Investor's Corner
Elon Musk’s ‘reckless conduct’ on Twitter highlighted by SEC in fiery rebuttal
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has issued a fiery response to the points outlined by Elon Musk’s legal team last week, which saw the Tesla CEO take a firm stand against the allegations of the agency. According to the SEC’s response, Musk must be held in contempt because his “reckless actions” on social media have been “stunning.”
Musk’s ‘stunning’ conduct
The SEC filed its rebuttal of Musk’s points on Monday, arguing that Musk has made no diligent or good faith effort to comply with the pre-approval provision of the court’s order. The SEC also pointed out that none of Elon Musk’s tweets since he reached a settlement with the agency last year were screened before they were posted online.
“The pre-approval requirement was designed to protect against reckless conduct by Musk going forward. It is therefore stunning to learn that, at the time of filing of the [contempt] motion, Musk had not sought pre-approval for a single one of the numerous tweets about Tesla he published in the months since the court-ordered pre-approval policy went into effect. Musk reads this Court’s order as not requiring pre-approval unless Musk himself unilaterally decides his planned tweets are material. His interpretation is inconsistent with the plain terms of this Court’s order and renders its pre-approval requirement meaningless” the agency wrote.
Material Information
The agency also argues that Musk’s February 19 tweet, where he noted that Tesla would produce around 500,000 vehicles in 2019, was material information to Tesla and its shareholders. The agency added that the frequency of Tesla’s references to its production forecast in its public statements is proof that such statements are material for the company.
“Musk’s recognition of the significance of Tesla’s vehicle production forecasts to investors is evidenced by the frequency with which he and Tesla highlight such forecasts in their public statements. For years and continuing through the company’s most recent earnings release, Tesla and Musk have prominently featured vehicle production forecasts in their public communications, including Tesla’s investor letters, Musk’s tweets, and the company’s filings with the SEC. While some companies emphasize forward-looking guidance on financial metrics such as revenue and earnings per share, Tesla often highlights guidance regarding expected production rates and deliveries. Given this focus on Tesla’s production capabilities, Musk cannot credibly argue that his statement, as Tesla’s CEO, that the company ‘will make around 500k’ cars in 2019 could not have reasonably contained information material to Tesla and its investors,” the SEC argued.
Disclosures
The SEC further argued that Musk’s tweet was different from the previous public disclosures. Tesla’s Q4 2018 and Full Year Update Letter noted that the company is expecting to deliver 360,000 to 400,000 vehicles in 2019, though Musk later pointed out in the earnings call that Tesla is aiming to produce around “maybe in the order of 350,000 to 500,000 Model 3s” this 2019. The SEC does not recognize Musk’s statement in the earnings call.
“Disputing the logical conclusion that new information about a critical company metric reasonably could be material to Tesla’s shareholders, Musk claims that the 7:15 tweet ‘simply was not ‘news.’’ It is frankly difficult to follow Musk’s tortured analysis, which attempts to cobble together information from various public statements by Tesla in January 2019 to arrive at the post hoc conclusion that his 7:15 tweet was ‘within previously disclosed ranges.’ Regardless, Musk’s arguments do not change the fact that, before the 7:15 tweet, Tesla had never disclosed that it planned to make around 500,000 cars in 2019. Therefore, Musk was required to obtain pre-approval before he published this statement.
“Prior to the 7:15 tweet, Tesla had not publicly disclosed any forecast of the total number of vehicles it expected to produce in 2019. This should end the Court’s inquiry as to whether Musk’s failure to seek pre-approval constituted a violation of the Court’s order. In the absence of an affirmative forecast on this important topic, Musk’s tweet contained new information that could reasonably have been material to Tesla and its shareholders.
“Tesla had, however, previously provided a clear forecast of total vehicle deliveries in 2019. Specifically, Tesla’s January 30, 2019 Fourth Quarter & Full Year Update (‘Update Letter’) stated, “In total, we are expecting to deliver 360,000 to 400,000 vehicles in 2019 . . . .” Tesla included the same delivery forecast in the pre-approved talking points for its January 30 earnings call. Evidently at a loss as to how to explain the material difference between the company’s repeated deliveries guidance and his 7:15 tweet, Musk’s brief does not even mention the deliveries guidance.
“Instead, Musk argues that his tweet could not reasonably have been material because Tesla previously stated that it was ‘targeting’ an annualized production rate in excess of 500,000 Model 3 vehicles sometime between Q4 of 2019 and Q2 of 2020. This guidance was also given in Tesla’s 2018 Form 10-K and during Tesla’s January 30 earnings call. But this was a qualified forecast (‘targeting’) of Tesla’s expected achievement of a production run rate (not of aggregate production) for a particular vehicle line at some future point in time (somewhere between late 2019 and the middle of 2020). On its face, the 7:15 tweet—which stated that Tesla will make around 500,000 cars in 2019—was materially different from Tesla’s production rate forecasts for Model 3.”
The skirmish continues
The release of the SEC’s response to Elon Musk’s stance would likely cause more volatility for Tesla and the performance of its stock (NASDAQ:TSLA). The agency and the CEO have clashed a number of times over the past year, and Tesla shareholders have been, for the most part, adversely affected. With the SEC’s response showing that the battle between Musk and the agency will likely continue, Tesla shareholders and those that follow the company closely would best be prepared for more ripples along the way.
A decision on the SEC’s request to hold Elon Musk in contempt of court for his February 19 tweet will be decided by the US District Court for Southern New York, the same office which which the CEO and the agency’s settlement last October.
The SEC’s rebuttal of Elon Musk’s arguments could be accessed here.
Elon Musk
Tesla Cybercabs narrowly miss deadly Amazon cargo plane crash
An Amazon cargo plane crash near Miami’s airport stopped feet from dozens of Tesla Cybercabs.
An Amazon Prime Air Boeing 767 cargo jet overran the runway at Miami International Airport on Sunday afternoon, killing five people and injuring five more. The jet, operated by North Carolina based carrier 21 Air as Flight 7598, touched down around 2 p.m. after arriving from San Juan, Puerto Rico, then crossed the airport perimeter, plowed across NW 67th Avenue and struck multiple vehicles before catching fire, according to the Associated Press.
Photos and video from the scene show the aircraft’s nose stopped within meters of a fenced staging lot holding dozens of gold painted Tesla Cybercabs, the steering wheel free robotaxi Tesla began putting on public roads in Austin last week. Miami-Dade Fire Rescue has confirmed the plane struck “multiple vehicles” but has not said whether any Cybercabs were among them, and neither Tesla nor airport officials have addressed the fleet directly.
The Cybercabs had not yet entered commercial service in Miami. Tesla’s existing Robotaxi operation there runs on modified Model Y vehicles and has been unsupervised since Ashok Elluswamy confirmed the detail on X in July.
Footage of the plane crash from earlier today | #ONLYinDADE pic.twitter.com/iGoOtnd6cD
— ONLY in DADE (@ONLYinDADE) September 6, 2026
Elon Musk offered the briefest of reactions. Replying to a Zero Hedge post about the Cybercabs sitting so close to the wreckage, he wrote a single word: “Weird.” He has not commented further, and Tesla has not issued a statement.
The timing puts Tesla’s newest vehicle near an unrelated but highly visible tragedy just days after its Austin debut, a launch that had already drawn scrutiny from federal regulators. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration opened an audit how Tesla certified the Cybercab as compliant with federal vehicle safety standards, a process Teslarati covered after the vehicle’s September 3 launch event. That inquiry concerns the car’s lack of a steering wheel and pedals, not the Miami crash.
Investigators from the FAA and NTSB are focused on the plane, not the parking lot beside it. Flight data reviewed by outlets including Simple Flying show the 767 touched down around 170 knots, well above the 135 to 140 knot range typical for the aircraft, though investigators have not determined a cause. Amazon said it is working with authorities and that its priority is the safety of everyone affected.
Whether any Cybercabs were damaged, and what Tesla plans for the fleet parked near one of the country’s busiest airports, remain open questions.
Featured
Tesla Cybercab is coming to Asia this month as US service officially begins
Tesla Asia says Cybercab will be on display in Hong Kong, Tokyo, Beijing and Shanghai this month.
Tesla’s Cybercab is heading to Asia. The official Tesla Asia account posted on X Thursday, inviting Cybercab fans to “Come experience the future of autonomy in Hong Kong, Tokyo, Beijing & Shanghai.” The post went up within hours of Tesla’s own Cybercab milestone in Texas, where the company said Thursday it had begun offering rides in across Austin.
Exact dates and venues for the Asia tour haven’t been released yet, though Tesla Hong Kong replied to the announcement with “Cybercab will be on display in Hong Kong soon,” while Tesla Japan’s response pointed fans to a sign up page for updates. Neither post mentions test rides or a service area, and nothing so far suggests Tesla is launching Robotaxi operations in any of the four cities. Based on how Tesla has run past Cybercab tours, in Europe in late 2024 and at US shopping centers that same December, the Asia stops are almost certainly static displays at Tesla stores or public venues as a means to stimulate buzz for its future driverless ride-hailing service in the big cities.
Cybercab will be on display in Asia this month!
Come experience the future of autonomy in Hong Kong, Tokyo, Beijing & Shanghai. pic.twitter.com/wGmmEastfX— Tesla Asia (@Tesla_Asia) September 4, 2026
The timing lines up with Tesla’s only prior Cybercab appearance in the region, a booth at the China International Import Expo in Shanghai last November, which Teslarati covered at the time. At that event, Tesla’s regional general manager for Shanghai framed the car as evidence of the company’s broader mission, a message Tesla has since formalized in its Master Plan Part IV, which states that “autonomous vehicles have the capacity to dramatically improve the affordability, availability and safety of transportation while reducing pollution, particularly in our increasingly dense global cities.” The same document is where Tesla lays out its “sustainable abundance” framing for Cybercab and Optimus alike, describing the two as the hardware behind an AI driven push to cut the cost of transportation and labor at scale.
Whether Cybercab actually operates as a robotaxi anywhere in Asia remains an open question, considering China has already pushed an autonomous ride-hailing market that’s run on homegrown players like Baidu’s Apollo Go and Pony AI. For now, the four city tour reads as a marketing push timed to Austin’s momentum.
Elon Musk
OpenAI cites distrust of SpaceX in decision to drop Cursor partnership
OpenAI will cut SpaceX-owned Cursor’s model access in November, citing Musk’s history of broken contracts.
OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT, announced late Friday that it is ending its partnership with Cursor, cutting off the coding tool’s access to its models on November 12. The move comes two weeks after SpaceX completed its $60 billion acquisition of Cursor’s parent company, Anysphere, folding the popular AI coding assistant into Elon Musk’s growing SpaceXAI division.
In a post on its website, OpenAI said the decision came down to trust, not technology. “We cannot be confident that SpaceX will use our technology within our terms of service, based on our experience with Elon Musk’s companies violating contracts,” the company wrote. OpenAI pointed to two specific incidents: X, now part of SpaceX, allegedly breaking the terms of an existing OpenAI contract after Musk bought Twitter.
That lawsuit is the backdrop for all of this. Musk cofounded OpenAI in 2015, left the board in 2018, and sued Sam Altman and Greg Brockman in 2024, arguing they abandoned the company’s nonprofit mission for profit. A federal jury sided with OpenAI in May, finding Musk waited too long to sue rather than ruling on the merits of his claims. Musk said at the time he would appeal to the Ninth Circuit, calling the outcome a “calendar technicality” rather than a real judgment.
SpaceX’s interest in Cursor predates that verdict by weeks. The company first struck a deal with Cursor in April, securing an option to acquire it for $60 billion or pay $10 billion for joint development work instead. As Teslarati reported at the time, the logic was straightforward: Cursor was paying retail prices to Anthropic and OpenAI, two of its most direct competitors, every time a developer used its product, while SpaceX had idle capacity on its Colossus supercomputer, roughly the equivalent of a million Nvidia H100 GPUs, that Cursor could use to train its own models instead. SpaceX exercised the option in June, days after its own IPO, and the deal closed in mid-August.
Once it closed, Musk moved fast. On an all-hands call with more than 1,000 Cursor employees, he reportedly told staff that SpaceXAI’s Grok was playing catchup in the AI race, unlike Tesla and SpaceX in their own markets, and singled out Anthropic as the company to catch. Cursor CEO Michael Truell now reports directly to Musk inside SpaceXAI.
Losing OpenAI’s models leaves Cursor leaning harder on Anthropic’s Claude, which has its own compute agreement with SpaceX, and on Cursor’s in-house Composer model, the one SpaceX’s compute was supposed to accelerate in the first place. OpenAI framed the November deadline as maximum notice under its contract, and said it wants to “go above and beyond” to help developers through the transition. Whether Anthropic makes the same call is now the open question in AI coding.
Tesla gives the Roadster an official “Go for launch” demonstration date
Tesla plans big safety improvements for Full Self-Driving v15
