5 ms·

Hindenburg Research is a well known short seller.

by thrill 6y ago

the-dude 6y ago
To be fair : they explicity state their position ( they are indeed short ) at the end of the article.
- Someone 6y ago
  It’s before a zillion background addendums, so not quite at the end think but it would be fairer to do so a lot earlier. Reason? I think most readers would stop reading this (IMO) badly written and badly formatted avalanche of statements (which may or may not be true, but the form in which it is presented doesn’t give me confidence that it is) before hitting that info.
  - smabie 6y ago
    You should see some of Citron Research's stuff. Absolutely amazing.
- codys 6y ago
  They also disclose immediately after the summary at the start (bullet points).
- guardiangod 6y ago
  Initial Disclosure: After extensive research, we have taken a short position in shares of Nikola Corp. This report represents our opinion, and we encourage every reader to do their own due diligence. Please see our full disclaimer at the bottom of the report. This is within 5 minutes of reading so I don't know where you got the 'end of the article' from. (I read the report this morning so they didn't added it after ward.)
  - adrianmonk 6y ago
    > don't know where you got the 'end of the article' from They didn't say only at the end. Near the top, the article itself even says to look at the end: "Please see our full disclaimer at the bottom of the report."
CydeWeys 6y ago
And they're short selling this position because they have good reason to believe the stock price is severely overinflated due to fraud. If what they're saying is true (and they provide lots of evidence) then this company is basically worthless.
- thrill 6y ago
  Short sellers take positions because they believe stocks are overvalued, at least in the short term, and at least can be made to look that way with sufficient negative marketing. When they share their market research with lots of adjectives, but oddly do not share any of the positives that a company may possess (and why would they?), then any investor acting on that one sided information has possibly done himself a significant financial disservice.
  - guardiangod 6y ago
    >oddly do not share any of the positives that a company may possess Oddly? It's not the job of the investors to champion for the company. The short seller presented a report with research and evidences. Another party is welcome to produce their own report that 'share any of the positives that a company may possess.' For example, Nikola. Let the company presents its side of the story, then it's up to the market/public to decide whether the reports stand on their own merit.
  - Apocryphon 6y ago
    Sure, and what are the positives specific to Nikola?
    - thrill 6y ago
      I hold no position in Nikola. Positives include them working in an area with potential large upsides, specifically trying to develop the use of Hydrogen where it's a good fit today, in long haul trucking. Future great places for it include shipping, sporadic power generation storage (wind and solar), etc. Batteries improve steadily, but so far nothing proven scalable and affordable doesn't involve significant amounts of limited lithium, meaning alternatives to battery systems are worth pursuing.
Analemma_ 6y ago
Articles like this are exactly what short-selling is supposed to be for: encouraging people to do deep research and find overvalued stocks.
beamatronic 6y ago
That’s an awfully tasteless choice of a name then. They are looking for companies that are going to catch on fire, crash and burn?
- perl4ever 6y ago
  As is sometimes noted, the Hindenburg is known as a gigantic disaster, but only a little over a third of the people on it died, which is probably better than you usually get from an airplane that explodes in a fireball at 600 feet. So maybe they are looking for companies that are going to have extreme PR disasters, regardless of actual consequences.
  - liability 6y ago
    The Hindenburg wasn't even the deadliest airship disaster. 36 died in the Hindenberg fire while 52 died on the Dixmude, 48 on R101, and 73 on the USS Akron (three survivors.) I think the Hindenburg is the best known because it was captured on film and broadcast radio, and was also the last.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
- function_seven 6y ago
  Huh. I actually didn't catch that until I read your comment. I think it's a great name. In any case, I think the "too soon?" window has closed for the Hindenburg Disaster.
- mediaman 6y ago
  They're looking for companies that are fatally flawed but present otherwise. Kind of like the Hindenburg. Hedge funds are not usually terribly concerned with marketing image. See, for example, Cerberus Capital Management, the former owner of Chrysler, which saw fit to name itself after a three-headed dog that guards the gates of Hell.
- eadan 6y ago

Hindenburg Research is a well known short seller.

by thrill 6y ago

Hindenburg Research is a well known short seller.

the-dude 6y ago

To be fair : they explicity state their position ( they are indeed short ) at the end of the article.

Someone 6y ago
It’s before a zillion background addendums, so not quite at the end think but it would be fairer to do so a lot earlier. Reason? I think most readers would stop reading this (IMO) badly written and badly formatted avalanche of statements (which may or may not be true, but the form in which it is presented doesn’t give me confidence that it is) before hitting that info.
- smabie 6y ago
  You should see some of Citron Research's stuff. Absolutely amazing.
codys 6y ago
They also disclose immediately after the summary at the start (bullet points).
guardiangod 6y ago
Initial Disclosure: After extensive research, we have taken a short position in shares of Nikola Corp. This report represents our opinion, and we encourage every reader to do their own due diligence. Please see our full disclaimer at the bottom of the report. This is within 5 minutes of reading so I don't know where you got the 'end of the article' from. (I read the report this morning so they didn't added it after ward.)
- adrianmonk 6y ago
  > don't know where you got the 'end of the article' from They didn't say only at the end. Near the top, the article itself even says to look at the end: "Please see our full disclaimer at the bottom of the report."

CydeWeys 6y ago

And they're short selling this position because they have good reason to believe the stock price is severely overinflated due to fraud. If what they're saying is true (and they provide lots of evidence) then this company is basically worthless.

thrill 6y ago
Short sellers take positions because they believe stocks are overvalued, at least in the short term, and at least can be made to look that way with sufficient negative marketing. When they share their market research with lots of adjectives, but oddly do not share any of the positives that a company may possess (and why would they?), then any investor acting on that one sided information has possibly done himself a significant financial disservice.
- guardiangod 6y ago
  >oddly do not share any of the positives that a company may possess Oddly? It's not the job of the investors to champion for the company. The short seller presented a report with research and evidences. Another party is welcome to produce their own report that 'share any of the positives that a company may possess.' For example, Nikola. Let the company presents its side of the story, then it's up to the market/public to decide whether the reports stand on their own merit.
- Apocryphon 6y ago
  Sure, and what are the positives specific to Nikola?
  - thrill 6y ago
    I hold no position in Nikola. Positives include them working in an area with potential large upsides, specifically trying to develop the use of Hydrogen where it's a good fit today, in long haul trucking. Future great places for it include shipping, sporadic power generation storage (wind and solar), etc. Batteries improve steadily, but so far nothing proven scalable and affordable doesn't involve significant amounts of limited lithium, meaning alternatives to battery systems are worth pursuing.

Analemma_ 6y ago

Articles like this are exactly what short-selling is supposed to be for: encouraging people to do deep research and find overvalued stocks.

beamatronic 6y ago

That’s an awfully tasteless choice of a name then. They are looking for companies that are going to catch on fire, crash and burn?

perl4ever 6y ago
As is sometimes noted, the Hindenburg is known as a gigantic disaster, but only a little over a third of the people on it died, which is probably better than you usually get from an airplane that explodes in a fireball at 600 feet. So maybe they are looking for companies that are going to have extreme PR disasters, regardless of actual consequences.
- liability 6y ago
  The Hindenburg wasn't even the deadliest airship disaster. 36 died in the Hindenberg fire while 52 died on the Dixmude, 48 on R101, and 73 on the USS Akron (three survivors.) I think the Hindenburg is the best known because it was captured on film and broadcast radio, and was also the last.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
function_seven 6y ago
Huh. I actually didn't catch that until I read your comment. I think it's a great name. In any case, I think the "too soon?" window has closed for the Hindenburg Disaster.
mediaman 6y ago
They're looking for companies that are fatally flawed but present otherwise. Kind of like the Hindenburg. Hedge funds are not usually terribly concerned with marketing image. See, for example, Cerberus Capital Management, the former owner of Chrysler, which saw fit to name itself after a three-headed dog that guards the gates of Hell.
eadan 6y ago