Investor's Corner
Tesla shareholders are taking a stand against law firm’s $6B TSLA stock request
Is the law firm behind the legal complaint that ultimately rescinded Elon Musk’s 2018 pay package looking to get overpaid? A growing number of Tesla shareholders say so. This is highlighted in a grassroots effort from Tesla stockholders who are currently using their voices to ask Delaware Judge Kathaleen McCormick to deny the request of law firm Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann, which is demanding a compensation of nearly $6 billion for their services in the case against Musk.
Elon Musk’s 2018 pay package was rescinded by Judge McCormick in late January. The case was filed by a thrash metal drummer and car enthusiast, Richard Tornetta, who held nine TSLA shares when the legal complaint was filed. In a brief, the lawyers noted that they should be compensated in the form of 29 million TSLA shares. The block of TSLA stock would be worth nearly $6 billion, which would translate to an hourly rate of about $288,888.
#DelawareCourt81
letter sent in support of giving the plaintiff's attorneys the reward they deserve: 9 shares. pic.twitter.com/cGWHx5Xxym— James Moore (@russellisright) March 5, 2024
“Plaintiff’s Counsel instead seeks a fee award in kind—a percentage of the shares returned for unrestricted use by Tesla (rather than cash). In other words, we are prepared to ‘eat our cooking.’ This structure has the benefit of linking the award directly to the benefit created and avoids taking even one cent from the Tesla balance sheet to pay fees. It is also tax-deductible by Tesla,” the lawyers wrote in a brief.
#DelawareCourt81
Fullfilled my duty from EUROPE as well ? pic.twitter.com/0fATjfdnvF— SeefyCar (@SeefyCar) March 6, 2024
Elon Musk has responded to the Delaware court’s decision on X, stating that the idea of paying the lawyers behind the case nearly $6 billion in TSLA stock was “criminal.” Musk’s sentiments are understandable, especially since the vast majority of TSLA shareholders did approve his 2018 compensation plan. A number of these shareholders have now decided to make their voices known by sending letters to Judge McCormick explaining that they do not just support Musk’s 2018 pay package — they are also against the idea of paying Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann nearly $6 billion in TSLA stock.
??#DelawareCourt81 pic.twitter.com/yy8WqewatA— Ale?andra Merz (@TeslaBoomerMama) March 6, 2024
The TSLA shareholders have selected the hashtag #DelawareCourt81 for their movement. A look at the hashtag on X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter, shows that retail shareholders from all walks of life are now sending letters to Judge McCormick. Some have even sent letters from abroad. Others shared personal stories about how their retirement is tied to TSLA stock, and how a $6 billion TSLA share grant to Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann would cause them great financial harm.
Ready to ? in the morning. This letter to the Delaware judge highlights these 4 points:#DelawareCourt81
1️⃣ The excessive $6 BILLION in attorney fees lacks transparency and does not benefit shareholders.
2️⃣ The invalidation of Elon Musk’s 2018 pay package is not based on a… pic.twitter.com/3I5Xeq7bDc— Gail Alfar (@GailAlfarATX) March 5, 2024
It remains to be seen if the Tesla shareholders’ efforts would affect Judge McCormick’s final rulings on the matter. But regardless of the Delaware Judge’s decision, the efforts undertaken by the Tesla shareholders deserve a notable amount of praise. Elon Musk seems to appreciate the shareholders’ efforts, at least, as the CEO expressed his thanks in a reply to a shareholder’s post about the initiative.
Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann’s brief about its request for compensation can be viewed below.
March 1, 2024 – Fee Brief as Filed_Tesla by Simon Alvarez on Scribd
Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to simon@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
Investor's Corner
Tesla gets price target upgrade on heels of crazy successful auto quarter
Tesla received a price target upgrade just on the heels of what was a crazy successful quarter for its automotive business, as the company reported a delivery beat of over 15 percent for Q2.
Jefferies analysts are upping Tesla’s price target (NASDAQ: TSLA) to $400 from $375, while maintaining their “Hold” rating on shares, and the strong automotive deliveries from Q2 is a big reason. However, there are some other catalysts that Jefferies believes position Tesla for a strong position in the second half of the year.
Strong Deliveries
Tesla reported 480,000 deliveries for Q2, while Wall Street was between 395,000 and 405,000, as an overall consensus. It was an incredibly strong quarter from a delivery perspective, and Tesla sold well more than it produced during the three months.
Tesla crushes Wall Street expectations, beats delivery estimates by over 15 percent
While vehicle deliveries are not necessarily looked at in the light that they used to be, Tesla still maintains a lot of advantages for keeping deliveries strong. With the loss of the $7,500 EV Tax Credit last year, Tesla still maintains a strong demand case for its EVs.
Robotaxi Performance
Tesla has been operating Robotaxi for over a year now, as it launched in Austin in mid-2025. That program has expanded to Houston and Dallas, the San Francisco Bay Area, and, most recently, Miami, Florida, the suite’s first appearance in the Sunshine State.
While the Robotaxi suite is still in its early phases and Tesla is working through things like fleet size and wait times, the company has been able to undercut the pricing of its competitors and has a great safety record.
Merger Speculation with Tesla and SpaceX
This is perhaps the biggest topic that many are speaking about with Tesla and SpaceX, and it is the one thing that seems to be on the mind of every investor.
Jefferies warns that growing talk of a Tesla-SpaceX merger could cause Tesla stock to trade more like a SpaceX proxy, which may disconnect it from underlying automotive fundamentals. SpaceX has a lot going for it, especially its compute deals that have been widely publicized as of late.
Profitability in New Projects Could Take Some Time
Tesla has a few long-term ventures in the pipeline, most notably the Optimus project and Robotaxi, which is launched but will take several years to expand to a meaningful level that resonates with everyday people.
This is something that investors need to be careful of. Tesla’s projects could take some time to round out, so Jefferies advises that these may carry initial losses, rather than immediate profit. Seasoned Tesla investors have echoed something like this for a long time; they knew going in it would not be an open-and-shut strategy. It was going to take time.
These new projects are no different.
Investor's Corner
NASA taps SpaceX to launch the telescope that could unlock new worlds
NASA’s Roman Space Telescope heads to orbit this August aboard SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy with massive scientific ambitions.
SpaceX is set to play a central role in one of NASA’s most anticipated science missions in years. The company’s Falcon Heavy rocket, currently the most powerful operational launch vehicle in the world, will carry the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope into orbit on August 30 from Kennedy Space Center in Florida. Roman is now in final preparations inside the Payload Hazardous Servicing Facility, where on June 26 technicians used a crane to lift the observatory into a specialized stand for fueling and pre-launch testing.
Roman is named after Nancy Grace Roman, NASA’s first chief of astronomy, whose career helped shape how the agency approaches space science.
NASA chose SpaceX Falcon Heavy because of Roman’s needs to reach a specific orbit far from Earth, well beyond where a standard Falcon 9 can deliver it. The Falcon Heavy, which first flew in 2018, has since become NASA’s go-to option for missions that need serious muscle without the cost and complexity of older launch systems.
Celebrating SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy Tesla Roadster launch, seven years later (Op-Ed)
Roman will carry a field of view at least 100 times wider than the Hubble Space Telescope, meaning it can photograph enormous swaths of the universe in a single shot rather than the narrow slices Hubble captures. That difference in scale is significant. While Hubble reshaped our understanding of the cosmos over 30 years, Roman is built to work faster and wider, surveying hundreds of millions of galaxies at once.
One of Roman’s most compelling capabilities is its potential to discover and photograph planets orbiting stars outside our solar system, and with enough precision to directly image planets that would otherwise be lost. That means scientists could study the atmosphere and surface characteristics of distant worlds rather than simply confirming they exist. Combined with Roman’s sweeping field of view, the telescope could detect thousands of exoplanets, and some of those planets may be in habitable zones where liquid water could exist. No telescope currently in operation has this level of power and capability. That capability alone could change what we know about other worlds, and perhaps finally answer the question: are we the only intelligent lifeforms in existence?
What Roman actually finds once it reaches orbit is an open question, and that is exactly what makes this launch worth watching.
Elon Musk
California snubs Tesla in its newly passed EV incentive that favors Rivian and Lucid
California passed a $135 million EV incentive that rewards Rivian and Lucid while sidelining Tesla
California just drew a line in the EV incentive sand to put Tesla on the wrong side of it. The state recently passed a $135 million program offering first-time electric vehicle buyers a direct incentive with no application required, but the rules were written in a way that leaves Tesla at a structural disadvantage compared to Rivian and Lucid.
The program caps eligible vehicles at $50,000 for new EVs and $25,000 for used ones. That pricing threshold rules out a significant portion of Tesla’s lineup, though some lower-priced Model 3 and Model Y configurations would still qualify. California-based automakers are exempt from the price cap entirely, regardless of what their vehicles cost. Rivian, headquartered in Irvine, and Lucid, based in the San Francisco Bay Area, both benefit from that exemption. Rivian’s R2 starts at roughly $45,000 but has versions above the cap. Lucid’s Air and Gravity start at $70,990 and $79,990 respectively, well above any threshold a non-California company would face.
California hits Tesla Cybercab and Robotaxi driverless cars with new law
Tesla built its reputation and a significant portion of its early market share in California, where EV adoption has consistently led the nation. The company operates its original factory in Fremont, California, and the state was home to Tesla’s headquarters for most of its existence. That changed in 2021 when Tesla moved its corporate headquarters to Austin, Texas. Since then, the relationship between the company and California Governor Gavin Newsom has been openly adversarial, with Musk and Newsom trading public criticism on multiple occasions.
California’s EV incentive landscape has shifted repeatedly in recent years, and Tesla has previously lost eligibility for state-level programs as its vehicles exceeded income-adjusted price thresholds. The federal $7,500 EV tax credit, which Tesla models have qualified for and lost depending on policy cycles, is no longer available after it expired without renewal, making state-level programs more meaningful to buyers than they have been in years.
The practical impact for buyers is more nuanced than the headline suggests. California residents purchasing a Tesla under $50,000 for the first time can still access the incentive. But the exemption written for California-based manufacturers is a structural advantage that rewards where a company plants its headquarters flag rather than where it builds its products, and Tesla moved that flag to Texas.