151–160 of 399 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Shorts drive the price down Not on their own they don't. You can go and short Facebook right now and it won't move the price at all.
Not individually, but if enough people short it, then that becomes a signal to other investors that maybe there's something they don't know about, which will push the price down.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It'd be funny but since he was born in South Africa he's disqualified from running.
Ted Cruz was born in Canada. The naturalization requirement is a lot looser than you might think.
Place of birth does not matter for the House or Senate. Only need to be a US citizen.
For the President it's a "higher standard" you must be a native born Citizen.
I'm curious - supposing HN had the power to decide, would you replace Elon Musk as CEO of Tesla? What kind of future does the company have without its founder? Personally, I think I would be much more confident in Tesla, and much more likely to buy a Tesla product, if he were not in charge.
The sad piece of karma in all of this is that Musk tweeted in an effort to destroy the shorts. His tweet turned out to: - give the shorts a big dip in his stock, - an investigation by the SEC - an investigation by the DOJ - the backing off of a deep pocketed investor in the Saudis - Him potentially being personally liable, which would mean having to step away from SpaceX and Tesla if he was found guilty of fraud. Thi…
I'm curious - supposing HN had the power to decide, would you replace Elon Musk as CEO of Tesla? What kind of future does the company have without its founder? Personally, I think I would be much more confident in Tesla, and much more likely to buy a Tesla product, if he were not in charge.
Äh, yes, Elon has made Tesla successful and he made it into a major car company that is still growth strongly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, it can be an oversimplification, but in this case it isn't. He clearly wanted to pump up the stock price and screw short sellers (he threw lots of indicators in the public space), and his statement was clearly and knowingly false. There was no secured funding. Optimism might justify a statement like "final stages of signing funding" or "almost closed the deal" or even "funding as good as secured" -- there might…
> He clearly wanted to pump up the stock price and screw short sellers (he threw lots of indicators in the public space), and his statement was clearly and knowingly false. There was no secured funding. No this is not textbook at all. See previous citation from the SEC re: intentionality as a key element in criminal fraud. "Clearly and knowingly false" is just a serious-sounding way to say a misstatement. Did Musk no…
In English, the sentence "Secured funding" is ambiguous in meaning: as a shorthand sentence, it could mean "we would only use secured funding for a transaction like this".
"Secured debt" is a thing, and therefore secured funding is a thing. Unless he clarified it someplace else in a way that was not in his favor, there is plenty of wiggle room in that sentence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ted Cruz was born in Canada. The naturalization requirement is a lot looser than you might think.
He was born a US citizen though. The requirement isn't that you are born on US soil, but that you are born a US citizen. John McCain was born in Panama.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not super knowledgeable in the stock market, what would he have gained from destroying the shorts? I understand that shorts are effectively a bet that the stock will go down but do they actually damage the company in any way? At a glance it sounds like trying to break the thermometer because you think it's too cold out there, the stock wasn't at risk because of the shorts, instead there were shorts because some i…
In addition to what other replies have said, Elon also has pledged some of his stock in order to secure personal loans. He will have to fund margin calls or sell his stock if the stock falls below a certain price.
Elon has used those loans to finance a rather extravagant lifestyle. He own FIVE mansions in Bel Air, all right next to or near each other. He owns a $70,000,000 private jet, a top-of-the-line Gulstream G650 ER, and flies everywhere with it, burning immense amounts of fuel sometimes just commuting within Los Angeles (between Hawthorne and Van Nuys airports, for example). Because his unusual compensation arrangement at Tesla is contingent on the company's increasing market value or maybe someday turning a profit (which has never ever happened), these loans against his Tesla stock are his main bread-and-butter.
In other words, Tesla's fate as a company and its stock price are intimately tied to Elon's personal financial solvency. That's gotta create some conflicts of interest between his various jobs as CEO, head of the Board of Directors, and a person who doesn't want to be personally financially wiped out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So, anyone can get away with a crime if they're overstressed? or just Elon? > His idea of "secured" is simply different from the SEC definition ... He is the CEO. He's not allowed to have a different definition. Words mean things. That's how we communicate.
> Words mean things. That's how we communicate. Yes, but words are often nuanced and ambiguous. It's why we have an entire legal system to interpret exactly what "words" mean.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Aside from the fact that he's not born in the US, he doesn't seem like a good orator.
"isn't a good orator"... Given that Trump is in office that doesn't seem to be a deal breaker