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

Tesla Enters “Whistleblower Hell”

thedrive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 162 posts

Re: Tesla Enters “Whistleblower Hell”

#61

Post by drusepth »

vikramkr wrote: post #7
drcross wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Short sellers have been causing the company a lot of trouble, Musk is correct in pointing them out so that their activities become known.

No, they really haven't. The best way to deal with shorts is to have a good quarter and crush them all. Or wait for a short squeeze. Lots of companies have misinformation spread by shorts all the time, but very few companies engage and attack shorts.

Why don't more companies "engage and attack shorts"? Aren't people taking short positions on companies effectively lowering the stock price of the company compared to someone just not buying their stock, and therefore doing potential damage to that company's valuation and future?

I'm surprised any company has the time to engage and attack those kinds of threats, but I'm not surprised there is an incentive for them to do so. Is it just the lack of time (or maybe optics, for whatever reason) that other companies don't "fight back"?

Re: Tesla Enters “Whistleblower Hell”

#62

Post by Lazare »

smallgovt wrote: post #43
vikramkr wrote: post #4

Tesla (or at least Elon) has a terrible habit of engaging with critics in deeply unproductive ways, such as all the anti short seller stuff they pulled. It makes them look very defensive and seem like they feel vulnerable/cant face the criticism, and maybe it's because they actually are vulnerable and doing things that merit short selling and whistleblowing. At least from a PR perspective you dont want to engage like…

> At least from a PR perspective you don't want to engage like this if you have nothing to hide. Responding in public fashion is a rational choice for TSLA to make assuming: 1) There exist short sellers who are willing to engage in malicious activities that hurt shareholder value 2) Publicizing their efforts to fight back against said actors acts as a deterrent for further malicious activity. I don't know for sure, b…

I find both extremely implausible, both individually and (especially) in combination.

Re: Tesla Enters “Whistleblower Hell”

#63

Post by Lazare »

drusepth wrote: post #61
vikramkr wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, they really haven't. The best way to deal with shorts is to have a good quarter and crush them all. Or wait for a short squeeze. Lots of companies have misinformation spread by shorts all the time, but very few companies engage and attack shorts.

Why don't more companies "engage and attack shorts"? Aren't people taking short positions on companies effectively lowering the stock price of the company compared to someone just not buying their stock, and therefore doing potential damage to that company's valuation and future? I'm surprised any company has the time to engage and attack those kinds of threats, but I'm not surprised there is an incentive for them to…

> Why don't more companies "engage and attack shorts"?

Because it's incredibly pointless, an utter waste of time, a distraction from things which actually matter, and can veer all-to-quickly into illegal actions as Musk has already found out? (His "taking Tesla private" tweet seemed to have been driven, in part, by a desire to punish shorts. It was later found, of course, to be illegal stock manipulation, and it wiped billions of dollars off Tesla's market cap.)

> Aren't people taking short positions on companies effectively lowering the stock price of the company compared to someone just not buying their stock, and therefore doing potential damage to that company's valuation and future?

In much the same way that people choosing not to buy Tesla shares do, yes. The effect is real, but even in extreme cases, trivial.

It is quite clear that Musk has done vastly more damage to Tesla by worrying about short sellers than the short sellers themselves could have possibly done (eg, with his "taking Tesla private" tweet, but there are many other examples).

> I'm not surprised there is an incentive for them to do so

There is no incentive to do so. It is actively harmful.

Re: Tesla Enters “Whistleblower Hell”

#64

Post by kneel »

Lazare wrote: post #62
smallgovt wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At least from a PR perspective you don't want to engage like this if you have nothing to hide. Responding in public fashion is a rational choice for TSLA to make assuming: 1) There exist short sellers who are willing to engage in malicious activities that hurt shareholder value 2) Publicizing their efforts to fight back against said actors acts as a deterrent for further malicious activity. I don't know for sure, b…

I find both extremely implausible, both individually and (especially) in combination.

You've never heard of rumor-mongering short sellers?

Very much a real phenomenon, hard to catch them and it's very lucrative.

Re: Tesla Enters “Whistleblower Hell”

#65

Post by finnthehuman »

smallgovt wrote: post #43
vikramkr wrote: post #4

Tesla (or at least Elon) has a terrible habit of engaging with critics in deeply unproductive ways, such as all the anti short seller stuff they pulled. It makes them look very defensive and seem like they feel vulnerable/cant face the criticism, and maybe it's because they actually are vulnerable and doing things that merit short selling and whistleblowing. At least from a PR perspective you dont want to engage like…

> At least from a PR perspective you don't want to engage like this if you have nothing to hide. Responding in public fashion is a rational choice for TSLA to make assuming: 1) There exist short sellers who are willing to engage in malicious activities that hurt shareholder value 2) Publicizing their efforts to fight back against said actors acts as a deterrent for further malicious activity. I don't know for sure, b…

Dude. You gotta let it go. These are pretty unsurprising allegations for a company like Tesla. And short sellers are not the boogieman, they're just an indication that the value of Tesla is highly uncertain.

Re: Tesla Enters “Whistleblower Hell”

#66

Post by baby »

kneel wrote: post #64
Lazare wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find both extremely implausible, both individually and (especially) in combination.

You've never heard of rumor-mongering short sellers? Very much a real phenomenon, hard to catch them and it's very lucrative.

Fake news right?

Re: Tesla Enters “Whistleblower Hell”

#67

Post by optimiz3 »

finnthehuman wrote: post #65
smallgovt wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At least from a PR perspective you don't want to engage like this if you have nothing to hide. Responding in public fashion is a rational choice for TSLA to make assuming: 1) There exist short sellers who are willing to engage in malicious activities that hurt shareholder value 2) Publicizing their efforts to fight back against said actors acts as a deterrent for further malicious activity. I don't know for sure, b…

Dude. You gotta let it go. These are pretty unsurprising allegations for a company like Tesla. And short sellers are not the boogieman, they're just an indication that the value of Tesla is highly uncertain.

IDK man, TheDrive pushes non-stop anti-Tesla stories, it's not unreasonable to suspect their motives. Just look at their story history; not exactly unbiased.

Re: Tesla Enters “Whistleblower Hell”

#68

Post by unityByFreedom »

smallgovt wrote: post #43
vikramkr wrote: post #4

Tesla (or at least Elon) has a terrible habit of engaging with critics in deeply unproductive ways, such as all the anti short seller stuff they pulled. It makes them look very defensive and seem like they feel vulnerable/cant face the criticism, and maybe it's because they actually are vulnerable and doing things that merit short selling and whistleblowing. At least from a PR perspective you dont want to engage like…

> At least from a PR perspective you don't want to engage like this if you have nothing to hide. Responding in public fashion is a rational choice for TSLA to make assuming: 1) There exist short sellers who are willing to engage in malicious activities that hurt shareholder value 2) Publicizing their efforts to fight back against said actors acts as a deterrent for further malicious activity. I don't know for sure, b…

Someone motivated to short-sell might be further motivated to state their case publicly. What's wrong with that?

Short selling is part of a functioning market. It's not some evil thing. It's one mechanism the financial world uses to gauge company value. I'm shocked every time I read this conspiracy theory on HN. The positions of these traders are public.

The only response to short sellers is to focus on your business. Responding with "it's a conspiracy" does not help your business.

Re: Tesla Enters “Whistleblower Hell”

#69

Post by [deleted] »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #58
kec wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But which is the more likely causes of this: That TSLA is the victim of an evil coordinated effort to cause the company to take, or just that 30% of the market genuinely believes they're overvalued. Given they have a higher market cap than either Ford or Honda, I'd be betting on the latter....

Equity value (market cap + debt) the real measure of company valuation, since debt holders are owners too. Ford's EV is 145B (42B market cap + 103B debt). Tesla's EV is 56B (44.5B market cap + 11.5B debt). Ford and Honda are still valued considerably higher than Tesla.

[deleted]

Re: Tesla Enters “Whistleblower Hell”

#70

Post by refurb »

kemiller wrote: post #31
kec wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But which is the more likely causes of this: That TSLA is the victim of an evil coordinated effort to cause the company to take, or just that 30% of the market genuinely believes they're overvalued. Given they have a higher market cap than either Ford or Honda, I'd be betting on the latter....

When you consider how rich and well-connected the players who stand to lose if Tesla wins, I don’t think it’s at all crazy to suggest that they are using some of that wealth to slow them down. If you happen to have 10 billion hanging around and there are billions more on the line, it’d almost be stupid not to. There’s no law against malicious short selling assuming you’re not outright lying about them in print. Oil c…

Wouldn’t a public company like Exxon need to disclose any massive short position on it’s quarterly public statements?

I think someone would have noticed if Exxon’s balance sheet said something like “Derivative securities - $2.8B”.

Post reply on HN