4 ms·
This is their business model. I remember first hearing about them on their Nikola report. They nailed it. The stock lost 99.93%. In my opinion, it's good for t
by aurareturn 2y ago
This is their business model. I remember first hearing about them on their Nikola report. They nailed it. The stock lost 99.93%.
In my opinion, it's good for the market that something like Hinderburg exists. It keeps companies more honest. And if they're wrong, they'll lose money.
- Rastonbury 2y agoAgreed that is why auditors, disclosure regulations and companies like hindenburg exist and how public markets should function, they prevent executives from defrauding the public. Keep the accounting clean, lest you invite scrutiny from shorts
- addicted 2y agoThe people who whine about shorts are ridiculous IMO. Yes, shorts have some negative incentives that we need to be careful about. But they’re the only ones in the entire market who don’t have incentives to lie about how well a company is doing. A decently run market with a reasonable number of shorts would not build up to the bubbles we see regularly that collapse and need to be bailed out. It was the shorts who noticed the housing bubble in the first place. If there’s were more of them they could have popped it much more gradually and less painfully than the crash we had which has been the precursor to a lot of the terrible things we’ve faced since then.
- solumunus 2y agoHow is someone short not incentivised to lie that a company is doing poorly? I can’t see how the incentives change at all. Maybe I’m misunderstanding you.
- saltminer 2y agoThe real problem is the SEC has largely abdicated its role to meaningfully prosecute fraud. Short sellers shouldn't be our only real defense against fraud, but that's the reality we (Americans) live in.