4 ms·

I'm ok with shorts in general, but I do wish that the SEC put at least as much energy into prosecuting some of the bad behavior by some negative parties (who ma

by jsight 8y ago

I'm ok with shorts in general, but I do wish that the SEC put at least as much energy into prosecuting some of the bad behavior by some negative parties (who may or may not have been shorts, tbh) as it is the company. I follow the company closely, and have definitely seen some questionable behavior that seemed to be aimed at trying to create the negative news cycle for the business. Things like promoted reddit articles and a horde of bogus NHTSA complaints can be very damaging to the business' fundamentals. But maybe there is more investigation into these things than I realize, and certainly the need to investigate this material doesn't negate the need to investigate Musk's own questionable conduct as well.

avar 8y ago
Why should the SEC be prosecuting short sellers writing slander about TSLA any more than they should be prosecuting the people who are long on TSLA writing literal or figurative press releases praising the company? Both parties have an interest in the stock going one way or the other. Regulators need to get involved when something like insider manipulation of the stock happens, say when the CEO uses Twitter the way Elon Musk does.
- jsight 8y ago
  When those statements are blatantly false with a clear intent to do reputational and market damage to the business they become more than simply "short sellers writing slander". When they pay to have them promoted it looks more like fraud.
  - avar 8y ago
    The SEC doesn't regulate people talking shit in public, even when those people are talking shit because they have a financial interest in a public company, or even if they're paying to make their message heard. They regulate things like people talking shit in public on Twitter while having access to insider information. There's no evidence that any of these people talking shit about TSLA because they hold shorts have access to information not available through the usual market disclosure mechanisms.

by jsight 8y ago

avar 8y ago

Why should the SEC be prosecuting short sellers writing slander about TSLA any more than they should be prosecuting the people who are long on TSLA writing literal or figurative press releases praising the company? Both parties have an interest in the stock going one way or the other. Regulators need to get involved when something like insider manipulation of the stock happens, say when the CEO uses Twitter the way Elon Musk does.

jsight 8y ago
When those statements are blatantly false with a clear intent to do reputational and market damage to the business they become more than simply "short sellers writing slander". When they pay to have them promoted it looks more like fraud.
- avar 8y ago
  The SEC doesn't regulate people talking shit in public, even when those people are talking shit because they have a financial interest in a public company, or even if they're paying to make their message heard. They regulate things like people talking shit in public on Twitter while having access to insider information. There's no evidence that any of these people talking shit about TSLA because they hold shorts have access to information not available through the usual market disclosure mechanisms.