Investor's Corner
Tesla’s $10 ‘bear case’ from Morgan Stanley highlights the noise surrounding TSLA
Tesla stock (NASDAQ:TSLA) looked alarming right before the markets opened on Tuesday amidst news that Morgan Stanley analyst Adam Jonas had lowered the electric car maker’s “bear case outcome” to just $10 per share, a steep drop from his initial worst-case scenario estimate of $97 per share. The analyst’s findings dealt a blow to Tesla stock during pre-market trading, pushing shares down by over 3% at one point.
The Morgan Stanley analyst’s worst-case estimate was driven in part by concerns about Tesla’s business in China, which would likely be adversely affected by the ongoing trade war between the country and the United States. According to Jonas, Tesla could generate about $9 billion in revenues in China between 2020 and 2024, but if Beijing targets the company with reprisal tariffs and restrictions, that figure could be halved, resulting in more than $16 billion of the electric car maker’s market value getting wiped out.
“Our revised case assumes Tesla misses our current Chinese volume forecast by roughly half, to account for the highly volatile trade situation in the region, particularly around areas of technology, which we believe run a high and increasing risk of government/regulatory attention. We believe as Tesla’s share price declines, the likelihood of the company potentially seeking alternatives from strategic/industrial/financial partners rises,” Jonas noted.
The analyst’s radical $10 estimate for Tesla unsurprisingly attracted a lot of attention, and it did not take long before news of Morgan Stanley’s updated views made the rounds online. What was not reported as much was that Adam Jonas kept his $230 price target on TSLA stock, as well as his equal-weight rating for the company under the firm’s best-case scenario. Also left out in a number of reports was Morgan Stanley’s best-case price target of $391, which is actually pretty optimistic considering the recent movements of Tesla stock.
Other personalities in the financial world eventually gave their take on Jonas’ worst-case scenario for Tesla. Jim Cramer, who has traded barbs with Elon Musk in the past, described the $10 estimate as “insane” and a simple gimmick. “Setting a price target of $10 on a $200 stock really is insane. How about $8? How about $12? Ten basically says, ‘I want to get talked about. Let’s talk about me,’” Cramer said, adding that “if he had done $47 would we have talked about him? No, but 10. Ten is right in your face. I question this piece of research.”
Cathie Wood of ARK Invest, who still maintains a positive stance on the company, also questioned the Morgan Stanley analyst’s findings. “Also interesting to note, Jonas cut his worst-case price by more than 90% but left his price target unchanged at $230. So, I guess he is suggesting that the probability of the bear case has dropped significantly, and/ or the probability of the bull case has increased,” Wood wrote on Twitter.
Considering the pervading negativity surrounding Tesla’s narrative today, it is unsurprising to see aspects of Morgan Stanley’s recent note getting misinterpreted. A look at social media platforms such as Twitter, for example, would reveal some Tesla critics stating that the $10 worst-case estimate was Morgan Stanley’s new price target for TSLA stock. This is untrue, but these instances all but highlight how easy it is for misconceptions about the electric car maker could spread.
This pervading negativity is seen in the mainstream coverage of the company. On Monday, Dan Ives from Wedbush Securities cut his price target and penned a scathing note to Tesla, even describing Elon Musk’s initiatives such as Full Self-Driving and the Robotaxi network as “sci-fi projects.” Ives’ statements on Monday garnered widespread attention, significantly more than his comments on Tuesday, when he explained that he does not think Tesla will eventually file for bankruptcy. Ives also noted on Tuesday that Tesla could return to profitability in the future, provided that demand is sustained and costs are cut.
At this point, it appears that the time is right for Tesla to adopt a more assertive PR strategy that is ready to debunk misinformation and clarify misconceptions at a moment’s notice. By doing so, Tesla can lay out its case clearly, providing explanations as necessary and leaving little to speculation. This would require constant vigilance on the part of the electric car maker, but it would help, at least by straightening out the facts of a story. These initiatives, coupled with an aggressive information campaign that dispels misconceptions about the company and its vehicles, could ultimately allow Tesla to change the course of its narrative for the better.
As of writing, Tesla stock is trading -0.29% at $204.76 per share.
Disclosure: I have no ownership in shares of TSLA and have no plans to initiate any positions within 72 hours.
There are a lot of Tesla bulls out there who have astronomical expectations for the company, especially as its arm of reach has gone well past automotive and energy and entered artificial intelligence and robotics.
However, some of the most bullish Tesla investors believe the company could become worth $100 trillion, and CEO Elon Musk does not believe that number is completely out of the question, even if it sounds almost ridiculous.
To put that number into perspective, the top ten most valuable companies in the world — NVIDIA, Apple, Alphabet, Microsoft, Amazon, TSMC, Meta, Saudi Aramco, Broadcom, and Tesla — are worth roughly $26 trillion.
Will Tesla join the fold? Predicting a triple merger with SpaceX and xAI
Cathie Wood of ARK Invest believes the number is reasonable considering Tesla’s long-reaching industry ambitions:
“…in the world of AI, what do you have to have to win? You have to have proprietary data, and think about all the proprietary data he has, different kinds of proprietary data. Tesla, the language of the road; Neuralink, multiomics data; nobody else has that data. X, nobody else has that data either. I could see $100 trillion. I think it’s going to happen because of convergence. I think Tesla is the leading candidate [for $100 trillion] for the reason I just said.”
Musk said late last year that all of his companies seem to be “heading toward convergence,” and it’s started to come to fruition. Tesla invested in xAI, as revealed in its Q4 Earnings Shareholder Deck, and SpaceX recently acquired xAI, marking the first step in the potential for a massive umbrella of companies under Musk’s watch.
SpaceX officially acquires xAI, merging rockets with AI expertise
Now that it is happening, it seems Musk is even more enthusiastic about a massive valuation that would swell to nearly four-times the value of the top ten most valuable companies in the world currently, as he said on X, the idea of a $100 trillion valuation is “not impossible.”
It’s not impossible
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 6, 2026
Tesla is not just a car company. With its many projects, including the launch of Robotaxi, the progress of the Optimus robot, and its AI ambitions, it has the potential to continue gaining value at an accelerating rate.
Musk’s comments show his confidence in Tesla’s numerous projects, especially as some begin to mature and some head toward their initial stages.
Elon Musk
Tesla director pay lawsuit sees lawyer fees slashed by $100 million
The ruling leaves the case’s underlying settlement intact while significantly reducing what the plaintiffs’ attorneys will receive.
The Delaware Supreme Court has cut more than $100 million from a legal fee award tied to a shareholder lawsuit challenging compensation paid to Tesla directors between 2017 and 2020.
The ruling leaves the case’s underlying settlement intact while significantly reducing what the plaintiffs’ attorneys will receive.
Delaware Supreme Court trims legal fees
As noted in a Bloomberg Law report, the case targeted pay granted to Tesla directors, including CEO Elon Musk, Oracle founder Larry Ellison, Kimbal Musk, and Rupert Murdoch. The Delaware Chancery Court had awarded $176 million to the plaintiffs. Tesla’s board must also return stock options and forego years worth of pay.
As per Chief Justice Collins J. Seitz Jr. in an opinion for the Delaware Supreme Court’s full five-member panel, however, the decision of the Delaware Chancery Court to award $176 million to a pension fund’s law firm “erred by including in its financial benefit analysis the intrinsic value” of options being returned by Tesla’s board.
The justices then reduced the fee award from $176 million to $70.9 million. “As we measure it, $71 million reflects a reasonable fee for counsel’s efforts and does not result in a windfall,” Chief Justice Seitz wrote.
Other settlement terms still intact
The Supreme Court upheld the settlement itself, which requires Tesla’s board to return stock and options valued at up to $735 million and to forgo three years of additional compensation worth about $184 million.
Tesla argued during oral arguments that a fee award closer to $70 million would be appropriate. Interestingly enough, back in October, Justice Karen L. Valihura noted that the $176 award was $60 million more than the Delaware judiciary’s budget from the previous year. This was quite interesting as the case was “settled midstream.”
The lawsuit was brought by a pension fund on behalf of Tesla shareholders and focused exclusively on director pay during the 2017–2020 period. The case is separate from other high-profile compensation disputes involving Elon Musk.
Investor's Corner
Tesla (TSLA) Q4 and FY 2025 earnings call: The most important points
Executives, including CEO Elon Musk, discussed how the company is positioning itself for growth across vehicles, energy, AI, and robotics despite near-term pressures from tariffs, pricing, and macro conditions.
Tesla’s (NASDAQ:TSLA) Q4 and FY 2025 earnings call highlighted improving margins, record energy performance, expanding autonomy efforts, and a sharp acceleration in AI and robotics investments.
Executives, including CEO Elon Musk, discussed how the company is positioning itself for growth across vehicles, energy, AI, and robotics despite near-term pressures from tariffs, pricing, and macro conditions.
Key takeaways
Tesla reported sequential improvement in automotive gross margins excluding regulatory credits, rising from 15.4% to 17.9%, supported by favorable regional mix effects despite a 16% decline in deliveries. Total gross margin exceeded 20.1%, the highest level in more than two years, even with lower fixed-cost absorption and tariff impacts.
The energy business delivered standout results, with revenue reaching nearly $12.8 billion, up 26.6% year over year. Energy gross profit hit a new quarterly record, driven by strong global demand and high deployments of MegaPack and Powerwall across all regions, as noted in a report from The Motley Fool.
Tesla also stated that paid Full Self-Driving customers have climbed to nearly 1.1 million worldwide, with about 70% having purchased FSD outright. The company has now fully transitioned FSD to a subscription-based sales model, which should create a short-term margin headwind for automotive results.
Free cash flow totaled $1.4 billion for the quarter. Operating expenses rose by $500 million sequentially as well.
Production shifts, robotics, and AI investment
Musk further confirmed that Model S and Model X production is expected to wind down next quarter, and plans are underway to convert Fremont’s S/X line into an Optimus robot factory with a capacity of one million units.
Tesla’s Robotaxi fleet has surpassed 500 vehicles, operating across the Bay Area and Austin, with Musk noting a rapid monthly expansion pace. He also reiterated that CyberCab production is expected to begin in April, following a slow initial S-curve ramp before scaling beyond other vehicle programs.
Looking ahead, Tesla expects its capital expenditures to exceed $20 billion next year, thanks to the company’s operations across its six factories, the expansion of its fleet expansion, and the ramp of its AI compute. Additional investments in AI chips, compute infrastructure, and future in-house semiconductor manufacturing were discussed but are not included in the company’s current CapEx guidance.
More importantly, Tesla ended the year with a larger backlog than in recent years. This is supported by record deliveries in smaller international markets and stronger demand across APAC and EMEA. Energy backlog remains strong globally as well, though Tesla cautioned that margin pressure could emerge from competition, policy uncertainty, and tariffs.
SpaceX blocks unauthorized Starlink terminals used by Russian troops
Tesla Semi pricing revealed after company uncovers trim levels
