Ok, this doesn't sound too crazy in context.
They aren't owners, they are suing to be released from their lease contracts because they feel they suffered "direct and concrete" damage from the way Teslas are now associated with "Elon Musk's actions".
this post was submitted on 11 Jun 2025
539 points (98.0% liked)
Technology
71371 readers
3484 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Of course it's not crazy. The CEO went all in on being a fascist piece of shit, and brazenly open drug addiction, which has directly damaged the assets of all of his businesses, their customers assets, and the entire brands.
If, within the next 5 years, Elon isn't billions in debt and destitute, that's how you know we all live in corporate dictatorships masquerading as "democracies".
I feel like we all very, very clearly knew it already.
Why would he be in debt though, the depreciation of the goodwill will not cause him to be millions in debt, just that the company would sell for less. There isn't a lot of ground to sue Elon sadly, you can sue Tesla for things like this though and there are probably some other things you can sue either Musk or Tesla, but even if you sue Tesla in the ground Musk wouldn't go into debt from it. Most likely case is that his assets are in a holding company anyway.
The US is a corrupt country and a lot of people are defending it or otherwise funding the corruption. Like why can't we see the annual reports of the companies these billionairs own?
Musk has pledged $62.5 billion in Tesla stock as collateral for margin loans of $12.5 billion.
Giacomo Santangelo, a senior lecturer in economics at Fordham University said “A 20% stock decline on a 60% loan-to-value loan means the borrower must immediately post additional collateral or face forced liquidation. This creates cascade risk, where small declines trigger margin calls, forcing either more pledging or open-market sales, putting more pressure on the stock.”
Ow right, I forgot the US is a corrupt nation and allows bullshit like this.
Then again, it is most likely his personal holding/company which has the loans and stock and he has 100% of the shares in that company which will go bankrupt if his loans ever default(? I think that;s the right word?).
Yes. His financial advisors have probably limited his liability. He can lose the value of his holdings, but is unlikely to go into debt himself.
I agree, it's a step beyond the little sticker on the back of the car.
I'd do the same if I had one but pedoguygate switched me off the brand and it's never been the direction that I wanted to see EVs go (look I have a button that makes the car/range go down really fast. I also don't think talk of range without reference to battery size is helpful)
They aren’t owners, they are suing to be released from their lease contracts because they feel they suffered “direct and concrete” damage from the way Teslas are now associated with “Elon Musk’s actions”.
As long as they agree to return the car...
If your Nazi landlord put up a sign in the front yard that says "THIS RENTER GIVES MONEY TO NAZIS," you'd probably want to end your lease, too
They feel they suffered "direct and concrete" damage from the way Teslas are now associated with "Elon Musk's actions", the GKA law firm said.
They are demanding the Paris commercial court order their lease contracts be terminated and legal costs reimbursed, it said in a statement
As funny as this is I can't see it going anywhere.
Maybe not, but there's some merit to it. Initially it was a highly desirable car, now one is ashamed to be in because owner is a Nazi. Another problem is that there's much higher risk that someone else will damage it (again, because of the owner).
Also: this was not accidental but a willful decision made by the company. If they did just Boeing it you would not have a case.
That should increase the insurance premium and therefore the lease as well due to the risk
Ya, I'm guessing insurance costs have risen and that definitely comes into play.
There’s absolutely merit to the idea, but probably not merit legally. But who knows, legalities are labyrinthine and stupid and vary from country to country.
Why? This was not something people must have expected due to it being obvious and there is also plain and obvious harm done to them.
Dear France, never change.
I mean I can relate.
I sold my car at loss because I couldn't abide the fascist shit he was flinging around everywhere.
Despite loving the car itself, I couldn't love myself owning it and being a moving advertisement for him.
I still hate that I gave money to fund a person's decline into being a drug addled, woman hating, Russia supporting, stingy-assed, election rigging, right wing megalomaniac.
I bought a whirling log, and they gave me a swastika!