Read on Twitter
1/ A short thread about $TSLA media coverage. Some reporters do a fine job, but still miss important facts. Others make me wonder if it's not deliberate.
2/ Let's start with the more innocent example, this Bloomberg story by @danahull & @Rauwald, about the departure of Tesla's head of European operations, Sascha Zahnd, after less than a year on the job. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-08/tesla-loses-another-europe-chief-in-midst-of-berlin-factory-push
3/ It's a big story, especially given endless Tesla turnover. The Bloomberg reporters included a key detail from their primary source:
"German publication Manager Magazin reported earlier Friday that Zahnd was leaving the company following disputes with CEO Elon Musk."
"German publication Manager Magazin reported earlier Friday that Zahnd was leaving the company following disputes with CEO Elon Musk."
4/ Bloomberg went further & confirmed with two anonymous sources. So, solid reporting:
"...according to two people who worked with him previously. They asked not to be identified because they are no longer at Tesla."
"...according to two people who worked with him previously. They asked not to be identified because they are no longer at Tesla."
5/ The story is all the more important because of Tesla's announced plans to build a factory in Brandenburg:
"Musk, 48, has been pushing to start construction of a factory near Berlin with the aim of producing Model Y crossovers there as soon as the middle of 2021."
"Musk, 48, has been pushing to start construction of a factory near Berlin with the aim of producing Model Y crossovers there as soon as the middle of 2021."
6/ Let's remember what happened there. Although lacking final permits, Tesla several months ago rushed to cut down a forest to clear the site for the plant (forest-clearing is not allowed between March & November).
7/ The Bloomberg story reports,
"Work at the site has been making progress despite minor coronavirus-related disruptions."
But that's just not true. On April 24, I wrote about the true state of affairs:
"Work at the site has been making progress despite minor coronavirus-related disruptions."
But that's just not true. On April 24, I wrote about the true state of affairs:
8/ It appears reporter Christoph Rauwald is based in Germany. Hey, Christoph, pick up the phone & do a little digging. Here's a link to my 4-24 story if you want to search for "Brandenburg" & get started. https://seekingalpha.com/article/4339781-teslas-transformation-chinese-company-seems-unstoppable
9/ It might also have been useful to mention that Tesla is getting eaten alive in Europe this year by the arrival of formidable EV competition. Q2 has been tough on all, but other EV makers are simply gutting Tesla: https://twitter.com/fly4dat/status/1259108228023156736
10/ (Yes, that's just Norway, but Norway is the most mature EV market in the EU, with immense EV incentives. And April results indicate the story is much the same all over Europe in Q2.)
11/ Also, it might have been nice to mention that Tesla does not appear to have enough cash to build any new factory, anywhere, without first raising more money. But that would have required studying Tesla's liquidity. https://seekingalpha.com/article/4342730-teslas-illusory-liquidity-update-and-cash-burn-estimate
12/ Okay, enough of that. On to the bigger gripe: one of my favorite targets, @TimHiggins of @WSJ who, it is well known, grows ever closer to publishing his book about Tesla and Musk.
I'm guessing it will be a great read, because I believe Musk has given him special access.
I'm guessing it will be a great read, because I believe Musk has given him special access.
13/ Let's look at a big story on the front page of the Journal's terrific Exchange section, published every Saturday (link at the end of this thread):
14/ There are many fine things about this lengthy story. For instance, it details the extraordinary margin loans Musk uses to support his lifestyle & outlines the dangers such borrowing can pose to the company. That said, Higgins engages in some subtle but important whitewashing.
15/ Higgins notes early on that Musk "has blasted authorities over shelter-in-place rules." He returns to this later:
16/ No mention at all here of Musk's January 31 tweet describing COV-19 as no more harmful than the common cold. Or later tweets deriding the "panic," forecasting no further deaths after mid-April, and announcing children were "immune."
17/ Further, no mention that Musk promised he had secured ventilators (cost: $50k or so a pop) but instead delivered 2nd hand sleep apnea machines ($800 a pop). From China. That proved useless if not dangerous. Instead it's a "battle with critics" as if there are two sides.
18/ Yes, the story is has details that are critical of Musk, but it feels optimized to shelter Musk from Google searches.
19/ And, in this lengthy story, detailing how a compensation plan tied to stock price might create unhealthy temptations, not a single mention of the "funding secured" episode. The word "fraud" (the SEC's factual allegations of which Musk agreed he cannot deny) nowhere appears.
20/ Some here may disagree with me. They view this as solid reporting. And, I concur that the focus on the danger of margin borrowing is overdue, and healthy. So, perhaps I'm being hyper-critical.
21/ Here's the link. Make up your own mind. https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-techs-cash-poor-billionaire-11588967043
