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

Block loses 20% of value as Hindenburg Research alleges fraud

finance.yahoo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 136 posts

Re: Block loses 20% of value as Hindenburg Research alleges fraud

#71

Post by refulgentis »

posharma wrote: post #34

I know this is going to be controversial, but I think it has to be said. Jack ruined Twitter first [1] (by over-hiring and then selling it to Elon) and now it's Block's turn. He still made billions, while thousands got laid off and are still suffering under Elon's questionable so called leadership. Are these the entrepreneurs we should be looking up to? The tech industry is already facing the brunt because of the mis…

The Bilton book was extremely illuminating on Dorsey, I totally agree, which reminds, I have to read longform more often....

Re: Block loses 20% of value as Hindenburg Research alleges fraud

#72

Post by locallost »

I agree there's a need for short sellers to keep the market in check, but this quote, also listed as the number one issue, doesn't really sit well with me:

> Misleading investors by overstating its genuine user counts, with former employees estimating as much as three quarters are “fake, involved in fraud, or…additional accounts tied to a single individual.”

Do they really know? Or is it just a feeling that they have, or a rumour somebody spread? Is it a rumour a former disgruntled employee blew up out of proportion?

The risk to the short seller is clear, but if they're going to advertise themselves as a "new breed of short sellers, relying on deep research", then they should come up with deep research, not this. Of all the things listed, I didn't see one thing that is based on any real data. They obviously hold clout because if I came up with this, the market wouldn't really care.

But maybe it can't really be fixed, don't know. Maybe the short seller is the fraud and it needs to take down several companies before people realize it's BS and eventually gets wiped out.

Re: Block loses 20% of value as Hindenburg Research alleges fraud

#73

Post by blitzar »

Closi wrote: post #37
achow wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hidenburgh seems to have directly accused Block. Block has systematically taken advantage of the demographics it claims to be helping. The “magic” behind Block’s business has not been disruptive innovation, but rather the company’s willingness to facilitate fraud against consumers and the government, avoid regulation, dress up predatory loans and fees as revolutionary technology, and mislead investors with inflated m…

Facilitating fraud != committing fraud Most banks and payment platforms will facilitate fraud to some extent, but it’s their duty to reduce this with compliance procedures.

> dress up predatory loans and fees as revolutionary technology, and mislead investors with inflated metrics

dress up blood testing as revolutionary technology, and mislead investors with inflated metrics - someone went to jail for fraud for that recently

Re: Block loses 20% of value as Hindenburg Research alleges fraud

#74

Post by neffo »

sam_goody wrote: post #50

In yesterday's thread about Hindenburg's post[1], there were several who claimed that Square rounds down to the nearest penny when paying their customers, and keeps the difference, and this amounts to millions. This both for their shares and their payments. I do not know if that is fraud, but if so, Hindenburg should pay attention. BTW, this was done in Superman, and used to build an [evil] AGI. Of course, that is ju…

Fraud? Illegal? Samir this is America!

Re: Block loses 20% of value as Hindenburg Research alleges fraud

#75

Post by blitzar »

jevgeni wrote: post #68
regulators wrote: post #48

Venmo has massive fraud too. I knew drug dealers in 2017 in San Francisco who openly sold marijuana, cocaine and other drugs via Venmo. Tens of thousands in transactions every 2-months. Hindenburg criticized the ability for a user to get a debit card by mail in any name but that is a form of KYC. It is true many companies including PayPal don’t force you to provide your social security number. But the user can still…

> Hindenburg criticized the ability for a user to get a debit card by mail in any name but that is a form of KYC. Not sure I understood you correctly, but this is the opposite of KYC.

Did they mean that once you obtained banking in one false name you could use that to pass KYC with other facilities?

Re: Block loses 20% of value as Hindenburg Research alleges fraud

#76

Post by TaylorAlexander »

sam_goody wrote: post #50

In yesterday's thread about Hindenburg's post[1], there were several who claimed that Square rounds down to the nearest penny when paying their customers, and keeps the difference, and this amounts to millions. This both for their shares and their payments. I do not know if that is fraud, but if so, Hindenburg should pay attention. BTW, this was done in Superman, and used to build an [evil] AGI. Of course, that is ju…

It was also done (incorrectly) in Office Space, noting the inspiration from Superman in the text of the film.

Re: Block loses 20% of value as Hindenburg Research alleges fraud

#77

Post by blitzar »

SeanAnderson wrote: post #3

It seems like a pretty wild time to be on the offensive against American fintech companies. No real comment on the merits of their research (yet), just a little shocked at the timing.

Why do you say that?

"apps" that do nothing more than transfer money two parties, representing 0 innovation and doing nothing new are valued in the 10's - 100's billions.

Re: Block loses 20% of value as Hindenburg Research alleges fraud

#78

Post by burnished »

jhugo wrote: post #53
mschuster91 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Which ones don't provide value to society, and how do they differ from shills with a long position? For example, ones that bet on a stock price where the resulting market cap goes far below the net value of the company (i.e. value of assets - value of liabilities) without any indicators backing that. The "ape army" exposed these shortsellers at GME and iirc, led to the dissolution of at least two of them.

How do these differ from shills who pump a stock price far above the net value of the company without any indicators backing that?

What are you getting at?

Re: Block loses 20% of value as Hindenburg Research alleges fraud

#79

Post by Nursie »

Kinrany wrote: post #57
Nursie wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is sanctions-evasion a good thing? Russia is currently fighting a war of aggression, applying controls on the flow of money in or out of there is one way in which the war machine can be starved.

I'm no expert, but restricting the flow of goods seems both necessary and sufficient. The war machine doesn't run on money. A state can always find a way to hide the transactions, on the other hand.

> The war machine doesn't run on money.

I think it might, particularly where the war machine has a partner willing to sell it arms.

Re: Block loses 20% of value as Hindenburg Research alleges fraud

#80

Post by atdrummond »

Kbelicius wrote: post #65
throw239849234 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

5. People for whom fiat money is impractical for one or more reasons This category is way larger than people in well-banked Western circles realise. Bitcoin (crypto) is one of the easiest ways for people affected by capital controls or sanctions (on the financial institutions they use, or the country they were unlucky enough to be born in) to freely move their (legally earned, and taxed) money across borders. Since o…

The idea that some cryptocoin is used by some large but unseen group of people is often talked about but nobody presents the data that show that this group really exists. Is there some real data that shows that this large group actually exists or is it all speculation?

The vast majority of the cash changers in Istanbul have tether and BTC logos.

There’s a similar situation in Lebanon with BTC’s near ubiquity in remittances.

Just because it doesn’t impact your life doesn’t mean this use isn’t self evident elsewhere.

Post reply on HN