mungofitch writes:
Well, no, to doubt it [accusations of criminality] is a cult statement.
Really? So you believe there is some evidence of these criminal acts by Musk?
Maybe the $156m he saved by violating securities law by not reporting his stake building in Twitter
until 11 days after the legal deadline having already passed the reportable threshold?
Don’t know. That’s pretty recent. What’s the law? Who has accused him? Is the alleged violation criminal? Would different reporting have actually cost him money? I haven’t seen anything official on this, just accusations on social media. And we know how reliable those are.
It’s also reasonable to ask how this sort of violation is typically handled. Trial? Jail time? Wrist slap? Fine? Nothing at all?
Meanwhile, if there was a violation, who actually made it? Was Musk hovering over his E*Trade app, making purchases himself? Then blatantly ignoring the rules? Or did he delegate it to some broker, who screwed up for some reason? Maybe it was several brokers who didn’t coordinate properly? I have no idea. Do you?
Violating the Twitter purchase contract terms is just a contract violation, but it’s a 10 digit ripoff–huge points for scale.
Great investment opportunity though: buy now at $34.20, wait for the class action suit, collect the extra $20.
This is, of course, all in your imagination at this point. But if you think it’s such a great investment opportunity, jump right in.
Illegal violations of the consent agreement to have material tweets reviewed by Tesla legal staff.
(he freely admits that he didn’t, and it’s a matter of public record that he was required to)
Um, er, no. The SEC have been pretty incompetent on this front so far. They’ve made accusations, but the judge told them to go fix their agreement and they’ve been quiet since. But even if Musk were doing what you claim, would it be criminal?
The old “funding secured” announcement for stock manipulation and material false statements to investors, and related issues.
Contempt.
Not going to fly either. That was settled strictly because the SEC was holding Tesla hostage, not because Musk did anything wrong. The only damage to investors was due to the SEC, not Musk. And the truly hilarious thing is that the settlement basically forced Musk to make an additional TSLA stock purchase now worth >10x what it was then. So the SEC screwed investors and handed Musk tens of millions of dollars in the exact opposite of punishment. A bunch of ineffective morons.
He was not held responsible for the bailing out of his brother’s soon-to-be-defunct company with other people’s money, so I suppose one can’t call that illegal.
It was pretty obviously a stitch up among buddies to the detriment of existing minority shareholders, though.
Not his brother’s company. In any case Solar City was in trouble only because it was the target of a short-seller attack, not because there was anything wrong with the company. The only detriment in taking over Solar City was to short-sellers, and they deserved to be screwed. Criminals like Jim Chanos.
A large majority of Tesla shareholders voted for the Solar City deal. And these were shareholders not named Musk or anything like it. So who should be held responsible in your universe? And where was the criminality?
Then there are all the flatly false announcements of products that don’t exist, he knew didn’t exist, and some of which can never exist as described.
Again, you have no idea what you’re talking about. And you’ve wandered far from criminality.
Some people might have taken the Optimus dancer seriously.
Like maybe all the new employees that Tesla is paying to work on AI? Maybe some of the same people who at one time didn’t take seriously the notion of landing rockets on their tails, but now don’t want to look stupid again? You don’t think Tesla is working on a robot? Or you think that if they don’t have a prototype this year that’s criminal?
The 2019 billions in capital raising (dilution which was of course flatly announced would never happen) was probably not hurt by the “million robotaxies by 2020” promise.
Oh, spare me! You’re digging deep into complete nonsense. Announcing you have no intention of raising capital today and then changing your mind when business conditions change is not criminal. And, like all Tesla capital raises, it was oversubscribed instantly.
And just who are you quoting there when you write “million robotaxies by 2020”? Not Musk. He did say that there would be that many cars with the hardware capable of being robotaxis when the software was ready, but that’s not the same thing, is it?
You’ve gone completely off the rails here. Not only is there nothing related to actual criminality, most of the wild accusations are pulled straight from the tabloids.
I’m guessing that since you have no interest in investing in any of Musk’s companies that you don’t spend any time doing research. So you just pick up your impressions from the popular press and similar. So why pretend to actually know anything about this? You’re listening to the hyenas and imagining that gives you some knowledge of what the lions are doing. Just don’t.
-IGU-
