Slashdot Mirror
Elon Musk Calls Boss of Tesla Troll Who's Heavily Invested In Oil Industry (electrek.co)
Okian Warrior shares a report from Electrek, written by Fred Lambert: One of Tesla's biggest anonymous trolls/shorts has been doxxed as an investment manager heavily invested in the oil industry. He has now deleted his Twitter account, which he used to promote his blog posts about Tesla and attack anyone saying anything that could be perceived as positive on Tesla, after Tesla CEO Elon Musk reportedly called his boss to complain about his behavior.
We are talking about "Montana Skeptic" who has been using Seeking Alpha, a financial blog aggregator, and Twitter to push the bear case on Tesla for the past 3 years. Hiding behind his anonymous persona on social media, Montana Skeptic went beyond just pushing the bear case. He also used the platforms to send insults and attacks to Tesla bulls, bloggers, YouTubers, and reporters discussing anything that he saw as potentially being positive for Tesla, including [this author] on numerous occasions to the point where I had to block him. But now that his real identity has been revealed to be Larry Fossi, a managing director at Rahr Enterprise, which is reportedly heavily invested in oil, we learn that his motivations could have originated from other reasons.
We are talking about "Montana Skeptic" who has been using Seeking Alpha, a financial blog aggregator, and Twitter to push the bear case on Tesla for the past 3 years. Hiding behind his anonymous persona on social media, Montana Skeptic went beyond just pushing the bear case. He also used the platforms to send insults and attacks to Tesla bulls, bloggers, YouTubers, and reporters discussing anything that he saw as potentially being positive for Tesla, including [this author] on numerous occasions to the point where I had to block him. But now that his real identity has been revealed to be Larry Fossi, a managing director at Rahr Enterprise, which is reportedly heavily invested in oil, we learn that his motivations could have originated from other reasons.
1) Montana Skeptic has (via intermediaries) presented two entirely different scenarios for why he left Twitter. One was that he was just leaving to spend more time focused on his investments, and it had nothing to do with outside pressure. The other is that Musk called his boss and his boss made him quit. Given his penchant for spinning conspiracy theories... take whichever one you want with a grain of salt.
2) There's a heavy dose of irony, in that just a few days ago Montana Skeptic was part of the troll attacks against Pulitzer-prize winning auto journalist Dan Neil (mad that he wrote a glowing review of the Model 3 in the Wall Street Journal) which ultimately led to Dan deleting his twitter account. He wrote a gloating post after they succeeded, which is kind of funny in light of recent events.
3) Fun Fact: Fossi (aka Montana Skeptic)'s employer is Stewart Rahl - a guy often described as Trump's only true friend, inflappably loyal. His office is in Trump Tower, two floors below Trump's.
"Lock and load, Brides of Christ!"
Always examine the hidden agenda.
"I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
most people are... musk is remarkably human.
Be aware that Montana Skeptic - famous for spinning conspiracy theories about Tesla and Musk that turn out not to be true - has given two conflicting explanations for why he deleted his Twitter account. In one of them, it had nothing to do with Musk, and in the other, it's all evil Elon's fault.
"Lock and load, Brides of Christ!"
Tesla has been hit with a torrent of fake news recently, trying to drive the stock down.
Most obviously and recently was the following:
1) Someone (not Tesla) posted that 23% of Tesla reservations have been cancelled.
2) Based on #1, an analyst downgraded the stock from "hold" to "underperform".
3) Tesla stock plummeted
4) Tesla notices #1 above and responded:
Dunno where this bs is coming from. Who knows about the future, but last week we had over 2000 S/X and 5000 Model 3 *new* net orders. — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 20, 2018
(Note: Tesla makes about 6,000 cars/month, so an increase of 7000 cars puts them even further behind on reservations. And as noted in the link below, they have not started showing them in stores yet, so Tesla has yet to tap the "drive before they buy" potential pool of customers.)
Word on the street is that shorts are running scared, doing everything they can to drive down the stock price. Including insider sabotage, misleading financial spin, and online harassment such as the OP.
This is basically the last-ditch effort of Tesla bears to drive the stock down. Once the next two quarters financials are in, there will be no case for shorting Tesla stock whatsoever.
It really is an amazing car. . . I feel like a requirement to short the stock is one of the following:
1) You have never test driven a Model 3
2) You are a shill for some competing industry/company
Yes, I am sure there is some kind of "rational" intrinsic valuation argument out there for shorting the stock, but, at the end of the day, Tesla makes cash from selling cars, not stock. . . and their latest car is amazing. They will sell as many as they can make at the current price point. If they manage to get the price down (which tends to happen at high volume), no army of Montana Skeptic shills will be able to save the oil industry from having to write-off huge portions of their fixed assets. . . Buckle-up and get ready for a crazy ride. . .
Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
It's clear in this world of misinformation and "fake news" that proof does nothing. That the only way to get an anonymous agent to stop spreading lies is to lift the veil of anonymity.
If someone wishes to criticize, they can either do so carefully and anonymously with cold hard facts. Or they can express their unsupported opinions openly and publicly. There is no middle ground.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
That's great you found "fake news" about Tesla.
How about all the glowing "articles" about Tesla over the last 8 years since it went public?
Are ALL of those good articles the "truth" because they are positive?
Have you ever heard of "pump and dump"?
Look at Tesla's valuation. There is no possible way that it could ever be profitable enough to warrant such a valuation. Ever.
Why is negative news "Trolls" and because of the "Shorts" and all the positive news is the "Truth"?
I've had enough economics to see an information disparity and profit opportunity here.
Interesting. But it is ok for somebody to lie and cheat in an effort to destroy your company, but it is bad to tell has boss AND the SEC about said individual's action?
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
I've read MS as well for several years. He has many lies, that he was using to influence the stock market. That is criminal, which is why he kept it anonymous.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Someone else made a valid point about disclosing biases, so here is mine: I own Tesla stock, and I'm "long" on it.
I originally wanted to do some study of the stock market, and I purchased the stock to make the study "valuable" to me.
That turned out to be a lucky choice because Tesla is the hurricane eye of controversial stock market reporting. It's the perfect test case for deciding whether stock market news reports, statistics, and opinions have any informational value.
In any event, be aware that I own some shares and have an interest in seeing Tesla succeed.
The fantastically written headline actually says Elon Musk calls himself a Troll that is heavily invested in the Oil Industry
English, it's not just for Christmas!
So I just read that Tesla asked for refunds from dealers in order to cover their debts. I suppose this is a lie as well?
That's not a lie, but it's a skewed interpretation of what actually happened.
Without posting my own explanation (which also might be skewed), do some digging into what actually happened, find a copy of the letter actually sent, and decide for yourself whether it's of any importance.
Thanks - Good catch.
It's a trolloff; may the trolliest troll win! Gentlemen, start your flames!
Table-ized A.I.
In this case, the man's behavior may have been criminal. Should criminals not be exposed for their criminal behavior?
This guy, Montana Skeptic was out in full force trying to down Tesla stock and bolster Oil stocks. He is a manager of a hedge fund. Isn't that manipulating the market? SEC?
See also, politicians who are virulent homophobes in public but are themselves gay in private.
Back in 2009/2010 I followed daily why the barrel price would change. I would just use google new searching for oil, barrel price, etc. The articles written for the price change most often than not would have a bs feel like they may not tell the whole story. Once instance the price went fast at the beginning of the day because the oil supplies at the refineries had dropped, then turned right around and dropped below the start of the day due to the fact that the refineries were producing heating oil to be ready for the coming winter, a normal part of the business. About a week later the price went up again because it was report the supply last week dropped, without mentioning the logical reason why. Another instance the price of the barrel was regularly going up because the supplies were decreasing in December. The stated reason was likely because of demand. I finally found an article pointing out there used (not sure if still the case) be inventory tax on oil at the end of December. My better understanding of the market, I see the investors with a clue like how they can predictably make money from oil. That is why some don't like Tesla
More likely, having not spoken to a sound attorney, he's blowing smoke. If the SEC does get involved, there may be a lot of smoke, the scent of pants on fire, and lots of subsequent litigation.
Nut cases have a habit of digging in deeper, when they should be looking for cover. Obsessed, they carry on even as noose gets tighter.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
And Musk will pay for that stupid outburst. That's accountability. Hiding behind an anonymous account, not revealing the conflict that arises from your business interests when attacking another company, that is the opposite of accountability.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Seriously. What the hell is that?
"Elon Musk Calls Boss of Tesla Troll Who's Heavily Invested In Oil Industry"
"calls the boss"
"calls up boss"
"phones boss"
"Elon Musk Phones the Boss of Heavily Oil-Invested Tesla Troll"
People calling Montana Skeptic a troll don't know the definition of a troll. Educate yourself. Skeptic's analysis has been far more objective and fact-filled than anything the bulls have had to offer. One should question why all some can do is label him a troll instead of arguing his points.
History has shown that the conman of the business world have attempted to scapegoat short sellers for the destruction caused by their frauds. See Enron.
That's spelled CEO, FYI. A lot of CEOs are.
Yes, he is human, and the workload may be getting to him. He's put an awful lot on his plate, juggling many balls in the air. I hope he takes a vay-cay away from his stressors soon, or I'm afraid that he might break. He's a good man who's under a lot of pressure right now. I hope we don't lose him.
Yea his boss has reminded him of how many SEC violations he made over 3 years, and he left a papertrail on the internet with his Twitter account. Deleting it wont help because Twitter archives peoples accounts for a period of time afterwards for legal backtracking. Larry is about to get screwed and his company is about have the shiznit load of fines for violating insider trading rules. Larry might even cop some jail time for being an idiot for that long.
You were thrust upon yourself? You poor bastard!
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
To my way of seeing it, Musk's move is really creepy. It's one plutocrat talking to another plutocrat about the uppity 'help' needing a yank on the leash.
He probably hired Pinkerton to find out who the 'troublemaker' is. Plutocrats stick together so his next move was to sidle up to the fink's boss.
So, if I'm parsing that headline correctly:
Elon Musk called the boss of Tesla a "troll who's heavily invested in the oil industry".
Cool story.
Let me just look up who the boss of Tesla is... ...oh
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
After the Tesla bankruptcy, maybe Kim Kardashian will licence 'Elon Musk' to be used as the brand name for a line of perfume.
Doxxing is not cool. I don't care if the guy is the world's biggest liar and jerk. Ignore him or prove him wrong, don't call his boss. Sheesh.
On the bright side, at least Musk didn't call this guy a pedophile.
#DeleteChrome
One Plutocrat says to another: 'One of your plebes is annoying me.'
Those who talk either don't know, or are talking their book. Tesla is the most shorted stock in the market. I'm sure you can figure out the rest...
Why guess when you can know? Measure!
"Bear case"? "Bulls"? I feel like I'm sitting at a table, drinking fancy, pretentious brands of whiskey with a bunch of douche bag stock traders.
sig: sauer
Manipulating stock market through spreading FUD is entirely legal. It's only illegal if you have privileged internal information.
It took me some time to parse it to "Elon Musk Calls (Boss of ((Tesla Troll) Who's Heavily Invested In Oil Industry)". Or is the Boss the one who's heavily invested? Like I said, train wreck
Prediction for end of Universe #42: Fencepost error in Quantum_bogosort.cpp
The troll may not be directly involved in Tesla. He may not directly hold shorts on Tesla, and his trolling may be driven by his position on oil. Or at least, he may be far enough away from any direct involvement to be able to hide it!
The behavior of an employee - especially an executive employee - affects the company. If a company allows that behavior to continue after they become aware of it, it can be argued that they are acting on the company's behalf, and the company can become liable. I'm sure the investment firm has skin in this game, so the SEC could come after them - and they can no long argue that they didn't know what the troll was doing.
I see a call to the CEO as a low pressure first step, especially in such high stakes games as this.
Oh, and I see the calls to oust Elon from the CEO role as part of the shorts (and industry) attack on Tesla. They know that Elon and his vision is a large part of Tesla's value.
Prediction for end of Universe #42: Fencepost error in Quantum_bogosort.cpp
Almost as bad as the "pedo guy" comment, even if he did finally come to his senses and apologize.
I've engaged with several of the most opinionated SeekingAlpha contributors who paint doom & gloom for Tesla and Montana Skeptic was by far the most cautious and reasonable one even if he was derisive of the cars and the overall plan.
As an experienced commercial lawyer, I imagine he felt that Musk was rushing headlong too quickly and accumulating too much debt to ever be profitable with Chapter 11 restructuring.
He was always clear in his articles that shorting Tesla is a dangerous game for the faint of heart and the foolhardy and that his own shorts were only by long-dated puts, early 2020 if memory serves.
There were other shorts who claim to have made fortunes shorting Tesla like frequent SA comment poster NYC1965 who claims to have made over 1/2 a million shorting Tesla.
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
The big "Ace in the hole" Tesla has over everyone else is their extensive Supercharging network. You can drive a Tesla on a road trip, even if you're going into parts of Mexico or Canada from the U.S., and the GPS automatically routes you to the Supercharging stations along the route, as needed, to keep you going.
With everyone else, you're relying on a hodge-podge network of mostly slower charging stations that make you sign up for accounts with each of them, in order to activate the charger and pay for it. I don't think the traditional auto-makers can really compete, even IF they build a superior EV to Tesla's offerings, unless they solve that problem -- building out their own fast charging networks that allow free charging (at least up to a certain amount per year).
What insider trading? Surely he didn't have any inside information about Tesla did he? Are you referring to some other investments?
12 pages of search results on fluffernutter complaining about Tesla on slashdot.
"Doesnt Tesla record everything? if there was convincing evidence of that, Musk would be publicising it." ... etc etc.
"You're absolutely right, no one should be enabling 'Autopilot' in a Tesla, ever, because it goes against defensive driving techniques."
"Tesla said in a previous article that autopilot had done this route 85,000 times. I guess repetition doesn't necessarily mean success here. Big surprise."
"This all just sounds so freaking complicated. EV owners insist it is simple, but it almost seems like sea travel by compass and sextant."
I propose a coining a new term. Tesla Derangement Syndrome. This boy is kray kray craaazy. Tesla haters, is this dude your spokesman?
While not explicitly insider trading (as I understand it), it seems dubious and borderline to, for example, short a stock/tell your company to short a stock while knowing that a smear piece of negative press is about to hit the internet in the next day (which you wrote).
While it may not be as surefire as shorting it in advance when you know the quarterly report is going to be worse than expected, once you gain a certain level of influence in the public eye, your posts ARE going to push the stock when they land. It would, for example, seem dubious if Trump sold a bunch of Exxon stock and then the next day announced that his administration was going to "seriously look" at cutting subsidies for oil drilling.
Don't laugh, but Congress and the Executive branch are explicitly exempt from the insider trading rules. There's a law stating just that.
No it's not. When a financial journalist writes a piece about stocks he owns (usually a statement made at the end of the column) that is not criminal.
Seriously, what rocks have you been living under?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
manipulating the market isn't illegal in itself. Only certain methods of doing it are, e.g. using insider information, releasing fake news to drive prices up or down etc. Publishing opinions no matter how biased or self interested is not illegal (though unethical).
While I prize what little anonymity I have, I realize there are people who abuse such things.
And in a case like this, I'm kinda glad the truth came out.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
If he's breaking SEC rules then tell the SEC.
A billionaire ringing up his boss though? That's just bullying. That proves that Musk is a cunt.
You don't get to the top of a big company without being a douchebag every once in a while. Of course you are so perfect.
Two wrongs does not make a right. An anonymous voice has no authority, which means it only gets traction if what they say is actually compelling, that there are people out there who agree with what they say. Shutting them down with threats doesn't prove they're wrong, nor does revealing that they're funded by big oil. If you think it did then you've just fallen for an ad hominem fallacy.
ROFL.. that was a truly awful troll attempt
"The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
Slashdot Editor Yet Again Fails To Comprehend Simple English Sentence Structure Making It Read Like A Retard Wrote It
How do _I_ know? I'm a goddam fucking bondholder that was thrust upon me!! I know more than YOU! Cunt!
You don't even know what electricity is.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
The UK has some pretty easy defamation laws, basically if his reputation is impugned in the eyes of a reasonable man then he is defamed. Not USA, UK.
New Zealanders are well balanced with a chip on each shoulder. One represents Australia, the other the rest of the world
Except Tesla itself is the reason the stock will tank
You were responding to a "yes or no" question; I'm afraid the correct response was not "Choice 'C' - Change of Subject*"
You know... if you hadn't posted as AC, you would've gotten a mod point just for participating!
Wow - the Slash-geist is in favor of doxxing. Wild.
To my way of seeing it, Musk's move is really creepy. It's one plutocrat talking to another plutocrat about the uppity 'help' needing a yank on the leash.
But apparently as long as someone is disliked by the cool kids, doing anything to them is acceptable.
What I meant was that he's likely to be sued and will likely have to pay money. But one's thing for sure, as outrageous as the accusation was, he didn't make it anonymously. So not the same thing at all.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
" it seems dubious and borderline to, for example, short a stock/tell your company to short a stock while knowing that a smear piece of negative press is about to hit the internet in the next day "
There's a name for it, although it's usually done in the opposite direction:
"Pump and dump"
I'm not connected to Tesla in any way and I don't have shares in the company. In this case I just happened to read an article on CNN and then saw a Slashdot comment directly refuting it so I asked if it was true. Then people got very, very defensive.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
is anonymity something that should be protected? is it a fundamental part of our society? I draw a distinction between anonymity and privacy.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
If someone wishes to criticize, they can either do so carefully and anonymously with cold hard facts. Or they can express their unsupported opinions openly and publicly. There is no middle ground.
I guess I'm trying to say that you don't get to fabricate lies and troll while retaining your anonymity. Or at least nobody is going to have sympathy when you're exposed.
Those two statements overlap, they do not conflict, and I've not walked back my position with the second statement.
If you disagree with the opinions I have expressed, that's fine. If you wish to fling ad hominem and inflammatory comments, that says more about you personally than about your opinions on the topic at hand.
Use your precious time to understand, contribute, and even reject bad ideas. It's a piss poor use of your time to shit on anything that you can't grasp or don't care about.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire