LNG: TESLARATI

Auto teardown expert Sandy Munro knows a thing or two about the Tesla Model 3. After initially criticizing the electric sedan for its build quality, Munro eventually experienced a change of heart as he delved deeper into the Model 3’s electronics and tech. By the end of his analysis, the teardown expert admitted that the vehicle made him “eat a lot of crow.”

Tesla and Munro have since communicated, with the auto veteran sending the electric car maker a list of over 200 pro bono suggestions that could improve the Model 3’s body, which he believed was over-engineered. Munro himself spoke with Elon Musk, who explained that the person responsible for the Model 3’s body design had been terminated. In response, Munro told the CEO that the response was “not fast enough,” since Tesla “never should have hired (the engineer)” in the first place.

Munro has talked about the Tesla Model 3 and his findings several times in the past, particularly when he gets featured as a guest in YouTube’s Autoline After Hours. In his recent appearance, the teardown expert discussed the opportunities for Tesla and the Model 3 in China, as well as the rapid progress of large-scale construction projects such as Gigafactory 3. Munro also showed some exasperation with some of the assumptions being thrown at Tesla by analysts.

“I found a new source of pain. Analysts, talking about things. Holy mackerel, where these guys get their ideas from, or where they get their information from is beyond me, but I can tell you one thing for sure. I know they didn’t tear apart one of these cars. I know they don’t really look at what it is that’s going on. I’m sure they’re good readers. Readers are leaders, but sometimes, they’re liars,” Munro noted.

Munro related that he has personally dealt with some of these bad data in the past. Emphasizing his point, the teardown expert stated that some of the assumptions being thrown about the company are flat-out untrue.

“Quite frankly, I’ve been on a few of these little shows and somebody says, ‘Well, you know, such-and-such from wherever says this.’ And I’m sitting there and going, ‘Ah, that’s not true.’ ‘Well, he said it was.’ I said ‘Oh, it’s not true.’ And then I’ll reach over like, I’ve got my books right over here. Somebody says something that I know is not true, I’ve got pictures, I’ve got numbers, I got data up the yin-yang. There’s nobody gonna argue with me, that’s for sure. And if I don’t know the answer, I got a whole 90 guys that’ll (be) happy to tell you which ends up. These other guys, I don’t know, I think it’s web searches and blogs and who knows, I don’t know. But it ain’t, it’s not for real,” Munro said.

One thing that really impressed Munro with the Tesla Model 3 was the vertical integration between the electric sedan’s software and hardware. The way that Tesla uses one component for multiple tasks was also lauded as a big advantage against rival automakers. The teardown expert has also spoken very highly of Tesla’s batteries, stating that the Model 3’s 2170 cells are the best that he has seen yet, being far above those that are used in the Chevy Bolt EV and BMW i3.

Watch Sandy Munro’s take on analyst’s inaccuracies in the video below.

As Tesla stock (NASDAQ:TSLA) battled a fresh wave of criticism following the release of its Q1 2019 vehicle production and delivery report, the company saw a supporter from a rather unlikely place. During a segment on Fox Business Network‘s Mornings with Maria, one of the show’s panels boldly defended Tesla, calling for more support for the company due to its industry-changing innovations.

Tesla and Elon Musk’s court appearance with the SEC was the primary topic in the segment, and the show brought on ARK Invest analyst Tasha Keeney to get her insights on the electric car maker. ARK is among the most bullish supporters of Tesla, with the firm setting a $4,000 price target for the company’s stock provided that it enters the autonomous ride-sharing market. Speaking to the show’s hosts, the ARK analyst reiterated her firm’s stance on the company as a potential leader in the self-driving market.

Dagen McDowell, a longtime finance journalist and one of the panels in Mornings with Maria, pointed out that Tesla’s edge is evident even at its current state where it does not have a consumer-ready full self-driving suite. McDowell argued that among the prominent automakers today, Tesla is the leader when it comes to vehicle software, an emerging industry that could be worth up to $1.2 trillion by 2030.

“You don’t even need to look ahead to autonomous vehicles. I had this discussion with someone I’m close to over the weekend who works in Silicon Valley. Every other automaker, even luxury automakers in Germany, Japanese, and American, they are awful at software. There is no other car and no other car company that compares to a Tesla. We all, as drivers and consumers, ought to be rooting for this company. You don’t have to own stock in it, but you ought to root for them because hopefully, all these automakers will realize, ‘Oh, our software stinks,’” McDowell said.

There is no doubt that Tesla is still learning several key aspects of the vehicle manufacturing process. The company is only turning 16 years old this year, and over that time, it has transformed itself from a niche carmaker that made a very quick and expensive car for the rich to a company that is on the brink of disrupting the mass market auto industry. At its core, Tesla is still a young company, and its lack of expertise in areas such as fine manufacturing processes is understandable, especially considering the number of vehicles it is producing today.

What Tesla has mastery of is vehicle software. Since the days of the first-generation Model S, the company has proven to be far ahead of competitors. Keeney named Tesla’s free over-the-air updates as a prime example of this, since the company’s more experienced rivals are largely still unable to implement the same system on their own vehicles. McDowell proved bolder, flat-out stating that traditional automakers simply don’t know how to make tomorrow’s vehicles. “It’s because they’re dug in and they don’t know how to run a car company in the new century. That’s literally what these companies look like. I’m surprised that Apple and Google haven’t done more to try and manufacture a car or produce software for one,” she said.

Tesla might be ending the week as volatile and polarizing as ever, but the company seems to be heading towards some calmer waters ahead. With the first quarter done, Tesla can now focus more on producing and delivering its vehicles in the second quarter. The over 10,000 vehicles in transit at the end of Q1 could actually work in Tesla’s favor in Q2, as the company will be starting the quarter with over 10,000 electric car sales.

Apart from this, Elon Musk and the SEC’s court hearing proved to be far less dramatic than what the company’s critics have wished. Prior to Musk’s appearance in court, speculations among Tesla skeptics pointed to the possibility that he would be stripped off the CEO’s title, and possibly even fired from the company. Over the course of the hearing, Judge Alison Nathan proved incredibly objective, asking the SEC to clarify if Musk would need to get approval for tweets that reiterated information that had already been disclosed. She also asserted that government lawyers must take all steps necessary to reach a resolution before invoking contempt.

At the end of the hearing, the judge urged Elon Musk and the SEC’s legal team to “take a deep breath, put your reasonableness pants on, and work this out.” Musk did not speak during the hearing, though he did state that he was “very impressed with Judge Nathan’s analysis” as he was leaving the courthouse.

As of writing, Tesla stock is trading +2.01% at $273.15.

Watch the recent Tesla segment in Fox Business Network‘s Mornings with Maria in the video below.

Disclosure: I have no ownership in shares of TSLA and have no plans to initiate any positions within 72 hours.

The day after the release of Tesla’s Q1 vehicle delivery and production report, CEO Elon Musk headed to a Manhattan courthouse to face the charges leveled against him by the Security and Exchange Commission (SEC). The SEC accused Musk of violating the terms of his settlement with the agency when the CEO tweeted on February 19 that Tesla will produce around 500k vehicles in 2019, echoing one of his statements from the Q4 2018 earnings call.

Musk arrived in the courthouse on Thursday in light spirits. Smiling to cameras, the Tesla CEO told reporters that he respects the American justice system. “I have great respect for the justice system and I think the judges in the American system are outstanding,” Musk said. When prompted by veteran CNBC reporter Phil LeBeau if he feels the same way about the SEC, Musk laughed and walked forward.

The SEC’s arguments

The courtroom was packed as Elon Musk and the SEC’s legal team faced off before U.S. District Judge Alison Nathan. Each side is given 45 minutes to express their arguments. The agency went first, represented by SEC attorney Cheryl Crumpton, who immediately claimed that Musk “recklessly tweeted out information that has no basis in fact (credit to Matt Robinson of Bloomberg, who is currently conducting a Live Blog of the hearing).”

Explaining further, Crumpton stated that the requirement that Musk get pre-approval for his tweets was “the heart of the relief” that the government had sought as part of its settlement. The SEC lawyer also noted it has become pretty clear “over the course of the last few weeks” that Musk does not intend to comply with last year’s settlement terms. Crumpton added that the agreement does not require every single tweet to be pre-approved, provided that the information in the posts was immaterial. “The communication we are talking about here is very, very different,” she said.

The SEC lawyer also pointed the blame to Tesla, who allegedly is failing to control the conduct of its CEO. “Tesla’s conduct is also troubling to the SEC. This court ordered Tesla to implement a mandatory pre-approval process, but they are apparently fine with Mr. Musk making up his own procedure. Tesla still seems unwilling to exercise any meaningful control over the conduct of its CEO,” Crumpton replied.

Judge Nathan, for her part, asked the SEC lawyer if Musk would need to get approval for tweets that reiterated information that had already been disclosed. The judge went through different hypotheticals with the SEC lawyer, such as repeating earlier guidance. “We’re not saying always yes or always no to that. It depends is the answer,” Crumpton said.

“This is a material statement no matter how you cut it, and it was a violation to not get it pre-approved,” Crumpton added.

For his alleged violations of his settlement, the SEC lawyer called on the court to give Musk a series of escalating fines if he continues to violate the order. Crumpton also stated that the SEC wants the court to order Musk to report monthly on his compliance with the settlement. “We want the court to tell them that this has to observed in the way that it’s written,” the SEC lawyer said.

Response from Tesla’s legal team

With the SEC having completed its argument, it was time for Elon Musk’s legal team to argue their points. Tesla lawyer John Hueston stated that “it’s very clear that Mr. Musk retained discretion in the policy. The policy makes clear that the tweet is subject to a fact-based determination by Mr. Musk.” The Tesla lawyer also stated that Musk’s decision to decide what’s material information was negotiated. “That’s exactly what Tesla negotiated for and got,” Hueston said.

The Tesla lawyer also argued that the SEC is currently pretending to be shocked that Musk gets to decide what is material information and what is not, but that is exactly what the the order says. “They agreed to take out language saying that everything has to be approved. There has to be an oversight process and there is an oversight process. They’re not happy about that today,” he said.

Musk’s legal team stated there is  not a clear enough standard to use the harsh recourse of contempt. Instead, Hueston stated that the SEC should have attempted to work things out with Elon Musk and Tesla before bringing the matter to court. “What the SEC should have done was approach in good faith and try to work things out,” the Tesla lawyer said. In response, Judge Nathan noted that her intent is “not only to invite it but to order it.” The judge also added that she will tell the parties to create a new agreement that incorporates the SEC’s concerns.

Addressing Musk’ counsel, Judge Nathan inquired about a scenario in which the CEO will be violating the terms of his settlement with the SEC. When the Tesla lawyer noted that he couldn’t think of one, the judge replied “You’re not very imaginative.”

Continuing his points, Hueston noted that the 15 post-order tweets that were cited by SEC as proof of Musk’s violation of his settlement shows that the agency believes “that, apparently, contempt can fall on him for things that he’s tweeting” even if the information had already been disclosed. “They have not shown that the proof of non-compliance is clear and convincing. This is not someone who’s wantonly saying he doesn’t care about processes and procedures. That’s someone who is trying his best to comply and has been diligent,” the Tesla lawyer said (credit to Bloomberg‘s Chris Dolmetsch for the update).

The SEC’s Rebuttal

The SEC lawyer returned stating that the agency did not rush into its request to have Musk held in contempt at all. “Its not that we rushed into court on the first opportunity. There have been a number of tweets over time.” Crumpton further added that the SEC assumed Musk will comply with the terms of his settlement despite his statements in 60 Minutes, where he explicitly commented that he does not respect the SEC.

Hearing Adjourned

Following the SEC’s rebuttal, Judge Nathan asserted that compliance with court orders is not optional, nor is it a game, regardless of whether you are a “small potato or a big fish.” She also noted that government lawyers must take all steps necessary to reach a resolution before invoking contempt, before adding that she has “serious concerns that whatever I decide here the issue will not be finally resolved.”

Judge Nathan ordered the two parties to arrange a meeting and send a letter to the court within two weeks. The parties will be required to indicate if they have reached an agreement or not. If no agreement is reached then, Elon Musk’s legal team and the SEC will hear from her in due course.

The hearing was adjourned after. In a statement following the hearing, Musk stated that he was “very impressed with Judge Nathan’s analysis.”