[adwn]

> Considering Musk was one of the founders, along with his cousins that currently run it.

Are you implying nepotism? Would you have said that it was "basically expected" if neither Musk nor his cousins would have been involved in SolarCity?

[jonknee]

This deal certainly would not have happened if Musk wasn't a giant shareholder and the Chairman of SolarCity. It makes very little sense on paper (SCTY loses a ton of money and TSLA needs every dollar it has plus a lot more to invest for the Model 3).

[kbenson]

> It makes very little sense on paper

I'm never sure how I'm supposed to interpret "on paper". Purely on current financials? That seems a poor way to plan IMO. There seem to be quite a few ways to market to each others customers and provide a more comprehensive "package" with this deal. I imagine we'll see car + powerwall + solar packages marketed directly soon.

[overcast]

You couldn't get those combo packages without a merger?

[kbenson]

Not with all the same possibilities. If it's the same company, they can sell one product close to margin (or below), and make it up in other products that are sold in the same package. Installing solar panels at zero profit isn't all that useful for Solar City as a singular entity, but if it's part of a package that includes an Automobile and Powerwall setup, there's a lot more places to make that profit.

[overcast]

That's what I'm implying. Certainly didn't decrease the chances of this.

[saiprashanth93]

It won't be nepotism if the decision makes business sense I guess.