,
22 tweets,
6 min read
Read on Twitter
1/ Lots of news today about Panasonic's cold feet at $TSLA's Nevada factory. This thread, though, concerns the Riverbend factory. Specifically, two amazing statements by Gov Cuomo in yesterday's sit-down with Buffalo News editorial staff: buffalonews.com/2019/04/10/aft…
2/ Cuomo claimed $TSLA is "ahead of schedule" in its hiring promises, but said if Tesla fails to meet those obligations by next April, then New York State will enforce the $41.2 million annual penalty obligation because "a contract is a contract." 
3/ First, a bit of history. The Riverbend Agreement dates back to 2014. The parties are a research foundation affiliated with State University of New York and a SolarCity subsidiary called Silevo, Inc. (now Silevo, LLC). Here's a link: sec.gov/Archives/edgar…
4/ New York State agreed to spend $750 million building & equipping a factory for Silevo, based on Silevo's claim that it had a stunning new "Triex" solar panel technology that would revolutionize the industry:
5/ Elon Musk's cousin, Lyndon Rive, was SolarCity's president, and represented Silevo at the groundbreaking ceremony. Here's what Rive told Cuomo, the other assembled dignitaries, and New York State taxpayers:
6/ Under the Riverbend Agreement, Silevo received 10 years of rent-free factory use. In exchange, Silevo promised 1,460 "high tech" jobs, with at least 900 to come within two years of factory opening, and with all to be retained at least five years.
7/ (Silevo made other promises. It pledged $5 billion in capital and operating expenditures over a decade's time, and promised to create thousands of "support jobs" elsewhere in New York State. But here I'll focus only on the "high tech" job promises.)
8/ In late 2015, with SolarCity struggling, the parties very quietly amended the Riverbend Agreement. The 1,460 "high tech" jobs became just any old jobs. The 900 shrunk to 500.
9/ What did New York State get in return? Absolutely nothing. No ceremony for these changes! No big speechifying! Not even any public announcement.
10/ So, if as Gov Cuomo says, Tesla (actually, Silevo; more on that later) is "ahead of schedule" on hiring, it's only because New York State quietly allowed Silevo to shrink its promises. And, as for the schedule, well, it has proved highly flexible:
11/ So, perhaps, Gov Cuomo, "a contract is a contract," but the contract as it exists today, after several highly suspicious amendments, has quite a bit less for New York State taxpayers than the one you boasted about in 2014.
12/ Even if the contract had never been changed, it was unfair from the start. Silevo received a $750 million factory in Year 1, but stood to forfeit a total of only $412 million in years 3-12 (which of course is a much smaller present value number).
13/ So, how did New York State negotiate such a terrible deal, and then let it become far worse with some highly secretive amendments? By having crooks running the show, that's how. Two of whom are now in federal prison. timesunion.com/news/article/K…
14/ What about that cutting edge Triex solar panel technology on which the deal was founded? It proved to be a complete mirage. Tesla handed the factory over to Panasonic for the manufacture of ordinary solar panels. pv-magazine.com/2017/03/06/tes…
15/ One hears endless promises of using the factory for $TSLA's long-promised Solar Roof Tiles. But those tiles are vaporware, intended simply to secure votes for $TSLA's bailout of SolarCity. They're catching on in Buffalo. buffalonews.com/2019/01/31/dav…
16/ Big claims. Big promises. Then failed technology. Secret amendments. Shrunken obligations. But that's not the worst of it. What happens if the jobs (to be sustained for five years) don't materialize on schedule? Can New York State sue Tesla?
17/ It can try. But it would lose. $TSLA has absolutely no legal obligation to New York State. Why not? Because the party on the contract is nothing more than an insolvent third-tier Tesla subsidiary.
18/ Has $TSLA ever assumed the obligations of Silevo (and I mean in writing, so as to be enforceable)? No. Has Gov Cuomo or Economic Development "Czar" Howard Zemsky ever demanded that Tesla do so? I've seen no such report.
19/ So, if the hiring at Riverbend falls short of the (shrunken) 500 employee target by next April, from whom does Gov Cuomo expect to collect? $TSLA is already cash-starved and back to losing money.
20/ Even assuming $TSLA is still solvent next April, will $TSLA's board agree to allow the company to satisfy an obligation for which it has no legal liability? TBD.
21/ Of course, there is always the option of faking it is. Hire 200 more low-wage employees in March to bring the April total to 500. Lay them off in June, assuming New York State will look the other way. Given $TSLA's MO, and that of politicians, it's probably a good bet.
22/ The Riverbend story, with its many crooked twists & turns, remains one of the most under-reported $TSLA scandals. I keep hoping that changes. I keep hoping someone will start asking who received what (and who paid it) for agreeing to shrink so radically the hiring promises.
