5 ms·

> They also went after him for a lot of other stuff. Like lying about a buyout offer for his company. Which he received a incredibly small punishment for.

by xkjkls 5y ago

TheParkShark 5y ago
Are you sure he was lying?
- xkjkls 5y ago
  I mean, similarly to my certainty Donald Trump was lying that his taxes are under audit, and thats why he can't release them. Do I have exact knowledge of Elon's head state, no, but I can make inferences from all his actions since. If a buyer truly existed to facilitate that transaction, that would be public knowledge at this point.
  - onethought 5y ago
    If you muck in the private equity world at all you'd know that this isn't true at all. Lots of deals and nearly deals happen everyday and they only reach the public sphere if the parties want it too.
    - xkjkls 5y ago
      This was an $100 billion deal at the time. It would have been the largest LBO of all time. If there hasn't been any institution revealed to have been financing it at this point then there wasn't one.
      - slownews45 5y ago
        I think it was pretty clear that he was thinking about Saudi / middle east / Norwegian / sovereign wealth type funding on equity side. Then debt for rest if needed. These funds are looking to diversify away from oil - so for them a play in EV space makes sense. The Saudis in particular planned to do an IPO in oil industry - but that ended up not happening which really changed their decision making. If it had they were explicit about desire to diversify (smart in my view). It wasn't a $100B deal. Many larger investors would rolled their holdings into the private entity - Elon alone would have. $40 - $50B. If debt is in mix equity portion even smaller. It would have been the deal of the century. "Saudi’s Public Investment Fund built the undisclosed stake of between 3 and 5 per cent of Tesla’s shares this year, according to people with direct knowledge of the matter. At Tesla’s current share price the position is worth between $1.7bn and $2.9bn. The stake, which is below the 5 per cent threshold that requires public disclosure, makes the PIF one of Tesla’s eight biggest shareholders, according to Bloomberg data. The PIF, which has more than $250bn in assets, initially approached Tesla and chief executive Elon Musk to express interest in purchasing newly issued shares in the electric vehicle company. However, Tesla did not act on the interest, one person informed on the matter said. Instead, the Saudi state fund acquired the position in secondary markets with the help of JPMorgan." - Financial Times. Someone's just chased down $2B of your stock on SECONDARY market - yeah - that's actually more interest than many deal talks even get to. And yes - discussions like this happen with some frequency - and it's not a scandal if the deal doesn't close - you just don't usually read about them. Elon says he wanted to talk to Apple about buying tesla as well, he's on twitter more than most. That said, folks on the deal side - there tends to be movement in stock prices 3 days before deals are announced - so someone is making money on the normally secret considerations.
        xkjkls 5y ago
        > I think it was pretty clear that he was thinking about Saudi / middle east / Norwegian / sovereign wealth type funding on equity side. Then debt for rest if needed. He was "thinking"? That's not funding secured. Why have all of these institutions specifically denied having discussed it at the time too? Either it wasn't these institutions, or funding was very far from secure at the time he claimed it was. > It wasn't a $100B deal. Many larger investors would rolled their holdings into the private entity - Elon alone would have. $40 - $50B. If debt is in mix equity portion even smaller. It would have been the deal of the century. If you are going to get investors for something like this, you're also going to roll over all the debt/options that you have on your books as well. It would have been close to ~100 billion, the largest LBO ever done. > And yes - discussions like this happen with some frequency - and it's not a scandal if the deal doesn't close - you just don't usually read about them. You don't read about them because the CEO doesn't announce they secured funding for one in the middle of trading. You know, the responsible thing to do.
kraig 5y ago
Call me pessimistic, but my thoughts on the matter is that TSLA and by association Musk have become too big to fail. Anything that would take Musk down would harm a lot of very wealthy investors.
- slownews45 5y ago
  There are people looking to take him down along with SpaceX / Tesla etc. Others are glad to have someone powering ahead relative to competition in places like China etc. We will see how it plays out.
slownews45 5y ago
As you are probably aware, buyout offers are routinely front run on the street by insiders. Ie, folks in the know get in early and book nice gains. So some folks actually liked hearing direct from CEO on what they were thinking. His twitter post was clear, he was "considering" taking TSLA private. His blog post on the rationale for his potential move is here: https://www.tesla.com/blog/taking-tesla-private https://www.tesla.com/blog/taking-tesla-private Anyone who bought in at this news would have been buying in for < $84 per share (split adjusted). Current stock price is 600 per share+. The problem the SEC has had in trying to charge him is that folks feel like the SEC really ignore some of the clear scam behavior by big players. Fail to deliver? No issue. Broker bad behavior and theft? Light FINRA slaps on the wrist. Complaints about Madoff? Investigate the complainers. CEO talking about potential to take a company private publically - all out WAR by SEC! He said he is considering something. It was not definite. Stock price didn't jump to the "buyout" price the way it normally would on a real buyout. So we have clear market data that folks didn't not consider his tweets a statement that a buyout was occuring. Yes - people want to make this into a huge crime. But he explained in his tweets pretty transparently to most what his thinking was. And they did go after him for this and everything else. Hey says Stock price too high in his opinion - BAM - they were on him. And they went after him for this. if you read between lines - the contempt court case got a bit of an eye roll from the judge involved.
- xkjkls 5y ago
  > His twitter post was clear, he was "considering" taking TSLA private. $420 funding secure indicates he already had financing ready. Why has this mystery funder never materialized. > Anyone who bought in at this news would have been buying in for < $84 per share (split adjusted). Current stock price is 600 per share+. This is hugely problematic as a response. Elon Musk's behavior is unethical whether Tesla stock went up or down. The stock price should not be used as justification for previous lies. If we accept that, then we accept markets where people can gamble on a lie and things are fine if their gamble works out. That's not the business culture I want to create. People should be honest about risks so that they can be properly evaluated. > The problem the SEC has had in trying to charge him is that folks feel like the SEC really ignore some of the clear scam behavior by big players. Elon Musk is literally the second biggest player! Ignoring his malfeasance creates more people willing to emulate him. > Fail to deliver? No issue. Broker bad behavior and theft? Light FINRA slaps on the wrist. Complaints about Madoff? Investigate the complainers. CEO talking about potential to take a company private publically - all out WAR by SEC! You won't find me giving a kind word to the SEC's currently regulatory practices, but we need to recognize that corporate culture is made from examples. When someone like Elon Musk publicly flouts all responsible corporate behavior, and doesn't have an example made of him, then that is going to breed people willing to make the exact same decisions. > He said he is considering something. It was not definite. "Funding secured" is definite. > Yes - people want to make this into a huge crime. But he explained in his tweets pretty transparently to most what his thinking was. It is a huge crime. In the middle of trading, he decided to fraudulently claim he had a buyout offer for his company. That screws over not just short sellers, but any one who had calls above the $420 a share price. There is no universe where that is healthy for our markets. > if you read between lines - the contempt court case got a bit of an eye roll from the judge involved. He's currently in a court case for his buyout of Solar City, where he announced a fake product, used it as reasoning for his one public company to buy a company that he, his brother, and his cousin's had the largest stake in, and he, his brother, and his other companies (Tesla and SpaceX) were the largest bondholders in. This is a cartoonish set of conflicts of interest here. But apparently that shouldn't matter, because "stock price."

> They also went after him for a lot of other stuff. Like lying about a buyout offer for his company. Which he received a incredibly small punishment for.

by xkjkls 5y ago

> They also went after him for a lot of other stuff. Like lying about a buyout offer for his company. Which he received a incredibly small punishment for.

TheParkShark 5y ago

Are you sure he was lying?

xkjkls 5y ago
I mean, similarly to my certainty Donald Trump was lying that his taxes are under audit, and thats why he can't release them. Do I have exact knowledge of Elon's head state, no, but I can make inferences from all his actions since. If a buyer truly existed to facilitate that transaction, that would be public knowledge at this point.
- onethought 5y ago
  If you muck in the private equity world at all you'd know that this isn't true at all. Lots of deals and nearly deals happen everyday and they only reach the public sphere if the parties want it too.
  - xkjkls 5y ago
    This was an $100 billion deal at the time. It would have been the largest LBO of all time. If there hasn't been any institution revealed to have been financing it at this point then there wasn't one.
    - slownews45 5y ago
      I think it was pretty clear that he was thinking about Saudi / middle east / Norwegian / sovereign wealth type funding on equity side. Then debt for rest if needed. These funds are looking to diversify away from oil - so for them a play in EV space makes sense. The Saudis in particular planned to do an IPO in oil industry - but that ended up not happening which really changed their decision making. If it had they were explicit about desire to diversify (smart in my view). It wasn't a $100B deal. Many larger investors would rolled their holdings into the private entity - Elon alone would have. $40 - $50B. If debt is in mix equity portion even smaller. It would have been the deal of the century. "Saudi’s Public Investment Fund built the undisclosed stake of between 3 and 5 per cent of Tesla’s shares this year, according to people with direct knowledge of the matter. At Tesla’s current share price the position is worth between $1.7bn and $2.9bn. The stake, which is below the 5 per cent threshold that requires public disclosure, makes the PIF one of Tesla’s eight biggest shareholders, according to Bloomberg data. The PIF, which has more than $250bn in assets, initially approached Tesla and chief executive Elon Musk to express interest in purchasing newly issued shares in the electric vehicle company. However, Tesla did not act on the interest, one person informed on the matter said. Instead, the Saudi state fund acquired the position in secondary markets with the help of JPMorgan." - Financial Times. Someone's just chased down $2B of your stock on SECONDARY market - yeah - that's actually more interest than many deal talks even get to. And yes - discussions like this happen with some frequency - and it's not a scandal if the deal doesn't close - you just don't usually read about them. Elon says he wanted to talk to Apple about buying tesla as well, he's on twitter more than most. That said, folks on the deal side - there tends to be movement in stock prices 3 days before deals are announced - so someone is making money on the normally secret considerations.
      - xkjkls 5y ago
        > I think it was pretty clear that he was thinking about Saudi / middle east / Norwegian / sovereign wealth type funding on equity side. Then debt for rest if needed. He was "thinking"? That's not funding secured. Why have all of these institutions specifically denied having discussed it at the time too? Either it wasn't these institutions, or funding was very far from secure at the time he claimed it was. > It wasn't a $100B deal. Many larger investors would rolled their holdings into the private entity - Elon alone would have. $40 - $50B. If debt is in mix equity portion even smaller. It would have been the deal of the century. If you are going to get investors for something like this, you're also going to roll over all the debt/options that you have on your books as well. It would have been close to ~100 billion, the largest LBO ever done. > And yes - discussions like this happen with some frequency - and it's not a scandal if the deal doesn't close - you just don't usually read about them. You don't read about them because the CEO doesn't announce they secured funding for one in the middle of trading. You know, the responsible thing to do.

kraig 5y ago

Call me pessimistic, but my thoughts on the matter is that TSLA and by association Musk have become too big to fail. Anything that would take Musk down would harm a lot of very wealthy investors.

slownews45 5y ago
There are people looking to take him down along with SpaceX / Tesla etc. Others are glad to have someone powering ahead relative to competition in places like China etc. We will see how it plays out.

slownews45 5y ago

As you are probably aware, buyout offers are routinely front run on the street by insiders. Ie, folks in the know get in early and book nice gains. So some folks actually liked hearing direct from CEO on what they were thinking. His twitter post was clear, he was "considering" taking TSLA private. His blog post on the rationale for his potential move is here: https://www.tesla.com/blog/taking-tesla-private https://www.tesla.com/blog/taking-tesla-private Anyone who bought in at this news would have been buying in for < $84 per share (split adjusted). Current stock price is 600 per share+. The problem the SEC has had in trying to charge him is that folks feel like the SEC really ignore some of the clear scam behavior by big players. Fail to deliver? No issue. Broker bad behavior and theft? Light FINRA slaps on the wrist. Complaints about Madoff? Investigate the complainers. CEO talking about potential to take a company private publically - all out WAR by SEC! He said he is considering something. It was not definite. Stock price didn't jump to the "buyout" price the way it normally would on a real buyout. So we have clear market data that folks didn't not consider his tweets a statement that a buyout was occuring. Yes - people want to make this into a huge crime. But he explained in his tweets pretty transparently to most what his thinking was. And they did go after him for this and everything else. Hey says Stock price too high in his opinion - BAM - they were on him. And they went after him for this. if you read between lines - the contempt court case got a bit of an eye roll from the judge involved.

xkjkls 5y ago
> His twitter post was clear, he was "considering" taking TSLA private. $420 funding secure indicates he already had financing ready. Why has this mystery funder never materialized. > Anyone who bought in at this news would have been buying in for < $84 per share (split adjusted). Current stock price is 600 per share+. This is hugely problematic as a response. Elon Musk's behavior is unethical whether Tesla stock went up or down. The stock price should not be used as justification for previous lies. If we accept that, then we accept markets where people can gamble on a lie and things are fine if their gamble works out. That's not the business culture I want to create. People should be honest about risks so that they can be properly evaluated. > The problem the SEC has had in trying to charge him is that folks feel like the SEC really ignore some of the clear scam behavior by big players. Elon Musk is literally the second biggest player! Ignoring his malfeasance creates more people willing to emulate him. > Fail to deliver? No issue. Broker bad behavior and theft? Light FINRA slaps on the wrist. Complaints about Madoff? Investigate the complainers. CEO talking about potential to take a company private publically - all out WAR by SEC! You won't find me giving a kind word to the SEC's currently regulatory practices, but we need to recognize that corporate culture is made from examples. When someone like Elon Musk publicly flouts all responsible corporate behavior, and doesn't have an example made of him, then that is going to breed people willing to make the exact same decisions. > He said he is considering something. It was not definite. "Funding secured" is definite. > Yes - people want to make this into a huge crime. But he explained in his tweets pretty transparently to most what his thinking was. It is a huge crime. In the middle of trading, he decided to fraudulently claim he had a buyout offer for his company. That screws over not just short sellers, but any one who had calls above the $420 a share price. There is no universe where that is healthy for our markets. > if you read between lines - the contempt court case got a bit of an eye roll from the judge involved. He's currently in a court case for his buyout of Solar City, where he announced a fake product, used it as reasoning for his one public company to buy a company that he, his brother, and his cousin's had the largest stake in, and he, his brother, and his other companies (Tesla and SpaceX) were the largest bondholders in. This is a cartoonish set of conflicts of interest here. But apparently that shouldn't matter, because "stock price."