Build Wealth to buy Freedom

A Tesla merger needs 50% plus one of ALL outstanding shares. Shares that don't vote count as a no. Elon's 77% comp package win becomes about 56%. It passes, but narrowly. Full video: youtube.com/watch?v=ZBxD8qgm…

I STRONGLY OPPOSE A TESLA–SPACEX MERGER! Special Edition 3: Addressing Critics and Summing Up the Debate Since publishing my series opposing a Tesla–SpaceX merger, I’ve received many comments defending the deal. I recently responded point by point to one reader who argued that the merger would benefit both companies. See attached. Here are five points every Tesla shareholder should consider. 1. A merger does not create value by itself. Simply combining two companies does not make them more valuable. Wall Street does not automatically assign a higher valuation just because two companies become one. Value must come from stronger earnings, higher cash flows, or measurable improvements in business performance—not from changing the corporate structure. 2. Synergies do not require a merger. “Synergy” is probably the most frequently used argument in favor of this deal. But here’s my question: What exactly can Tesla and SpaceX accomplish together that they cannot accomplish as independent companies? Joint ventures, strategic partnerships, shared projects, and technology agreements already exist for precisely this purpose. Even two divisions within the same company face coordination challenges. I acknowledge that a merger might offer some administrative convenience. But convenience is not a compelling justification for a multitrillion-dollar transaction. If proponents claim substantial synergies, they should quantify them. 3. A merger will NOT make Elon spend more time on Tesla. Some argue that combining the companies would allow Elon to devote more attention to Tesla. Where is the logic? Elon already controls how he allocates his time. Changing the ownership structure does not create more hours in his day or guarantee greater attention to Tesla’s operations. There is simply no logical basis for assuming that a merger would solve Tesla’s leadership attention problem. 4. If you believe in SpaceX, buy SpaceX. SpaceX may have tremendous growth potential. But that is an argument for investing in SpaceX—not for merging it with Tesla. Investors should be free to choose their exposure to each company. Why force Tesla shareholders to take on SpaceX’s capital requirements, business risks, and valuation uncertainties? Why put all your eggs in one basket when diversification remains an option? 5. Most importantly: Elon’s 2025 CEO Performance Award. This is the issue I believe investors should examine most carefully. Tesla’s 2025 CEO Performance Award ties Elon’s potential additional equity compensation to demanding operational and market-capitalization milestones. The underlying principle is straightforward: Elon must deliver extraordinary results for Tesla shareholders before earning extraordinary compensation. Now consider a potential merger. What happens if Elon obtains overwhelming voting control of the combined company through the transaction? If his control is already secured, one of the key incentives behind the performance award—earning greater ownership and influence through Tesla’s success—could be substantially weakened. Why would that make him more motivated to focus on Tesla? Why would it strengthen his incentive to achieve Tesla’s demanding operational and valuation milestones? In my view, it could do precisely the opposite. And that would represent a serious risk to existing Tesla shareholders. My conclusion I remain firmly opposed to a Tesla–SpaceX merger. I am not against SpaceX. I am not against Elon Musk. And I am certainly not against Tesla’s long-term success. I simply believe these two extraordinary businesses can create tremendous value independently. A merger should be justified by measurable economic benefits—not speculation, vague synergies, or blind faith in one individual. To fellow retail shareholders: Ask questions. Examine the numbers. Think independently. And protect your interests before making a decision. Sometimes, being a responsible shareholder means saying NO.

I enjoyed this video and love the work Alexandra (@TeslaBoomerMama) and Amy (@Amy787) are doing to help with this potential merger. But I like to address something Herbert (@herbertong) said that not only I disagree with, I actually think is counterproductive to spread that message. No, Herbert, the share exchange ratio matters enormously, both short and long term. Suggesting it won’t matter because the combined company might eventually be worth $100 trillion is absurd. Our ownership percentage determines how much of that $100 trillion we get! The reason I want to address it is because this is the third time I’ve heard Tesla investors and content creators suggesting that getting the merger done quickly is more important than the terms. Frankly, I’m concerned we’ll start hearing this more frequently from the people who wanted bad to be done fast. So let’s remember a few things and think this through: 1- xAI was built partly with talent developed at Tesla, but Elon created it outside Tesla to maintain control. SpaceX eventually acquired it, leaving Tesla shareholders without direct participation in its growth. 2- SpaceX shareholders have already enjoyed extraordinary returns and now stand to benefit enormously from xAI. Meanwhile, Tesla investors have endured years of volatility, delays, and disappointing returns while financing the development of FSD, robotaxis, and Optimus. 3- Tesla is finally approaching the commercialization of those technologies, whose enormous potential isn’t yet reflected in earnings. Why should we surrender that upside without a healthy acquisition premium? Any other company trying to acquire Tesla today would have to pay a substantial premium. Why should SpaceX be any different? 4- we’ll probably hear the reasoning that SpaceX’s AI compute revenue is about to explode, potentially reaching $500B to $1T, so Tesla shareholders should accept whatever terms are offered to participate in that growth ASAP. That’s nonsense. Elon is an extraordinary entrepreneur, but forecasting market demand has never been his strongest skill. Assuming today’s reported $50 per watt compute pricing will persist as another 20 GW of capacity comes online is extremely optimistic. Demand may remain enormous, but prices can fall substantially. 5- Waiting could actually benefit shareholders of both companies. Suppose SpaceX reaches $250B in revenue, only half of Elon optimistic prediction, it could generate $80B–$100B in profits, and commands a $4T–$5T valuation. Meanwhile, Tesla probably will trade around $400–$450, worth approximately $1.5T–$1.75T, as robotaxi and Optimus profits take longer to materialize. SpaceX could then make an offer of share exchange ratio of 2.5 to 1 and it will be over 80% premium for Tesla shareholders and it would dilute much less SpaceX shareholders. Waiting is not necessarily bad, a larger SpaceX valuation could make it easier to offer Tesla shareholders a substantial premium while limiting the percentage dilution experienced by SpaceX shareholders. We might lose some initial SpaceX growth but we might gain bigger premium and easier approval process which is very important. I agree that getting the merger done sooner rather than later would be preferable, especially considering the political and regulatory uncertainties surrounding the next election cycle. Ideally, I would like to see the transaction completed, sealed, and locked in well before that becomes an issue, but that doesn’t mean the terms shouldn’t be favorable. Finally, we need to trust the process. The people working on a potential merger understand these issues far better than most of us. I am sure they are working hard to find terms that are acceptable to both groups of shareholders while minimizing conflicts of interest, legal challenges, and unnecessary litigation. The merger matters and the timing matters, but the valuation, premium, dilution, and exchange ratio matter just as much.

if @elonmusk asks, we'll consider it.

I cant wait to get chart requests for $SPCX tomorrow. How can I do TA on a chart like this?

$RKLB actually opened its weekly candle above resistance this week. 125.29 is the level to hold this week to avoid deeper backtests

$TSLA is going exactly according to plan. Weekly cloud sits around 400 Backtests aren't bearish