Investor's Corner
Op-Ed: Tesla faces a unique challenge–a growing number of investors who no longer believe in Elon Musk
Tesla’s (TSLA:NASDAQ) Proxy Statement 2024 revealed that the company is asking shareholders to approve two big proposals at the upcoming annual meeting of stockholders in June: Tesla’s reincorporation to Texas and the ratification of Musk’s 2018 compensation plan, which was rescinded by a Delaware judge in late January. Considering the sentiments of the Tesla community online today, it would appear that the electric vehicle maker will be facing a rather unique situation in June — a growing group of shareholders who have grown to dislike Elon Musk.
Elon Musk has never really behaved like a conventional CEO, not for Tesla or any company that he leads or has led in the past. Tesla will also never have 100% of his time, as he is also the CEO of SpaceX, and he is involved with his other companies like Neuralink, The Boring Company, xAI, and X, formerly Twitter. For years, Musk and the Tesla community seemed to have maintained an agreement that such a setup was agreeable. But with Tesla stock down 40% year-to-date, sentiments surrounding Musk have become quite negative.
Negative Sentiments
These sentiments became quite evident after Tesla announced that it was looking to ratify Musk’s 2018 compensation package, and they became even more prominent when the company went live with https://www.supportteslavalue.com/, a dedicated website that encourages shareholders to support the company’s proposals. Such sentiments were quite notable in the r/TeslaMotors subreddit, a group with over 2.7 million members. When a user posted a link to https://www.supportteslavalue.com/, the vast majority of the comments claimed that they would be voting against the ratification of Musk’s 2018 compensation package.
Support Tesla!
byu/cicada57 inteslamotors
The same is true on social media platform X. Musk has become more polarizing than ever as he continued to express his opinions on political and societal matters, and this has resulted in a growing number of Tesla community members seemingly getting disillusioned with the CEO. This was quite evident with Leo KoGuan, a prominent retail shareholder who claims to hold over 27 million TSLA shares. While KoGuan has been very supportive of Musk in the past, his recent posts showed a notable disdain for the CEO. “I fell in love with the crafted image, I was naĩve,” KoGuan wrote. He also noted that if Musk only spends more time at Tesla, the company would be so much better off.
If Elon just spends 50% of his working hours at Tesla, none can beat Elon and Tesla. I just want him to spend 50% of his waking hours on Tesla bc he is Tesla tyrant CEO. If he doesn’t want to or has no time for Tesla, he should graciously fade away and appoint his replacement. https://t.co/ROZCtKLCTM— KoGuan Leo (@KoguanLeo) April 18, 2024
A look at the overall sentiments of alleged TSLA shareholders that seem inclined to vote against Musk’s 2018 compensation plan suggests that investors are most frustrated about the company’s stock price, which has never really recovered since Musk sold part of his personal shares when he purchased Twitter. Many are also notably frustrated at Musk’s polarizing and controversial posts on X, some of which seem to be targeting the very demographic that initially supported Tesla and ensured its survival in its early years. The volume of Musk’s posts about topics like DEI, the US border, and politics has also given the impression that he is simply not focused on Tesla anymore.
Elon Musk: Strength to Liability
Overall, the situation could be summarized as follows: In 2018, most TSLA shareholders seemed secure in the belief that Musk was the company’s biggest strength. In 2024, a growing number of shareholders seem to believe that Musk has become Tesla’s biggest liability. So prominent are these sentiments today that some have seemingly adopted the idea that Musk is now weighing Tesla down and driving it to the ground, so the EV maker’s best chance of survival is to kick Musk out of Tesla and replace him with a more level-headed and focused CEO — someone like Tim Cook, who is arguably not as innovative as Steve Jobs, but is the leader that brought Apple to a $2.55 trillion valuation.
Making EVs profitably and at scale is extremely difficult. pic.twitter.com/KZenPfZBwt— ALEX (@ajtourville) April 21, 2024
As noted by Tesla community members on social media, TSLA stock, after accounting for the stock splits that the company has implemented over the years, was trading at less than $20 per share when Musk’s 2018 compensation package was initially approved. Thus, even in its current state, it should be noted that TSLA shares are still up over 800%. While Tesla has fallen significantly from its peak, when the company was worth over a trillion dollars, it is still more than eight times more valuable than it was when investors approved Musk’s compensation plan.
For those who don’t know, the stock was under $20 when it was first approved in 2018. pic.twitter.com/QmbcNcgaLF— John Shoemaker (@RealJohnShoe) April 22, 2024
In a way, voting against the ratification of Musk’s 2018 compensation plan will probably ensure that Tesla becomes a competent, predictable carmaker — and that’s not so bad at all. Tesla will still be one of the few American automotive startups that survived and thrived in a very long time. That’s a whole lot of accomplishments that can never be taken away from the company, no matter what happens moving forward. Voting in support of the company’s proposals would likely mean that Tesla, under Musk’s leadership, will continue to wager its future on risky innovations that hold world-changing potential, like AI and humanoid robots, all while Musk is focused on multiple, high-profile projects like SpaceX’s Starship program.
History will ultimately determine which of these choices will be the better option for Tesla.
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’s flying Roadster just revealed something bigger than the car
Analysts say the Roadster demo puts a Tesla and SpaceX merger back on the table.
The Roadster unveiling near Waco ended Thursday night, and by Friday morning much of the investor reaction had less to do with the car than with who owns the rocket technology inside it.
Wedbush analyst Dan Ives said the event “puts the Tesla/SpaceX relationship on the table in a tangible way,” pointing to the propulsion, pressure vessel and control hardware sitting on a Tesla product. Gene Munster of Deepwater Asset Management called the demo “a ridiculous display of engineering” with “no commercial value” beyond embarrassing traditional automakers, though he said it showed Musk wants the two companies together.
The more specific forecast came a day earlier from Barclays. Analyst Dan Levy told clients a deal could be announced before Tesla’s annual meeting, which must happen by December 6, and that an announcement in late October or early November could make shareholder approval harder. Barclays expects SpaceX to be the buyer in an all stock deal, with Tesla holders receiving SpaceX shares at a premium, based on market values of roughly $2.1 trillion for SpaceX and $1.5 trillion for Tesla. If nothing lands around the meeting, the bank still sees an announcement within 6 to 12 months.
The Roadster demo just added more weight to merger speculations. Tesla’s demo used cold gas thrusters and pressure tanks of the kind SpaceX uses on Falcon 9, and Musk described the car as a collaboration between Tesla and SpaceX engineers, as we mentioned in our breakdown of the three Roadster configurations.
Musk has not publicly addressed a deal since the event, as far as we have seen. His most direct answer remains the one he gave at the All In Summit, when he said that with so much collaboration, “who can imagine what action one might take” without ruling anything out. Ives has held to a 2027 timeline since his March note, and Musk pushed back on the China piece of the speculation when ARK floated a year end announcement in August.
The next test is Tesla’s third quarter earnings call on October 21. However, we recall in July that Musk told analysts, “we can’t talk about combining companies and that kind of thing on an earnings call,” so a clear answer wouldn’t be expected.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk breaks his silence on the Starlink impact to Ukraine drones
Musk says the US military and president set Starshield limits, not SpaceX, amid Ukraine complaints.
Elon Musk says the speed limit cutting out Ukraine’s military Starlink terminals is not SpaceX’s decision. In a post on X Wednesday, Musk wrote that “Starshield systems are owned and controlled by the US government. Any limits on speed or usage are decided by the US military and ultimately POTUS.” He added that Starlink is a commercial service limited to civilian or defensive activities and “cannot be used for offensive military action, as doing so would be inappropriate for a commercial company.”
He was replying to Mykhailo Fedorov, Ukraine’s former defense minister, who had thanked Musk for restoring connectivity at speeds up to 160 km/h and said removing the Starshield limit entirely is “now critical for Ukraine’s defense.”
Starshield systems are owned and controlled by the US government. Any limits on speed or usage are decided by the US military and ultimately POTUS.
Starlink is a commercial service owned and controlled by SpaceX. Usage of Starlink is limited to civilian or defensive activities and cannot be used for offensive military action, as doing so would be inappropriate for a commercial company.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) October 14, 2026
The complaint started Tuesday night, when Ukrainian officials said military terminals began losing service above roughly 100 mph. Presidential adviser Serhiy Beskrestnov said the defense forces got no warning and several missions were disrupted, as Teslarati reported earlier Wednesday. The 7th Rapid Reaction Corps told Reuters connections dropped for 10 to 20 seconds at speeds well below the limit, which made drones harder to control. Poland’s foreign minister, Radoslaw Sikorski, asked Musk on X whether he is “playing politics with your products again.”
That is why the Starlink and Starshield distinction matters. SpaceX introduced Starshield in 2022 as the government version of Starlink, with an initial focus on Earth observation, communications and hosted payloads. It won a Space Force contract in 2023 with a $70 million ceiling. In December 2024, the Pentagon moved Ukraine’s terminals onto Starshield, covering about 3,000 units across two contracts. Ukraine’s military connections therefore run through a service that Musk now says sits under Washington’s control.
While Musk’s post describes who holds authority, it does not infer that anyone ordered the limit, and neither SpaceX nor the US government has confirmed who set it. Ukrainian officials have pointed to the timing, which follows President Trump’s push for an energy ceasefire and Musk’s Saturday post that “Zelensky has gone too far.” The BBC noted Trump denied threatening to restrict intelligence sharing with Kyiv, and no evidence has been presented that Washington requested the cap.
The episode also revives a promise from 2025. After Poland accused him of threatening Ukraine’s access, Musk said Starlink “will never turn off its terminals” and would not be used as a bargaining chip. Poland has since supplied more than 29,000 terminals to Ukraine. Teslarati also covered Kyiv’s search for Starlink alternatives in 2025, and the latest dispute gives that search new urgency.
Investor's Corner
Tesla opens the Q&A for its biggest earnings call yet
Tesla opens its Q3 earnings Q&A, and Cybercab, Robotaxi, Optimus and regulators loom over October 21.
Tesla has opened its shareholder question portal for the Q3 2026 earnings call, with the Say Q&A page already listing questions. Investors have until 4:00 p.m. EDT on October 20 to submit and vote on what management should answer.
The call is set for Wednesday, October 21. Tesla will post results after the market closes, with a live webcast at 4:30 p.m. CT, or 5:30 p.m. ET, through its investor relations site.
Say ranks questions by the number of shares behind the votes, which gives institutional holders extra weight over the retail crowd.
Ahead of Q2, retail investors asked why Robotaxi growth had stalled, when Cybercab would start customer rides, and where the Optimus Gen 3 ramp stood, while an institutional holder asked how Tesla and SpaceX would split Terafab duties. Cybercab has since answered one of those. Tesla said last week it has 300 plus Cybercabs serving Austin, up eightfold in 30 days, with Dallas named as the next city. The questions now are likely to move from when to how fast.
There is also a regulatory question hanging over the call. NHTSA has demanded sworn answers on how the pedal free Cybercab was certified against federal safety standards, with responses due October 30, nine days after the call. Whether an analyst raises it live is unknown, but it is the kind of exposure that tends to find its way into a Q&A.
The numbers will not be the main draw. Tesla already reported 486,532 deliveries and 13.7 GWh of storage for the quarter. Consensus sits around 43 to 45 cents per share on roughly $27.8 billion in revenue, according to Zacks, after a Q2 report that missed on EPS. Goldman Sachs, which holds a Neutral rating and a $360 target, argues the outlook for Robotaxi, FSD and Optimus will matter more to the stock than the quarter itself.
The call also lands six days after the rescheduled Roadster event, which Tesla will stream on X on Thursday, October 15, at 7:55 p.m. CT. If the Roadster shows up with a production date or a SpaceX thruster package, expect it to climb the voting list before the deadline.