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 and SpaceX merger talks hit a new stage, and one hurdle remains
Tesla and SpaceX merger talks are reportedly advancing, and a deal could arrive by December.
Tesla and SpaceX are moving closer to a combination, with a deal announcement possible as soon as December, Bloomberg reported on Thursday, citing people familiar with the matter. The companies have also discussed a scenario in which the announcement slips into early 2027.
Boards and advisers on both sides are now working through the terms of the deal and the governance structure of the combined company, according to the report. One open item is how many SpaceX shares Tesla investors would receive. Bloomberg had previously reported that the two companies were aiming to announce a deal in the first half of next year and close it before the end of President Donald Trump’s term, so a December announcement would pull that schedule forward by months.
Tesla shares rose as much as 1.9% to $398.35 after the report, while SpaceX gained 0.6% to $140.63. SpaceX carries a market value of about $1.9 trillion following its June IPO, and Tesla is valued at about $1.55 trillion, which would make a combination the largest corporate deal on record. Neither company responded to requests for comment.
The talks became official on October 20, when Elon Musk said on SpaceX’s third quarter earnings call that both companies had formed special committees of independent directors to study a merger, as Teslarati reported. Musk said he could not take part because he is “a conflicted party” and called the process “an odd kabuki dance.” He also noted that Tesla would need approval from 50 percent of all outstanding shares, a bar the company missed in 2025 when a board declassification proposal won support from only 39.4 percent.
China remains the biggest structural problem. Bloomberg’s sources said the companies still need to work out how to isolate Tesla’s large and profitable manufacturing business in China from SpaceX’s U.S. government and defense contracts. JPMorgan analyst Rajat Gupta described those two factors last month as “key dynamics that are at odds with each other” for regulatory and shareholder approval. Musk has repeatedly said Tesla has no plans to separate its China business, a position he restated in August after ARK Invest predicted a merger announcement before the end of the year.
Washington adds another layer. Democrats took control of Congress in this month’s midterms and have pledged to investigate Musk’s business and political activities, which could bring added scrutiny to a deal involving one of the Pentagon’s most important launch and satellite contractors.
The report also lands three weeks before Tesla’s December 3 annual meeting at Giga Texas. That ballot has only three items, led by the re-election of Musk, board chair Robyn Denholm and JB Straubel, and includes no merger proposal. Any deal announced in December would likely require a separate special meeting for Tesla shareholders to vote on it.
The two companies already share a growing list of projects, including the Terafab semiconductor plant in Texas. Tesla’s next generation Roadster, which uses cold gas thrusters built on SpaceX hardware, turned up on display at SpaceX headquarters last month and has become one of the clearest public examples of that overlap.
Elon Musk
Nvidia’s board meets on Jensen Huang, and Elon Musk already has an answer
Elon Musk says it would be an honor to hire Jensen Huang amid Nvidia turmoil.
Elon Musk says he would welcome Jensen Huang at one of his companies if Nvidia’s board decides to push out its longtime chief executive.
On Wednesday evening, the financial account ZeroHedge posted “Elon please hire Jensen” on X. Musk replied roughly two hours later: “That would be an honor.” Neither Huang nor Nvidia had responded publicly as of Wednesday night.
Musk’s reply came as Nvidia’s board met to decide Huang’s future. The Wall Street Journal reported that directors were preparing to oust him following reports of two extramarital relationships. One involves Alice Huang, a Singapore-based businesswoman whom U.S. intelligence officials reportedly believe was working for China’s Ministry of State Security. The New York Times separately reported a relationship with Kimberly Powell, Nvidia’s vice president of health care. Huang acknowledged being unfaithful in a memo to employees on Sunday but gave no details.
@zerohedge That would be an honor
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 12, 2026
Under Nvidia’s bylaws, a majority of its 11 directors can remove the CEO with or without cause. Bloomberg reported that the board has been working with an outside firm on possible replacements and may name an interim chief, with CFO Colette Kress seen as the likely pick. Nvidia shares fell more than 8 percent in extended trading, according to CNBC, and the company is scheduled to report quarterly earnings on November 17.
Musk has more riding on Nvidia’s leadership than most tech executives. In August, he told investors on SpaceX’s first earnings call as a public company that it would build its AI infrastructure exclusively on Nvidia hardware, calling Vera Rubin “the best architecture.” SpaceX is also working with Nvidia on the compute payload for Starmind, its planned orbital AI constellation. In October, SpaceX said it had a binding commitment for a roughly $40 billion lease of Vera Rubin GPUs and related equipment, with the leases expected to begin in the first half of 2027.
The scale of that dependence is already enormous. On its Q3 call, SpaceX said it was bringing roughly 200,000 to 220,000 Nvidia GB300 GPUs online each month and expects 2.5 to 3 GW of nameplate compute by the end of the year. That buildout is now reaching new sites like the proposed $24 billion power plant and supercomputer campus at Starbase.
The relationship between the two executives also goes back nearly a decade. Huang has often told the story of personally delivering Nvidia’s first DGX-1 AI supercomputer to Musk in 2016, when no other customer wanted one. “Nobody wanted to be part of it, except for Elon,” Huang said on the Joe Rogan Experience last December.
Musk did not say what role Huang might fill, and his reply stops short of a formal offer. Huang co-founded Nvidia in 1993 and still owns about 3.6 percent of its stock, so any move to a Musk company would depend on whether, and how, he leaves the chipmaker he has run for more than three decades.
Elon Musk
SpaceX’s Anthropic deal has a catch, and Elon Musk just addressed it
Elon Musk says SpaceX’s Anthropic compute deal cuts both ways after Chamath floats higher prices.
Elon Musk pushed back on Sunday against the idea that SpaceX’s compute contract with Anthropic is a one way bet, after venture capitalist Chamath Palihapitiya argued the company could use a termination clause to charge the AI lab far more.
“It works both ways, of course. If compute becomes plentiful and cheap, SpaceX revenue will drop. No crying in the casino for either party,” Musk wrote on X Sunday evening, replying to a clip of Palihapitiya’s comments shared by AI commentator Rohan Paul.
On the All-In podcast released Sunday, Palihapitiya said either side can walk away from the agreement on 90 days’ notice. If data center supply tightens, he argued, SpaceX could exercise that option and bring the contract back at two to three times the current price, and Anthropic would have little choice but to accept. He called it “the kingmaking move,” according to BigGo Finance.
The clause itself is not new. SpaceX disclosed in its IPO filings in May that Anthropic would pay $1.25 billion per month for dedicated capacity at its Colossus clusters through May 2029, nearly $45 billion in total, with both companies able to terminate on 90 days’ notice, as Teslarati reported at the time. SpaceX’s later compute deals with Google and Reflection AI carry similar exit terms.
What has changed is the political backdrop. Palihapitiya’s thesis rests on incoming Democratic governors pulling tax incentives for data centers and slowing new construction. In Texas, Gov.-elect Gina Hinojosa campaigned on a moratorium on new data center approvals, and Deutsche Bank analysts warned last week that SpaceX’s Texas compute capacity could face delays. SpaceX and Tesla shares both fell after the midterm results.
A slowdown would favor companies that already own capacity. SpaceX acquired xAI in February and has been renting data centers to outside AI labs before the space is needed for Grok. At the Baron Investment Conference on Friday, Musk said SpaceX was “getting 50 billion a year for 35 billion dollar investments” and that it can bring a data center online in eight or nine months, compared to two and a half years for competitors. He also said SpaceX is tracking toward an annualized revenue rate above $100 billion in December, with a “best guess” of $500 billion by December 2027.
Musk’s reply points to the other side of the clause. Anthropic has signed large compute agreements with Amazon, Google and Microsoft, and if that capacity comes online faster than new construction slows, the AI lab would have its own leverage to renegotiate or leave. Musk has called Anthropic “obviously currently the leader in AI,” and it remains one of SpaceX’s largest compute customers.
SpaceX shares rose more than 2 percent in overnight trading late Sunday after closing Friday at $134.27, according to Stocktwits.
Tesla and SpaceX merger talks hit a new stage, and one hurdle remains
SpaceX hid behind another name in the Arizona desert, and now it’s going big
