Skip to comments.Tesla CEO Buys $17 Million Mansion; Got $465 Million Govt. Loan
Posted on 12/29/2012 12:58:26 PM PST by ColdOne
Taxpayers footed the bill for a $465 million loan to troubled electric carmaker Tesla as part of President Barack Obamas green energy stimulus. But Teslas CEO Elon Musk is now riding high with the purchase of his new $17 million mansion.
Mr. Musks 20,248-square-foot hilltop mansion boasts breathtaking views, a two-story library with rolling ladder, a home theater, and a five-car garage to house his taxpayer-subsidized, pricey Tesla vehicles.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
This shows the man isn’t really interested in making cars—he just interested in making Obama bucks. The day will come when the free money will run out and the Tesla will join the Tucker as an idea who was too early.
Wonder where the money for it came from.
Probably sees it as his ‘fair share’ and his ‘due’ for his ‘brilliant management’.
If he had built a successful car company that could stand on its own, I’d say good for him.
The fact that he’s only in business due to a $465M “loan” courtesy of us taxpayers.....and that allowed him to buy a $17M hilltop mansion....I have a SERIOUS problem with.
This has zip to do with envy; it has everything to do with graft and political cronyism; crony capitalism at its worst.
Niiiice...! NEW USA NOMENKLATURA SYSTEM.....
TESLA made 359 cars last year, so we’re loaning him $1-million plus per vehicle...
In Bel Air, no less.
“This has zip to do with envy”.
I agree. This certainly isn’t jealousy because someone is wealthier. I feel it is like having an issue with someone with a nice car.. one they stole from someone else. It isn’t “what they have” ; it’s how they got it.
Musk isn’t in the auto business. He’s in the government loan business. He’ll do anything to get those Obamabucks.
Like a locomotive except less efficient.
Also, don’t those big mansions have huge carbon footprints?
That’s probably okay too. Since his heating and cooling is electric.
What auto manufacturer was it that had 10 or so cars spontaneously ignite a few months back and burn to crisps?
These green energy loans, including those to companies that fail (seems like most of them) are successes for the Rats because the loans both pay political cronies and some of the money makes its way back into Democrat campaign coffers.
Well, there's a good bit of ignorance rearing its ugly head on this thread, but I'll pick on you. ;-)
Tesla CEO Elon Musk makes just $33,280 a year; has option to buy 5.27 million sharesFrom: http://green.autoblog.com/2012/08/16/tesla-ceo-elon-musk-makes-just-33-280-a-year-has-option-to-buy/
He's not cashing in on Tesla, he's a good CEO who'll only make money if the company succeeds. He's also the founder of SpaceX, which is doing very well and making a good bit of money, and will also provide manned trips to the Space Station in a couple of years.
Musk is the founder of PayPal, and mainly from the sale of that company already has a net worth north of $650 million. I think he can easily afford a $17 million mansion.
Just got an SBA loan and I had to commit all my personal assets as collateral. I knew I should have just invented a windmill powered car that saved the snails and had a horn that cried every time a tree got chopped down in the world.
I could be looking at yacht brochures instead of Free Republic.
For those who'd like a little more insight, here's the Forbe's article on the new mansion:
Sounds like he got a pretty good deal, it was initially listed at $27 million. ;-)
So how come he couldn’t loan some of that net worth to his own company?
Because he didn't become that wealthy doing stupid things...why should he when investors will assume the risk in hope of reward?
Some relatives of mine moved to Hawaii in the past few months, job change. Liberals. So we're chatting with them a couple days ago, and the issue of electric cars came up, "clean" energy and all that. Thinking of getting one. I told the husband that electric cars are dirty, dirtier than gasoline powered cars. He asked "how's that?". I asked him if he sees any nuclear power plants or hydro-electric plants in Hawaii. Then told him almost all the electriciy in Hawaii is generated by burning oil and coal. So recharging that clean electric car is burning oil. Thousands of megawatts produced by burning oil. Half a megawatt here and there produced by wind or alternatives.
They were speechless! Said they would check for themselves. I said good!
Why should he indeed, when he’s got Uncle Sucker in his hip pocket?
I didn’t choose to invest with this guy. Obama gave him OUR money.
I didnt choose to invest with this guy. Obama gave him OUR money."
Like I said in an earlier post, I'm not sure that was a good investment. Even if it's repaid, what's the interest rate? Nothing like what a regular investor is hoping for...
Don't blame Musk for gaming the system though, all good capitalists do it. ;-)
Plenty of room in the tumbrels for him and Obama both.
but he won’t care. he got his. probably getting big bucks as CEO of a company that will never make a dime, and will never have to repay this “loan”
“Plenty of room in the tumbrels for him and Obama both.”
0, well that is somewhat understandable. Musk, on the other hand, has done nothing either illegal or unethical. Instead, he has provided a better future for mankind going forward.
I wouldn’t invest in Tesla, but SpaceX looks like a good bet.
I hope things improve for you! You seem bitter. :-)
This is blatant corruption. In developing countries with a long history of corruption and trying to put a stop to it, for example China, government officials are put to death for amounts involved in this deals. This person should be jailed and all his assets confiscated. This country is lost because of this kind of corruption if it is not stopped. It is what fosters groups like Occupy.
Nah, I cheerfully despise the connected thieves who are ripping me off.
“Nah, I cheerfully despise the connected thieves who are ripping me off.”
I am completely opposed to the government wasting money. The fact is, though, that Tesla may very well eventually be profitable. That is certainly in contrast to Solyndra and the other “green investments” the 0 administration has made.
Are you saying he’s gay?
“Musk is the founder of PayPal, and mainly from the sale of that company already has a net worth north of $650 million. “
So then why does he need 465 million of my tax money?
So you’ve just proven me right.
He IS a parasite.
Further, there is absolutely zero proof that any electric car program will be profitable at any point in the future.
Especially if common sense wins out and government teet money dries up.
Right now, the only thing keeping electric car makers going is government teet money.
“So then why does he need 465 million of my tax money?”
Why do any of the big companies need tax money (or tax breaks)? Don’t I recall that GE paid no taxes last year? As I said, they game the system.
It look as though, unlike Solyndra and the other bad loans, Tesla will pay the loan back - and ahead of schedule.
“Further, there is absolutely zero proof that any electric car program will be profitable at any point in the future.”
There is never any “proof” that something will happen in the future. Some possibilities are more likely than others, though.
“Especially if common sense wins out and government teet money dries up.
Right now, the only thing keeping electric car makers going is government teet money.”
I expect you mean “teat” money.
I don’t think you’re right about profitability though. Right now 13,000 people have put money down on Tesla vehicles. That works out to a cool $1.3 billion worth of vehicles. Other than charge time, you wouldn’t be giving up much over a regular sports car. The top of the line model does 0-60 MPH in 4.4 seconds, and has a range of around 300 miles. The cost for a charge is about $17 in LA, which has higher than average electricity prices. The cost to go the same distance in a 30 MPG car would be about double that.
Electric cars will make more and more sense as the technology improves. Personally, I could like a nuclear powered car (via nuclear generated electricity).
From your promoting them, I take it that you work for them and thus have a vested interest in keeping the government pork flowing to the company.
You might actually be able to find some idiots that are also true believers in electric fantasy cars.
Fact remains, electric cars will not be profitable at all.
Fact remains, Musk is a big Obama fan.
Fact remains, Musk is big on getting government funds and not using his own money in calculated risk.
Fact remains, GE is a good example of cronyism, recall their massive donations and buddyism with Obama?
“Tesla will pay the loan back - and ahead of schedule.”
Just like GM “paid back” their bailout loan, right?
[They haven’t by the way.]
“There is never any proof that something will happen in the future. Some possibilities are more likely than others, though.”
Funny, you said it is a fact, from your post 34: “The fact is, though, that Tesla may very well eventually be profitable. “
It is not.
So are you habitually a liar or just intellectually dishonest to a fault?
Nope, that's quite a leap of logic on your part. I am an admirer of Elon Musk, who's done very well with the impetus of PayPal to start him off. SpaceX is taking on the established interests and soundly beating them at the space launch game.
"You might actually be able to find some idiots that are also true believers in electric fantasy cars. Fact remains, electric cars will not be profitable at all."
You keep trying to state that as fact, but you're instead making predictions. You seem unable to make the distinction between the two. We'll see how things play out in reality.
"Fact remains, Musk is a big Obama fan."
Musk contributes to both Dems and the GOP, but my take is that he does it to further his interests. Smart, eh? Just what I'd expect of a self-made billionaire.
"Fact remains, Musk is big on getting government funds and not using his own money in calculated risk."
Along with a ton of other companies...that is called "smart business".
"Fact remains, GE is a good example of cronyism, recall their massive donations and buddyism with Obama?"
Sure, and the relevance is what exactly? (BTW in my view GE is far worse than Tesla, it paid $0 in 2011 taxes right?)
Tesla will pay the loan back - and ahead of schedule.
"Doubt that. Just like GM paid back their bailout loan, right? [They havent by the way.]"
Obviously not like GM...duh.
There is never any proof that something will happen in the future. Some possibilities are more likely than others, though.
'Funny, you said it is a fact, from your post 34: The fact is, though, that Tesla may very well eventually be profitable. '
I absolutely did not say that.
Look genius, "may very well be" is not a statement of certainty. Words have meaning. (I will note that I said "Tesla will pay its loan off ahead of schedule", which should also have been stated as a probability, not a guarantee. Mea culpa.)
"So are you habitually a liar or just intellectually dishonest to a fault?"
Sometimes I long for the good old days of duels. However, given that you're clearly not the sharpest tool in the shed I'll just let it slide...
Look genius, "may very well be" is not a statement of certainty.
“The fact is though, that the probability of rolling doubles in craps is one in six.”
That statement is not a guarantee that doubles will come up every time.
The fact is though,”
That is a statement of guarantee.
Might want to sharpen your tool pal.
Nope. Time for a logic or English class - I'm not exactly sure where your comprehension falls short.
1. something known to be true: something that can be shown to be true, to exist, or to have happened
Btw, Edisons electric car was a hot item in 1912. This is 2012.
“You said “The fact is”. YOU need to be more precise in your use of language. Either it’s a “fact” or it isn’t. And you clearly stated “The fact is”. Say what you mean and mean what you say.”
Oh, I do. And you have certainly grasped the meaning of “fact”. However, when I say: “The fact is that event X has probability Y of happening.” that is stating that the probability Y is certain - not the event X.
I hope this (finally) clears this up for you. Happy New Year!
Happy New Year.
When you use teh term “The Fact IS” you are makign a statement of guarantee.
You are asserting that the following is unequivocally true.
And it is a fact that electric cars will not be profitable.
One reason: The cost of generating electricity is too high.
Another: Energy density in batteries versus charging time.
It takes less time to fill a fuel tank than it does to charge a battery.
Plus, I’ve never known a car to brick itself irreparably when it runs out of gas.
Forty thousand dollars and you might have a usable vehicle again, but your warranty won’t cover it.
But hey, keep lying and being dishonest as well as insulting.
THAT always works to sway people.
By the by, you entered this thread with insults pal.
Better sharpen your tool some more.
He also claims he never said post 34.
He’s a liar, a poor one at that, and has zero credibility.
Especially when he smears capitalism in his one certain post.
[Quick PL, try to get those posts removed so you’ll look like a good guy!]
“The fact is, though, that Tesla may very well eventually be profitable. “ -post 34 claiming “Fact” in future profitability.
“I absolutely did not say that. “ -Post 399 where he claims he never said post 34.
Either he’s a liar, or has multiple people posting from the same handle?
No, it's called corporate welfare, and a lack of good citizenship. And it's no better than if I went down to some government office and signed up to receive food stamps. It doesn't matter that 47 percent of the people in this country do it, it's still robbery using the coercive force of government to appropriate the property of those who earned it.