Tesla reports a worse than expected loss $282.3m

Status
Not open for further replies.
Probably you can guess how things work in the EU, when you can hire slovenian construction worker for 5 $/h even in California.

Goldman Sachs just upgraded Tesla's stock to 'buy', capital raise is coming soon..
 
Tesla claimed that they didn't violate any law. If anything went wrong it was either the contractor or subcontractor.

Did Federal or State agencies investigate the potential violations of labor laws by Tesla ?

Quote:
Assuming the article is correct, we need to do right by Mr. Lesnik and his colleagues from Vuzem. This is not a legal issue, it is a moral issue. As far as the law goes, Tesla did everything correctly. We hired a contractor to do a turnkey project at our factory and, as we always do in these situations, contractually obligated our contractor to comply with all laws in bringing in the resources they felt were needed to do the job.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Nebroch
Goldman Sachs just upgraded Tesla's stock to 'buy', capital raise is coming soon..


Well, that was quick. And GS is one of the underwriters, incredible.
 
Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
Originally Posted By: badtlc
more hits coming tesla's way: http://amp.timeinc.net/fortune/2016/05/16/tesla-cheap-labor/?source=dam

That's the big problem about earning a reputation for having every little detail under your control: It's next to impossible to claim you knew nothing about stuff like this.

Nothing like a little old-fashioned slave labor to help get your company off of the ground.

badtlc, your link:
Originally Posted By: amp.timeinc.net/.../tesla-cheap-labor
Tesla CEO Elon Musk woke up to an unwelcome surprise over the weekend: a report that his company used cheap foreign labor to build new facilities.

In a lengthy feature, The Mercury News on Sunday accused Tesla TSLA of using approximately 140 workers from Eastern European countries to build a car-painting facility at Tesla’s Fremont, Calif. plant. The report claims that Tesla paid workers as little as $5 an hour—a far cry from the $52-an-hour average the company would have to pay an American contractor.


According to a letter from the contractor Eisenmann "Tesla paid $55/hour for "additional services". This rate gave Vuzem full opportunity to pay its workers appropriately."

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CiwqLVfUYAABWSu.jpg

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/733007230149107712/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc^tfw


Originally Posted By: cnbc.com
"We are interested in accuracy first and foremost," a spokesman for Mercury News told CNBC. The publication noted that Lesnik had provided pay stubs as part of a court case that supported his claims.

"Our story does not say Tesla paid these people $5 an hour," the spokesman said, "Our story says that Gregor Lesnik was getting $5 an hour, according to his pay stubs."


http://www.cnbc.com/2016/05/18/elon-musk-tesla-paid-55-an-hour-to-paint-factory-builders.html?__source=yahoo|finance|headline|headline|story&par=yahoo&doc=103647259

San Jose Mercury News reported something, amp.timeinc.net reports something else. You can't trust anything on internet, you need to trace all stories back to the source. Even then the story may be a faked.
 
Originally Posted By: Nebroch
Originally Posted By: Nebroch
Goldman Sachs just upgraded Tesla's stock to 'buy', capital raise is coming soon..


Well, that was quick. And GS is one of the underwriters, incredible.


Didn't there used to be some sort of laws about manipulating a stock one has an interest in?
 
Originally Posted By: Nebroch
Originally Posted By: Nebroch
Goldman Sachs just upgraded Tesla's stock to 'buy', capital raise is coming soon..


Well, that was quick. And GS is one of the underwriters, incredible.


Ooops, that little detail really stinks. I hope this at least gives the fanboys some perspective.
 
Originally Posted By: Huie83
It can sometimes take a long time to become profitable, especially with a new technology.


Electric cars are not a new technology. They predate ICE cars, and our ancestors abandoned them as soon as the ICE was invented, because they sucked.

They'll continue to suck until either there's a radical breakthrough in battery technology, or we no longer need to travel long distances.
 
Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
Originally Posted By: Nebroch
Originally Posted By: Nebroch
Goldman Sachs just upgraded Tesla's stock to 'buy', capital raise is coming soon..
Well, that was quick. And GS is one of the underwriters, incredible.
Didn't there used to be some sort of laws about manipulating a stock one has an interest in?

It is illegal if Goldman Sachs coordinate the recommendation and underwrite the stock. But they didn't, the two independent groups didn't talk to each other about Tesla.

Goldman Sachs isn't that stupid, one day it recommends the stock and next day underwrite the stock.

Tesla doesn't need to pressure Goldman Sachs in writing positive about their company to give business to Goldman Sachs. If they get caught they will be in big trouble, it doesn't worth the possible gain in stock price.

The opinion below is from businessinsider.com, it is a little long.

Originally Posted By: businessinsider.com
On Wednesday, before the stock market opened in New York, Goldman Sachs analyst Patrick Archambault upgraded shares of Tesla.

Archambault put a "Buy" rating and a $250 a share price target on the stock because of what he sees as the market's failure to "fully [capture] the company's disruptive potential."

On Wednesday, after the market closed in New York, Tesla said it would sell $2 billion worth of stock, $1.4 billion of which would be issued by the company.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk would sell $600 million worth of stock to meet a tax obligation related to his buying even more Tesla stock.

Running the book for that new stock offering? Morgan Stanley and ... Goldman Sachs.

Now if you believe that banks — and specifically Goldman — are bad actors, this sort of deal makes sense. You might, in this scenario, say, "Well, of course: Goldman says nice things about Tesla and then Tesla does a nice thing for Goldman."

This would, however, be a breach of what the banks call a "Chinese Wall," or a separation of various divisions that could come into conflict one another.


Originally Posted By: businessinsider.com
Research and investment banking are examples of divisions that could create a conflict of interest and between which there exists said wall — meaning that research analysts don't know who investment banks are doing deals with and investment banks don't know what analysts think of companies outside of published research.

In an email to Business Insider, Goldman Sachs said: "Our Research is independent. We followed all of our standard policies and procedures with respect to our research publication [on Wednesday]."

It seems unlikely that a coordinated breach happened here. That would be illegal and, while I'm not a criminal or a lawyer, it would seem that the point of breaking the law is not to get caught.


A big problem here is that Goldman can't save itself from itself.

Publishing a positive opinion on a company Goldman was about to do investment-banking business with — in order to secure more fees from said business — is a very public hill to die on.

It's a little too obvious. You will get caught. (The whole of Finance Twitter had this figured out in minutes.) And again, not a criminal, not a lawyer, but this seems very much in tension with the goals one seeks to achieve when they break the law. Namely: Get away with it.

For this to be such a flagrant and clear breach of the Chinese Wall inside Goldman you'd have to think the firm really is that stupid, or regulators are that inept, or you are that smart. Which you can certainly do. Go ahead. I don't. Call me naïve.

The question that interests me is why does everything have to look so bad?

Like, it doesn't take much to connect the dots here, spin the story that the markets are corrupt and we, the public, are all being taken for a ride by Wall Street.

But there's also seemingly no great way Goldman could've gotten around this issue. The firm can't have some sort of compliance middleman stop the publishing of Archambault's note without the Chinese Wall effectively coming down.



http://www.businessinsider.com/goldman-sachs-tesla-equity-offering-2016-5
 
I am forced to keep in mind that just about every single unethical act in the financial industry has been predated by professions from the experts that such a thing cannot be done.

Gotta love the industry. You can just toot your own horn all you like, as long as you get someone on the other side of a partition to do the tooting for you.
 
Originally Posted By: badtlc
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR


I hired a contractor to repair termites damage to my previous house in Irvine 2 years ago, I only look at the contract of all the repairs they would do and the cost, I signed the contract without knowing they hired a subcontractor to do the actual works and I didn't know how much the actual workers got paid from the subcontractor. Was that my job to know they got paid fairly ? And how do I know which is fair ?

By laws, do the individual or company responsible for the contractor and/or subcontractor worker's compensation ?


You cannot compare commercial to residential. Legally, they are completely different animals.

And tesla's reactions are purely PR. They are doing this because they got caught. They knew what was going on from the get go. There is no way they didn't unless they had completely inept people in charge of executing their contracts.


And you know exactly what each employee is ACTUALLY getting paid from each sub-contractor? You know what their net is? You have reviewed each tax return to verify this? AND you have first hand knowledge that Tesla employees knew of this?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top