It's not even 100% clear to me that Musk's tweets are on balance hurting Tesla.

How much would Tesla be spending on advertising if not for Musk's antics?

I hope tsla stays operational long enough to crank out the pickup.

Musk almost went vertical takeoff in the recode interview but managed to refrain from promising that... for now.

Still pushing the roof tiles as some meaningful catalyst for growth

says he doesn't acquire companies, he builds them.

Keeeeeed,

You are again ignoring the context.

Musk leaks the production numbers to InsideEVs.

Musk then comments that the numbers he leaked are wrong without providing any detail.

Double the publicity without having to officially disclose anything substantive allowing him room to game the numbers as needed at EOQ.

Of course its helpful to the stock price. Its also a con job.

In which direction do you think musk was suggesting the numbers were wrong?

Are you saying that bc the Q ended on a weekend, you think the AR number is reasonable?

Podcast Episode "Working Through the Pain at Tesla"


https://www.revealnews.org/episodes/...pain-at-tesla/


Employees told not to call 911 and to take Lyfts to the ER instead. Also, show up to work the next day or you're written up.

So we now know 2 things


1) the EC was moved up because of the wsj report dropping about tbe widening doj investigations (cant let that drop when stock is 260)

And

2) the incoherent rambling about safety for 20 minutes on the EC because of the reveal story



Musk is a sociopath and pathological liar who parades himself around as the world's savior. Tesla is a cult for people who were raised without a male role model to teach them how to sniff out this type of stuff.

Have a read of the legal mess in this. A large pension fund suing Musk and various co-defendant major Wall Street banks for Musk's blatant fraud in giving false statements prior to and in his 2017 bond offering. Who's going to underwrite secondaries going forward given the legal, financial and reputational risks being involved with this fraud?

https://twitter.com/Paul_M_Huettner/...70096186392581

Judging by the names of investment banks named in that very complaint... pretty much every investment bank.

your logic being that because they are already being sued, it wont prevent them from underwriting secondaries?


It's sad that this logic is not terrible because its pretty clear no one is going to reign in musk and his fraud pumping, only time will do that

It's not really logic. It's more just pointing at the evidence that banks seem fine with working with Tesla.

no man Goldman ****ing Sachs is going to take a MORAL STAND here.

lol.

Dude, even as an intern I was required to go through ethics training. Goldman cares about ethics (to the extent required by law) a lot.

It's not legally required to do very much other than dot the i's and cross the t's on every god damn form SEC requires.

think GS will pass up doing business with MBS going forward? There's ethics and then there's ethics.

What the hell? So because banks once gladly worked with Enron, they'll always be glad to work with Enron even after fraud becomes known? Bizarre logic man.

Musk is now SEC censured with hard evidence of fraud and lies, and both criminal and civil liabilities piling up. That's a world apart from a year ago when they underwrote these secondaries and he was the darling of Wall Street with close to zero negative press and no known investigations.
Nothing to do with morality. It's about legal and reputational risk. Tesla is now a known fraud with an erratic CEO. He tanked the stock $110 by a drugged up tweet. You're either being very stupid or purely disingenuous.

Evidence? ****ing liar!

I mean if it was drugs that's more bullish than the alternative (that he's just completely lost his mind)

This made up doctors **** is weird, not sure if anyone is following it but some docs are surfacing that show tesla provided injury reports to osha signed off by dr that either dont exist or in one case died years ago.


Part of the reveal story regarding tesla sending employees to ER instead of calling ambulances


This stuff seems a little far fetched to me, wont affect stock price anyways but wtf

Link to dr stuff

https://twitter.com/PlainSite/status...283698688?s=19

Hint: I wasn't referring to the drugs...

Translation: stock price, bro

This isn't hard, Spurious. Stock was $365 after a nice earnings and had just ramped on a 5% Saudi stake and may have been going even higher.

Then he fraud-tweets marijuana-number $420 "funding secured", and as it becomes clear over the following days and weeks that he's a fraud and a liar, it tanks to $290. Then the SEC investigation and lawsuit filing news - started solely by this tweet! - tank it to $250.

$365 - $250 = $110 tanking, which is what I said. The market was up 1% during this period and there wasn't other market moving news.

So yes, he did tank the stock $110 with a drugged up tweet. I'm being kind/bullish in assuming he was drugged at the time and not completely insane.

I'm the "****ing liar" and not Musk? lol? Shows where your head is at, bro.

You are such an idiot that you convince yourself of the BS.

First of all, the Saudis didn't move the stock to $365 (stock opened at $340), the stock was actually halted at $367 after Musk's tweet. Then, you cherry pick the time frame which is absolutely absurd and the reality is that the stock price today is higher than it was when the Saudis invested.

You spew absolute nonsense. It's flabbergasting that people actually believe the stuff you write when you are almost always wrong.

Spurious,
Most people would agree with what I said. I'm pretty bemused you find it in any way controversial.

There's no "cherry pick" - the increasing skepticism about "funding secured" and what that said about Musk's sanity/self control/honesty caused increasingly panicked selling. You had hundreds of longs begging him to stop tweeting as the stock crashed. Then the leak of the SEC news following by the filing tanked the stock rapidly even further. Longs were despairing and blaming Musk's tweets. It was absolutely the cause for the 30% drop over the weeks following; the market was up 1% during that period and anticipation/pump for positive earnings Q3 was strong.

Then Q3 early announcement and blowout brought it up off the $260ish lows.

None of this is controversial. Bulls and bears would agree on this narrative I think, that the "funding secured" thing tanked the stock down to lows. I dunno what's going on in your head.

It obviously tanked the stock, the way you make it sound makes it more drastic (by making up numbers) and is not taking anything afterwards into account. It's also cherry picking the time period which makes it even more absurd.