk, but he is never one to shy away from questioning the CEO’s statements. Back in 2011 alone, Neil made a bet with Musk about when the company could start producing the Model S. In an article in the Los Angeles Times, Neil described Musk’s timetable for the all-electric sedan as an “audacious timeline that makes many in the car industry roll their eyes.”
Tesla might be controversial amidst Elon Musk’s occasional Twitter outbursts and the company’s tendency to meet its target timelines later than expected, but at the end of the day, the vehicles it produces ultimately speak for themselves. After all, professional reviewers like Neil, who are veterans of the auto industry, are praising the Model 3 Performance not because of Elon Musk’s rockstar status, but because of its own merits. And that, ultimately bodes well for Tesla.
Tesla received a price target boost from Morgan Stanley, according to a new note on Monday morning, but there is some considerable caution also being communicated over the next year or so.
Morgan Stanley analyst Andrew Percoco took over Tesla coverage for the firm from longtime bull Adam Jonas, who appears to be focusing on embodied AI stocks and no longer automotive.
Percoco took over and immediately adjusted the price target for Tesla from $410 to $425, and changed its rating on shares from ‘Overweight’ to ‘Equal Weight.’
Percoco said he believes Tesla is the leading company in terms of electric vehicles, manufacturing, renewable energy, and real-world AI, so it deserves a premium valuation. However, he admits the high expectations for the company could provide for a “choppy trading environment” for the next year.
He wrote:
“However, high expectations on the latter have brought the stock closer to fair valuation. While it is well understood that Tesla is more than an auto manufacturer, we expect a choppy trading environment for the TSLA shares over the next 12 months, as we see downside to estimates, while the catalysts for its non-auto businesses appear priced at current levels.”
Percoco also added that if market cap hurdles are achieved, Morgan Stanley would reduce its price target by 7 percent.
Perhaps the biggest change with Percoco taking over the analysis for Jonas is how he will determine the value of each individual project. For example, he believes Optimus is worth about $60 per share of equity value.
He went on to describe the potential value of Full Self-Driving, highlighting its importance to the Tesla valuation:
“Full Self Driving (FSD) is the crown jewel of Tesla’s auto business; we believe that its leading-edge personal autonomous driving offering is a real game changer, and will remain a significant competitive advantage over its EV and non-EV peers. As Tesla continues to improve its platform with increased levels of autonomy (i.e., hands-off, eyes-off), it will revolutionize the personal driving experience. It remains to be seen if others will be able to keep pace.”
Additionally, Percoco outlined both bear and bull cases for the stock. He believes $860 per share, “which could be in play in the next 12 months if Tesla manages through the EV-downturn,” while also scaling Robotaxi, executing on unsupervised FSD, and scaling Optimus, is in play for the bull case.
Will Tesla thrive without the EV tax credit? Five reasons why they might
Meanwhile, the bear case is placed at $145 per share, and “assumes greater competition and margin pressure across all business lines, embedding zero value for humanoids, slowing the growth curve for Tesla’s robotaxi fleet to reflect regulatory challenges in scaling a vision-only perception stack, and lowering market share and margin profile for the autos and energy businesses.”
Currently, Tesla shares are trading at around $441.
Tesla bear Michael Burry got blunt with his beliefs over the company’s valuation, which he called “ridiculously overvalued” in a newsletter to subscribers this past weekend.
“Tesla’s market capitalization is ridiculously overvalued today and has been for a good long time,” Burry, who was the inspiration for the movie The Big Short, and was portrayed by Christian Bale.
Burry went on to say, “As an aside, the Elon cult was all-in on electric cars until competition showed up, then all-in on autonomous driving until competition showed up, and now is all-in on robots — until competition shows up.”
Tesla bear Michael Burry ditches bet against $TSLA, says ‘media inflated’ the situation
For a long time, Burry has been skeptical of Tesla, its stock, and its CEO, Elon Musk, even placing a $530 million bet against shares several years ago. Eventually, Burry’s short position extended to other supporters of the company, including ARK Invest.
Tesla has long drawn skepticism from investors and more traditional analysts, who believe its valuation is overblown. However, the company is not traded as a traditional stock, something that other Wall Street firms have recognized.
While many believe the company has some serious pull as an automaker, an identity that helped it reach the valuation it has, Tesla has more than transformed into a robotics, AI, and self-driving play, pulling itself into the realm of some of the most recognizable stocks in tech.
Burry’s Scion Asset Management has put its money where its mouth is against Tesla stock on several occasions, but the firm has not yielded positive results, as shares have increased in value since 2020 by over 115 percent. The firm closed in May.
In 2020, it launched its short position, but by October 2021, it had ditched that position.
Tesla has had a tumultuous year on Wall Street, dipping significantly to around the $220 mark at one point. However, it rebounded significantly in September, climbing back up to the $400 region, as it currently trades at around $430.
It closed at $430.14 on Monday.
Investor's Corner
Mizuho keeps Tesla (TSLA) “Outperform” rating but lowers price target
As per the Mizuho analyst, upcoming changes to EV incentives in the U.S. and China could affect Tesla’s unit growth more than previously expected.
Mizuho analyst Vijay Rakesh lowered Tesla’s (NASDAQ:TSLA) price target to $475 from $485, citing potential 2026 EV subsidy cuts in the U.S. and China that could pressure deliveries. The firm maintained its Outperform rating for the electric vehicle maker, however.
As per the Mizuho analyst, upcoming changes to EV incentives in the U.S. and China could affect Tesla’s unit growth more than previously expected. The U.S. accounted for roughly 37% of Tesla’s third-quarter 2025 sales, while China represented about 34%, making both markets highly sensitive to policy shifts. Potential 50% cuts to Chinese subsidies and reduced U.S. incentives affected the firm’s outlook.
With those pressures factored in, the firm now expects Tesla to deliver 1.75 million vehicles in 2026 and 2 million in 2027, slightly below consensus estimates of 1.82 million and 2.15 million, respectively. The analyst was cautiously optimistic, as near-term pressure from subsidies is there, but the company’s long-term tech roadmap remains very compelling.
Despite the revised target, Mizuho remained optimistic on Tesla’s long-term technology roadmap. The firm highlighted three major growth drivers into 2027: the broader adoption of Full Self-Driving V14, the expansion of Tesla’s Robotaxi service, and the commercialization of Optimus, the company’s humanoid robot.
“We are lowering TSLA Ests/PT to $475 with Potential BEV headwinds in 2026E. We believe into 2026E, US (~37% of TSLA 3Q25 sales) EV subsidy cuts and China (34% of TSLA 3Q25 sales) potential 50% EV subsidy cuts could be a headwind to EV deliveries.
“We are now estimating TSLA deliveries for 2026/27E at 1.75M/2.00M (slightly below cons. 1.82M/2.15M). We see some LT drivers with FSD v14 adoption for autonomous, robotaxi launches, and humanoid robots into 2027 driving strength,” the analyst noted.
Tesla expands Robotaxi app access once again, this time on a global scale
Tesla gets price target boost, but it’s not all sunshine and rainbows
