[Arzh]

What if it was true, what if he was working with a group to secure funding to take the company private? Would that make the claim that he was 'deceiving' the investors invalid? I don't really know anything about this kinda thing but I would think if he was just saying that he was working towards that goal but deiced not to do it wouldn't be 'deceiving.'

[jonknee]

Well the SEC has access to Tesla's internal documents and came to the conclusion that he did not do these things. It makes some quite detailed claims and is worth reading:

https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2018/comp-pr2018-2...

[ijpoijpoihpiuoh]

"Working to secure" and "secured" are two entirely different things. Even if your hypothetical were true (and I'm sure we will find out during the trial, supposing there is one), it would still be misleading investors.

[rchaud]

When I'm making a deal, I usually keep my mouth shut about it until every document that needs to be signed, has been signed. The Musk worship on here and the Internet in general has for too long overlooked his impulsive behaviour in the capacity of his CEO role.

[Arzh]

I don't find impulsiveness to bar someone from being am effective CEO (though I might not invest in that company). I was looking for a more reasoned answer around if it would still be illegal to say what he did if he actually had the backing he was alluding to. The answer that jonknee gave shows that my question is not the case in this instance but it was a more hypothetical.