Musk's "Funding Secured" May Constitute Securities Fraud

Yesterday, Elon Musk Tweeted that he would take Tesla private and "funding was secured". If false, he may be in trouble.

"Funding Secured" is a material statement that can affect stock prices. It better be true.

The New York Times asks Did Elon Musk Violate Securities Laws With Tweet About Taking Tesla Private?

Mr. Musk’s audacious offer to take private Tesla, the innovative auto company he founded and leads as chairman and chief executive, will surely go down as one of the most unorthodox takeover bids ever.

At two sentences and just 53 characters — “Am considering taking Tesla private at $420. Funding secured.” — it was probably the shortest offer ever. (General Motors’ prospectus in 2010 was over 230 pages.)

Mr. Musk offered no basis for the $420 offering price, which would ordinarily be arrived at after reams of analysis by investment bankers and negotiations with a committee of independent Tesla directors.

It was Mr. Musk’s “funding secured” statement on Twitter that may put the iconoclastic founder most at risk. He provided no details about how much funding had been secured, from whom or under what conditions. His email to employees did not mention anything about the funding.

“That’s a clear factual statement,” said John C. Coffee Jr., a professor at Columbia Law School who specializes in corporate law and securities fraud. “If it’s not fully secure, that’s potentially a very material misrepresentation, and a very straightforward violation of Rule 10b-5” of the securities law — in short, securities fraud.

It is illegal for a director or officer of a public company “to knowingly or recklessly make material misstatements about that company,” said John Coates, a professor at Harvard Law School who teaches mergers and acquisitions. Mr. Musk’s “tweets seem cryptic at best, and it is hard to see how he has complied with his duty to not be misleadingly incomplete.”

Even at a time when Twitter is the preferred medium for presidential communiqués, this is no way to commence a takeover bid. “It’s crazy,” Professor Coates said. “If I assigned this scenario to my students, the list of legal issues would fill many pages.”

For one thing, it is doubtful that a private Twitter account provides adequate notice for a public announcement of a $72 billion deal that is likely to move a stock’s price. (By the end of the day, Tesla shares had shot up over 10 percent.)

Mr. Musk has also put the company itself in an awkward situation. “If I were their lawyer, I’d tell them to have an 8-K filing at the S.E.C. the first thing in the morning,” Professor Coates said, referring to a regulatory filing used to disseminate information that may be important to shareholders. “It needs to explain if this was a joke or a mistake, and if not, what he really meant.”

Largest LBO in History

Bloomberg discusses the math in Musk Mulls Taking Tesla Private, Valuing Company at $82 Billion.

At $420 a share, Tesla would have an enterprise value of about $82 billion including debt. To take it private, the billionaire would have to pull off the largest leveraged buyout in history, surpassing Texas electric utility TXU’s in 2007.

The buyout is “highly unlikely,” said Joel Levington, analyst at Bloomberg Intelligence. “Funding $50 billion plus for a negative free cash flow business would be difficult, if not extraordinary.”

Yesterday, I wrote Private Lies: Musk Tweets He Will Take Tesla Private.

He better be able to prove his statements, and soon.

Mike "Mish' Shedlock

Comments
No. 1-12
Bankster
Bankster

The largest buyouts so far have been ~$25-$30B and they were funded mostly by debt with ~$10-15B equity checks. This would be a ~$75 billion buyout and I doubt leverage would increase dramatically as the company has negative cash flow. In fact, Tesla has negative Operating cash flows before capex and debt repayment. Therefore, the equity check would be at least $50B. Who's going to make that investment? BTW, many of the record setting buyouts either went bankrupt or went through a period of financial distress (TXU, Hyatt, EOP...). Tesla won't go private unless the valuation is <$50b>

stillCJ
stillCJ

Editor

I wonder if Elon picked his imaginary $420 number because that number has special significance to a certain group of people? Later he'll probably say "I was obviously just joking".

stillCJ
stillCJ

Editor

Obviously Mr. Market does not believe Elon's claim of buying out at $420, otherwise the stock would be $420 right now. Seems Elon actually gave new shorts a golden opportunity (if you can find any shares available to short).

RonJ
RonJ

FASB was told by congress to allow banks to lie about the value of their assets. The current bull market began immediately after. Why is Musk being held to a different standard than the banks?

Roger_Ramjet
Roger_Ramjet

Elon's desire to engage in a LBO to take out existing shareholders would be monumentally stupid. With negative earnings and a $370 share price, TSLA's equity is the cheapest component in the company's capital stack. Replacing the no cost equity with higher yielding debt would ensure that the company would never earn a dollar of profit and would likely see the company end up in bankruptcy. If anything, TSLA should be issuing more equity hand over fist at the current share price.

Stories