Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

SEC Sues Musk and Seeks Ban for His Tweets on Go-Private Deal

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 884 posts

Re: SEC Sues Musk and Seeks Ban for His Tweets on Go-Private Deal

#351

Post by tempestn »

dragonwriter wrote: post #208
Rooster61 wrote: post #192

I very much hate to see this. Not for Musk's sake, as he has been pretty much asking for something like this to happen. I hate it because of the damage it will do to Tesla and SpaceX when he's likely banned from leading a company. Tesla's not exactly lighting the world on fire in terms of potential long term success, but SpaceX really has been doing well in recent years. The fact that they are already refurbishing so…

> I hate it because of the damage it will do to Tesla and SpaceX when he's likely banned from leading a company. He would only be banned from leading a public company; SpaceX is still private (and, heck, maybe he could realize his plan of taking Tesla private, too.) So, SpaceX wouldn't be directly effected.

Could affect their ability to get government contracts if he's convicted.

Re: SEC Sues Musk and Seeks Ban for His Tweets on Go-Private Deal

#352

Post by seansmccullough »

treis wrote: post #84

>According to Musk, he calculated the $420 price per share based on a 20% premium over that day’s closing share price because he thought 20% was a “standard premium” in going-private transactions. This calculation resulted in a price of $419, and Musk stated tha the rounded the price up to $420 because he had recently learned about the number’s significance in marijuana culture and thought his girlfriend “would find…

I wonder if he was high when he wrote the tweet?

Re: SEC Sues Musk and Seeks Ban for His Tweets on Go-Private Deal

#353

Post by rayiner »

scythe wrote: post #324
rayiner wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It cannot be argued that Tesla pushed forward both electric cars and self-driving vehicles as a major force (original self-driving push was a DoD X-Prize Sure it can. Tesla has done basically nothing for self-driving cars, it's technology is glorified lane-keeping. As to electric cars, the Model S is the third best-selling electric car ever, after the Nissan Leaf and the Chevy Volt. Both of those cars were introduc…

>Electric cars are not yet mainstream, but when the become mainstream, they're going to look a lot more like a Chevy Volt than a Model S or Model 3. Is your argument based on the form factor? Tesla's EV value proposition is based on the range of the battery pack, which blows the Leaf out of the water (the Volt is a hybrid). Switching to a smaller form factor (hatchback) would increase Tesla's range advantage. How is…

> How is putting an electric motor in a slightly different shape of car a more important accomplishment than making it run for 300 miles on a charge? The end-game car might look like a Chevy Volt on the outside, but under the hood it'll look more like a Tesla.

The Model 3 has more range because it has a much bigger and more expensive battery pack, and accordingly a much higher price tag (starting at $30,000 versus starting at $50,000). There is nothing to suggest that Tesla is going to be able to scale down to a mainstream price faster than Nissan, Chevy, etc., improve the performance of their offerings which sre already much closer to a mainstream price point. Tesla’s persistent inability to sell the promised base Model 3 suggests the opposite.

Re: SEC Sues Musk and Seeks Ban for His Tweets on Go-Private Deal

#354

Post by stcredzero »

eanzenberg wrote: post #348
stcredzero wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just revisionist history and completely wrong. Steve Jobs pretty much set Apple on the premium goods track when he returned You are revising what I actually said, and about that you are completely wrong. I never denied that Jobs set Apple on the premium goods track. However, he was one of the major forces keeping it from devolving into being only a peddler of luxury goods. Tech innovation does better with goo…

Apple produces better products than google and microsoft, get over it. The market decided.

Apple produces better products than google and microsoft, get over it.

It sounds like you're the one who needs to get over something.

For the record, I've been an iPhone user since the 2nd iPhone. I'm typing this on a Macbook Pro, and I bought the 1st unibody Macbook. I've developed iPhone apps and I've been an Apple user since 1980.

Yes, Apple produces better products for now. However, as the years pass, those products might remain recognizably luxury, but become increasingly irrelevant, like a watch fob. Apple now is to Apple in the several years before Steve Jobs died as Pixar now is to Pixar in the days when they came out with Toy Story and Up.

The market decided. Here's the thing. It never stops deciding.

Re: SEC Sues Musk and Seeks Ban for His Tweets on Go-Private Deal

#355

Post by asn0 »

threeseed wrote: post #172
stcredzero wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are Apple products different now that Jobs are gone? Yes. Jobs as local despot acted as a curb to bad decisions. Jobs had a vision which acted as a countervailing force to keep Apple from being completely sucked into being a money grubbing luxury goods company. the core people that make and design all their overpriced, planned obsolescence devices are still there, often uncredited, while everyone else likes to focus…

This is just revisionist history and completely wrong. Steve Jobs pretty much set Apple on the premium goods track when he returned. The iMac, iPod, iPad, iPhone were all developed under his watch and all were premium priced. Apple has pushed the margins higher but that's only because the market can absorb it. Computing is more central to people's lives and they are willing to pay a premium for a good experience.

I've started to think Apple is more competitive on laptops than it looks from the price.

Every time I've priced out a laptop with similar configuration to my MBP (including a good-quality display, NvME SSD, good battery life), it always ends up costing about the same as an MBP. And then Apple's customer service definitely tips in their favor (I've been spoiled by fast, convenient, competent repair service at the Apple store).

So either everyone is making big margins on well-configured laptops, or the perception of over-priced MBP's is misplaced.

Re: SEC Sues Musk and Seeks Ban for His Tweets on Go-Private Deal

#356

Post by drawkbox »

rleigh wrote: post #250
drawkbox wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Elon Musk survived the Great Recession when other car companies needed bailouts, that is pretty good line item. Ford probably would have needed one as well if Ford's didn't still run it. Elon is also an engineer first, that is needed at innovative companies, not some metric focused MBA C-level executive just looking to cash out. Musk actually cares about what he is building and has done a smashing job considering the…

When your company is a tiny player, needing bailouts is largely irrelevant. Tesla didn't have anything like the risk and exposure which required the bailouts. Most of the major manufacturers didn't require bailouts either… Your comments regarding being "made with love" doesn't square with all the other articles I've read recently regarding the poor fit and finish of new Teslas. They are having problems scaling up, an…

Musk can easily bring in process people and metric focused people to help. Removing the product/engineering focused CEO that is part of the product innovation and success is a very bad idea.

You do need a focused innovative leader to run innovative companies that are competing with big players, if you get a metrics guy as the CEO or one calling the shots they will fade away.

Taking away the founder/creator is like how Python is without Guido and Linux kernel without Linus, they will eventually run out of momentum and get convoluted with many directions trying to take the lead for short term needs, similar to how node went for a long time or Microsoft under Ballmer or Apple under John Sculley (they thought an exec guy from Pepsi could run a technology company).

The typical process only focused metric MBA guys should come in when the innovating is done and it is time to focus on short term revenues over product, which eventually runs out everytime as it is milked and research and development is killed.

There is a reason Amazon is so successful still, Bezos is an engineer/product guy first that is laser focused on taking profits and putting them back into R&D, hard to beat that as you can see.

Re: SEC Sues Musk and Seeks Ban for His Tweets on Go-Private Deal

#357

Post by threeseed »

stcredzero wrote: post #224
threeseed wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just revisionist history and completely wrong. Steve Jobs pretty much set Apple on the premium goods track when he returned. The iMac, iPod, iPad, iPhone were all developed under his watch and all were premium priced. Apple has pushed the margins higher but that's only because the market can absorb it. Computing is more central to people's lives and they are willing to pay a premium for a good experience.

This is just revisionist history and completely wrong. Steve Jobs pretty much set Apple on the premium goods track when he returned You are revising what I actually said, and about that you are completely wrong. I never denied that Jobs set Apple on the premium goods track. However, he was one of the major forces keeping it from devolving into being only a peddler of luxury goods. Tech innovation does better with goo…

So Apple products are purely luxury goods and serve no utility. I think that's more than a little ridiculous.

Re: SEC Sues Musk and Seeks Ban for His Tweets on Go-Private Deal

#358

Post by rohit2412 »

dragontamer wrote: post #313
Cshelton wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't believe so. I have been a Tesla owner and investor for a long time now. I know where Elon comes from, what missions and goals he has stated for years now, and what he is trying to accomplish. I promise you, Elon legitimately thought there would be an opportunity to go private again. He's said he wanted to do so in the past, and even has said they never wanted to go public, but were left with no choice. I don'…

> I promise you, Elon legitimately thought there would be an opportunity to go private again. That's cool and all. And that's probably why the DoJ case will fail (at least, I'm betting that the DoJ case will turn up nothing). But this is the SEC: they only have to prove recklessness or negligence. That Musk was NEGLIGENT in his ability to properly vet the information before tweeting. In particular: > Musk knew or was…

I find it hilarious that intent is under doubt. Somehow people have forgotten "short burn off the century". If shorts squeeze did happen, there would be cheering everywhere.

Re: SEC Sues Musk and Seeks Ban for His Tweets on Go-Private Deal

#359

Post by dxhdr »

browsercoin wrote: post #69

I'm perplexed how Musk could act without thinking of the consequences? Now I fear that he will be banned from SpaceX as well, when you are convicted of fraud by SEC, it will impact your duties at other companies. It takes decades to build a reputation but it can be destroyed overnight with a single tweet.

> It takes decades to build a reputation but it can be destroyed overnight with a single tweet.

To be more accurate it was a series of Tweets, each expanding the narrative and doubling down on the original statement:

- "Shareholders could either to sell at 420 or hold shares & go private"

- "My hope is all current investors remain with Tesla even if we’re private. Would create special purpose fund enabling anyone to stay with Tesla. Already do this with Fidelity’s SpaceX investment."

- "Def no forced sales. Hope all shareholders remain. Will be way smoother & less disruptive as a private company. Ends negative propaganda from shorts."

- "Investor support is confirmed. Only reason why this is not certain is that it’s contingent on a shareholder vote."

Re: SEC Sues Musk and Seeks Ban for His Tweets on Go-Private Deal

#360

Post by jaggederest »

tempestn wrote: post #351
dragonwriter wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I hate it because of the damage it will do to Tesla and SpaceX when he's likely banned from leading a company. He would only be banned from leading a public company; SpaceX is still private (and, heck, maybe he could realize his plan of taking Tesla private, too.) So, SpaceX wouldn't be directly effected.

Could affect their ability to get government contracts if he's convicted.

I was surprised to see someone dealing with export restricted technology and secret clearance launch missions smoke mj on the podcast. I know for a fact they're still relatively zero tolerance about that.
Post reply on HN