4 ms·

why do X and SpaceX comingle assets and feuds like this? if I were a SpaceX shareholder, I'd be concerned about my CEO's misadventures with a separate company n

by gcr 2y ago

why do X and SpaceX comingle assets and feuds like this? if I were a SpaceX shareholder, I'd be concerned about my CEO's misadventures with a separate company negatively impacting SpaceX's future plans for the South American spacefaring market (whether or not it currently exists).

throw03172019 2y ago
I believe SpaceX declined to block X on their Starlink internet service.
- wmf 2y ago
  No, Starlink is blocking X. They're trying to take the high road.
  - tomjakubowski 2y ago
    they reversed course on this one: > Elon Musk's satellite broadband firm, Starlink, on Tuesday said that it is complying with Brazil's top court order to block access to social media platform X in the country, a day after informing the country's regulator it would not obey the order.
the_mitsuhiko 2y ago
> if I were a SpaceX shareholder, I'd be concerned about my CEO's misadventures I think the actual answer is that if you invest into Musk companies you do it because of Musk. So you will do and okay whatever makes Musk happy because him being there is what makes the stock do the things the stock does (or anticipation of future stock/IPO performance).
- indoordin0saur 2y ago
  I invest in Tesla because I think it's a great product with a positive vision of the future. I do wish Musk was more measured but my opinion of him doesn't affect my opinion that electric cars are good, Tesla makes the best and has proven their ability to scale.
  - the_mitsuhiko 2y ago
    Leading up to the votes for the move out of Delaware it became pretty clear how significant parts of the non institutional investors are rallying behind Musk. I don't think I have ever seen such a frenzy getting people to go for a proxy vote. That is not happening because Tesla is great, that's happening because there was a real worry about what Musk would do. I don't know for sure, but if I were to guess I would say a not insignificant part of Tesla's market prices is Musk himself.
    - indoordin0saur 2y ago
      I actually think Musk could go away and if you had a similarly driven CEO, with the same vision as him but without any public political opinions, the stock would actually go up.
      - Zigurd 2y ago
        Alternatively, nobody competent would take the job because the valuation is so far out of line that anyone who does not have a cult following who seem to believe FSD will work by the end of this year, for sure, and that the robot is not a joke, will end up being blamed for TSLA being valued in line with similar sized car companies instead of having a P/E ratio 10X that of Toyota. It's not exactly Enron but it rhymes.
  - MPSimmons 2y ago
    To be _very_ honest, I think Tesla would be worth more and would be better received if Elon stepped away entirely from executive decision-making.
    - gcr 2y ago
      Honestly, agreed. The most interesting and valuable parts of Tesla are the parts that Musk is uninvolved and uninterested in. Take the supercharger network for example. That could have been a gateway to complete market domination by Tesla, and Musk threw the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity away because it wasn’t shiny and chrome enough for him.
freedomben 2y ago
TFA is paywalled so I can't read it, but from what I understand SpaceX got pulled in because they wouldn't block X for Starlink customers in Brazil, not because of commingling of assets. The judge then penalized SpaceX and the snowball rolled from there.
Pedro_Ribeiro 2y ago
FYI SpaceX and Starlink were not involved in this feud at all until the judge froze Starlink's bank account just for the connection to Elon. In reality the one that decided to involve SpaceX was the judge.
- RIMR 2y ago
  The judge froze Starlink's bank account because Elon refused to comply with a legal order given to SpaceX by the Brazilian government to block X. Agree with it or not, it's something that is legally required of ISPs operating inside of Brazil. Elon Musk refused on "free speech" grounds, and they retaliated. He's now complying and blocking X to Starlink customers in Brazil.
  - ripjaygn 2y ago
    That is not true, Starlink's bank account was frozen before even the ban on X.
- stetrain 2y ago
  My understanding was SpaceX were operating as an ISP in the country of Brazil, and refusing to comply with the ruling to block X.com within the country of Brazil. Is that not the case?
  - soulofmischief 2y ago
    Ideological grounds are a great reason to risk exposure to multiple assets. Musk should use any power at his disposal to resist government censorship. (This is not a statement about Musk's general attitude towards censorship, which is extremely circumstantial) Musk needs to set expectations around Starlink now regarding censorship and unwarranted, broad-scope data requests. If he doesn't, then one of the most important wins of non-terrestrial, NGO-provided internet will be taken away. The war for a fair and free internet rages on, shareholders be damned. edit: nvm, I didn't realize he already gave in: https://www.theverge.com/2024/9/3/24235204/starlink-block-x-brazil-comply-elon-musk https://www.theverge.com/2024/9/3/24235204/starlink-block-x-... That's pretty sad.
jeffwask 2y ago
His boards are stacked with his personal cadre of yes men.
geniium 2y ago
This seems to be very political- related to the upcoming Brazilian votes and freedom.
muaytimbo 2y ago
some things are more important than returns, I'd rather export free speech than import censorship. That said you should know that up front.
cesarb 2y ago
> why do X and SpaceX comingle assets and feuds like this? My understanding of the case, from reading the original orders from the judge, is not that their assets are comingled, but rather that both are under direct control of Elon Musk (him being the majority owner of both SpaceX and Twitter), and therefore form a single "economic group". AFAIK, there are some situations in which the law allows going for assets of other companies in the same economic group, and that seems to be what happened here: Twitter did not have enough assets to pay the fines, so assets from the rest of the economic group have been frozen to ensure the fines will be paid.
- ivewonyoung 2y ago
  > him being the majority owner of both SpaceX and Twitter Musk only owns 40% of SpaceX so he's not the majority shareholder.
  - cesarb 2y ago
    > Musk only owns 40% of SpaceX so he's not the majority shareholder. The judge's order says otherwise (https://noticias-stf-wp-prd.s3.sa-east-1.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/wpallimport/uploads/2024/08/30171714/PET-12404-Assinada.pdf https://noticias-stf-wp-prd.s3.sa-east-1.amazonaws.com/wp-co... page 35): "O grupo econômico de fato liderado por ELON MUSK, com atuação em território nacional, engloba entre outras empresas a X BRASIL INTERNET LTDA, a STARLINK BRAZIL SERVIÇOS DE INTERNET e a STARLINK BRAZIL HOLDING LTDA, diretamente ligadas à SPACE EXPLORATION HOLDINGS, LLC, cujo controle acionário é de ELON MUSK, que detém 50,5% de suas ações, sendo que 78,7% das ações com direito a voto lhe pertencem, conforme demonstrado no comunicado da Federals Comunications Comission, obtido no endereço eletrônico [...]" Though it's possible that the judge and you are looking at different companies; you might be looking at the USA company, while the judge might be looking at a separate holding company which is the parent of the Brazilian companies.
    - ivewonyoung 2y ago
      [flagged]
ivewonyoung 2y ago
[flagged]

by gcr 2y ago

throw03172019 2y ago

I believe SpaceX declined to block X on their Starlink internet service.

wmf 2y ago
No, Starlink is blocking X. They're trying to take the high road.
- tomjakubowski 2y ago
  they reversed course on this one: > Elon Musk's satellite broadband firm, Starlink, on Tuesday said that it is complying with Brazil's top court order to block access to social media platform X in the country, a day after informing the country's regulator it would not obey the order.

the_mitsuhiko 2y ago

> if I were a SpaceX shareholder, I'd be concerned about my CEO's misadventures I think the actual answer is that if you invest into Musk companies you do it because of Musk. So you will do and okay whatever makes Musk happy because him being there is what makes the stock do the things the stock does (or anticipation of future stock/IPO performance).

indoordin0saur 2y ago
I invest in Tesla because I think it's a great product with a positive vision of the future. I do wish Musk was more measured but my opinion of him doesn't affect my opinion that electric cars are good, Tesla makes the best and has proven their ability to scale.
- the_mitsuhiko 2y ago
  Leading up to the votes for the move out of Delaware it became pretty clear how significant parts of the non institutional investors are rallying behind Musk. I don't think I have ever seen such a frenzy getting people to go for a proxy vote. That is not happening because Tesla is great, that's happening because there was a real worry about what Musk would do. I don't know for sure, but if I were to guess I would say a not insignificant part of Tesla's market prices is Musk himself.
  - indoordin0saur 2y ago
    I actually think Musk could go away and if you had a similarly driven CEO, with the same vision as him but without any public political opinions, the stock would actually go up.
    - Zigurd 2y ago
      Alternatively, nobody competent would take the job because the valuation is so far out of line that anyone who does not have a cult following who seem to believe FSD will work by the end of this year, for sure, and that the robot is not a joke, will end up being blamed for TSLA being valued in line with similar sized car companies instead of having a P/E ratio 10X that of Toyota. It's not exactly Enron but it rhymes.
- MPSimmons 2y ago
  To be _very_ honest, I think Tesla would be worth more and would be better received if Elon stepped away entirely from executive decision-making.
  - gcr 2y ago
    Honestly, agreed. The most interesting and valuable parts of Tesla are the parts that Musk is uninvolved and uninterested in. Take the supercharger network for example. That could have been a gateway to complete market domination by Tesla, and Musk threw the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity away because it wasn’t shiny and chrome enough for him.

freedomben 2y ago

TFA is paywalled so I can't read it, but from what I understand SpaceX got pulled in because they wouldn't block X for Starlink customers in Brazil, not because of commingling of assets. The judge then penalized SpaceX and the snowball rolled from there.

Pedro_Ribeiro 2y ago

FYI SpaceX and Starlink were not involved in this feud at all until the judge froze Starlink's bank account just for the connection to Elon. In reality the one that decided to involve SpaceX was the judge.

RIMR 2y ago
The judge froze Starlink's bank account because Elon refused to comply with a legal order given to SpaceX by the Brazilian government to block X. Agree with it or not, it's something that is legally required of ISPs operating inside of Brazil. Elon Musk refused on "free speech" grounds, and they retaliated. He's now complying and blocking X to Starlink customers in Brazil.
- ripjaygn 2y ago
  That is not true, Starlink's bank account was frozen before even the ban on X.
stetrain 2y ago
My understanding was SpaceX were operating as an ISP in the country of Brazil, and refusing to comply with the ruling to block X.com within the country of Brazil. Is that not the case?
- soulofmischief 2y ago
  Ideological grounds are a great reason to risk exposure to multiple assets. Musk should use any power at his disposal to resist government censorship. (This is not a statement about Musk's general attitude towards censorship, which is extremely circumstantial) Musk needs to set expectations around Starlink now regarding censorship and unwarranted, broad-scope data requests. If he doesn't, then one of the most important wins of non-terrestrial, NGO-provided internet will be taken away. The war for a fair and free internet rages on, shareholders be damned. edit: nvm, I didn't realize he already gave in: https://www.theverge.com/2024/9/3/24235204/starlink-block-x-brazil-comply-elon-musk https://www.theverge.com/2024/9/3/24235204/starlink-block-x-... That's pretty sad.

jeffwask 2y ago

His boards are stacked with his personal cadre of yes men.

geniium 2y ago

This seems to be very political- related to the upcoming Brazilian votes and freedom.

muaytimbo 2y ago

some things are more important than returns, I'd rather export free speech than import censorship. That said you should know that up front.

cesarb 2y ago

> why do X and SpaceX comingle assets and feuds like this? My understanding of the case, from reading the original orders from the judge, is not that their assets are comingled, but rather that both are under direct control of Elon Musk (him being the majority owner of both SpaceX and Twitter), and therefore form a single "economic group". AFAIK, there are some situations in which the law allows going for assets of other companies in the same economic group, and that seems to be what happened here: Twitter did not have enough assets to pay the fines, so assets from the rest of the economic group have been frozen to ensure the fines will be paid.

ivewonyoung 2y ago
> him being the majority owner of both SpaceX and Twitter Musk only owns 40% of SpaceX so he's not the majority shareholder.
- cesarb 2y ago
  > Musk only owns 40% of SpaceX so he's not the majority shareholder. The judge's order says otherwise (https://noticias-stf-wp-prd.s3.sa-east-1.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/wpallimport/uploads/2024/08/30171714/PET-12404-Assinada.pdf https://noticias-stf-wp-prd.s3.sa-east-1.amazonaws.com/wp-co... page 35): "O grupo econômico de fato liderado por ELON MUSK, com atuação em território nacional, engloba entre outras empresas a X BRASIL INTERNET LTDA, a STARLINK BRAZIL SERVIÇOS DE INTERNET e a STARLINK BRAZIL HOLDING LTDA, diretamente ligadas à SPACE EXPLORATION HOLDINGS, LLC, cujo controle acionário é de ELON MUSK, que detém 50,5% de suas ações, sendo que 78,7% das ações com direito a voto lhe pertencem, conforme demonstrado no comunicado da Federals Comunications Comission, obtido no endereço eletrônico [...]" Though it's possible that the judge and you are looking at different companies; you might be looking at the USA company, while the judge might be looking at a separate holding company which is the parent of the Brazilian companies.
  - ivewonyoung 2y ago
    [flagged]

ivewonyoung 2y ago

[flagged]