On the contrary, short sellers are the people who work hard to find out which companies are abusing the stock markets to defraud investors. They are knowledgeable, they do a lot of research, they are a strong pressure for better governance and less cheating from the management.
They are a partial solution to the principal-agent problem.
And, if one is an investor, they should readily see the obvious. Musk's big screw up not tweeting to "squeeze the shorts". His big screw up is that he failed to squeeze the shorts the only way that matters - by failing to make Tesla a sound business, which can sustain itself.
It appears that all observations are well within the models' 95% confidence level spread. That is, the models, even those from over a decade ago are doing quite well.
Not surprising, given the amount of work that goes into them.
Link works, and says what? That there is a small year-to-year increase.
What's the long-term reality? EU has lowered its emissions by almost 30%, and the US has kept pumping CO2 in the atmosphere.
US emissions, 1990-2016: emissions growing or flat throughout the period. (https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/styles/large/public/2018-04/us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-1990-2016.png)
EU emissions, 1990-2016: almost a 30% decrease, consistently going down. [europa.eu] (https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Greenhouse_gas_emission_statistics_-_emission_inventories)
You can see the occasional bump up here and there, but the trend is clear, as is the irresponsible US attitude towards the problem.
No, the data literally cannot be interpreted in the misleading and self-serving way that Tesla is passing around and that you, paid shills, repeat.
The meaning of the test, as explained in the NHTSA debunking (https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/national-highway-traffic-safety-administration-issues-statement-about-new-car) is that Tesla and Musk are lying again, like that one other time that never-never-never happened, when Tesla claimed a non-existent "5.4" rating, and got told again.
What we see here is just another element of the pattern of lies and exaggerations by Tesla and her CEO, Elon "pedo guy" Musk.
Down-modding the facts repeatedly will not make them true, dear paid shills.
No, it literally isn't, and NHTSA is making a point of underlining it fatly. It is bothersome, because people will believe the lies of Musk and his paid shills like yourself, and cause harm, get injured or die.
Tesla never claimed that the NHTSA gave them higher than five stars.
Please, the link is upthread. Tesla did lie about NHTSA "5.4" ratings. NHTSA corrected them. Instead of learning their lesson, and sticking to the truth, however unexciting, Musk cannot keep himself from lying.
Now that this "5+" fake news doesn't work anymore, he's trying another lie, selling a test for more than it actually measures. NHTSA corrected them again. It is the same behavior - no lessons learned. Lying is the default mode of Tesla.
It is also the reason for their inevitable demise come next year - they aren't only lying to their customers and investors, they are lying to themselves too, and believing it. And when the link with reality is lost, reality catches up in the most unpleasant ways. Which is what we're seeing now.
Which is also a lie - the NHTSA clarification says its data doesn't show what Tesla says it shows. Hence, when someone says which is a fact, they're also wrong. Or, as in your case, lying.
No, I find looking at a stream of bytes quite a pointless exercise. The opinion on the test validity of the test designers and administrators is quite enough for me.
There was a case, which was settled, with Musk and Tesla accepting a considerable fine and concessions to SEC demands.
$40m is a non-trivial amount of legal fees, and the fact that this settlement was accepted is a very good indication of the estimate the lawyers gave to Tesla management about the likelihood of success of challenging SEC in court.
Incidentally "substantiating" the claim has the same likelihood.
And it is apparently indistinguishable from a zero.
Musk won't resign as CEO. He wants to be fired, so that he can be an "outsider" when Tesla crashes and burns in a few months, because that way he can lie to his cultists "I could have saved it". Musk's been trying to get fired for almost two months now. The problem is, the board is made of his cronies, who want to take the blame for his "management" about as much as he wants.
That "Russian hackers" allegedly can change election results with impunity from the US to Gibraltar, or that the alleged "victims" of such yuuge machinations can fight back?
The problem of the West is not "assertive Russia", the problem of the West is its weakening, sick democracy, which fell victim of its oligarchies and which is so impotent, that even with the technologies at its fingertips cannot solve elementary problems like decent education and healthcare for everyone.
All this talk of "external enemies" is to cover up the failures at home.
Which, incidentally, is the same thing Putin's doing.
The value of the stock is the net present value of its future revenue stream.
The factors, or the independent variables that influence the stock value are the profit margins, the market share, the qualify of management, the products, etc. These are things that no "shorts" have influence over, this is exclusively Elon Musk's province.
The stock value is not an independent variable in the mix, it is a dependent variable, and whether it goes up or down is the result of good or bad financial results, sound or unsound management, good or abysmal customer service, sales volume that generates enough revenue and products built so that they are profitable when sold at the produced volumes.
The stock price, on which the shorts bet is a dependent variable in this equation. It depends on the views on the fundamental, intrinsic stock value by the different players in the stock market. The stock price, however, does not influence the "value", except when it is allowed to do so by the company's management, for example, when the company borrows on a bet of the future stock price.
The fact that Mr. Musk and Tesla decided $40 million in fines is a less expensive proposition than paying lawyer fees to defend themselves in court speaks volumes about the advice they got.
The SEC attempt to influence Tesla with the least drastic measures is actually very responsible - had Tesla kept its part of the bargain, the stake holders would have been exposed to significantly less uncertainty and volatility.
Regretfully, it seems Mr. Musk has seen the writing on the wall and is trying desperately to get fired before the crash and burn, so that he can pretend from outside that it wasn't his fault. Sadly for him, his lapdog board will not fire him because they desperately do not want to bear the blame.
Slashdot Mirror
There is an adblocker for them.
On the contrary, short sellers are the people who work hard to find out which companies are abusing the stock markets to defraud investors. They are knowledgeable, they do a lot of research, they are a strong pressure for better governance and less cheating from the management. They are a partial solution to the principal-agent problem. And, if one is an investor, they should readily see the obvious. Musk's big screw up not tweeting to "squeeze the shorts". His big screw up is that he failed to squeeze the shorts the only way that matters - by failing to make Tesla a sound business, which can sustain itself.
Indeed. Let's see how the models are doing.
http://www.realclimate.org/ind...
It appears that all observations are well within the models' 95% confidence level spread. That is, the models, even those from over a decade ago are doing quite well.
Not surprising, given the amount of work that goes into them.
Link works, and says what? That there is a small year-to-year increase.
What's the long-term reality? EU has lowered its emissions by almost 30%, and the US has kept pumping CO2 in the atmosphere.
US emissions, 1990-2016: emissions growing or flat throughout the period. (https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/styles/large/public/2018-04/us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-1990-2016.png)
EU emissions, 1990-2016: almost a 30% decrease, consistently going down. [europa.eu]
(https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Greenhouse_gas_emission_statistics_-_emission_inventories)
You can see the occasional bump up here and there, but the trend is clear, as is the irresponsible US attitude towards the problem.
No, the data literally cannot be interpreted in the misleading and self-serving way that Tesla is passing around and that you, paid shills, repeat.
The meaning of the test, as explained in the NHTSA debunking (https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/national-highway-traffic-safety-administration-issues-statement-about-new-car) is that Tesla and Musk are lying again, like that one other time that never-never-never happened, when Tesla claimed a non-existent "5.4" rating, and got told again.
What we see here is just another element of the pattern of lies and exaggerations by Tesla and her CEO, Elon "pedo guy" Musk.
Down-modding the facts repeatedly will not make them true, dear paid shills.
it's literally the NHTSA's data.
No, it literally isn't, and NHTSA is making a point of underlining it fatly. It is bothersome, because people will believe the lies of Musk and his paid shills like yourself, and cause harm, get injured or die.
Tesla never claimed that the NHTSA gave them higher than five stars.
Please, the link is upthread. Tesla did lie about NHTSA "5.4" ratings. NHTSA corrected them. Instead of learning their lesson, and sticking to the truth, however unexciting, Musk cannot keep himself from lying.
Now that this "5+" fake news doesn't work anymore, he's trying another lie, selling a test for more than it actually measures. NHTSA corrected them again. It is the same behavior - no lessons learned. Lying is the default mode of Tesla.
It is also the reason for their inevitable demise come next year - they aren't only lying to their customers and investors, they are lying to themselves too, and believing it. And when the link with reality is lost, reality catches up in the most unpleasant ways. Which is what we're seeing now.
It is an easy job, even if it doesn't pay all that well.
Tesla never claimed that the NHTSA gave them higher than five stars. T
LOL. Never? As in never-never? As in really-really-never?
What is this story about then?
https://www.greencarreports.co...
Why do you paid musk shills never stop lying?
They claimed that the NHTSA data shows
Which is also a lie - the NHTSA clarification says its data doesn't show what Tesla says it shows. Hence, when someone says which is a fact, they're also wrong. Or, as in your case, lying.
No, I find looking at a stream of bytes quite a pointless exercise. The opinion on the test validity of the test designers and administrators is quite enough for me.
There was a case, which was settled, with Musk and Tesla accepting a considerable fine and concessions to SEC demands.
$40m is a non-trivial amount of legal fees, and the fact that this settlement was accepted is a very good indication of the estimate the lawyers gave to Tesla management about the likelihood of success of challenging SEC in court.
Incidentally "substantiating" the claim has the same likelihood.
And it is apparently indistinguishable from a zero.
Musk won't resign as CEO. He wants to be fired, so that he can be an "outsider" when Tesla crashes and burns in a few months, because that way he can lie to his cultists "I could have saved it". Musk's been trying to get fired for almost two months now. The problem is, the board is made of his cronies, who want to take the blame for his "management" about as much as he wants.
Who cares about what a pathetic compulsive liar like Musk tweets?
Virtually all of his grandstanding tweet lies have been debunked.
Most recent debunked lie: "our cars have the highest NHTSA whatever".
https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-re...
If stuff at walmart makes your heart race, you fully deserve whatever walmart does to you.
Why should not the shorts short? The "story" above is just another Musk lie:
https://money.usnews.com/inves...
Tesla is a piece of hype by paid trolls like "Rei".
And the headline is simply another Musk lie, already deniedby the NHTSA:
https://money.usnews.com/inves...
That "Russian hackers" allegedly can change election results with impunity from the US to Gibraltar, or that the alleged "victims" of such yuuge machinations can fight back?
The problem of the West is not "assertive Russia", the problem of the West is its weakening, sick democracy, which fell victim of its oligarchies and which is so impotent, that even with the technologies at its fingertips cannot solve elementary problems like decent education and healthcare for everyone.
All this talk of "external enemies" is to cover up the failures at home.
Which, incidentally, is the same thing Putin's doing.
It is also the past. If you think police selling information to rich criminals is new, you're very, very ill-informed.
No, shorting does not reduce "stock value".
The value of the stock is the net present value of its future revenue stream.
The factors, or the independent variables that influence the stock value are the profit margins, the market share, the qualify of management, the products, etc. These are things that no "shorts" have influence over, this is exclusively Elon Musk's province.
The stock value is not an independent variable in the mix, it is a dependent variable, and whether it goes up or down is the result of good or bad financial results, sound or unsound management, good or abysmal customer service, sales volume that generates enough revenue and products built so that they are profitable when sold at the produced volumes.
The stock price, on which the shorts bet is a dependent variable in this equation. It depends on the views on the fundamental, intrinsic stock value by the different players in the stock market. The stock price, however, does not influence the "value", except when it is allowed to do so by the company's management, for example, when the company borrows on a bet of the future stock price.
The fact that Mr. Musk and Tesla decided $40 million in fines is a less expensive proposition than paying lawyer fees to defend themselves in court speaks volumes about the advice they got.
The SEC attempt to influence Tesla with the least drastic measures is actually very responsible - had Tesla kept its part of the bargain, the stake holders would have been exposed to significantly less uncertainty and volatility.
Regretfully, it seems Mr. Musk has seen the writing on the wall and is trying desperately to get fired before the crash and burn, so that he can pretend from outside that it wasn't his fault. Sadly for him, his lapdog board will not fire him because they desperately do not want to bear the blame.
How does this thing help me at all?
Your post would have been funnier without the insulting jab, buddy.
But blockchain is no ordinary hammer, blockchain is the only hammer that can make every problem behave as nail.
Imagine what would happen if Musk left. [...] stock would dive 40% minimum.
Why would anyone want to invest in a company in which one perishable asset accounts for 40% of the value?
Karl Marx already covered this. History only repeats itself as farce.