Investor's Corner
Tesla Shorts come out just in time for Summer
Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) shorts are coming out, and their vocal stances against the electric automaker are just in time for Summer. Temperatures are rising, so naturally, the shorts are appearing from thin air, just as Tesla’s momentum is building to finish out the second quarter of 2020.
The market will always have those looking to capitalize on a successful company’s downfall. The problem is, Tesla is not experiencing a downfall, nor is it experiencing any issues that really have to do with the automaker’s integrity as a company. Tesla is experiencing some critiques with some problems within the vehicle’s touchscreens, and some subjective opinions regarding build quality, but is that really enough to derail the momentum that the company has compounded over the past 6 months?
In my opinion, no.
However, there are a series of financial analysts who claim that TSLA is going to fall from grace, and its $1,000 stock price, which fluctuates day-to-day, will be a short-lived phenomenon that cannot hold. The analysts claim that Tesla is merely another hot car company with a fun business model and new technology, and that’s what is making it successful. However, these analysts fail to realize that Tesla is much bigger than just a company that builds sustainable cars. It is an entire tech business, focused on vehicles, energy, and sustainability, and the $1,000 stock price it holds is wholly justified.
A name that may be familiar to the TSLA stockholders is Adam Jonas. The Morgan Stanley analyst has been a notorious TSLA critic, who has continued to revise his price targets and ratings for the stock. Jonas’ current stock advice for TSLA is a $650 PT with a “Sell” position.
This is a preview from our weekly newsletter. Each week I go ‘Beyond the News’ and handcraft a special edition that includes my thoughts on the biggest stories, why it matters, and how it could impact the future.
A big thanks to our long-time supporters and new subscribers! Thank you.
While Jonas does recognize Tesla as a “tech” company and not just an automaker, his most recent note to investors indicated that the company holds a series of increased risks because “proven/mature companies” have a lesser degree of execution risk.
It is pretty interesting to hear someone who follows Tesla firmly suggest that the company isn’t proven. The automotive side of Tesla may be young with only twelve years of car sales, but it’s more than proven because everything that Elon Musk has said has become a reality.
It goes all the way back to Tesla’s Master Plan. Make an expensive car, use that money to build a cheaper car, and then use that money to create an even cheaper car.
2008 Roadster > Tesla Model S/X > Tesla Model 3
It is all right there. We could break it down further by talking about Elon Musk’s goal of building world-class automobiles that operate in an environmentally-friendly fashion that aren’t “slow and boring” as he once referred to previous battery-powered machines.
It is more than proven that Tesla is reliable, or mature, even though its a young company. It has repeatedly dug itself out of holes, built upon weaknesses, and risen from the dead in times where it really seemed like things wouldn’t pick back up. For a refresher, watch a documentary called “Revenge of the Electric Car.”
Another analyst is Gordon Johnson, the founder of GLJ Research. In an interview with Benzinga, Johnson talked about his stance on TSLA, which he said, “couldn’t be more bearish.”
Johnson points to Tesla’s lineup of vehicles as the indicator of why he feels the company isn’t an excellent pick for investing.
“Initially it was the S and the X that were going to dominate in the luxury market. That didn’t happen. Then it was going to be the Model 3, which was their mass-market car, which took them to profitability. That didn’t happen. Then it was the Model Y, right? They won’t even tell you what orders are on the Model Y.”
Tesla is coming off of three straight profitable quarters. Q3 and Q4 2019 were both profitable, and Q1 2020 was the first time in company history that the company was profitable in the first three months of the year. The Model Y didn’t begin deliveries until March, so the Model 3, while it did have some non-profitable quarters, led the company to three straight profits over the last three quarters.
As far as the S and X, electric cars were somewhat taboo when both of those vehicles were released. It wasn’t a huge market like it is today, and it was Tesla’s first real attempt at creating an everyday car. While I think Johnson has a point, the S and the X still manage to be a central part of Tesla’s fleet today, constantly receiving updates for performance and battery tech through software upgrades.
But Johnson turned his sights onto the Cybertruck. Claiming the $50 deposit (which is actually $100) is just a ploy to obtain high preorder numbers, he doesn’t even think the car is street legal. This is interesting considering it has traveled on public roads several times, and the IIHS is considering a “no side mirrors” law that would allow the Cybertruck to keep its current design.
Then Johnson mentioned the Semi. “It’s almost like the Tesla Semi,” he said, comparing the commercial vehicle to the Cybertruck. “…Where they were taking preorders for $100,000 three years ago, and they still haven’t made the car.”
The issue with this is, the Semi has always been in the plans. Yes, it wasn’t in production, but it is about to begin its first volume phase in Fremont. The issue was battery production shortages, which evidently no longer seem to be an issue because of Musk’s indication regarding the Semi’s imminent production. It isn’t like Tesla would keep the money from preorders if they scrapped the Semi plans.
Analysts are entitled to their opinions, of course. But there needs to be more education regarding their decisions, in my opinion. There is a lot of proof that Tesla is doing a lot of great things, and it starts with recognizing the mission that the company has set out to achieve. No automaker is perfect, and Tesla never claimed to be. It has had its problems just like any other car company, and it will work through them. Touchscreens fail, batteries need a replacement, tires need patching every now and again. But these issues aren’t exclusive to Tesla, they happen to every manufacturer’s cars at some point or another.
Temperatures are rising, the A/C is cranked up, and the Shorts are out. It’s Summertime, ladies, and gentlemen.
Disclosure: I have no ownership in shares of TSLA and have no plans to initiate any positions within 72 hours.
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 $134.27, according to Stocktwits.
Tesla and SpaceX shares fell on Wednesday after Democrats swept both chambers of Congress. The decline stood out as broader market securities recovered and turned positive, while both of Musk’s publicly traded companies lagged.
CEO Elon Musk already joked about the unsuccessful campaigning for the Republicans, but now the new party will make pretty drastic changes to how it handles Tesla and SpaceX, and those companies will adjust their outlook.
Let’s take a deeper look.
Tesla ($TSLA)
Tesla shares traded lower during the regular session after Democrats secured both the House and Senate. The stock was down 2.32 percent at around 1:45 p.m. on the East Coast, trading at around $389.30.
The pressure is tied to more than the raw scale of Musk’s political spending, estimated at $450–474 million this cycle with roughly $224 million directed at Texas. In that state, Tesla now faces a Democratic governor and a Democratic senator after Gina Hinojosa unseated Greg Abbott and James Talarico defeated Ken Paxton.
The Austin Gigafactory, Robotaxi pilot programs in multiple Texas cities, and any related AI compute expansion sit under a new state executive who campaigned against certain corporate subsidies and floated a moratorium on new data-center construction.
Federally, Democratic control of key committees opens the door to deeper examination of Tesla’s autonomous-driving safety record, federal energy-storage and manufacturing incentives, and the national-security implications of any combination with SpaceX.
Investors are also weighing whether the company’s historically close alignment with the prior Republican leadership will invite slower permitting, additional hearings, or tighter rules on Full Self-Driving deployment.
For Tesla, the political shift adds near-term friction around state permitting and federal regulatory approvals for autonomy and energy storage. A potential merger with SpaceX may face slower review even if it proceeds.
Core growth drivers such as vehicle deliveries, energy deployments, and robotaxi rollout remain intact, yet the stock now carries a higher political-risk premium that could weigh on valuation until the company demonstrates workable relationships with the new Texas leadership and congressional majorities.
SpaceX ($SPCX)
SpaceX shares also declined in live trading on November 4 following the Democratic midterm sweep. The stock traded at $134.97, down 4.49 percent. The drop occurred even as broader indexes stabilized, highlighting a company-specific reaction to the election outcome.
Musk’s large contributions, concentrated in Texas races that both companies lost, place SpaceX’s Starbase launch facility and headquarters under a new Democratic governor.
At the federal level, Democratic control of Congress enables greater scrutiny of NASA, the Department of Defense, and other contracts that support a meaningful share of revenue, along with reviews of Starlink national-security uses and any Tesla merger. Analysts have noted that empowered committees can hold hearings and request documents on these relationships.
For SpaceX, the results raise the risk of delayed contract awards, higher compliance costs, and tighter constraints on AI and satellite infrastructure expansion, particularly in Texas where a data-center moratorium has been discussed.
A merger with Tesla could encounter political friction that slows integration of launch, connectivity, and autonomy capabilities.
While Starlink growth and launch cadence continue as primary drivers, the company faces a more contested path for federal funding and state-level operations, requiring management to rebuild ties with the new congressional majorities and Texas leadership to limit the overhang.
SpaceX hid behind another name in the Arizona desert, and now it’s going big
Nvidia’s board meets on Jensen Huang, and Elon Musk already has an answer
