Skip to main content

Taking Tesla Private

Taking Tesla Private
August 7, 2018
The following email was sent to Tesla employees today:

Earlier today, I announced that I’m considering taking Tesla private at a 
price of $420/share. I wanted to let you know my rationale for this, and why
I think this is the best path forward.

First, a final decision has not yet been made, but the reason for doing this
is all about creating the environment for Tesla to operate best. As a 
public company, we are subject to wild swings in our stock price that can be
a major distraction for everyone working at Tesla, all of whom are 
shareholders. Being public also subjects us to the quarterly earnings cycle 
that puts enormous pressure on Tesla to make decisions that may be right for
a given quarter, but not necessarily right for the long-term. Finally, as 
the most shorted stock in the history of the stock market, being public 
means that there are large numbers of people who have the incentive to 
attack the company.

I fundamentally believe that we are at our best when everyone is focused on 
executing, when we can remain focused on our long-term mission, and when 
there are not perverse incentives for people to try to harm what we’re all 
trying to achieve.

This is especially true for a company like Tesla that has a long-term, 
forward-looking mission. SpaceX is a perfect example: it is far more 
operationally efficient, and that is largely due to the fact that it is 
privately held. This is not to say that it will make sense for Tesla to be 
private over the long-term. In the future, once Tesla enters a phase of 
slower, more predictable growth, it will likely make sense to return to the 
public markets.

Here’s what I envision being private would mean for all shareholders, 
including all of our employees.

First, I would like to structure this so that all shareholders have a choice
. Either they can stay investors in a private Tesla or they can be bought 
out at $420 per share, which is a 20% premium over the stock price following
our Q2 earnings call (which had already increased by 16%). My hope is for 
all shareholders to remain, but if they prefer to be bought out, then this 
would enable that to happen at a nice premium.

Second, my intention is for all Tesla employees to remain shareholders of 
the company, just as is the case at SpaceX. If we were to go private, 
employees would still be able to periodically sell their shares and exercise
their options. This would enable you to still share in the growing value of
the company that you have all worked so hard to build over time.

Third, the intention is not to merge SpaceX and Tesla. They would continue 
to have separate ownership and governance structures. However, the structure
envisioned for Tesla is similar in many ways to the SpaceX structure: 
external shareholders and employee shareholders have an opportunity to sell 
or buy approximately every six months.

Finally, this has nothing to do with accumulating control for myself. I own 
about 20% of the company now, and I don’t envision that being substantially
different after any deal is completed.

Basically, I’m trying to accomplish an outcome where Tesla can operate at 
its best, free from as much distraction and short-term thinking as possible,
and where there is as little change for all of our investors, including all
of our employees, as possible.

This proposal to go private would ultimately be finalized through a vote of 
our shareholders. If the process ends the way I expect it will, a private 
Tesla would ultimately be an enormous opportunity for all of us. Either way,
the future is very bright and we’ll keep fighting to achieve our mission.

Thanks,
Elon

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

OWASP Top 10 Threats and Mitigations Exam - Single Select

Last updated 4 Aug 11 Course Title: OWASP Top 10 Threats and Mitigation Exam Questions - Single Select 1) Which of the following consequences is most likely to occur due to an injection attack? Spoofing Cross-site request forgery Denial of service   Correct Insecure direct object references 2) Your application is created using a language that does not support a clear distinction between code and data. Which vulnerability is most likely to occur in your application? Injection   Correct Insecure direct object references Failure to restrict URL access Insufficient transport layer protection 3) Which of the following scenarios is most likely to cause an injection attack? Unvalidated input is embedded in an instruction stream.   Correct Unvalidated input can be distinguished from valid instructions. A Web application does not validate a client’s access to a resource. A Web action performs an operation on behalf of the user without checking a shared sec

CKA Simulator Kubernetes 1.22

  https://killer.sh Pre Setup Once you've gained access to your terminal it might be wise to spend ~1 minute to setup your environment. You could set these: alias k = kubectl                         # will already be pre-configured export do = "--dry-run=client -o yaml"     # k get pod x $do export now = "--force --grace-period 0"   # k delete pod x $now Vim To make vim use 2 spaces for a tab edit ~/.vimrc to contain: set tabstop=2 set expandtab set shiftwidth=2 More setup suggestions are in the tips section .     Question 1 | Contexts Task weight: 1%   You have access to multiple clusters from your main terminal through kubectl contexts. Write all those context names into /opt/course/1/contexts . Next write a command to display the current context into /opt/course/1/context_default_kubectl.sh , the command should use kubectl . Finally write a second command doing the same thing into /opt/course/1/context_default_no_kubectl.sh , but without the use of k

标 题: 关于Daniel Guo 律师

发信人: q123452017 (水天一色), 信区: I140 标  题: 关于Daniel Guo 律师 关键字: Daniel Guo 发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Apr 26 02:11:35 2018, 美东) 这些是lz根据亲身经历在 Immigration版上发的帖以及一些关于Daniel Guo 律师的回 帖,希望大家不要被一些马甲帖广告帖所骗,慎重考虑选择律师。 WG 和Guo两家律师对比 1. fully refund的合约上的区别 wegreened家是case不过只要第二次没有file就可以fully refund。郭家是要两次case 没过才给refund,而且只要第二次pl draft好律师就可以不退任何律师费。 2. 回信速度 wegreened家一般24小时内回信。郭律师是在可以快速回复的时候才回复很快,对于需 要时间回复或者是不愿意给出确切答复的时候就回复的比较慢。 比如:lz问过郭律师他们律所在nsc区域最近eb1a的通过率,大家也知道nsc现在杀手如 云,但是郭律师过了两天只回复说让秘书update最近的case然后去网页上查,但是上面 并没有写明tsc还是nsc。 lz还问过郭律师关于准备ps (他要求的文件)的一些问题,模版上有的东西不是很清 楚,但是他一般就是把模版上的东西再copy一遍发过来。 3. 材料区别 (推荐信) 因为我只收到郭律师写的推荐信,所以可以比下两家推荐信 wegreened家推荐信写的比较长,而且每封推荐信会用不同的语气和风格,会包含lz写 的research summary里面的某个方面 郭家四封推荐信都是一个格式,一种语气,连地址,信的称呼都是一样的,怎么看四封 推荐信都是同一个人写出来的。套路基本都是第一段目的,第二段介绍推荐人,第三段 某篇或几篇文章的abstract,最后结论 4. 前期材料准备 wegreened家要按照他们的模版准备一个十几页的research summary。 郭律师在签约之前说的是只需要准备五页左右的summary,但是在lz签完约收到推荐信 ,郭律师又发来一个很长的ps要lz自己填,而且和pl的格式基本差不多。 总结下来,申请自己上心最重要。但是如果选律师,lz更倾向于wegreened,