Has anyone else publicly copied the Hindenburg investigation/financial model? It's not proprietary AFAIK.
Take a look at Scorpion Capital.
Who were pretty much right about Ginkgo Bioworks (DNA)
I have made the decision to disband Hindenburg Research
131–140 of 430 posts
Re: I have made the decision to disband Hindenburg Research
#132Earlier quoted context omitted.
The market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent. The market will tolerate infinite BS for arbitrary periods of time. Which also means being careful of short selling. It can put you at unlimited risk even if you are absolutely right.
> Which also means being careful of short selling. There are a number of businesses I know are badly run and will eventually fail, but I cannot find a way to monetize that safely without knowing the timeline for failure.
If you are the only person who thinks that it might fail, one cent put options will be free and you can buy them until the price hits zero, and then you can make a cent.
For example, the opportunity to sell $TSLA for $180 in one month costs about thirty cents right now. Keeping this up for ten years would cost $36.
Re: I have made the decision to disband Hindenburg Research
#133"just feeling like it" seems insufficient explanation for dismantling a successful organization rather than transitioning it they just completed their "pipeline of ideas" with "the last Ponzi cases" - seems like a surprisingly clean and abrupt end for an investigative organization the team members are "brilliant" and "family to me" but heis disbanding rather than transitioning leadership He mentions some team members…
Is this a decision to avoid litigation? I’ve seen people post analyses that disprove Hindenburg’s claims. And recently Supermicro’s independent auditors didn’t find the same issues Hindenburg claimed. Is it possible they’ve basically got rich from misleading attacks on stocks and are now shutting down to avoid something bad? Basically cashing out on their short positions? EDIT: since I am rate limited, here’s my repl…
> And recently Supermicro’s independent auditors didn’t find the same issues Hindenburg claimed.
What are you on about? Their Big 4 auditor resigned and said that nobody should trust anything that the company's board says. Are you referring to the one (1) person they hired and paid to clear themselves of wrongdoing?
Re: I have made the decision to disband Hindenburg Research
#134Earlier quoted context omitted.
The first line of that article is "New financial and accounting executives will be appointed, as recommended by the investigation committee" I agree that harm is possible when short selling and lying about it.
That’s because several people (and also EY, their auditor at the time) resigned in the wake of that report. Probably under pressure and lots of stress but also because of all the things that the initial independent investigation suggested needed to be reviewed. But now multiple investigations have completed those reviews and found nothing. And Supermicro has to fill vacant positions. EDIT: since I am rate limited, he…
Why would an investigation committee need to recommend that a company fill vacant financial and accounting executive positions? What you're saying makes no sense.
Re: I have made the decision to disband Hindenburg Research
#135I'm so confused – I thought these guys were the absolute best in blowing the whistle on scammy corporations.
nobody needs forever companies. I don't know why people aspire to do that.
just create strike teams: incorporate, capitalize, execute, distribute capital, unincorporate
Re: I have made the decision to disband Hindenburg Research
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
The market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent. The market will tolerate infinite BS for arbitrary periods of time. Which also means being careful of short selling. It can put you at unlimited risk even if you are absolutely right.
> It can put you at unlimited risk even if you are absolutely right. The risk is in borrowing, not short selling. How many momo jockies out there think about the "unlimited risk" from buying Tesla on margin? In that case, you're shorting USD, but no one talks about that because it always will be fashionable to short USD. Just like it always will be fashionable to short JPY, for carry and more. Until it's not.
Short selling a stock means borrowing shares and selling them.
Re: I have made the decision to disband Hindenburg Research
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Many self-important people online are quick to pounce on short sellers as being evil, and that will forever be a serious red flag to me thanks in no small part to Nate Anderson and the folks at Hindenburg Research. Credible arguments can be made however that short-selling itself, especially naked short selling, is an unethical thing to do as the pure possibility of short-selling makes some forms of crime possible i…
1. Naked short selling basically doesn't happen anymore. To the extent that it does happen it's a mere technicality and the borrow is found after a couple of days. 2. There is very little money in shorting. Pumping and dumping by making up positive news is much more lucrative. "to the moon" has been a trope for years, and there is no equivalent on the short side. Even the world's most successful short seller Jim Chan…
1. FTDs are at an all time high. Naked short selling is an epidemic. This is provably false.
2. Operational shorting as a part of market making and derivatives strategies is an enormous part of the market. This is also demonstrably false.
3. The DOJ has the resources, not the jurisdiction. Self regulation will always be underfunded. Trying to argue that short selling is an effective form of privatized self regulation is laughable.
Re: I have made the decision to disband Hindenburg Research
#138I've ironically lost more money the more closely I've paid attention to my investments because I was naively confident in the market's ability (or as I've come to suspect, willingness) to react to evidence of fraud. The amount of deceit put out into the world and gobbled up, on purpose, in business is obscene and seriously depressing. The magnitude of damage to psyches and thus economies that anyone acting in a fraud…
Even without fraud, the markets seem incredibly forgiving. For example, one would think that what Crowdstrike outage did to the airlines and businesses worldwide (and the levels of incompetence displayed) in 2024, would have destroyed the company. Instead, the stock has recovered nicely and it's business as usual. Or the massive security breaches - same outcome, it's as though nobody cares.
Equifax should not be in business anymore
Re: I have made the decision to disband Hindenburg Research
#139I've ironically lost more money the more closely I've paid attention to my investments because I was naively confident in the market's ability (or as I've come to suspect, willingness) to react to evidence of fraud. The amount of deceit put out into the world and gobbled up, on purpose, in business is obscene and seriously depressing. The magnitude of damage to psyches and thus economies that anyone acting in a fraud…
Even without fraud, the markets seem incredibly forgiving. For example, one would think that what Crowdstrike outage did to the airlines and businesses worldwide (and the levels of incompetence displayed) in 2024, would have destroyed the company. Instead, the stock has recovered nicely and it's business as usual. Or the massive security breaches - same outcome, it's as though nobody cares.
People don't invest because they think a company is competent. They invest because they are looking for a return.
The mistake CrowdStrike made will likely have little to no effect on their revenue. Since the stock dropped a bit (emotional investors getting out) it became a good value proposition, so people bought it cheap.
The reasons companies use CrowdStrike haven't gone away. Existing contracts can't just be terminated. By the time it comes up for renewal few will remember the incident, fewer still will care.
What you see as "levels of incompetence" others see as "made a mistake". You don't fire suppliers for a mistake- that's experience to them, and they're unlikely to make that mistake again anytime soon.
Plus of course, replacing anything like that at scale is a lot of work, expensive, and career-risky. Who, in the enterprise, is taking on that task? Who is advocating for it?
The market is forgiving because the outlook remains strong. The outlook remains strong because the business fundamentals remain strong.
Re: I have made the decision to disband Hindenburg Research
#140[deleted]