Elon Musk and Donald Trump are engaged in an ongoing conflict, affecting Tesla’s market performance. Tesla shares have decreased by 12%, resulting in Musk losing $15.8 billion. This downturn could make this fallout potentially more costly than Bill Gates’ divorce.

Both have been vocal on social media. Musk claimed dissatisfaction and noted he asked Trump to back away and removed the EV Mandate. Trump, in response, suggested government subsidies for Musk should be cut, expressing surprise over Biden’s inaction.

The situation has become an engaging topic, especially with Tesla’s valuation concerns. Attention is on the June 12 launch of Tesla’s robotaxi, though regulatory challenges may arise if the dispute prolongs.

Comparisons are drawn to the Gates’ divorce. Melinda Gates received $76 billion after a lengthy marriage, while Elon and Trump’s ties were brief yet impactful. For the fallout costs to exceed those of the Gates, Tesla shares would need to plummet to $226, seen as a possible outcome. Bill Gates has publicly shared he holds a short position on Tesla.

The ongoing feud between Musk and Trump appears to have put further pressure on Tesla’s already fragile share price. With a 12% drop leading to nearly $16 billion shaved off Musk’s net worth, the damage to shareholder sentiment has been immediate and tangible. The tension, although personal in nature, is bleeding into the business sphere at a moment when markets are acutely sensitive to unexpected political entanglements impacting corporate strategy.

What we’re witnessing resembles more than just a personality clash—it’s a public exchange with material consequences. Musk, known for his frequent and candid remarks, indicated that he had urged Trump to refrain from interfering, specifically stressing the removal of the electric vehicle policy as a condition. Trump, not one to mince words, shot back by suggesting Musk’s government support should be reconsidered, chiding the current administration for not acting more forcefully.

The disclosure adds a layer of uncertainty ahead of what should be a pivotal moment for the company: the launch of its robotaxi service on 12th June. While this event has been met with market anticipation, we shouldn’t overlook the regulatory red tape that could surface under a politically charged microscope. Longer term market impact depends less on the announcement, and more on the viability of regulatory approval remaining on track. At the moment, that can’t be taken for granted.

From a derivatives standpoint, traders must weigh the short-term pressure on implied volatility against the pricing of Tesla’s near-term options. The reaction so far tells us that sentiment has softened. Premiums on weekly puts have risen, reflecting apprehension over another price leg lower. If the stock stumbles further, especially toward the $226 mark—an area implied in comparison to the Gates split—a more forceful repricing could be triggered. That level seems distant but remains within the bounds of technical feasibility if market sentiment continues to deteriorate.

Gates’ previous comments about his bearish stance on Tesla have resurfaced in discussions, not least because they seemed prescient given recent market moves. His public short position has added weight to the growing idea that the stock’s prior valuation may not be well-supported in a climate of increased political scrutiny and magnified founder behaviour.

What’s key now is to remain aware of not just macroeconomic trends, but also of political speech and regulatory pivot points. As weeks progress, option expiries will offer brief windows of opportunity—but these must be approached with discipline. Price action around the robotaxi announcement will act as a temperature check. Should it fail to excite or is met with heightened legal uncertainty, downside plays may pick up pace.

We are monitoring gamma exposure closely. At the moment, hedging flows appear manageable, but should Tesla linger below key technical support lines in the $230-$240 range, dealers’ positioning would begin to exert downward force by amplifying sharp intraday swings. This is not merely theoretical—past moves have demonstrated how liquidity can evaporate quickly when sentiment is fractured and automated flows dominate.

In a climate where personalities attract as much attention as products, the consequences spill into areas that were once insulated. For now, maintain acute awareness of headline sensitivity and keep exposure scalable to new developments.