Investor's Corner
Tesla gets restraining order against TSLA critic who tried to disrupt Model 3 test car
The man behind one of the most prominent anti-Tesla accounts on Twitter, @skabooshka, has been issued a temporary restraining order after allegedly trying to cause an accident during a Model 3 test vehicle’s Navigate on Autopilot demonstration. The noted TSLAQ member reportedly drove so recklessly that his vehicle ended up triggering the Model 3’s crash emergency avoidance maneuver.
The temporary restraining order was granted by the Alameda County Superior Court in CA on Friday, though it is still unknown if the restraining order has been served. In its filing, Tesla claimed that California resident Randeep Hothi, the man allegedly behind the TSLAQ @skabooshka account on Twitter, had “stalked, harassed, and endangered” three employees who were driving a Model 3 in the Bay Area. The electric car maker noted that this was not the first time that the noted short committed acts against the company, as he also reportedly injured a member of Tesla’s security personnel when he was caught trespassing on company property.
Tesla explains its request for a restraining order as follows (credit to Twitter user Nafnlaus for providing screenshots of the documents). The following are excerpts from Tesla’s restraining order.
Respondent has a history of trespassing at Tesla’s facilities, unlawfully taking photographs and video to post on his Twitter account, and other misconduct, as explained in the Leslie Declaration. However, in recent months, Respondent’s conduct has escalated and has resulted in violent and intimidating confrontations with Tesla employees.
In an incident in February 2019, Respondent hit Tesla’s security employee Tyler James with his car as Mr. James approached Respondent to ask him to leave Tesla’s private property. Mr. Tyler suffered minor injuries. The Respondent did not stop and fled the scene. The Fremont Police Department were called and arrived on the scene. The Department later attempted to issue Respondent a warning notice of trespass, but was unsuccessful because Respondent has avoided and been uncooperative in meeting with Fremont police officers.
More recently, on April 16, 2019, Respondent stalked, harassed, and endangered (three Tesla employees) who were driving on the highway in a Tesla-owned Model 3 vehicle bearing manufacturer plates and mounted with camera equipment. In particular, Responded pursued these employees on the public highway for about 35 minutes, variously driving ahead of, beside, and behind them, and swerving dangerously close to the vehicle. Respondent swerved so close to the side of the Tesla that the vehicle’s side-collision (crash) avoidance safety feature was triggered to engage an emergency maneuver to avoid the collision.
These employees had no prior knowledge of Respondent’s interactions with Tesla, but it appeared that Respondent was trying to interfere with their drive, and each feared that Respondent’s road conduct would cause a collision and injure them. Fearing for his safety and for the safety of the other passengers in the Model 3 (a Tesla employee) called the San Francisco Police Department at that time. However, because no officers were in the area, (the Tesla employee) ultimately did not request that an officer be sent to their location.
On April 22, 2019, Tesla will host an event at its headquarters at 3500 Deer Creek Road, Palo Alto, during which Tesla employees will be demonstrating vehicle functionality in manufacturer-plated vehicles on nearby roads. Respondent has expressed interest in this event on Twitter, and his Twitter followers have encouraged him to try to follow and interfere with these drives. Respondent is a vocal Tesla detractor, claims to be a Tesla short-seller, and tweets extensively about his desire to see Tesla (and its Autopilot technology) fail. To ensure the safety of Tesla employees and the public, temporary protection is needed, on April 22,2019, for any Tesla employee driving a Tesla vehicle with manufacturer plates within 5 miles of Tesla’s headquarters at 3500 Deer Creek Road, Palo Alto, California.
It should be noted that @skabooshka’s actions mentioned by Tesla in its restraining order disturbingly mirror some of the suggestions proposed by the TSLAQ community when the noted bear posted images of the company’s Model 3 test car on Twitter. Among these suggestions include braking in front of Tesla’s test vehicles, as well as intentionally swerving into the electric cars’ lane to ensure that the company’s demonstrations are authentic. Other Tesla bears also joked that it would be amusing if the Model 3 crashed.
Due to his actions, the noted Tesla bear will now be required to stay at least 100 yards away from the Fremont factory or the employees named in Tesla’s restraining order. He is also required to stay 10 yards away from any Tesla vehicle with manufacturer plates within five miles of the factory. The restraining order is effective until May 7, when a hearing is set.
The Tesla critic’s reckless actions seemed to have stemmed from a particular focus on Tesla’s upcoming Autonomy Investor Day on April 22, where the electric car maker is expected to give investors a deep dive into its full self-driving initiatives, including its custom Hardware 3 computer. Test rides on vehicles equipped with unreleased features of Autopilot and the Full Self-Driving suite are also expected to be held in the event.
Neither Tesla nor Hothi have responded to requests for comment to media publications such as The Verge, though the @skabooshka Twitter account boldly declared on Saturday post that “I will not rest. This is my promise. Tesla is a zero. @elonmusk will go to prison.” Elon Musk, for his part, noted on Twitter that the actions of the noted Tesla bear was something that he has never seen before.
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.
Tesla’s flying Roadster just revealed something bigger than the car
How Tesla’s Roadster fan system and thrusters are built to dominate the corners
Tesla Roadster: Three configs, one can fly, 0-60 in 0.8 seconds
SpaceX reveals how its 1 Million AI satellite network will work and prevent space collisions
Elon Musk’s Boring Company lands a new Middle East deal, and Nashville is about to get faster
