View Single Post
  #236  
Old Posted Aug 22, 2018, 11:57 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 24,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrownTown View Post
Of your 2 examples only one really applies. Paul Manafort didn't cop a plea, he went to trial. And right now it's looking like the jury is hung so he might end up the smartest guy in the room if he skates on all these charges while all the other rubes pled guilty.
I don't want to get this thread closed by talking politics here so I won't. But the Tesla Board is not immune to be held to account for their own fiduciary duties and they know it, or should. It's a lesson the Theranos board is now learning.

Quote:
Establishing what the board knew and when is key to the SEC’s probe. For instance, if Mr. Musk didn’t show the board a relatively firm deal with potential investors, it could indicate that the conversations weren’t as far along as he suggested when he tweeted that he had “funding secured” for a deal.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/sec-pre...s&page=1&pos=6

But if he did tell them the complete details of what now appears to be very tentative negotiations for deal funding and they failed to clarify for stockholders after Musk's disastrous tweet, they could have their own hot water to boil in.

Meanwhile, things are getting really sticky at Tesla:

Quote:
Some Tesla Suppliers Fret About Getting Paid
By Tim Higgins, Marc Vartabedian and Christina Rogers
Updated Aug. 20, 2018 4:48 p.m. ET

Tesla Inc.’s tumultuous year has fueled concern among some of its suppliers about the auto maker’s financial strength after production of the Model 3 car drained some of its cash, according to industry executives and documents.

A recent survey sent privately by a well-regarded automotive supplier association to top executives found that 18 of 22 respondents believe that Tesla is now a financial risk to their companies, according to the document reviewed by The Wall Street Journal . . . .

Delays this year in the production of the Model 3 car drained Tesla’s cash, which fell by $1.13 billion in the first six months of the year to $2.24 billion . . . .

Tesla’s cash and cash equivalents fell to $1.69 billion as of Aug. 12, according to the records. That was largely because it repaid $500 million of a revolving credit line in July. Tesla plans to tap that same amount again later this quarter, according to the records. That, plus additional cash flow that Tesla anticipates from an increase in vehicle deliveries in the second half of the quarter, is expected to leave it with several hundred million dollars more in cash at the end of September compared with three months earlier, according to the records.

To conserve cash, Tesla has asked some of its capital-equipment suppliers in recent weeks for cash back ranging from 9% to 20% of what the company paid dating back to 2016, according to people familiar with the requests. In one email to a supplier reviewed by the Journal, Tesla asked for help to make “an immediate impact” by providing a rebate on products already purchased . . . .

One parts supplier was asked by Tesla for a 10% reduction on costs across the board going forward, a person familiar with the matter said in an interview. This person said the request was extreme, saying other auto makers typically seek savings of 1% to 2% on individual parts or programs.

The supplier said Tesla indicated it would ask to extend the payment terms to 120 days from 60 days if it didn’t get the price reduction, a length rarer among auto makers than a 90-day term.

Eleven of 23 responding suppliers in the survey said Tesla had asked them to extend payment terms . . . .

Public records show 16 companies since October have taken the unusual step of filing mechanic’s liens—or legal claims seeking unpaid compensation—against Tesla claiming bills haven’t been paid for supplies and services. Previously, only four liens had been filed against Tesla in all of 2015 and 2016 combined . . . .
https://www.wsj.com/articles/some-te...s&page=1&pos=2

A few months ago Tesla might have solved its cash problems with a secondary stock offering or by selling bonds but both those options could be problematic with an active SEC investigation.
Reply With Quote