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

421–430 of 884 posts

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

#421

Post by diminoten »

detaro wrote: post #400
diminoten wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought his tweet was legal, assuming he wasn't lying about any of it, which indications are he wasn't. Maybe I don't understand...

The SEC complaint claims that "Musk knew or was reckless in not knowing that each of these statements was false and/or misleading because he did not have an adequate basis in fact for his assertions."

That's good to know -- I think, based on some random article I read a month ago or so, he can beat that charge, because he had concrete knowledge about the Saudi Sovereign Wealth Fund being interested in helping take Tesla private.

Again, I could be wrong, and I really wish I could remember where I found that article...

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

#422

Post by Reelin »

cma wrote: post #398
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.

SpaceX could be affected by him losing his security clearance for illegal drug use though.

So US interests could be harmed by damage to an important US company, itself entirely due to backwards US drug policies? I don't think Musk is the problem in that case...

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

#424

Post by likpok »

rayiner wrote: post #322
rococode wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious, does "reasonable" actually matter in a case like this? Say he tweeted "I just killed someone LOL" and the stock price drops. Could that also be construed as misleading investors?

The SEC needs to prove he made a “materially” false and misleading statement. The Supreme Court has defined a “material” fact for purposes of the securities laws to mean that there is: > a substantial likelihood that the...fact would have been viewed by the reasonable investor as having significantly altered the “total mix” of information made available. If a statement is an obvious joke, no reasonable investor could…

Could the SEC use as evidence the fact that the price went up post-tweet, and down after Tesla recanted? That is arguably objective evidence of reasonable investors taking his tweet as a material fact to their trading strategies (i.e. by buying stock).

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

#425

Post by andybak »

threeseed wrote: post #357
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…

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

You seem to be willfully interpreting the parent post. It's more nuanced than you are claiming.

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

#426

Post by [deleted] »

cma wrote: post #398
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.

SpaceX could be affected by him losing his security clearance for illegal drug use though.

[deleted]

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

#427

Post by mikestew »

rohit2412 wrote: post #300
bufferoverflow wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if they will be able to demonstrate that any damage was actually done. The $420 tweet had a reverse effect in the end, not what most people would expect from such a tweet.

https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/95otw7/just...

My ex-brother-in-law is the only reason I'd believe those stories aren't completely fictitious. I wonder if there's a formal psychological diagnosis for "thinks simple math is a genius system that everyone else missed". Because I had money, and EBIL didn't, he was always coming to me with shit like this. I don't know how many times I said something along the lines of, "if it's that easy, why isn't Goldman Sachs taking out loans for $200 million to buy TSLA shares?"

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

#428

Post by dragontamer »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #407
avar wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's be real here. In the grand scheme of things Tesla's selling luxury toys and is bound to be something similar to cars as what Apple is to general computing. Overly expensive status symbols. Both in number of vehicles sold[1] and in distance driven[2] Tesla vehicles are handily beat by the likes of the Chevy Volt and Nissan Leaf. Those are the sorts of vehicles that are going to change the game and make a dent in…

Let’s be real then. Tesla is actually attempting to ramp energy storage and EVs as fast as possible. No one else is even trying. Nissan has sold 300k Leafs in 7 years. Tesla sells that many EVs in a year at their current run rate. Ford isn’t even going to sell sedans in the US anymore, only low gas mileage trucks. The president of Fiat Chrysler asked people not to buy their EVs, as they lost money on each one. The Vo…

> Let’s be real then. Tesla is actually attempting to ramp energy storage and EVs as fast as possible.

I know we've talked about this before. But +100MW-hrs here and there is nothing. Yeah, 300MW in Australia is impressive for Lithium Ion. But...

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/07/24/business/ener...

This singular $3 Billion project will give 2GW of power. If the lake holds 8-hours of water, that'd be 16-GW-hrs of energy in a single project.

---------

If energy storage is to be figured out in the USA, we need to be calculating GW-hr scale projects, not MW-hr scale projects like Mr. Musk.

Lithium Ion's main benefit was to Tesla, as Tesla would have a 2nd place to sell their Lithium Ion batteries. Its great for Tesla, but its way too small of a scale for me to consider it as a major solution to the USA's energy problem.

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

#429

Post by gammateam »

djsumdog wrote: post #68
chollida1 wrote: post #6

This comment I made a few weeks ago is coming alot closer to the truth than I would have expected. I hope for Space X and Tesla's sake that the reports of a directory and Executive ban don't come true. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18016250#18016292 SpaceX is doing well, Tesla has pulled itself back from the brink and may actually become a profitable car company. All Elon had to do was keep his head down and n…

I'd hope the company itself would be fine. I really hate this idea of the grand visionary. A good friend of mine who is a mechanical engineer despises Musk. I listened to a bit of his Joe Regan interview and when Regan asked him how he has the time to do all of the things he does, there are smoke jokes about him being an alien, but not once did he say, "Well I have an amazing team of engineers" and credit all the tho…

The company won't be fine because it'll be trading at $20 per share.

(Yes, $20 is hyperbole, now read the rest)

The real issue will be the 2019 bondholder covenants. Tesla won't have the cash to pay them, Tesla won't have the buying interest to absorb dilution, and Tesla will still need money.

Basically with a lower and lower share price Tesla has fewer and fewer ways to service its debt and do further fundraising. They can, it just won't be good for shareholders. This is called a death spiral.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/deathspiral.asp

For a healthy company, a low share price has nothing to do with anything. For example, Tesla without debt and positive revenues would be a healthy company at $20 per share, it would even be undervalued and hurray you are the only person that noticed! But thats not the case for Tesla. Tesla is not a healthy company. And its going to become toxic.

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

#430

Post by browsercoin »

SimbaOnSteroids wrote: post #267
DennisP wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not only is it a private company, but "A Musk trust owns 54 percent of the outstanding stock of SpaceX, and has voting control of 78 percent of the outstanding shares....No other shareholder owns 10 percent or more." Short of a criminal conviction I think he'll be fine with SpaceX. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tesla-spacex-shareholders... Given that Musk has made his point with electric cars and major luxury br…

The battery and solar operations side of TSLA are critical to spaceX's mission to Mars. Can't have a martian colony without being able to harvest and store energy. Additionally the CV being done at Tesla could prove critical in automating prefabrication of living spaces and life support infrastructure. Can't be doing anything like that remote controlled with 8 min latency.

I'm going to have to correct you on the solar part, Solar City is a dud. I was listening to a podcast and it was said that Solar City's acquisition would be Tesla's undoing. I think that's Musk's biggest concern, not so much the $420 tweet but the fact that scrutiny directed at the Solar City acquisition that will land Musk in serious trouble.

https://twitter.com/qtrresearch/status/1024254098068176896

Allegedly, ex-Solar Cities are saying they were told to fake sales. Quoth the Raven podcast first brought it to attention but now that the SEC investigation is starting, it will be a matter of time before Musk is under the gun, this time with serious jail time, if the allegations hold true.

Post reply on HN