Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity

147
18
Favorite

Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity

The Wall Street Journal2021-07-12

Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal. In 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla ...

Source Link

Disclaimer: Investing carries risk. This is not financial advice. The above content should not be regarded as an offer, recommendation, or solicitation on acquiring or disposing of any financial products, any associated discussions, comments, or posts by author or other users should not be considered as such either. It is solely for general information purpose only, which does not consider your own investment objectives, financial situations or needs. TTM assumes no responsibility or warranty for the accuracy and completeness of the information, investors should do their own research and may seek professional advice before investing.

147

Report

Comment（18）

Ironteam
·2021-07-12
Doesnt change the fundamental of the company. May affect term if he loses the lawsuit.
Reply
1
Report
SSVC
·2021-07-12
Hmmm.Appreciate your response and comments Thanks
Reply
3
Report
Fold Replies
- Angsana:
  yoz
  2021-07-12
  Reply
  Report
MM88188
·2021-07-12
Ok
Reply
1
Report
Deonc
·2021-07-12
Ok
Reply
2
Report
ITNerd
·2021-07-12
Like and comment please
Reply
2
Report
Fold Replies
- ITNerd:
  Thank you
  2021-07-12
  Reply
  Report
Nickystonks
·2021-07-12
I hope the stock price drops then it will be more juicy
Reply
4
Report
Fold Replies
- Ironteam:
  Juicyyyyy
  2021-07-12
  Reply
  Report
MarkChan
·2021-07-12
Sky Rocket and to the moon
Reply
4
Report
SandDust
·2021-07-12
That is why we need the independent board for, they are accountable to prevent cases like this
Reply
3
Report
TohYangYang
·2021-07-12
Like and comment pls
Reply
2
Report
Fold Replies
- Juvie:
  ok
  2021-07-12
  Reply
  Report
Des123
·2021-07-12
good
Reply
Like
Report
gov
·2021-07-12
Good
Reply
4
Report
Fold Replies
- TohYangYang:
  Nice
  2021-07-12
  Reply
  Report
Rteo
·2021-07-12
That’s why SP stuck at low $600
Reply
3
Report
FreeAcc
·2021-07-12
Ok
Reply
4
Report
Fold Replies
- David_chau87:
  Wow
  2021-07-12
  Reply
  Report
- Jasonlim:
  like
  2021-07-12
  Reply
  Report
- Pigmonkey:
  LikE pls
  2021-07-12
  Reply
  Report
k2000
·2021-07-12
Hahaha price lousai
Reply
7
Report
BlueDragon
·2021-07-12
Like and comments
Reply
5
Report
Fold Replies
- FunnyFun:
  Ok
  2021-07-12
  Reply
  Report
- Bliang:
  A
  2021-07-12
  Reply
  Report
- Darrenhung:
  ok
  2021-07-12
  Reply
  Report
AdrinaChow
·2021-07-12
Like
Reply
6
Report
Fold Replies
- PumpItUp:
  Nice!
  2021-07-12
  Reply
  Report
foreret
·2021-07-12
Great
Reply
9
Report
crtyn
·2021-07-12
Like and comment, thanks
Reply
5
Report
Fold Replies
- rachhy:
  yeaaa
  2021-07-12
  Reply
  Report
- 1521yes:
  like
  2021-07-12
  Reply
  Report

Most Discussed

7x24

All

Terms and Conditions·Privacy Policy

Company: TTMF Limited. Tech supported by Xiangshang Yixin.

Email：uservice@ttm.financial

{"i18n":{"language":"en_US"},"data":{"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1101488191?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","thumbnail":"","is_english":true,"pubTime":"2021-07-12 07:59","share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","id":"1101488191","market":"us","top_or_hot":-1,"title":"Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity","media":"The Wall Street Journal","content":"<div>\n<p>Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n","source":null,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nElon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-12 07:59 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4><strong>The Wall Street Journal</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","isBrief":false,"type":0,"news_type":1,"symbol":"TSLA","symbol_name":"特斯拉","start_time":0,"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4","article_id":"1101488191","we_media_id":null,"thumbnails":[],"rights":null,"url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1101488191","pubTimestamp":1626047978,"sourceInfo":null,"weMediaInfo":null,"summary":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. ","collect":0,"end_time":0,"defaultTopTitle":"wsj.com","property":[],"viewcount":null,"language":"en","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"translate_title":"埃隆·马斯克被叫来为Tesla收购SolarCity辩护","themeId":null,"isJumpTheme":false,"ttsUrl":null,"symbols_score_info":{"TSLA":0.9},"content_text":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.\nFive years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.\nMr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.\nA primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.\nOther issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.\nIf Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.\nThe trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.\nMr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”\n“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.\nMr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.\nFounded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.\nAttorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.\nWhen Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.\nThat information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.\nIf Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.\n“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”\nFor Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.\n“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.\nMr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.\nThe prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.","kind":null,"is_publish_news":true,"is_publish_highlight":true,"is_publish_live":false,"is_publish_wemedia":null,"editions":null,"column":"","sentiment":"0","news_tag":"","news_rank":0,"symbols":[],"gpt_button":1},"commentList":[{"id":146296828,"gmtCreate":1626080859364,"gmtModify":1703752934607,"author":{"id":"3561582804451218","authorId":"3561582804451218","name":"Ironteam","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/820ff4e88bef87bdd250ce62ad08f334","vip":1,"hat":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0a8758340a08196056f8bc1e54805193","crmLevel":5,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"authorIdStr":"3561582804451218","idStr":"3561582804451218"},"htmlText":"Doesnt change the fundamental of the company. May affect term if he loses the lawsuit.&nbsp;","listText":"Doesnt change the fundamental of the company. May affect term if he loses the lawsuit.&nbsp;","text":"Doesnt change the fundamental of the company. May affect term if he loses the lawsuit.","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/146296828","repostId":1101488191,"repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1101488191","pubTimestamp":1626047978,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1101488191?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-12 07:59","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1101488191","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. ","content":"<blockquote>\n Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n</blockquote>\n<p>In 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.</p>\n<p>Five years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.</p>\n<p>A primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.</p>\n<p>Other issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.</p>\n<p>If Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.</p>\n<p>The trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”</p>\n<p>“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.</p>\n<p>Founded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.</p>\n<p>Attorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.</p>\n<p>When Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>That information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.</p>\n<p>If Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”</p>\n<p>For Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.</p>\n<p>“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.</p>\n<p>The prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nElon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-12 07:59 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4><strong>The Wall Street Journal</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1101488191","content_text":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.\nFive years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.\nMr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.\nA primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.\nOther issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.\nIf Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.\nThe trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.\nMr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”\n“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.\nMr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.\nFounded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.\nAttorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.\nWhen Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.\nThat information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.\nIf Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.\n“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”\nFor Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.\n“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.\nMr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.\nThe prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":146344969,"gmtCreate":1626055702451,"gmtModify":1703752463958,"author":{"id":"3574906731000207","authorId":"3574906731000207","name":"SSVC","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/545a5ea462ff4ac7cc100bd3d8d97f72","vip":1,"crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"authorIdStr":"3574906731000207","idStr":"3574906731000207"},"htmlText":"Hmmm.Appreciate your response and comments Thanks&nbsp;","listText":"Hmmm.Appreciate your response and comments Thanks&nbsp;","text":"Hmmm.Appreciate your response and comments Thanks","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/146344969","repostId":1101488191,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1101488191","pubTimestamp":1626047978,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1101488191?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-12 07:59","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1101488191","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. ","content":"<blockquote>\n Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n</blockquote>\n<p>In 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.</p>\n<p>Five years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.</p>\n<p>A primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.</p>\n<p>Other issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.</p>\n<p>If Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.</p>\n<p>The trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”</p>\n<p>“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.</p>\n<p>Founded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.</p>\n<p>Attorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.</p>\n<p>When Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>That information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.</p>\n<p>If Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”</p>\n<p>For Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.</p>\n<p>“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.</p>\n<p>The prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nElon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-12 07:59 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4><strong>The Wall Street Journal</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1101488191","content_text":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.\nFive years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.\nMr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.\nA primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.\nOther issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.\nIf Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.\nThe trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.\nMr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”\n“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.\nMr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.\nFounded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.\nAttorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.\nWhen Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.\nThat information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.\nIf Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.\n“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”\nFor Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.\n“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.\nMr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.\nThe prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":5193839,"gmtCreate":1626067582937,"gmtModify":1663230853450,"authorId":3575326435298567,"author":{"id":3575326435298567,"idStr":"3575326435298567","authorId":3575326435298567,"name":"Angsana","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3c8492153d7059ec1aa704a1bd541c14","vip":1,"crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":146344969,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"<u>yoz</u>","text":"<u>yoz</u>","html":"<u>yoz</u>"}],"langContent":"EN"},{"id":146312940,"gmtCreate":1626053611080,"gmtModify":1703752386785,"author":{"id":"3575962752135178","authorId":"3575962752135178","name":"MM88188","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7c2029092cd1ce761811b752114cd1b2","vip":1,"crmLevel":7,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"authorIdStr":"3575962752135178","idStr":"3575962752135178"},"htmlText":"Ok","listText":"Ok","text":"Ok","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/146312940","repostId":1101488191,"repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1101488191","pubTimestamp":1626047978,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1101488191?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-12 07:59","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1101488191","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. ","content":"<blockquote>\n Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n</blockquote>\n<p>In 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.</p>\n<p>Five years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.</p>\n<p>A primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.</p>\n<p>Other issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.</p>\n<p>If Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.</p>\n<p>The trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”</p>\n<p>“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.</p>\n<p>Founded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.</p>\n<p>Attorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.</p>\n<p>When Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>That information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.</p>\n<p>If Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”</p>\n<p>For Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.</p>\n<p>“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.</p>\n<p>The prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nElon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-12 07:59 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4><strong>The Wall Street Journal</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1101488191","content_text":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.\nFive years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.\nMr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.\nA primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.\nOther issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.\nIf Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.\nThe trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.\nMr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”\n“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.\nMr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.\nFounded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.\nAttorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.\nWhen Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.\nThat information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.\nIf Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.\n“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”\nFor Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.\n“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.\nMr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.\nThe prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":146303410,"gmtCreate":1626052138730,"gmtModify":1703752338844,"author":{"id":"3569316529855154","authorId":"3569316529855154","name":"Deonc","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d9aa45dd2eb58357f6477dcfb99d1415","vip":1,"crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"authorIdStr":"3569316529855154","idStr":"3569316529855154"},"htmlText":"Ok","listText":"Ok","text":"Ok","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/146303410","repostId":1101488191,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1101488191","pubTimestamp":1626047978,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1101488191?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-12 07:59","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1101488191","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. ","content":"<blockquote>\n Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n</blockquote>\n<p>In 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.</p>\n<p>Five years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.</p>\n<p>A primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.</p>\n<p>Other issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.</p>\n<p>If Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.</p>\n<p>The trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”</p>\n<p>“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.</p>\n<p>Founded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.</p>\n<p>Attorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.</p>\n<p>When Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>That information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.</p>\n<p>If Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”</p>\n<p>For Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.</p>\n<p>“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.</p>\n<p>The prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nElon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-12 07:59 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4><strong>The Wall Street Journal</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1101488191","content_text":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.\nFive years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.\nMr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.\nA primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.\nOther issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.\nIf Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.\nThe trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.\nMr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”\n“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.\nMr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.\nFounded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.\nAttorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.\nWhen Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.\nThat information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.\nIf Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.\n“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”\nFor Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.\n“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.\nMr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.\nThe prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":146309177,"gmtCreate":1626052081299,"gmtModify":1703752335709,"author":{"id":"3586341894652753","authorId":"3586341894652753","name":"ITNerd","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/db0211ca9ea8852ce606418ee5492671","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"authorIdStr":"3586341894652753","idStr":"3586341894652753"},"htmlText":"Like and comment please&nbsp;","listText":"Like and comment please&nbsp;","text":"Like and comment please","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/146309177","repostId":1101488191,"repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1101488191","pubTimestamp":1626047978,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1101488191?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-12 07:59","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1101488191","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. ","content":"<blockquote>\n Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n</blockquote>\n<p>In 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.</p>\n<p>Five years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.</p>\n<p>A primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.</p>\n<p>Other issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.</p>\n<p>If Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.</p>\n<p>The trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”</p>\n<p>“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.</p>\n<p>Founded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.</p>\n<p>Attorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.</p>\n<p>When Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>That information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.</p>\n<p>If Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”</p>\n<p>For Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.</p>\n<p>“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.</p>\n<p>The prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nElon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-12 07:59 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4><strong>The Wall Street Journal</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1101488191","content_text":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.\nFive years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.\nMr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.\nA primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.\nOther issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.\nIf Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.\nThe trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.\nMr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”\n“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.\nMr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.\nFounded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.\nAttorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.\nWhen Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.\nThat information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.\nIf Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.\n“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”\nFor Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.\n“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.\nMr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.\nThe prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":5191535,"gmtCreate":1626052108809,"gmtModify":1663230840837,"authorId":3586341894652753,"author":{"id":3586341894652753,"idStr":"3586341894652753","authorId":3586341894652753,"name":"ITNerd","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/db0211ca9ea8852ce606418ee5492671","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":146309177,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"Thank you","text":"Thank you","html":"Thank you"}],"langContent":"EN"},{"id":146972672,"gmtCreate":1626051840496,"gmtModify":1703752328463,"author":{"id":"3581978054709801","authorId":"3581978054709801","name":"Nickystonks","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9ea10f153b0e264f05c7d19fcc08cdee","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"authorIdStr":"3581978054709801","idStr":"3581978054709801"},"htmlText":"I hope the stock price drops then it will be more juicy","listText":"I hope the stock price drops then it will be more juicy","text":"I hope the stock price drops then it will be more juicy","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/146972672","repostId":1101488191,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1101488191","pubTimestamp":1626047978,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1101488191?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-12 07:59","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1101488191","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. ","content":"<blockquote>\n Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n</blockquote>\n<p>In 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.</p>\n<p>Five years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.</p>\n<p>A primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.</p>\n<p>Other issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.</p>\n<p>If Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.</p>\n<p>The trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”</p>\n<p>“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.</p>\n<p>Founded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.</p>\n<p>Attorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.</p>\n<p>When Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>That information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.</p>\n<p>If Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”</p>\n<p>For Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.</p>\n<p>“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.</p>\n<p>The prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nElon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-12 07:59 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4><strong>The Wall Street Journal</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1101488191","content_text":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.\nFive years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.\nMr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.\nA primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.\nOther issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.\nIf Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.\nThe trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.\nMr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”\n“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.\nMr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.\nFounded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.\nAttorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.\nWhen Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.\nThat information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.\nIf Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.\n“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”\nFor Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.\n“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.\nMr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.\nThe prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":5195157,"gmtCreate":1626080878417,"gmtModify":1663230856555,"authorId":3561582804451218,"author":{"id":3561582804451218,"idStr":"3561582804451218","authorId":3561582804451218,"name":"Ironteam","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/820ff4e88bef87bdd250ce62ad08f334","vip":1,"crmLevel":5,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":146972672,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"<u>Juicyyyyy</u>","text":"<u>Juicyyyyy</u>","html":"<u>Juicyyyyy</u>"}],"langContent":"EN"},{"id":146970841,"gmtCreate":1626051563683,"gmtModify":1703752319264,"author":{"id":"3555328083089722","authorId":"3555328083089722","name":"MarkChan","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ce362b41e66dea03b5ad37b4327920a7","vip":1,"crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"authorIdStr":"3555328083089722","idStr":"3555328083089722"},"htmlText":"Sky Rocket and to the moon&nbsp;","listText":"Sky Rocket and to the moon&nbsp;","text":"Sky Rocket and to the moon","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/146970841","repostId":1101488191,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1101488191","pubTimestamp":1626047978,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1101488191?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-12 07:59","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1101488191","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. ","content":"<blockquote>\n Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n</blockquote>\n<p>In 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.</p>\n<p>Five years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.</p>\n<p>A primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.</p>\n<p>Other issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.</p>\n<p>If Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.</p>\n<p>The trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”</p>\n<p>“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.</p>\n<p>Founded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.</p>\n<p>Attorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.</p>\n<p>When Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>That information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.</p>\n<p>If Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”</p>\n<p>For Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.</p>\n<p>“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.</p>\n<p>The prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nElon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-12 07:59 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4><strong>The Wall Street Journal</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1101488191","content_text":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.\nFive years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.\nMr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.\nA primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.\nOther issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.\nIf Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.\nThe trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.\nMr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”\n“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.\nMr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.\nFounded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.\nAttorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.\nWhen Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.\nThat information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.\nIf Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.\n“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”\nFor Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.\n“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.\nMr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.\nThe prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":146952662,"gmtCreate":1626050990856,"gmtModify":1703752300610,"author":{"id":"3581331938298103","authorId":"3581331938298103","name":"SandDust","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ea6083d742fc232449a625fb122842c8","vip":1,"crmLevel":5,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"authorIdStr":"3581331938298103","idStr":"3581331938298103"},"htmlText":"That is why we need the independent board for, they are accountable to prevent cases like this","listText":"That is why we need the independent board for, they are accountable to prevent cases like this","text":"That is why we need the independent board for, they are accountable to prevent cases like this","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/146952662","repostId":1101488191,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1101488191","pubTimestamp":1626047978,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1101488191?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-12 07:59","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1101488191","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. ","content":"<blockquote>\n Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n</blockquote>\n<p>In 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.</p>\n<p>Five years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.</p>\n<p>A primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.</p>\n<p>Other issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.</p>\n<p>If Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.</p>\n<p>The trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”</p>\n<p>“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.</p>\n<p>Founded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.</p>\n<p>Attorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.</p>\n<p>When Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>That information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.</p>\n<p>If Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”</p>\n<p>For Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.</p>\n<p>“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.</p>\n<p>The prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nElon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-12 07:59 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4><strong>The Wall Street Journal</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1101488191","content_text":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.\nFive years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.\nMr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.\nA primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.\nOther issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.\nIf Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.\nThe trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.\nMr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”\n“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.\nMr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.\nFounded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.\nAttorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.\nWhen Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.\nThat information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.\nIf Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.\n“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”\nFor Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.\n“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.\nMr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.\nThe prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":146963115,"gmtCreate":1626049921137,"gmtModify":1703752266320,"author":{"id":"3584395488031951","authorId":"3584395488031951","name":"TohYangYang","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3e76cb2a204369fb8e5eb9e84a258516","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"authorIdStr":"3584395488031951","idStr":"3584395488031951"},"htmlText":"Like and comment pls&nbsp;","listText":"Like and comment pls&nbsp;","text":"Like and comment pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/146963115","repostId":1101488191,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1101488191","pubTimestamp":1626047978,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1101488191?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-12 07:59","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1101488191","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. ","content":"<blockquote>\n Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n</blockquote>\n<p>In 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.</p>\n<p>Five years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.</p>\n<p>A primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.</p>\n<p>Other issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.</p>\n<p>If Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.</p>\n<p>The trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”</p>\n<p>“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.</p>\n<p>Founded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.</p>\n<p>Attorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.</p>\n<p>When Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>That information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.</p>\n<p>If Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”</p>\n<p>For Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.</p>\n<p>“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.</p>\n<p>The prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nElon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-12 07:59 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4><strong>The Wall Street Journal</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1101488191","content_text":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.\nFive years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.\nMr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.\nA primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.\nOther issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.\nIf Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.\nThe trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.\nMr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”\n“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.\nMr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.\nFounded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.\nAttorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.\nWhen Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.\nThat information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.\nIf Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.\n“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”\nFor Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.\n“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.\nMr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.\nThe prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":5191119,"gmtCreate":1626050054387,"gmtModify":1663230840550,"authorId":3578559022708914,"author":{"id":3578559022708914,"idStr":"3578559022708914","authorId":3578559022708914,"name":"Juvie","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9174cf1baa02042e82114235e72d7246","vip":1,"currentWearingBadge":{"badgeId":"972123088c9646f7b6091ae0662215be-3","templateUuid":"972123088c9646f7b6091ae0662215be","name":"Legendary Trader","description":"Total number of securities or futures transactions reached 300","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/656db16598a0b8f21429e10d6c1cb033","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/03f10910d4dd9234f9b5702a3342193a","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0c767e35268feb729d50d3fa9a386c5a","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":1,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2022.09.02","exceedPercentage":"93.12%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100},"crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":146963115,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"ok","text":"ok","html":"ok"}],"langContent":"EN"},{"id":146985965,"gmtCreate":1626049687457,"gmtModify":1703752257696,"author":{"id":"4087685411789360","authorId":"4087685411789360","name":"Des123","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ba7602b4b7e3538c8a7d687463663003","vip":1,"crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"authorIdStr":"4087685411789360","idStr":"4087685411789360"},"htmlText":"good&nbsp;","listText":"good&nbsp;","text":"good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/146985965","repostId":1101488191,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1101488191","pubTimestamp":1626047978,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1101488191?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-12 07:59","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1101488191","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. ","content":"<blockquote>\n Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n</blockquote>\n<p>In 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.</p>\n<p>Five years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.</p>\n<p>A primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.</p>\n<p>Other issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.</p>\n<p>If Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.</p>\n<p>The trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”</p>\n<p>“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.</p>\n<p>Founded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.</p>\n<p>Attorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.</p>\n<p>When Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>That information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.</p>\n<p>If Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”</p>\n<p>For Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.</p>\n<p>“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.</p>\n<p>The prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nElon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-12 07:59 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4><strong>The Wall Street Journal</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1101488191","content_text":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.\nFive years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.\nMr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.\nA primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.\nOther issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.\nIf Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.\nThe trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.\nMr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”\n“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.\nMr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.\nFounded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.\nAttorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.\nWhen Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.\nThat information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.\nIf Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.\n“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”\nFor Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.\n“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.\nMr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.\nThe prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":146986881,"gmtCreate":1626049544143,"gmtModify":1703752256053,"author":{"id":"3583750403365476","authorId":"3583750403365476","name":"gov","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e50e768a875518adb25631ba4c32578f","vip":1,"crmLevel":9,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"authorIdStr":"3583750403365476","idStr":"3583750403365476"},"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/146986881","repostId":1101488191,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1101488191","pubTimestamp":1626047978,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1101488191?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-12 07:59","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1101488191","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. ","content":"<blockquote>\n Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n</blockquote>\n<p>In 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.</p>\n<p>Five years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.</p>\n<p>A primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.</p>\n<p>Other issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.</p>\n<p>If Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.</p>\n<p>The trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”</p>\n<p>“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.</p>\n<p>Founded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.</p>\n<p>Attorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.</p>\n<p>When Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>That information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.</p>\n<p>If Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”</p>\n<p>For Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.</p>\n<p>“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.</p>\n<p>The prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nElon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-12 07:59 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4><strong>The Wall Street Journal</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1101488191","content_text":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.\nFive years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.\nMr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.\nA primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.\nOther issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.\nIf Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.\nThe trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.\nMr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”\n“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.\nMr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.\nFounded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.\nAttorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.\nWhen Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.\nThat information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.\nIf Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.\n“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”\nFor Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.\n“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.\nMr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.\nThe prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":5191085,"gmtCreate":1626049928869,"gmtModify":1663230838349,"authorId":3584395488031951,"author":{"id":3584395488031951,"idStr":"3584395488031951","authorId":3584395488031951,"name":"TohYangYang","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3e76cb2a204369fb8e5eb9e84a258516","vip":1,"currentWearingBadge":{"badgeId":"972123088c9646f7b6091ae0662215be-3","templateUuid":"972123088c9646f7b6091ae0662215be","name":"Legendary Trader","description":"Total number of securities or futures transactions reached 300","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/656db16598a0b8f21429e10d6c1cb033","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/03f10910d4dd9234f9b5702a3342193a","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0c767e35268feb729d50d3fa9a386c5a","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":1,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":"93.78%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100},"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":146986881,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"Nice","text":"Nice","html":"Nice"}],"langContent":"EN"},{"id":146981264,"gmtCreate":1626049396458,"gmtModify":1703752253291,"author":{"id":"3582595806100338","authorId":"3582595806100338","name":"Rteo","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ba4c61a94c707cd25f18400b8cc52a4c","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"authorIdStr":"3582595806100338","idStr":"3582595806100338"},"htmlText":"That’s why SP stuck at low $600","listText":"That’s why SP stuck at low $600","text":"That’s why SP stuck at low $600","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/146981264","repostId":1101488191,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1101488191","pubTimestamp":1626047978,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1101488191?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-12 07:59","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1101488191","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. ","content":"<blockquote>\n Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n</blockquote>\n<p>In 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.</p>\n<p>Five years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.</p>\n<p>A primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.</p>\n<p>Other issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.</p>\n<p>If Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.</p>\n<p>The trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”</p>\n<p>“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.</p>\n<p>Founded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.</p>\n<p>Attorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.</p>\n<p>When Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>That information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.</p>\n<p>If Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”</p>\n<p>For Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.</p>\n<p>“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.</p>\n<p>The prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nElon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-12 07:59 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4><strong>The Wall Street Journal</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1101488191","content_text":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.\nFive years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.\nMr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.\nA primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.\nOther issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.\nIf Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.\nThe trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.\nMr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”\n“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.\nMr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.\nFounded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.\nAttorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.\nWhen Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.\nThat information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.\nIf Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.\n“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”\nFor Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.\n“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.\nMr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.\nThe prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":146912563,"gmtCreate":1626049115452,"gmtModify":1703752242716,"author":{"id":"3581823397971154","authorId":"3581823397971154","name":"FreeAcc","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6c561f6ffa43b092a23982419590bfc7","vip":1,"crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"authorIdStr":"3581823397971154","idStr":"3581823397971154"},"htmlText":"Ok","listText":"Ok","text":"Ok","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":3,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/146912563","repostId":1101488191,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1101488191","pubTimestamp":1626047978,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1101488191?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-12 07:59","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1101488191","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. ","content":"<blockquote>\n Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n</blockquote>\n<p>In 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.</p>\n<p>Five years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.</p>\n<p>A primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.</p>\n<p>Other issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.</p>\n<p>If Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.</p>\n<p>The trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”</p>\n<p>“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.</p>\n<p>Founded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.</p>\n<p>Attorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.</p>\n<p>When Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>That information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.</p>\n<p>If Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”</p>\n<p>For Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.</p>\n<p>“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.</p>\n<p>The prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nElon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-12 07:59 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4><strong>The Wall Street Journal</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1101488191","content_text":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.\nFive years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.\nMr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.\nA primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.\nOther issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.\nIf Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.\nThe trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.\nMr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”\n“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.\nMr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.\nFounded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.\nAttorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.\nWhen Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.\nThat information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.\nIf Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.\n“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”\nFor Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.\n“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.\nMr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.\nThe prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":5190937,"gmtCreate":1626049363622,"gmtModify":1663230841249,"authorId":3578052873261314,"author":{"id":3578052873261314,"idStr":"3578052873261314","authorId":3578052873261314,"name":"David_chau87","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":146912563,"type":1,"supId":5190907,"prevId":0,"content":"Wow","text":"Wow","html":"Wow"},{"id":5190907,"gmtCreate":1626049299081,"gmtModify":1663230840629,"authorId":3583013291377509,"author":{"id":3583013291377509,"idStr":"3583013291377509","authorId":3583013291377509,"name":"Jasonlim","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/267c1a2f725df0fb1a5215f427359d1e","vip":1,"crmLevel":5,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":146912563,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"<u>like</u>","text":"<u>like</u>","html":"<u>like</u>"},{"id":5190901,"gmtCreate":1626049284898,"gmtModify":1663230839645,"authorId":3568071651427696,"author":{"id":3568071651427696,"idStr":"3568071651427696","authorId":3568071651427696,"name":"Pigmonkey","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3402225c0172781df7553e20722ebad7","vip":1,"crmLevel":5,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":146912563,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"LikE pls","text":"LikE pls","html":"LikE pls"}],"langContent":"EN"},{"id":146937934,"gmtCreate":1626048813228,"gmtModify":1703752232515,"author":{"id":"4087443573108990","authorId":"4087443573108990","name":"k2000","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/24bf802bad93726dcd0c1e73228cbae2","vip":1,"crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"authorIdStr":"4087443573108990","idStr":"4087443573108990"},"htmlText":"Hahaha price lousai","listText":"Hahaha price lousai","text":"Hahaha price lousai","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":7,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/146937934","repostId":1101488191,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1101488191","pubTimestamp":1626047978,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1101488191?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-12 07:59","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1101488191","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. ","content":"<blockquote>\n Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n</blockquote>\n<p>In 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.</p>\n<p>Five years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.</p>\n<p>A primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.</p>\n<p>Other issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.</p>\n<p>If Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.</p>\n<p>The trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”</p>\n<p>“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.</p>\n<p>Founded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.</p>\n<p>Attorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.</p>\n<p>When Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>That information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.</p>\n<p>If Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”</p>\n<p>For Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.</p>\n<p>“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.</p>\n<p>The prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nElon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-12 07:59 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4><strong>The Wall Street Journal</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1101488191","content_text":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.\nFive years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.\nMr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.\nA primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.\nOther issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.\nIf Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.\nThe trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.\nMr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”\n“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.\nMr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.\nFounded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.\nAttorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.\nWhen Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.\nThat information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.\nIf Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.\n“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”\nFor Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.\n“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.\nMr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.\nThe prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":146935658,"gmtCreate":1626048737874,"gmtModify":1703752229751,"author":{"id":"4087932884013320","authorId":"4087932884013320","name":"BlueDragon","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/431c326e19a16844e147d10866565f27","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"authorIdStr":"4087932884013320","idStr":"4087932884013320"},"htmlText":"Like and comments","listText":"Like and comments","text":"Like and comments","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":3,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/146935658","repostId":1101488191,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1101488191","pubTimestamp":1626047978,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1101488191?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-12 07:59","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1101488191","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. ","content":"<blockquote>\n Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n</blockquote>\n<p>In 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.</p>\n<p>Five years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.</p>\n<p>A primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.</p>\n<p>Other issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.</p>\n<p>If Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.</p>\n<p>The trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”</p>\n<p>“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.</p>\n<p>Founded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.</p>\n<p>Attorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.</p>\n<p>When Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>That information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.</p>\n<p>If Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”</p>\n<p>For Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.</p>\n<p>“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.</p>\n<p>The prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nElon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-12 07:59 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4><strong>The Wall Street Journal</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1101488191","content_text":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.\nFive years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.\nMr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.\nA primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.\nOther issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.\nIf Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.\nThe trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.\nMr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”\n“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.\nMr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.\nFounded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.\nAttorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.\nWhen Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.\nThat information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.\nIf Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.\n“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”\nFor Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.\n“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.\nMr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.\nThe prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":5190785,"gmtCreate":1626048805489,"gmtModify":1663230840347,"authorId":3581664026895626,"author":{"id":3581664026895626,"idStr":"3581664026895626","authorId":3581664026895626,"name":"FunnyFun","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e07aca58746125ec6ef6115042d363e9","vip":1,"currentWearingBadge":{"badgeId":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493-2","templateUuid":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493","name":"Senior Tiger","description":"Join the tiger community for 1000 days","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0063fb68ea29c9ae6858c58630e182d5","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/96c699a93be4214d4b49aea6a5a5d1a4","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/35b0e542a9ff77046ed69ef602bc105d","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":1,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2024.01.12","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":146935658,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"Ok","text":"Ok","html":"Ok"},{"id":5190975,"gmtCreate":1626049504870,"gmtModify":1663230838450,"authorId":3573606104770883,"author":{"id":3573606104770883,"idStr":"3573606104770883","authorId":3573606104770883,"name":"Bliang","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0d7cd18997f43a1b7035c0207a1c5872","vip":1,"crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":146935658,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"A","text":"A","html":"A"},{"id":5190830,"gmtCreate":1626048975733,"gmtModify":1635231676514,"authorId":3574734588858295,"author":{"id":3574734588858295,"idStr":"3574734588858295","authorId":3574734588858295,"name":"Darrenhung","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4071eb35791d34354cdd8637c991a073","vip":1,"currentWearingBadge":{"badgeId":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84-1","templateUuid":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84","name":"Real Trader","description":"Completed a transaction","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2e08a1cc2087a1de93402c2c290fa65b","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4504a6397ce1137932d56e5f4ce27166","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b22c79415b4cd6e3d8ebc4a0fa32604","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":1,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100},"crmLevel":5,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":146935658,"type":1,"supId":5190785,"prevId":0,"content":"<u>ok</u>","text":"<u>ok</u>","html":"<u>ok</u>"}],"langContent":"EN"},{"id":146936262,"gmtCreate":1626048659756,"gmtModify":1703752227791,"author":{"id":"3583131237618472","authorId":"3583131237618472","name":"AdrinaChow","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d1b867f4c2019d6ec313665b1af8431b","vip":1,"crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"authorIdStr":"3583131237618472","idStr":"3583131237618472"},"htmlText":"Like","listText":"Like","text":"Like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/146936262","repostId":1101488191,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1101488191","pubTimestamp":1626047978,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1101488191?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-12 07:59","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1101488191","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. ","content":"<blockquote>\n Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n</blockquote>\n<p>In 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.</p>\n<p>Five years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.</p>\n<p>A primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.</p>\n<p>Other issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.</p>\n<p>If Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.</p>\n<p>The trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”</p>\n<p>“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.</p>\n<p>Founded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.</p>\n<p>Attorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.</p>\n<p>When Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>That information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.</p>\n<p>If Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”</p>\n<p>For Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.</p>\n<p>“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.</p>\n<p>The prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nElon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-12 07:59 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4><strong>The Wall Street Journal</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1101488191","content_text":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.\nFive years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.\nMr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.\nA primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.\nOther issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.\nIf Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.\nThe trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.\nMr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”\n“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.\nMr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.\nFounded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.\nAttorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.\nWhen Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.\nThat information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.\nIf Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.\n“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”\nFor Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.\n“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.\nMr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.\nThe prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":5190762,"gmtCreate":1626048708199,"gmtModify":1663230841538,"authorId":3571699784798633,"author":{"id":3571699784798633,"idStr":"3571699784798633","authorId":3571699784798633,"name":"PumpItUp","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/be2a05fd6a34da9d3a9d1ff63df025cf","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":146936262,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"Nice!","text":"Nice!","html":"Nice!"}],"langContent":"EN"},{"id":146930933,"gmtCreate":1626048399322,"gmtModify":1703752220601,"author":{"id":"3583238931757961","authorId":"3583238931757961","name":"foreret","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e6c4521bde5d8dd70495836ae756f811","vip":1,"crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"authorIdStr":"3583238931757961","idStr":"3583238931757961"},"htmlText":"Great","listText":"Great","text":"Great","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":9,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/146930933","repostId":1101488191,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1101488191","pubTimestamp":1626047978,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1101488191?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-12 07:59","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1101488191","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. ","content":"<blockquote>\n Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n</blockquote>\n<p>In 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.</p>\n<p>Five years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.</p>\n<p>A primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.</p>\n<p>Other issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.</p>\n<p>If Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.</p>\n<p>The trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”</p>\n<p>“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.</p>\n<p>Founded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.</p>\n<p>Attorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.</p>\n<p>When Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>That information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.</p>\n<p>If Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”</p>\n<p>For Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.</p>\n<p>“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.</p>\n<p>The prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nElon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-12 07:59 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4><strong>The Wall Street Journal</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1101488191","content_text":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.\nFive years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.\nMr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.\nA primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.\nOther issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.\nIf Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.\nThe trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.\nMr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”\n“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.\nMr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.\nFounded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.\nAttorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.\nWhen Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.\nThat information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.\nIf Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.\n“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”\nFor Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.\n“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.\nMr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.\nThe prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":146994891,"gmtCreate":1626048339513,"gmtModify":1703752218807,"author":{"id":"3581556523917541","authorId":"3581556523917541","name":"crtyn","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/62554f7ddf70dc78b9e6f2cc7c56c702","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"authorIdStr":"3581556523917541","idStr":"3581556523917541"},"htmlText":"Like and comment, thanks&nbsp;","listText":"Like and comment, thanks&nbsp;","text":"Like and comment, thanks","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/146994891","repostId":1101488191,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1101488191","pubTimestamp":1626047978,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1101488191?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-12 07:59","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1101488191","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. ","content":"<blockquote>\n Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n</blockquote>\n<p>In 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.</p>\n<p>Five years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.</p>\n<p>A primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.</p>\n<p>Other issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.</p>\n<p>If Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.</p>\n<p>The trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”</p>\n<p>“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.</p>\n<p>Founded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.</p>\n<p>Attorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.</p>\n<p>When Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>That information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.</p>\n<p>If Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.</p>\n<p>“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”</p>\n<p>For Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.</p>\n<p>“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.</p>\n<p>Mr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.</p>\n<p>The prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Elon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nElon Musk Is Called to Defend Tesla’s Purchase of SolarCity\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-12 07:59 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4><strong>The Wall Street Journal</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-is-called-to-defend-teslas-purchase-of-solarcity-11626001200?mod=hp_lead_pos4","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1101488191","content_text":"Plaintiffs allege that the billionaire entrepreneur led Tesla to overpay for SolarCity in 2016. Mr. Musk has defended the deal.\n\nIn 2016,Elon Muskhad two unprofitable businesses on his hands in Tesla and SolarCity Corp. His solution to improve their outlook: combine them into asingle clean-energy business.\nFive years later, Mr. Musk is being called to defend the propriety of that roughly $2.1 billion tie-up in a Delaware court. Plaintiffs, which include several pension funds that owned Tesla stock, have characterized the deal as a scheme to benefit himself and bail out a home-solar company on the verge of insolvency.\nMr. Musk, who is expected to take the stand in the nonjury trial as early as Monday, was chairman of both companies at the time. His attorneys have framed the acquisition as an opportunity to realize his long-held goal of creating avertically integrated sustainable energy company.\nA primary question in the case is whether Mr. Musk, who owned roughly 22% of Tesla at the time, controlled the transaction. Proving that claim is a challenge because Mr. Musk was a minority shareholder of Tesla and the company’s shareholders approved the acquisition. Lawyers for Mr. Musk say that SolarCity was worth more than Tesla paid for it and the electric vehicle-maker’s board members, who included Mr. Musk’s brother, Kimbal Musk, acted independently.\nOther issues before the judge include whether Tesla board members were conflicted and whether vital information about the deal was withheld from shareholders.\nIf Mr. Musk loses, he could be asked to makeTeslaInc.TSLA0.63%whole. That payment could equal the value of the SolarCity transaction if the presiding judge finds that the solar firm wasn’t worth anything when Tesla agreed to buy it.\nThe trial in Delaware Chancery Court has been delayed for more than a year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Mr. Musk is the lone board member being sued. Tesla’s other board members at the time of the SolarCity tie-up agreed to settle last year for a combined $60 million, paid by insurance. The board members, some of whom had interests in both Tesla and SolarCity, denied wrongdoing.\nMr. Musk has built areputation as an unusualand sometimescombative chief executive. He has already flashed some of that in the case, making for a confrontational witness in a 2019 deposition, repeatedly goading plaintiff’s attorney Randall Baron, whom he called “reprehensible” for “attacking sustainable energy.”\n“SolarCity I think would have done just fine by itself and Tesla would have done fine by itself, but in the long-term, they are better together. And that is what the future will show,” Mr. Musk said in the deposition.\nMr. Musk brought the proposed deal to Tesla’s board in early 2016, court records show. The plaintiffs describe SolarCity as having been in severe financial distress leading up to the deal, at risk of tripping a debt covenant and without other fundraising options. Shareholders weren’t fully informed of the company’s condition, they say.\nFounded in 2006 by Mr. Musk’s cousins, SolarCity generated net losses of $769 million and $375 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.\nAttorneys for Mr. Musk say SolarCity was solvent and could have pursued other fundraising options.\nWhen Mr. Musk testifies, he is likely to be asked about how much involvement he had in the deal with SolarCity, said Lawrence Hamermesh, executive director of the Institute for Law and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School. “One of the things the plaintiffs are going to want to show is whether he had his fingers all over the negotiations and development and timing of the deal,” Mr. Hamermesh said.\nThat information will help the court decide whether the Tesla chief executive controlled the company’s consideration of the merger, as will testimony about some directors’ conflicts of interest and whether they made their decisions independently.\nIf Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, the presiding judge, finds Mr. Musk didn’t control the deal, the case is likely over for the plaintiffs, Mr. Hamermesh said. Case law in Delaware generally defers to the business judgment of independent and properly motivated directors. On the other hand, if the evidence points to control, the court would assess whether the deal process and price were fair and, if not, whether Mr. Musk should be ordered to pay money back to Tesla, Mr. Hamermesh said.\n“The theory would be that Tesla has been damaged and Musk is the responsible party,” he said. “He would have to make Tesla whole.”\nFor Mr. Musk, who now ranks among the wealthiest people on the planet, the optics of a loss likely would be more meaningful than any court-ordered financial judgment, said Seth Goldstein, an analyst for Morningstar Research Services LLC.\n“You could see the board become extra diligent with regard to acquisitions that aren’t in Tesla’s current, existing industries,” Mr. Goldstein said.\nMr. Musk is no stranger to court appearances. In 2019, he was called to the stand in a case in which a British cave exploreraccused him of defamation. The juryfound him not guilty.\nThe prior year, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Mr. Musk and Tesla over claims that he misled investors through his tweets. Mr. Musk and Tesla settled the lawsuit by each paying $20 million, andMr. Musk agreed to have certain of his tweets reviewedby Tesla’s lawyers before publishing them.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":5190728,"gmtCreate":1626048561574,"gmtModify":1663230842027,"authorId":3569563989023705,"author":{"id":3569563989023705,"idStr":"3569563989023705","authorId":3569563989023705,"name":"rachhy","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/987b013132c46b8f60047c8f8cc9a066","vip":1,"crmLevel":5,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":146994891,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"<u>yeaaa</u>","text":"<u>yeaaa</u>","html":"<u>yeaaa</u>"},{"id":5190723,"gmtCreate":1626048549963,"gmtModify":1663230837638,"authorId":3575273204402761,"author":{"id":3575273204402761,"idStr":"3575273204402761","authorId":3575273204402761,"name":"1521yes","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5c7c5c91dad8a3479b64a59aca3d3845","vip":1,"currentWearingBadge":{"badgeId":"44212b71d0be4ec88898348dbe882e03-3","templateUuid":"44212b71d0be4ec88898348dbe882e03","name":"President Tiger","description":"The transaction amount of the securities account reaches $1,000,000","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/fbeac6bb240db7da8b972e5183d050ba","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/436cdf80292b99f0a992e78750ac4e3a","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/506a259a7b456f037592c3b23c779599","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":1,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.22","exceedPercentage":"93.73%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1101},"crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":146994891,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"like","text":"like","html":"like"}],"langContent":"EN"}],"hasMoreComments":true,"newsSizeData":{"likeSize":147,"commentSize":18,"repostSize":0,"favoriteSize":0,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false}}