Tesla shareholders have a long list of questions about failed promises

"Can you please tie purchased FSD to our owner accounts vs. locked to the car? This will help us enjoy it in any Tesla we drive/buy and reward us for hanging in so long, some of us since 2017."

This has been asked in the past and Elon has refused.

Interesting for a group who's stock in Tesla has appreciated > 3 times since the start of 2023, but I digress....

My question: from the article: "fewer than 500 miles between critical disengagement...".

I don't think I've ever gone more than 50 miles between critical disengagement - and that's on the open highway.

I think it's very unlikely there will be good direct answers to all of these, but some of them are capable of being "we won't be proceeding with that" and have less consequence than you might think: Stepping back from higher risk futures does mean heading off blue sky profit, but it also stops cash bleed. So from an investor point of view, with both bulls and bears involved, some walk-back responses please some investors, as well as annoying others.

The roof tile venture (and battery tech for non-vehicle uses) are good precisely because they are about achievables. The semi likewise, is clearly viable, given other market trends from European manufacturers (I tend to think this is one niche battery swap is a no brainer in. but Tesla/Musk may still disagree)

The Sub $25,000 car thing: That market now belongs to China. MG, BYD and GWM have product at scale. I think Tesla missed a niche but that said, why deliberately pursue low profit margin sales? If the market for expensive Tesla cars is holding up, you have to believe in 10x sales down the bottom end to want to invest to meet it. The mistake was saying it: Not delivering may be a sound strategy (even if it annoys me)

I'm not an EV owner, or direct investor.