By now it is well known that Tesla held a secretive conference call after announcing the reveal of it’s $35,000 Model 3 (see also: The Secret Tesla Conference Call to Which You Were Not Invited here). The call, which Musk only invited a handful of reporters to attend, eventually leaked into the public domain and had to be transcribed by Carl Marks Advisors VP, Paul Huettner.

The idea of the company having a secret conference call, during which it appeared to release a material amount of nonpublic information, while at the same time being under the watchful eye of the SEC, was shocking even to some Tesla supporters. Longtime Tesla bulls, like HyperChange TV's Galileo Russell, took exception to not being included in the latest slate of Tesla disclosures.

After tweeting at Elon Musk yesterday, Musk admitted to Russell that not providing a transcript of the call and not opening up it up to the public was "a mistake". Musk ultimately appeared to place the blame on the Tesla communications team, or at least those members of the communication team that he hasn't fired yet.

Tesla comms is fixing. That was a mistake. — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 5, 2019

But now it looks as though the situation may be worse than originally anticipated. In following up on the situation, a report out yesterday by the Los Angeles Times actually stated that Tesla conducted yet another round of disclosures after its original secret conference call, but this time, only with Deutsche Bank.

"An analyst at Deutsche Bank said Tesla had shared information with him about Model 3 profit margins, even though Musk refused to answer a question about margins on the media conference call," the report says. If true, this would be especially egregious breach of Reg FD because one of the questions that Elon Musk ducked on the first secretive conference call was a question about the vehicle's margin. According to a transcript provided by Huettner, when asked about the Model 3's margin by Forbes, Elon Musk said he wasn't "going to answer questions like that".

Moderator: [00:32:42] Thank you. Our next question comes from Chuck Tannert with Forbes. Chuck Tannert: [00:32:47] Good afternoon. What is that Tesla's profit margin on each and every $35,000 Model 3 sold? Elon Musk: [00:32:57] Yeah. We're not going to answer questions like that. Next question.

But why would Deutsche Bank be entitled to answers when even the super secret media group wasn’t? Well, perhaps in addition to probing Deutsche Bank's loans to Donald Trump, Congress should also look into the German bank's financial ties to Musk next:

6/ Oh, yes, and just so you know, Deutsche Bank is the Administrative Agent and Collateral Agent under $TSLA's crucial Asset-Based Loan (ABL) Agreement. Eight other banks rely on $DB to police the covenants in that agreement. pic.twitter.com/uS8eEHSwof — Polixenes (@Polixenes13) March 6, 2019

If the bank was indeed granted this nonpublic information, it would amount to a second jarring violation of Regulation FD and much more than the "mistake" Elon Musk has made it out to be. Further, it’s difficult to believe that the original call was a mistake on its own, when Tesla IR stated in its introduction of the call: "This is all on the record. But, please do not publish the recording or transcripts of this call."

Too late for that.

This selective doling out of material nonpublic information, including updated financial guidance, should not only be taken as demeaning and insulting to the company's investors, but is also a slap across the face by the Securities and Exchange Commission. Musk has until March 11 to respond to the commission's request to hold him in contempt of court for violating his settlement agreement. We will be keeping our eyes on that docket.