Chad Whitlock

Get 3 months of Full Self-Driving (Supervised) or up to $1,000 off with my referral link. ts.la/chad829019

@SawyerMerritt 👀🔥

BREAKING: Tesla has officially released FSD V14.3 I'm downloading it in my Model Y right now. Here's everything that's new: • Improved parking location pin prediction, now shown on a map with a P icon. • Increased decisiveness of parking spot selection and maneuvering. • Rewrote the Al compiler and runtime from the ground up with MLIR, resulting in 20% faster reaction time and improving model iteration speed. • Enhanced response to emergency vehicles, school buses, right-of-way violators, and other rare vehicles. • Mitigated unnecessary lane biasing and minor tailgating behaviors. • Improved handling of small animals by focusing RL training on harder examples and adding rewards for better proactive safety. • Improved traffic light handling at complex intersections with compound lights, curved roads, and yellow light stopping - driven by training on hard RL examples sourced from the Tesla fleet. • Upgraded the Reinforcement Learning (RL) stage of training the FSD neural network, resulting in improvements in a wide variety of driving scenarios. • Upgraded the neural network vision encoder, improving understanding in rare and low-visibility scenarios, strengthening 3D geometry understanding, and expanding traffic sign understanding. • Improved handling for rare and unusual objects extending, hanging, or leaning into the vehicle path by sourcing infrequent events from the fleet. • Improved handling of temporary system degradations by maintaining control and automatically recovering without driver intervention, reducing unnecessary disengagements. Upcoming Improvements: • Expand reasoning to all behaviors beyond destination handling. • Add pothole avoidance. • Improve driver monitoring system sensitivity with better eye gaze tracking, eye wear handling, and higher accuracy in variable lighting conditions.

@CuriosityonX @grok are these images real?

🚨: Insane new image of Moon captured by Artemis II today

👀

@WR4NYGov He also brings 6.5 million times more innovation and value to the market place. We need brighter politicians.

Elizabeth Warren has a $10M net worth. She’s never run a business or created a job. We need a wealth tax on politicians. We could call it the Pocahontas Pelosi Tax.

@SawyerMerritt I think the adults would as well! Great idea

Tesla should sell an Optimus costume like this for Halloween or something. Kids would love it.

@GerberKawasaki 😂

On the other hand, Rivian deliveries were up 30% ! With new models coming and continuing tech improvements, Rivian is the pure EV play now. $RIVN

@SawyerMerritt @ElectricNews3 And this is why they will continue to lose readership.

What a dumb article. Tesla's Q1 deliveries are expected to be up YoY. Reuters is comparing Q1, historically the softest sales quarter of the year for all automakers, to Q4, historically the strongest sales quarter of the year...

@garyblack00 🤣😂

For those who are new here, $TSLA was our largest position for a few years. One can’t just fall in love with a stock and hold onto it at any price relative to valuation. When price exceeds value, investment discipline requires that one trims or exits. This is a first principle of investing.

@77yudisjdx @Anas_tatab @itskyleconner You probably still own a vcr too. Lmfao

@Chadwhitlock @Anas_tatab @itskyleconner No gas car is losing 13% capacity in 50k miles or even 100k miles. Cope and seethe.

One of the worst parts of EV ownership is losing range every day… even when the car is just sitting there! I’m down to 87% capacity after nearly 4 years and 57,000 miles The palladium Model S / X are known for higher than usual capacity loss so this isn’t a shock, it just sucks. Enjoy the video ⚡️

@em_Lazzy DJT received over 77 million votes

Over 8 million people showed up yesterday—and this is the response??? Not leadership. Not reflection. Just ego and immaturity. There is absolutely nothing presidential about this. It’s honestly embarrassing!!!

@scaling01 😂🤣

Elon trying to pump Tesla so that SpaceX doesn't have to do another merger and bail out Tesla too he already kinda bailed out X via the xAI merger, but that didn't work as all of the xAI co-founders left. so now he has to bail out X + xAI with a SpaceX merger and soon he is going to dump all of that onto retail lmao

@NotA_Bull 😂🤣

Sold my $TSLA for a profit … I get the hype, but a 360 P/E goes against everything I’ve learned about investing. Are you still holding $TSLA at these levels, or is the math not mathing? lol

@wholemars @NestorLRamos @Tesla_Optimus Exactly

@NestorLRamos @Tesla_Optimus Great, when can I buy one?

I understand that most of us are waiting for the @Tesla_Optimus to drop… but the Figure 3 at $25k is a very compelling alternative…

@SenMarkKelly Go electric

This is from a gas station in Phoenix yesterday: $6.49 for a gallon of gas. All because Trump started war with no plan and no idea how it would affect everyday Americans. I'm fighting to suspend the federal gas tax to bring families some relief, but what they really need is a president focused on lowering their costs.

@Mishi_2210 127

A month ago, the national price of gasoline as $2.93 a gallon. Today it's $3.94. One man is to blame: Donald Trump.

The Tesla Cybercab now only holds one passenger + cab driver. But hey. Steer by wire action!

😂 Elon offers to literally pay people’s salaries out of his own pocket during a government shutdown and somehow that’s still not good enough. It’s always, “Why didn’t he solve ALL problems instantly, permanently, and to my exact specifications?” At this point it’s not even about solutions—it’s just professional complaining.

This guy was told for less than 5% of his wealth he could solve world hunger and when he was offered the information he asked for on how this could be accomplished he remained silent and never said a word back.

@TxWlkSftBigStk @WSJ @grok what's cheaper to own and maintain, a gas car or a Tesla?

@WSJ Until you see the cost of home needed adjustment for a panel upgrade and increased energy costs.

American car buyers anxious about rising gas prices will find that many electric vehicles are as cheap as they’ve ever been on.wsj.com/4dApK2i

This analysis assumes a Tesla/SpaceX merger would happen today, and that’s exactly why it misses the bigger picture. Tesla has no incentive to merge at current valuations because the market has not yet fully recognized its most asymmetric upside drivers—autonomy through Cybercab and the potential of Optimus. Right now, Tesla is still largely valued as a high-growth auto and energy company with optionality on autonomy and robotics, but once that optionality turns into real revenue, margins, and scale, Tesla’s earnings profile changes dramatically. The dilution argument relies on a static view of Tesla’s EBITDA, using a backward-looking number that doesn’t reflect what happens if autonomy scales into a robotaxi network or if Optimus begins meaningful commercial deployment. In those scenarios, Tesla’s EBITDA doesn’t grow incrementally, it expands by multiples, and the company starts to resemble a high-margin, software-driven platform rather than a traditional manufacturer. That shift alone changes how the market values Tesla, both in terms of earnings power and multiple. It’s also important to understand that multiple expansion follows proof, not speculation. Today’s multiple reflects uncertainty around execution. As Tesla proves out autonomy and robotics, that uncertainty compresses, and the market begins to price in more durable and scalable cash flows. At the same time, SpaceX is already heavily valued on future expectations tied to Starlink and launch dominance, whereas Tesla still has significant upside that has yet to be fully capitalized. Timing is everything here. A merger today could very well look dilutive on paper, but a merger at a later stage—after Tesla’s earnings power, margins, and narrative have fundamentally shifted—is an entirely different equation. If Tesla’s market cap and EBITDA are significantly higher and its business mix is more software and platform-driven, the math flips, and what looks like dilution today becomes strategic consolidation tomorrow. There’s also no operational reason to merge in the near term. Both companies benefit from staying independent while they execute on their core missions. Tesla is focused on scaling autonomy, robotics, and energy, while SpaceX continues to expand Starlink and push forward with Starship. Merging too early would risk capping Tesla’s upside before it is fully realized. The bottom line is that the “25% dilution” argument only works if you assume a merger happens at today’s valuations. The more realistic path is that Tesla waits until Cybercab revenue is visible, Optimus is commercially validated, and its earnings power is significantly larger. At that point, Tesla is not a $1.5 trillion company acquiring SpaceX—it’s a much larger, more profitable, and more fully understood platform. In that context, a merger is not dilutive, it’s strategic.

For $TSLA bulls excited by a potential TSLA/SpaceX merger: If TSLA with a 100x EV/EBITDA and $1.5T market cap buys SpaceX with a 200x EV/EBITDA and $1.5T market cap, the dilution math suggests a 20-25% reduction in TSLA value. Math: - TSLA issues $1.5T new equity for $1.5T SpaceX equity. - TSLA EBITDA of $15B/year combines with SpaceX EBITDA of $7.5B/year. - Combined entity now has $3.0T Equity and $22.5B EBITDA. TSLA has $30B net cash which is insignificant to this analysis. - Because stocks post-merger generally trade at the lowest common multiple and SpaceX future cash flows are highly uncertain, post merger TSLA/SpaceX should trade at a 100x EV/EBITDA so $2.25T. That’s a reduction of $750 billion in value (100 point multiple change x $7.5B EBITDA purchased = $750B) = 25% reduction. - The 25% value reduction is commonly referred to as a “conglomerate discount” since stocks trading separately on their own multiples and growth prospects almost always trade at higher multiples vs two companies merged together where the lowest common multiple generally prevails. - In my 30 years as a professional investor I have rarely seen post-merger companies trade at “blended multiples” based on the underlying companies’ respective multiples and growth prospects. - Financial history is littered with examples where unrelated companies with different multiples and growth prospects were merged together and the lowest common multiple won out (e.g. RJR/Nabisco, GE, ITT, Gulf & Western, Time Warner, Sara Lee, Fortune Brands, several others). - On the other hand, if SpaceX buys TSLA that could result in short term gains for TSLA shareholders but expect TSLA investors who bought TSLA for its upside in EVs, autonomy, and robots and who now own SpaceX stock to sell their shares post merger. - There can only be one multiple for a stock. With conglomerates, the least common multiple generally prevails. The notable exception to this rule has been Berkshire, because of the Warren Buffett premium that attaches to the company purchased. In short, a TSLA/SpaceX merger is a solution looking for a problem. It’s dilutive for $TSLA shareholders and so unlikely to happen.