28 ms·

It's messed up that Grok underwrote all those subprime mortgages in 2008

• bandrami 9mo ago
  I think the argument is that it's messed up that a large debt swap from xAI kept Musk's margin on Twitter from being called by his investors, and now that debt is being absorbed by SpaceX.
  • andsoitis 9mo ago
    > Musk's margin on Twitter from being called by his investors, Primary and largest investors in X are: Elon Musk, Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, Larry Ellison, Jack Dorsey. I don't know that you need to worry about their financial well-being or that they are getting a raw deal.
    • hayd 9mo ago
      I think people are more concerned about SpaceX getting the raw deal here.
      • bandrami 9mo ago
        And specifically that if the music is about to stop SpaceX has an implicit government backstop
        • wlesieutre 9mo ago
          It doesn't have to; the government's rescue of GM in 2008 killed a bunch of brands that they owned. But given the current administration, I don't have a lot of faith in the government looking out for anyone else's interests here.
          • esseph 9mo ago
            Starlink is about to get billions and billions from the BEAD program, on top of this.
          • bandrami 9mo ago
            And TARP destroyed 4 of the 5 largest investment banks in the US, but it still left a bad taste in a lot of people's mouths
          • deleted 9mo ago
            [deleted]
      • andsoitis 9mo ago
        > SpaceX getting the raw deal here. Have they complained?
        • acdha 9mo ago
          You’re really asking whether anyone at a private company is publicly speaking up against the famously emotional and vindictive owner?
          • andsoitis 9mo ago
            Yes. People are saying they’re worried that the poor private investors of SpaceX are getting the short end of the stick. That seems like misplaced concerned for an investor class that really aren’t suffering.
            • bandrami 9mo ago
              Well, no, the worry is that xAI's bondholders, who are also Twitter's bondholders, will be indemnified from any loss on those bonds at public expense because they are now also SpaceX bondholders and SpaceX is a national security interest of the US.
              • andsoitis 9mo ago
                > bonds at public expense because they are now also SpaceX bondholders and SpaceX is a national security interest of the US. If our elected officials have done a poor job diversifying risk by not just depending on one single supplied, they are to blame and we should hold them accountable. But, is that even the case?
            • acdha 9mo ago
              This thread specifically excluded the big investors, but they too have nothing but loss popping the bubble: Musk has been talking up the value of their investment. If they criticize in public, they’re just costing themselves money — much safer to sell and walk away.
            • 9mo ago
    • bandrami 9mo ago
      Yeah, the financial well-being of those investors is not what people are worried about here
      • deleted 9mo ago
        [deleted]
    • SilasX 9mo ago
      Whoa, I had to do a double-take on the Dorsey mention -- like, didn't he take the money and run while laughing at the folks that overpaid? But it seems he's retained a 2.4% ownership stake in Twitter/X, according to Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Dorsey#Twitter https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Dorsey#Twitter Still, don't make the mistake I did, which was to read the above comment to mean "he put more money in at the time of the buyout", since he was called an "investor in X".
    • deleted 9mo ago
      [deleted]