特斯拉的首席執(zhí)行官馬斯克于本周二在推特（Twitter）上公布了以每股420美元的價格將公司私有化的想法,。這一推文不代表最終的決定,，但卻引發(fā)了無數(shù)的猜測，也把這家電動汽車廠商的股價推到了今年的最高點,。

這一可能性也給特斯拉的投資者——無論是大型的共同基金還是散戶——留下了一大堆問題和風險,，以及一個可能的重要抉擇：他們可以選擇以較低的溢價現(xiàn)在賣掉股票，也可以選擇繼續(xù)持有,，賭私有化的特斯拉會在長遠的未來給他們帶來更多利益,。

馬斯克想要擺脫做空者和每個季度發(fā)布財報的壓力，發(fā)布推文后,，他又在一份信中表示他會給股東一個選擇,，特斯拉私有化以后,，他們可以繼續(xù)當投資者,，或是拿錢并放棄股權(quán)。不過對于散戶而言,，公眾股變成私股的先例幾乎沒有,。而共同基金的經(jīng)營者可能需要考慮自己能夠分配多少資金持有缺乏流動性的股票。

特斯拉的發(fā)言人拒絕對此發(fā)表評論,。

散戶投資者

馬斯克最大的信徒群體中,，有一群他登月計劃的愿景和熱愛所感召的散戶投資者。如果馬斯克把公司私有化,，這些投資者有理由謹慎行事,。

密歇根大學（University of Michigan）羅斯商學院（Ross School of Business）的教授埃里克·戈登表示,，馬斯克需要仔細想想辦法，讓現(xiàn)有的散戶投資者自愿保留這家私有化公司的股權(quán),，但他們持股價值的透明度會有所損失,。

戈登在本周三的采訪中表示：“他們要蒙著眼睛展開一次長期的投資。他們會坐在一輛飛速行駛的車中,，路面崎嶇不平,，而現(xiàn)在他們什么都看不到?！?

不過,，他表示，許多散戶投資特斯拉都是出于對馬斯克的信賴,，因此他們或許愿意踏上這段旅程,。

私有化公司可能也會對一些小型投資者造成障礙。馬斯克可以相對容易地在私有化的特斯拉中繼續(xù)給員工發(fā)行股票,。私有化的結(jié)構(gòu)也許會阻止新的散戶投資者加入,，因為私有股份受到證券法的豁免，往往要求買方是有資質(zhì)的投資者,，擁有高凈值且經(jīng)驗豐富,。

對一些看好特斯拉的股東來說，賣掉股票會損失太多錢,。Gerber Kawasaki Inc.的首席執(zhí)行官羅斯·格伯稱,，他的公司代表散戶持有價值大約1,500萬美元的特斯拉股票。除非別無選擇,，否則他不會賣掉股票,。格伯表示，馬斯克如果開價420美元,，那就太低了,，他認為特斯拉的每股價值為571美元。

格伯在采訪中表示：“沒有誰是為了把特斯拉的股票在420美元的價位上賣出而買它的,。他們購買特斯拉的股票,，是因為十年后它的價值會達到如今的10倍。特斯拉將成為下一個亞馬遜（Amazon）或谷歌（Google）,?！?

此外，Carlyle Group Inc.的聯(lián)合創(chuàng)始人大衛(wèi)·魯賓斯坦在周三接受Bloomberg Radio采訪時表示,，因為以首席執(zhí)行官領(lǐng)導的買斷可能會導致潛在的利益沖突,，獨立的董事會需要確保整個過程公平執(zhí)行。

魯賓斯坦在公司私有化和上市方面有著豐富的經(jīng)驗,，他說：“如果領(lǐng)導私有化的是首席執(zhí)行官,，那么董事會就必須確保一切都在公平條件下進行,，而不是單單有利于首席執(zhí)行官?！?

共同基金

彭博社收集的數(shù)據(jù)顯示,，投資顧問持有的股份占到了特斯拉總股份的64%。除了馬斯克自己持有公司20%的股份之外,，特斯拉的大股東還包括T. Rowe Price Group Inc.,，以及富達投資集團（Fidelity Investments）的母公司FMR LLC。

法規(guī)規(guī)定,，共同基金的非流動性投資,，不得超過資產(chǎn)的15%。不過非上市流通的證券可能會被視為流動資產(chǎn),。

這些基金也可以利用自己的資產(chǎn),。例如，富達的發(fā)言人查爾斯·凱勒就表示,，他們的共同基金可以最多把自己10%的資產(chǎn)用于非流動性投資,。

實際上，多數(shù)大型基金只會把自己1%至3%的資產(chǎn)用于這種投資,。富達還持有了Uber Technologies Inc.,、Lyft Inc.和愛彼迎（Airbnb Inc.）等許多私有公司的股票。

Morningstar Inc.的管理研究主管拉塞爾·金奈爾表示,，許多共同基金擁有私有公司的股票,，因為他們認為那些公司最終會上市。但特斯拉的情況更加復雜難明,。

金奈爾說：“特斯拉的情況相反,，它要從上市公司變成私人公司。這個議題有點棘手,?！彼茰y大部分基金傾向于賣掉特斯拉的股份，或者保留一小部分,，以此繼續(xù)了解公司的情況,。（財富中文網(wǎng)）

譯者：嚴匡正

Musk, Tesla’s chief executive officer, floated the idea of going private at a price of $420 per share Tuesday on Twitter. The tweet, which does not represent a final decision, touched off a firestorm of speculation and sent shares of the electric-car maker to their highest price this year.

The possibility also leaves Tesla investors — both big mutual funds and retail holders alike — with a thicket of questions, risk and perhaps a big decision: They can sell now at a low premium or hang on and bet that in the long run a private Tesla will pay out even more.

Musk, who wants relief from short-sellers and quarter-to-quarter pressures, said in a letter following the tweet that he would like to give shareholders a choice to either remain investors in a private Tesla or get bought out. But for retail investors, little precedent exists for converting public shares to private ones. Mutual fund operators might need to wrestle with limits on how much they can allocate to more illiquid holdings.

A Tesla spokesman declined to comment.

Retail Investors

Some of Musk’s big believers are mom and pop investors attracted to the entrepreneur’s vision and penchant for tackling moonshot projects. If Musk takes the company private, there’s reason for those investors to proceed with caution.

Musk could carefully engineer a way for existing retail investors to voluntarily keep their shares in a private vehicle, but they would lose some transparency on their value, said Erik Gordon, professor at the University of Michigan’s Ross School of Business.

“They are going to be buckled in for a long-term ride, blind-folded,” Gordon said in an interview Wednesday. “They’ll be in a very fast car, going down a bumpy road, now blind-folded.”

But many retail investors may take the journey since they own the stock based on their belief in Musk, he said.

A private vehicle could pose hurdles for some small investors too. Musk could continue to issue shares of a privately held Tesla to employees relatively easily. The private structure might keep out new mom-and-pop investors because private shares fall under securities law exemptions that most often require buyers to be an accredited investor — with a high net worth and sophistication.

For some bullish Tesla shareholders, tendering their shares would leave too much money on the table. Ross Gerber, CEO of Gerber Kawasaki Inc., said his firm holds about $15 million in Tesla stock on behalf of his retail customers. He said he would only tender his shares if he had no alternative. Gerber said Musk’s suggested price if $420 a share is way too low and thinks the stock is worth $571 a share.

“No one bought Tesla to sell at $420,” Gerber said in a interview. “They bought it because, over 10 years, it could be worth 10 times that. It could be the next Amazon or Google.”

Moreover, because a CEO-led buyout could come with potential conflicts of interest, an independent board would have to ensure that the procedure is executed fairly, David Rubenstein, co-founder of the Carlyle Group Inc., said in a Bloomberg Radio interview Wednesday.

“If the CEO is going to lead it, the board would have to make certain everything is done fairly so it’s not just to the advantage of the CEO,” said Rubenstein, who has extensive experience with taking companies private and public.

Mutual Funds

Investment advisers account for 64 percent of ownership of Tesla shares, according to data collected by Bloomberg. Beyond Musk’s own personal 20 percent stake in the company, big holders include T. Rowe Price Group Inc. and FMR LLC, the parent of Fidelity Investments.

Regulatory limits dictate that mutual funds cannot have more than 15 percent of assets held in illiquid investments. But private securities may be treated as liquid.

Funds can enforce their own caps as well. For instance, Fidelity mutual funds can hold up to 10 percent of their assets in illiquid securities, according to spokesman Charles Keller.

In practice most of its large funds hold only about 1 to 3 percent in such holdings. Fidelity also owns stakes in a number of private companies including Uber Technologies Inc., Lyft Inc. and Airbnb Inc.

Russel Kinnel, director of manager research at Morningstar Inc., said that a number of mutual funds own shares in private companies on the assumption that those companies will eventually go public. But with Tesla the situation is murkier.

“With Tesla you would be going the other way, from public to private. That could be a tricky proposition,” he said. He speculated that most funds would opt to sell their shares or perhaps keep just a small stake in Tesla to stay informed about the company.