Buying opportunities are when prices are artificially low, Prices aren't low they are actually still quite high for the value as a lot of these badly burnt gamblers exit the market as the debts they incurred take their toll, the prices will likely continue to settle as those people exit and are unlikely to return. It will also scare off a lot of other suckers.
Actually I would say their is far more technology reference material available in digital form that is completely unavailable in tree form. By coincidence I happen to be looking at a guide to updating the firmware to a particular piece of tech I admin, it is only available in pdf form via a secure download site, no tree copies available. The same is true for a great deal of technical reference material.
No, actually it is in the opinion of the law and SEC. behaviour of CEO statements are strictly enforced to a common standard. Given what has happened I would say it is almost a certainty at this point that Tesla/Musk will face at a bare minimum a large fine, whether they end there will be dependent on whether they perceive any malice in his actions (e.g. going after the shorts) or if potentially he, other board members or family of his profited from the surge.
No their really aren't differing theories on how CEO's should behave. The laws and regulations for public companies are quite clear and explicit and not open to free interpretation by differing theories. You can spin the future of the company, you can make bold predictions that are borderline complete BS, you CANNOT outright lie, mislead the market or manipulate the market. The Stock price is back down because the information he released has thus far been shown to be bullshit, hence the lawsuits and the SEC. If you think a Galaxy class CEO's job is to land the company in potentially multi billion dollar lawsuits then yeah he just hit it out of the park!
Only partly agree, sure AT&T has some liability here, but seriously what sort of idiot relies on a phone number and phone company as the source of authentication to secure your assets? obviously he wasn't serious about security in the first place.
personally if I was a shareholder I would feel utterly pissed at that explanation as it leaves the door wide open for lawsuits for market manipulation. It provides no assurance that the "funding secured" at $420 a share was actually an on the table offer.
Sorry but no it does not work that way. IT comes down to whether the SEC believes Musk had sufficient reason to believe the funding was secure. Market influencing statements from company execs come with legal requirements, Even if Musk personally believed he had sufficient reason to believe it was secured it may not be enough to meet the market/SEC requirements. This is why most companies don't let public statements happen over twitter and instead require them to go via legal departments who careful check wording before release. It is looking like while the SEC may only fine or give a soft rap over the knuckles. The problem for them will be the legal actions by shorters, longs, and options traders, Musk/Tesla is going to be open to a huge amount of civil lawsuits for loses, basically those few words just opened him up to a massive unnecessary financial exposure.
How about feeling sorry for the poor bastards whose accounts are compromised with this. Even if they don't individually lose money their cards will be cancelled and they will have massive inconvenience at a minimum. regardless all the insurance costs and the cleanup costs simply get passed on to the customers anyway.
exactly there is no need to guess, we will all know soon enough, the announcement triggered lawsuits and the SEC. sit back and eat popcorn till then when we either get to see the shorters cry and jump out windows or watch Musk go insane when he realises how much money he will be personally liable for.
seriously are you that dense? a Loan Offer is a firm commitment
. a discussion with your bank saying," hey next week I might be interesting in taking out a loan for a house can I talk to you about that if I decide too?" and them "saying sure come talk" that is not a firm commitment, which on the face of it is what people are suggesting Musk has, if it is the former he is fine, if it is the later he is FUCKED!
The claim from the OP was that laws and agreements have been passed that permit the bypassing of GDPR, websites can't do that (at least not without agreements from lawmakers.)
yes it is and that is great as now I can make a choice to give them access to my data or decide their content is not worth trading my data for. Previously they would just take my data.
If they are agreements circumventing GDPR then it isn't GDPR that is violating your privacy, it is the arsehole politicians looking to work around it and the reasons they have to do that is GDPR actually makes what they were previously doing silently illegal.
ahhhh perhaps you might want to go read what GDPR is, it is the OPPOSITE of what you are claiming. GDPR is all about giving users back ownership and control of their data and imposing sanctions against those that abuse your data. I doubt it will have much effect but it certainly isn't about giving up more privacy.
Making an offer is irrelevant. HE MADE A STATEMENT that he knew would directly affect the share value, i.e. by stating he had securely funding for $420 a share. He now must show that too his board if they don't already have it as well as the SEC. Failure to do so will be considered fraud.
Musk is the CEO, He made a market statement that he had secured funding and at a price of $420 a share. If true all is good and the short sellers can go suck a lemon. If not true then Musk will most likely have his arse sued off and be forced to cover those losses as well as some serious legal issues with the SEC. you can't make market sensitive statements about your company as the CEO if they are not true, that is fraud. It doesn't matter whether he sold or bought shares, that is completely irrelevant.
Yep pretty much this, I currently work for one of those large multi national tech firms. The policy is if you quit you are pretty much walked out the door on the spot but they will welcome you back with open arms. I have many friends who have left and returned.
quite often you make the least amount from your work while it is in its infancy while the bulk of your costs are also spent in this time. A major video game franchise is a long term investment as are many other front weighted investments. Unfortunately IP law treats everything the same but the reality is without those laws many games, medicenes or other high risk projects would never exist without those protections.
That is the sort of zealotry and ignorant rhetoric that turns people away from the open source community, you do no one any favours with your blinkered approach to the world.
Staying there in a few weeks time over the labour day weekend. Have not been to New York in 20 years but even I had no trouble finding 4 star accommodation for under $400 a night and that is during a holiday weekend, let alone something like a doubletree. really sounds like they saw you coming and milked you for all your worth.
Slashdot Mirror
Buying opportunities are when prices are artificially low, Prices aren't low they are actually still quite high for the value as a lot of these badly burnt gamblers exit the market as the debts they incurred take their toll, the prices will likely continue to settle as those people exit and are unlikely to return. It will also scare off a lot of other suckers.
Actually I would say their is far more technology reference material available in digital form that is completely unavailable in tree form. By coincidence I happen to be looking at a guide to updating the firmware to a particular piece of tech I admin, it is only available in pdf form via a secure download site, no tree copies available. The same is true for a great deal of technical reference material.
When Elon Tweeted it was in the 340's, it is now 303.
No, actually it is in the opinion of the law and SEC. behaviour of CEO statements are strictly enforced to a common standard. Given what has happened I would say it is almost a certainty at this point that Tesla/Musk will face at a bare minimum a large fine, whether they end there will be dependent on whether they perceive any malice in his actions (e.g. going after the shorts) or if potentially he, other board members or family of his profited from the surge.
In less time than it took you to type that pointless moronic comment you could have googled it and answered the question
No their really aren't differing theories on how CEO's should behave. The laws and regulations for public companies are quite clear and explicit and not open to free interpretation by differing theories. You can spin the future of the company, you can make bold predictions that are borderline complete BS, you CANNOT outright lie, mislead the market or manipulate the market. The Stock price is back down because the information he released has thus far been shown to be bullshit, hence the lawsuits and the SEC. If you think a Galaxy class CEO's job is to land the company in potentially multi billion dollar lawsuits then yeah he just hit it out of the park!
Only partly agree, sure AT&T has some liability here, but seriously what sort of idiot relies on a phone number and phone company as the source of authentication to secure your assets? obviously he wasn't serious about security in the first place.
personally if I was a shareholder I would feel utterly pissed at that explanation as it leaves the door wide open for lawsuits for market manipulation. It provides no assurance that the "funding secured" at $420 a share was actually an on the table offer.
Sorry but no it does not work that way. IT comes down to whether the SEC believes Musk had sufficient reason to believe the funding was secure. Market influencing statements from company execs come with legal requirements, Even if Musk personally believed he had sufficient reason to believe it was secured it may not be enough to meet the market/SEC requirements. This is why most companies don't let public statements happen over twitter and instead require them to go via legal departments who careful check wording before release. It is looking like while the SEC may only fine or give a soft rap over the knuckles. The problem for them will be the legal actions by shorters, longs, and options traders, Musk/Tesla is going to be open to a huge amount of civil lawsuits for loses, basically those few words just opened him up to a massive unnecessary financial exposure.
How about feeling sorry for the poor bastards whose accounts are compromised with this. Even if they don't individually lose money their cards will be cancelled and they will have massive inconvenience at a minimum. regardless all the insurance costs and the cleanup costs simply get passed on to the customers anyway.
"The only difference between the two is that the former has 24GB of GDDR6, while the latter doubles that to 96GB. "
So does someone need a typing or a maths class?
exactly there is no need to guess, we will all know soon enough, the announcement triggered lawsuits and the SEC. sit back and eat popcorn till then when we either get to see the shorters cry and jump out windows or watch Musk go insane when he realises how much money he will be personally liable for.
seriously are you that dense? a Loan Offer is a firm commitment
. a discussion with your bank saying," hey next week I might be interesting in taking out a loan for a house can I talk to you about that if I decide too?" and them "saying sure come talk" that is not a firm commitment, which on the face of it is what people are suggesting Musk has, if it is the former he is fine, if it is the later he is FUCKED!
The claim from the OP was that laws and agreements have been passed that permit the bypassing of GDPR, websites can't do that (at least not without agreements from lawmakers.)
yes it is and that is great as now I can make a choice to give them access to my data or decide their content is not worth trading my data for. Previously they would just take my data.
If they are agreements circumventing GDPR then it isn't GDPR that is violating your privacy, it is the arsehole politicians looking to work around it and the reasons they have to do that is GDPR actually makes what they were previously doing silently illegal.
ahhhh perhaps you might want to go read what GDPR is, it is the OPPOSITE of what you are claiming. GDPR is all about giving users back ownership and control of their data and imposing sanctions against those that abuse your data. I doubt it will have much effect but it certainly isn't about giving up more privacy.
200 miles is not a long distance for an F15, you are looking at well under 10 mins of flight time.
Making an offer is irrelevant. HE MADE A STATEMENT that he knew would directly affect the share value, i.e. by stating he had securely funding for $420 a share. He now must show that too his board if they don't already have it as well as the SEC. Failure to do so will be considered fraud.
Musk is the CEO, He made a market statement that he had secured funding and at a price of $420 a share. If true all is good and the short sellers can go suck a lemon. If not true then Musk will most likely have his arse sued off and be forced to cover those losses as well as some serious legal issues with the SEC. you can't make market sensitive statements about your company as the CEO if they are not true, that is fraud. It doesn't matter whether he sold or bought shares, that is completely irrelevant.
You are talking about the US and specifically California. Science and reality has no place in the courtroom.
Yep pretty much this, I currently work for one of those large multi national tech firms. The policy is if you quit you are pretty much walked out the door on the spot but they will welcome you back with open arms. I have many friends who have left and returned.
quite often you make the least amount from your work while it is in its infancy while the bulk of your costs are also spent in this time. A major video game franchise is a long term investment as are many other front weighted investments. Unfortunately IP law treats everything the same but the reality is without those laws many games, medicenes or other high risk projects would never exist without those protections.
That is the sort of zealotry and ignorant rhetoric that turns people away from the open source community, you do no one any favours with your blinkered approach to the world.
Staying there in a few weeks time over the labour day weekend. Have not been to New York in 20 years but even I had no trouble finding 4 star accommodation for under $400 a night and that is during a holiday weekend, let alone something like a doubletree. really sounds like they saw you coming and milked you for all your worth.