3 ms·
> I don't know if the word "contamination" is appropriate here, but it's pretty clear that Elon doesn't see any kind of sharp boundaries between his various ent
by dragontamer 4y ago
> I don't know if the word "contamination" is appropriate here, but it's pretty clear that Elon doesn't see any kind of sharp boundaries between his various enterprises.
Even without "contamination", TSLA stock price collapsed by over $100+ because Elon Musk predictably sold $Billions of stock to pay for the TWTR buyout. Its not like $33 Billion came out of nowhere. Elon had to sell TSLA to get that money.
If TWTR keeps losing money, Elon will be forced to sell more and more TSLA stock to keep it afloat.
And this is all the legal / ethical way of doing things. No "contamination" in just selling stock to support another. Even then, we can see the huge drop in TSLA stock prices (compared to the rest of the market, which rebounded in the past few weeks on good inflation data).
- mbreese 4y agoRandom thought -- is it a conflict of interest to sell so many shares, knowing that it will have a major impact on share price? If you know your personal actions (needing to sell a lot of TSLA shares to buy Twitter) will have an impact on your professional responsibilities (keeping the TSLA share price high), when does that become a conflict? Is there a way to mitigate that conflict?
- dragontamer 4y agoThat's the board's problem. Normally, you're not supposed to have the largest shareholder, CEO, and Board Chair be the same person. SEC forced Elon off the board chair at least. But yeah, its a well known fact that Tesla's setup is full of conflicts of interest. It doesn't seem like the shareholders (or the board) feels like fixing it though.