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

GM scales back partnership with electric truck startup Nikola

detroitnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 122 posts

Re: GM scales back partnership with electric truck startup Nikola

#41

Post by NicoJuicy »

jariel wrote: post #23
NicoJuicy wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He tried that already. Literally, if you watch his interview about the DJT ticker, you see him praising everything and blaming others when it went bankrupt.

That was before the RobinHood trading nation era of hyper speculative investors. Just like ~15% of the US population believes Trump when totally fabricates facts about the election, he could take a run at perennially duping investors in 2020 and beyond. "We're about to sign a huge deal for a Moscow property" ... and then it doesn't really happen. "We signed a huge deal with Macau developers" ... but it's not material…

That's normally when the SEC gets involved.

Re: GM scales back partnership with electric truck startup Nikola

#42

Post by slg »

gwern wrote: post #29
slg wrote: post #18

I know we aren't supposed to judge a book my its cover and I can't even put my finger on exactly why I feel this way, but simply naming your company Nikola when your biggest competitor is Tesla has always seemed like a huge red flag to me.

You feel that way because you realize that it's a calculated attempt to ride the coattails of an infinitely more successful and reputable company, a deliberate confusion, like if you opened a coffee chain named 'Farbucks' (slogan: "We'll make your dollar go further!"), or the small pennystocks which aim for stock tickers deliberately similar to real companies (Matt Levine covers the occasional bumps in the stocks of…

Is there official word on that being the reason for the name? That is certainly one of the theories I had and it shows a lack of ethics. However it isn't the only theory I had and they all looked bad.

For example, maybe they weren't being sleazy and they thought this was a clever play off Tesla. It isn't clever. It is unprofessional. It also shows a lack of clear vision in that they are fundamentally defining a company based off being an alternative to competitor. This shows a lack of leadership.

Or maybe they are even stupider than we gave them credit for. They saw the company was named Tesla and assumed Nikola Tesla had a direct hand in designing electric cars and were too lazy to look up the rather tangential connection between the man and the company. This shows a lack of knowledge or desire for knowledge.

I couldn't think of any positive reason for the name.

Re: GM scales back partnership with electric truck startup Nikola

#43

Post by posguy »

walrus01 wrote: post #34
omarforgotpwd wrote: post #28

Trevor Milton invited me to his headquarters to prove his trucks weren't fake. While we were having lunch I asked him about the longtime friend of his (15 years, went to his wedding) who he had framed for extortion. The friend later committed suicide when he got out of jail. This was all happening during the Nikola reverse-IPO process. After a recording of our conversation was posted online, a bunch of women came for…

Just to be clear, did you record this in a jurisdiction that is single-party consent for recording audio?

Considering it wasn't a telephone call and was possibly in a common space (restaurant, lunch room, etc), this type of recording might not need two party consent in the handful of states that are not one party consent states: https://www.wallsheinlaw.com/articles/the-two-party-consent-...

Re: GM scales back partnership with electric truck startup Nikola

#44

Post by freeone3000 »

tomrod wrote: post #25
slg wrote: post #18

I know we aren't supposed to judge a book my its cover and I can't even put my finger on exactly why I feel this way, but simply naming your company Nikola when your biggest competitor is Tesla has always seemed like a huge red flag to me.

I would have expected Edison to keep the theme consistent.

GE still holds that trademark, from when it was founded (as Edison General Electric).

Re: GM scales back partnership with electric truck startup Nikola

#45

Post by renewiltord »

opportune wrote: post #36
renewiltord wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were Jan 20, 2023 puts on this guy. And there still are. The problem here is that I don't actually know anything about NKLA or the business they're in. If you think they'll go under in the next two years, you could make bank on just debit spreads. And if you think they're a shite company but don't know where they're gonna go, do you really know anything?

The max upside for these are all less than 3x. I wouldn't call something with >2 years to execute with a max upside of 3x "bank"

You're real damn sure, right? You got another sure shot at 3x over 2 years? There's enough in the order book there for you to turn $30k into $100k.

Re: GM scales back partnership with electric truck startup Nikola

#46

Post by vmception »

pbrb wrote: post #32
vmception wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We may be in a new era of equities, where the unfortunately under-informed masses are able to really move the needle on a lot of stocks, throwing all sorts of value-trading strategies out the window. nah, we just need valuations another order of magnitude higher in more companies. when the market is flooded with money the price of everything goes higher because there is nothing else to buy. that's literally what "i…

man, this is what i have been telling myself for the past 3 years. but, here we are, in a pandemic, hitting all time highs. i've decided i'm just going DCA my pile of cash into the market (was saving for real estate deals, but continually get outbid by all cash buyers or people doing reverse exchanges that NEED to close, with the tax savings offsetting the increased prices).

> but, here we are, in a pandemic, hitting all time highs.

what were you telling yourself? Trillions of dollars have been added to the market because Congress told the Central bank and Treasury to do that, and other countries did the same thing too.

An unlimited amount of money is being used to buy a fixed number of [eligible] assets, that is inflation.

Re: GM scales back partnership with electric truck startup Nikola

#47

Post by opportune »

renewiltord wrote: post #45
opportune wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The max upside for these are all less than 3x. I wouldn't call something with >2 years to execute with a max upside of 3x "bank"

You're real damn sure, right? You got another sure shot at 3x over 2 years? There's enough in the order book there for you to turn $30k into $100k.

I'm not sure, just because I think something is intrinsically worthless doesn't mean there won't be other people who still think the stock has value in 2 years.

I think it's a malinvestment unless you are reasonably certain there will be a drop soonish but want to hedge that bet with something long-dated.

Anyway, I was simply responding to your statement that you could make bank on it, which I highly disagree with. So much uncertainty is already priced in that the max upside is only 3x even if the company becomes completely worthless in the next 2 years.

Re: GM scales back partnership with electric truck startup Nikola

#48

Post by renewiltord »

opportune wrote: post #47
renewiltord wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're real damn sure, right? You got another sure shot at 3x over 2 years? There's enough in the order book there for you to turn $30k into $100k.

I'm not sure, just because I think something is intrinsically worthless doesn't mean there won't be other people who still think the stock has value in 2 years. I think it's a malinvestment unless you are reasonably certain there will be a drop soonish but want to hedge that bet with something long-dated. Anyway, I was simply responding to your statement that you could make bank on it, which I highly disagree with. S…

Right, but that's where it comes in that you have better knowledge than the aggregate of the market. Whether or not it's bank is how much the gain is. Whether or not it's worth the risk is separate.

A quick test for the certainty a lot of people are expressing here on the company's worthlessness is how much they're willing to bet on making that real.

And I agree with you, I wouldn't make the trade. But that's all because I can't predict it.

Re: GM scales back partnership with electric truck startup Nikola

#49

Post by ponker »

renewiltord wrote: post #30
ponker wrote: post #26

I wish I had the balls to short this on IPO but I saw what was happening with Tesla and I chickened out.

There were Jan 20, 2023 puts on this guy. And there still are. The problem here is that I don't actually know anything about NKLA or the business they're in. If you think they'll go under in the next two years, you could make bank on just debit spreads. And if you think they're a shite company but don't know where they're gonna go, do you really know anything?

I knew NKLA wasn't worth $20 billion, but had no idea, and still have no idea, whether it will be priced at $20 billion.

Re: GM scales back partnership with electric truck startup Nikola

#50

Post by renewiltord »

ponker wrote: post #49
renewiltord wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were Jan 20, 2023 puts on this guy. And there still are. The problem here is that I don't actually know anything about NKLA or the business they're in. If you think they'll go under in the next two years, you could make bank on just debit spreads. And if you think they're a shite company but don't know where they're gonna go, do you really know anything?

I knew NKLA wasn't worth $20 billion, but had no idea, and still have no idea, whether it will be priced at $20 billion.

Well, no company is 'worth' its market cap since you can rarely exchange it for that value in total. But of course the only meaningful notion of absolute 'worth' of something like this is the value as determined by the market. Of course it may not have been worth it to you at the marginal clearing price, but that's because the value to you is a function of the valuer and the thing being valued.
Post reply on HN