Cornfed_88 retweetledi
🚨A 5-year-old girl from China shocks viewers after solving a Rubik’s Cube in just 15 seconds.
English
Cornfed_88
9.4K posts
The CIA has 24 hours to return the documents to Tulsi Gabbard’s office or else I will make a motion to issue a subpoena. These documents have been requested by Congress. @DNIGabbard @CIADirector
Leading Report@LeadingReport
CIA seized 40 boxes of JFK and MK-ULTRA files that were being processed by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) for declassification.
English
NGOer finansiert av offentlig sektor ansetter de samme politikerne som vedtar bevilgningene, helt uten relevante krav til kompetanse.
dn.no/politikk/lan-m…
Norsk
In my view the ultimate purpose is for Elon to gain full voting control over Tesla with his 10x voting power SpaceX shares.
I have no interest in owning SpaceX at current valuation right now. Those that do can buy SpaceX in whatever ratio to Tesla they want. I want to stay put in Tesla until we have millions of Robotaxis.
As a reminder Google went public at 10x sales and 240% growth. SpaceX is 100x sales with much slower growth.
English
@teslayoda Exactly. The ultimate merger purpose is to fund Space X’s datacenters in space with revenue from Robotaxi and Optimus. Elon once said Tesla wasn’t chip restrained. Now, in the cusp of Robotaxi unleash, there is a chip shortage that can only be solved with the $119B Terafab.
English
Let the public decide SpaceX valuation via its IPO.
Let shareholders of both public companies vote on the merger.
A car company and a rocket company should not merge.
Two businesses that can combine their core competencies to deliver orbital AI data centers should.
They just need a real customer to fund CAPEX. If only Anthropic or Google were interested.
Gali@Gfilche
If @Tesla & @SpaceX merge, there will be a very intense shareholder vote to get this approved Here's my 2 cents & how I'm voting. Yes. Whatever Elon & management say is fair, is a yes from me. Why? Tesla & SpaceX are valued at roughly $1.5T & $1.75T respectively. If SpaceX buys Tesla (makes sense because of Elon's dual voting class shares), maybe they do it a ~20% premium to $1.5T and make it a 50/50 merger of equals. Tesla shareholders will complain about not getting compensated for @robotaxi success, @Tesla_Optimus, etc ... But the truth is, both companies are very similar in size with parrelel upside trajectories. Additionally, they are joined at the hip with Elon leading them both and the Terafab project. Tesla is a ~$100B revenue run-rate, barely growing, valued at nearly 20X sales in this merger... extremely high for a low gross margin company. Giving $TSLA arguably ~$1T of value based on future product lines that aren't material yet SpaceX is a $25B revenue run-rate company with @Starlink already 0 to 1 poised to hit a $30-40B revenue run-rate in the next 18 months. With MUCH HIGHER profitability than Tesla's current business. That means even thought Tesla has 4X the revenue of SpaceX, it's profitability is actually equal in size. When I look at the intrinsic earnings power ($15B of operating cashflow/yr) of Tesla & SpaceX they are actually very similar. With each of them spending all their operating cash flow and more on CAPEX for future projects (including @Xai in SpaceX). Each getting a very aggressive valuation based on future growth prospects. It's almost impossible to predict how the earnings/cashflow will evolve. Especially because a lot of it depends on accounting and how the Terafab/Optimi in Space is structured. Long story short, it's very complicated, and millions of hot take articles will be written about it ... but all in all, a merger of equals, or roughly that, looks fair to me. Another kicker to consider and why I'm voting yes. I trust Elon to do right by shareholders. $TSLA is up 34,687% since it's 2010 IPO, not bad. Tesla has a management team with a track record of making crazy ambitious goals and executing. They're vision for an intergalactic future gets even grander as a combined entity with SpaceX. Let them cook. Full disclaimer I'm a $TSLA & SpaceX investor.
English
I dont think Elon has any communications with them. I think its more a question of self interest.
The real reason to merge is Elon has dual class ownership in SpaceX. His shares has 10x voting power. Meaning he will gain full voting control in the merged entity. Unlike now where he has very low voting control in tesla.
Premumably it will also make admin stuff easier. Elon can also get away with 1 earnings call per quarter instead of 2.
Some advantage down the line from getting the AI layer integrated in the same company as Tesla.
Both are in the chip/datacenter/AI space. It makes sense on some level.
Personally I dont like the valuation/hype in SpaceX right now. Even if you could argue the hype also is real in Tesla right now.
English
@grant_melson Elon probably just told them to push this agenda. Seems stupid to merge them. They both have enough runway independently and don't need each other for anything.
English
Sort the comments by number of likes and you’ll find that most do not want a merge right now (or soon) such is the case right now with many Tesla influencers’ comment sections
And yet, we are getting a near unanimous push for “Tesla weak, SpaceX strong, merge now” from larger accounts.
So is this bots? Or is it possible there’s an eerie disparity between the unanimous big accounts and split small accounts?
Gali@Gfilche
If @Tesla & @SpaceX merge, there will be a very intense shareholder vote to get this approved Here's my 2 cents & how I'm voting. Yes. Whatever Elon & management say is fair, is a yes from me. Why? Tesla & SpaceX are valued at roughly $1.5T & $1.75T respectively. If SpaceX buys Tesla (makes sense because of Elon's dual voting class shares), maybe they do it a ~20% premium to $1.5T and make it a 50/50 merger of equals. Tesla shareholders will complain about not getting compensated for @robotaxi success, @Tesla_Optimus, etc ... But the truth is, both companies are very similar in size with parrelel upside trajectories. Additionally, they are joined at the hip with Elon leading them both and the Terafab project. Tesla is a ~$100B revenue run-rate, barely growing, valued at nearly 20X sales in this merger... extremely high for a low gross margin company. Giving $TSLA arguably ~$1T of value based on future product lines that aren't material yet SpaceX is a $25B revenue run-rate company with @Starlink already 0 to 1 poised to hit a $30-40B revenue run-rate in the next 18 months. With MUCH HIGHER profitability than Tesla's current business. That means even thought Tesla has 4X the revenue of SpaceX, it's profitability is actually equal in size. When I look at the intrinsic earnings power ($15B of operating cashflow/yr) of Tesla & SpaceX they are actually very similar. With each of them spending all their operating cash flow and more on CAPEX for future projects (including @Xai in SpaceX). Each getting a very aggressive valuation based on future growth prospects. It's almost impossible to predict how the earnings/cashflow will evolve. Especially because a lot of it depends on accounting and how the Terafab/Optimi in Space is structured. Long story short, it's very complicated, and millions of hot take articles will be written about it ... but all in all, a merger of equals, or roughly that, looks fair to me. Another kicker to consider and why I'm voting yes. I trust Elon to do right by shareholders. $TSLA is up 34,687% since it's 2010 IPO, not bad. Tesla has a management team with a track record of making crazy ambitious goals and executing. They're vision for an intergalactic future gets even grander as a combined entity with SpaceX. Let them cook. Full disclaimer I'm a $TSLA & SpaceX investor.
English
@kellyglawson @grant_melson I think you hit the nail on the head.
English
@grant_melson I’ve been wondering the same; early honest discussion and dissent turned to an ad campaign. The vote will be an uphill battle, retail will be mostly ‘no’ because of absentee votes. Institutions are key and will need a sweet deal to give Elon total control.
English
Does it help to merge with a company with even more extreme PE? I dont think so.
Tesla does 10x more sales vs SpaceX. SpaceX is growing faster right now.
I agree Robotaxi might take longer than people like to roll out. On the other hand Tesla would have to mega slow roll CyberCab production, to keep it in lock step with demand, if that is the case.
English
@grant_melson imho merge asap, instead of in 2-3 years. Robotaxi und Optimus will still take years to bring significant earnings, we are trading at 400PE and we are seeing right now how slowly robotaxis are being deployed
English
We can directly compare it to Elons comp plan vote. It is crystal clear resistance is higher now.
I think the majority is still aligned with Elon. Normally only 50% of retail votes. For this vote that means 50% 'no' right of the bat. Then you start counting the actual 'no' votes.
Depending on the institutional vote it might not be that easy to get this vote passed.
English
“Most comments” does not necessarily mean “Mist shareholders”
If the post is moaning then the comments tend to “moan along” with it….human confirmation bias.
For the record, I’m not for or against at this point because there hasn’t even been a proposal of it …I suspect this is the “majority “ of shareholders at this point 🤷🏻♂️
Remember the 5/95 rule….5% of people make 95% of the noise on social media…..😉
English
I noticed that at the time.
I dont think is has to be some sinister thing, but for sure most of the Tesfluensers have some back channel communications where they coordinate.
It was the same on Elons comp plan. The big accounts coordinated to make a push for it. Only resistance was less, so it didnt form a rift in the same way.
English
Check out this clip of Alexandra on cyberbulls episode from almost a month ago. She says, regarding the merger, retail will play a huge role and "we will have to motivate the troops". And suddenly we saw big accounts start pushing for the merger. 🤔
Full video - skip to 56:00
youtu.be/8_03Lks7f5g?si…
YouTube
English
English
@New_Dimension10 @SpaceX Not sure about that, cash flows could actually be similar. Starlink is a lot more profitable than selling cars
English
GigaNevada and the Panasonic investment in Tesla was absolutely critical to Tesla’s success. GigaNevada was a success from day one. As is the LFP factory, the supercharger network, the Lithium Refinery. There are any examples of vertical integration that worked.
And GigaNevada first, and then battery day/4680s both eased the supply chain constraints because Tesla’s moves spurred suppliers to produce more and supply Tesla with more battery cells. So 4680s were also a success - much earlier than cities give Tesla credit - because their existence caused suppliers to produce more cells for Tesla.
This just play worked again. TSMC will be producing more chips - after telling Elon Musk that they wouldn’t are weren’t “comfortable” increasing production.
The Terafab is already contributing to its purpose - solving for the chip constraint. IE - it is already a successful project. Why? Because Merely ANNOUNCING the Terafab caused TSMC to approve Billions in spend to increase chip production in the US. And unlike dry electrodes - which had never been successfully produced before chips have been. To your point - Tesla is only producing two chips and at large scale and will start with Intels help and buying existing machines.
TSMCs move gives Tesla/SpaceXAI more time to figure chip production out. The time when there is a shortfall between how many chips suppliers can give Tesla and what Tesla needs just moved out further into the future.
English
FIRST: Tesla Announces the Terafab.
SECOND: Suppliers approve capex to increase chip supply for Tesla.
Elon Musk is following the PROVEN PLAYBOOK of the Panasonic investment/ and GigaNevada. Battery cells were a constraint. Cell suppliers initially said they couldn’t supply cells, but quickly stepped up production when GigaNevada was announced.
Same play just worked with the Terafab. Tesla announced the Terafab - and TSMC stepped up with increased investment to provide Tesla with more chips.
Tesla and SpaceX still need the Terafab - but will take every chip suppliers can provide too. These extra chips sooner allows Tesla to scale RoboTaxi & Optimus faster.
S.E. Robinson, Jr.@SERobinsonJr
TESLA / TERAFAB: Today, The Taiwan Semiconductor ($TSM) board approved an extra $20 billion for its Arizona chip plant and $31.3 billion for future fabs to support long-term capacity expansion for AI demand. Elon has stated TSMC will make AI5 initially in Taiwan and then Arizona. AI6.5 will use TSMC 2nm also from Arizona. Would not be surprised to see TSMC become an official partner of Terafab, like Intel, in the near future.
English
Aside from the small detail that I dont actually hve the voting rights for my shares, I would probably vote 'no'.
Im open to being convinced if the terms are great. I doubt they will be.
I would expect a 1:1 ratio.
Most likely a moot point. Institutions will probably decide this.
Personally I have basically no interest in owning SpaceX at $2T any time soon.
If people love SpaceX so much they can buy it whatever ratio to Tesla they want.
There is no need to merge aside from the fact that Elon wants full control.
I think SpaceX will be dead weight for years. And will dilute Robotaxi earnings. Worst case we also get lower PE as a combined entity.
English
If @Tesla & @SpaceX merge, there will be a very intense shareholder vote to get this approved
Here's my 2 cents & how I'm voting.
Yes. Whatever Elon & management say is fair, is a yes from me.
Why? Tesla & SpaceX are valued at roughly $1.5T & $1.75T respectively. If SpaceX buys Tesla (makes sense because of Elon's dual voting class shares), maybe they do it a ~20% premium to $1.5T and make it a 50/50 merger of equals.
Tesla shareholders will complain about not getting compensated for @robotaxi success, @Tesla_Optimus, etc ...
But the truth is, both companies are very similar in size with parrelel upside trajectories. Additionally, they are joined at the hip with Elon leading them both and the Terafab project.
Tesla is a ~$100B revenue run-rate, barely growing, valued at nearly 20X sales in this merger... extremely high for a low gross margin company. Giving $TSLA arguably ~$1T of value based on future product lines that aren't material yet
SpaceX is a $25B revenue run-rate company with @Starlink already 0 to 1 poised to hit a $30-40B revenue run-rate in the next 18 months. With MUCH HIGHER profitability than Tesla's current business. That means even thought Tesla has 4X the revenue of SpaceX, it's profitability is actually equal in size.
When I look at the intrinsic earnings power ($15B of operating cashflow/yr) of Tesla & SpaceX they are actually very similar. With each of them spending all their operating cash flow and more on CAPEX for future projects (including @Xai in SpaceX).
Each getting a very aggressive valuation based on future growth prospects.
It's almost impossible to predict how the earnings/cashflow will evolve. Especially because a lot of it depends on accounting and how the Terafab/Optimi in Space is structured.
Long story short, it's very complicated, and millions of hot take articles will be written about it ... but all in all, a merger of equals, or roughly that, looks fair to me.
Another kicker to consider and why I'm voting yes. I trust Elon to do right by shareholders.
$TSLA is up 34,687% since it's 2010 IPO, not bad.
Tesla has a management team with a track record of making crazy ambitious goals and executing. They're vision for an intergalactic future gets even grander as a combined entity with SpaceX.
Let them cook.
Full disclaimer I'm a $TSLA & SpaceX investor.
English
You dont think Elon has planned the merger for a while?
Hence he axed compact and has been slow rolling projects for years. Result: growth has stalled.
At the same time he has been pumping up SpaceX as fast as possible.
The merger would not work if SpaceX is considerably smaller.
English
Glass Lewis will recommend 'no' because Elon will gain full voting control with his dual class shares.
Institutions will probably ignore the recommendation if they get some premium.
I doubt they are enthusiastic about giving up their voting power without compensation.
I expect around 50% of retail will vote. Maybe a bit higher.
My guess is approximately 15% less support from retail vs Elon comp plan. Depending on terms obviously. Also very hard to gage the level of resistance from my X feed alone. Resistance seems considerable to me. Certainly more than with previous votes.
Almost certainly the majority of retail that actually votes will vote with Elon.
Given that a large chunk of retail usually doesnt vote it would not be unlikely with a majority 'no' from retail.
Elon needs to secure a lot of institutional votes. If institutional support drops from comp plan levels, it will probably be very difficult to get enough votes.
If institutions give more support vs the comp plan vote the retail vote is unlikely to influence the result.
Slight drop from institutions plus 15% drop from retail would result in the vote narrowly passing. Grok estimated 51.3% with my assumptions.
English
They aren’t close to a majority. It is the same few spamming X repeatedly. And the same few that also called for dividends, or share buybacks or advertising and have basically been on the short-sighted what can you do for me now side for years….. So then the 3 incentive plan votes and Texas vote become a good datapoint - because those all passed with a super majority. Plus Sawyer’s poll showed a super majority too. A few I consider to be grifters sowing Fear and Doubt - but I think the vast majority of these people will likely change their mind if presented with a specific deal and deal terms. I think these investors just need concrete facts before they make up their mind. Nothing wrong with that.
The common denominator seems to be that few uncertain have not had shares for that long…. 7 years or way less….. In contrast, the other longterm Shareholders I talk to recognize the chip constraint for the existential threat to Optimus scaling that it is and understand the need to solve for it…. There is a large difference in share count if you started buying 16 years ago that favors investors that want a merger ASAP. This makes sense as we recognize the playbook that worked so well before and have the voting power to make it happen. Institutions also will recognize the need for the deal and the supply constrains and capital needs for the fab and the compounding benefits of vertical integration.
English
Cornfed_88 retweetledi
Cornfed_88 retweetledi
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️Exclusive to X - This will not be on YouTube
Plenty of Good News for Tesla and SpaceX
Navigation might be the culprit
English
Cornfed_88 retweetledi
Cornfed_88 retweetledi
What happened with CORE INFLATION today
I've been hacked on YT. Please follow me here
The CPI number came in hot on the headline number, but this was expected due to energy costs.
What wasn't expected by the hotter core number. The equities in the premarket are down, especially the Nasdaq after a major run up. This could easily reverse today as the main reason for the CPI miss was housing, a trailing indicator, and there was an adjustment due to catching up on the government shutdown.
Rents and equivalent rents both showed .5% increase month over month and we all know this is impossible. So the core number and the headline number are both overstated.
Do you think the markets will realize this issue later today and turn around, or is this profit taking healthy?
Please follow me on Twitter. It is not clear I can get my YouTube channel back.
English
Ron Baron is one of the best investors of our lifetime. When Ron speaks, investors listen.
What do you think of Ron?
Sawyer Merritt@SawyerMerritt
Ron Baron today on $TSLA: "Now is the time for Tesla. I think it's (the stock) going to be $2,000 or $2,500 over the next 10 years." At $2,500, that would make Tesla a roughly $8.3 trillion company, 5.7x higher than today.
English