9 ms·
Elon Musk’s Funding for Tesla Wasn’t So Secure
- paulpauper 8y agodarn they put a paywall
- RayVR 8y agoI think any paywall based on # articles read can be bypassed with incognito mode
- vsah 8y agoYou can't get around Bloomberg's with just incognito, but if you block cookies from bloomberg.com it can't count how many articles you read and gets stuck at 9 articles left.
- tanderson92 8y agoincognito doesn't allow cookies to be stored after exiting incognito, so in fact it does allow you to read as many articles as you wish simply by closing and re-opening the incognito tab. As another poster noted, FF incognito doesn't track cookies across tabs.
- MrEldritch 8y agoI know at the very least that you can get around Bloomberg's with Firefox's equivalent of Incognito alone.
- suprfsat 8y agoAMP version doesn't paywall: https://www-bloomberg-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.bloomberg.com/amp/view/articles/2018-08-13/funding-for-elon-musk-s-tesla-buyout-wasn-t-so-secure?amp_js_v=0.1 https://www-bloomberg-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.bloombe...
- ikeboy 8y agoI get around Bloomberg's using chrome incognito whenever I'm past 10
- pbreit 8y agoJust in the first paragraph, author mis-represents "considering" as "planning to". No, he would not need to buy all the shares. No, he was not suggesting a "firm offer to the board" was imminent. No, he did not imply "having agreements".
- RayVR 8y ago“Investor support is confirmed. Only reason why this is not certain is that it’s contingent on a shareholder vote.” This certainly means that if you only need a shareholder vote then you have everything else in place. "Only reason" by definition means there is no other reason this couldn't be.
- eduah 8y agoIf I offer you money for a thing, you have a board you know agrees with a deal to sell, you do no anticipate any due diligence hiccups, isn't the only uncertainty about the sale the vote of you other co-owners of the thing I am trying to buy? Note he didn't say the only step, he said the only uncertain thing that could stop the deal are the share holders.
- gamblor956 8y agoNo, he said it was the only reason. Therefore, due diligence, etc. couldn't be the reasons the deal didn't happen.
- eduah 8y agoYes, precisely what I am saying. That he has no reason, we can reasonably deduce from his statements, to think due diligence, etc might be the reason why the deal doesn't go through. So again, just for clarity, he didn't say the only to be done is the vote, he said the only reason why he currently expects the deal might not happen is if rejected by share holders.
- bjl 8y ago'Funding secured' has a very specific meaning in finance. And it definitely implies that he has a party that, contingent on a shareholder vote, has a legal obligation to buy out all existing shares (if necessary).
- neo4sure 8y agoI find it hilarious that Bloomberg thinks it knows whats going on at Tesla. They are desperately trying to give tesla one last black eye before it goes private.
- robertAngst 8y agoI'm over this elon cult. Or marketing company.
- supernovae 8y agoover what? How is Tesla any different from any other company out to make money? I sort of wish many of the places i worked/work at went private... the market is a joke.
- kolbe 8y agoThis isn't 'Bloomberg'. It's Matt Levine's Opinion, and his opinions (which always come with ample justification, unlike yours) are very highly regarded.
- sheepmullet 8y agoThe problem is he doesn’t provide a reasonable explanation for why Musk made his comments. It doesn’t take a genius to think, as the CEO of a public company, saying you have funding confirmed when you don’t might land you in hot water. So the most likely scenario is he understood all of this and said it anyway. Why?
- tanderson92 8y agoIt's not knowable at this time why Musk made his comments. As a writer the best Levine can do is contextualize the situation and how it compares to norms of corporate finance, try to probe at possible plausible explanations for Musk's behavior, and evaluate the relative likelihood of each as well as the potential pitfalls. Of course none of the proposed explanations are really tenable. It isn't Levine's task to explain why Musk made the comments -- that falls rather squarely on Musk, or, perhaps, the SEC.
- SheinhardtWigCo 8y agoMaybe they’re running out of money faster than anyone realizes and this is a desperate Hail Mary? That would explain the erratic and possibly illegal nature of the announcement.
- aresant 8y agoFunding is likely a major concern but as others have pointed out on these threads Tesla could likely raise at least operating capital into foreseeable future without a major problem. I think what this is a case of is further evidence that shareholder agreements should require corporate oversight of twitter accounts for CEOs :)
- TAForObvReasons 8y ago> Tesla could likely raise at least operating capital into foreseeable future without a major problem. Save for the fact that he explicitly insisted in conference calls and other places that Tesla doesn't need to raise money in 2018.
- rodgerd 8y agoOr, if you believe Azealia Banks, tweeting on acid.
- jczhang 8y agoI just found out about this woman. She cray.
- Nokinside 8y agoTSLA market cap is like 3 years of Toyota's net income. Toyota also has enough liquid assets that it could take Tesla private with cash using Musk's plan. It would be no sweat decision if they would value the business $420 per share. :)
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- tryitnow 8y agoI highly recommend reading "The Paypal Wars" - I think Musk learned a lot from his mistakes at Paypal, but I also think there are elements of his personality that are still problematic for managing a going concern. Nonetheless, I personally like the guy and wish him the best, we need more like him.
- dagoat 8y ago> we need more like him. Not Musk bashing, I am genuinely curious as to why you think that?
- mgiannopoulos 8y agoNot many billionaires putting their money on space exploration and renewable energy? Sounds like a good reason.
- sdinsn 8y agoLots of billionaires are. They just tend to keep to themselves. Also, Bezos has Blue Origin.
- eduah 8y agoWhich one are landing orbital class rockets again? FYI, Blue Origin has been at it longer that spaceX has existed. But SpaceX, spending at least 5X less money is landing orbital class rockets and whilst Blue Origin is doing suborbital flights.
- nopriorarrests 8y ago>SpaceX, spending at least 5X less money not to argue, but both Blue Origin and SpaceX are private and don't disclose ther financial information, to my best knowledge. So where is this number coming from?
- 8y ago
- sokoloff 8y ago> [Cost of compliance] is a more common complaint from small companies than from giants like Tesla, though; Tesla can afford some lawyers. Also I am sorry to be rude but given Musk's Twitter proclivities I feel like they are maybe not spending all that much on securities lawyers? Laughed out loud at this.
- Leary 8y agoI bought shares after elon's tweet. Gonna sue him now.