Short sellers aren't priced that the price went up - they're pissed that it went up from alleged market manipulation by its CEO,
I have some fine land in Florida to sell you. It's just a bit wet.
Of course short sellers are pissed the price went up. Short sellers haven't cared about Musk's earlier tweets that depressed the stock price. Short sellers also engage in market manipulation. All the short sellers care about is profit -- they don't care how or why.
What's different is that Musk gave them an opening to sue the company. I suspect it is a very small opening and I doubt they will get anywhere, but with billions at stake, why not try?
You are correct that paper ballots do not eliminate the possibility of fraud. However, they do make it significantly more difficult, assuming that there are multiple people with different ideologies watching the storage of the ballots.
If Verizon's operating costs increase, they're no longer getting optimal profit if they keep the costs to the customer the same.
If Verizon's costs increase, that provides zero leverage to increase their prices or fees. Hence their profits go down, and there is little they can do about it -- assuming Verizon has already maximized total revenue.
If all market participant's costs increase, then Verizon has some leverage to increase prices or fees. Otherwise, no.
$1 may not be enough to turn off current customers, but it may reduce customer acquisition. Over time, it may reduce revenue. I assume that Verizon puts a lot of effort into determining the maximum prices and fees they can charge.
There were stories at the time of people who contested a foreclosure, pointing out that the bank didn't have the right to foreclose, but judges could not believe that the banks would engage in such corrupt acts, so ruled in favour of the banks.
I wonder if those judges have ever had second thoughts about their decisions, which resulted in taking away people's houses, based on possibly fraudulent statements by banks?
Would using a modern, safety-first programming language like Rust, that's designed to avoid whole classes of software bugs, prevented this glitch from happening?
Hah, hah, hah. You actually think this was a "bug" and not designed that way? LOL!
GM isn't the greatest example of a well run company.
GM sold its European operations to PSA recently. GM Europe had lost money for a long time. PSA has turned it around and it is now profitable in about a year.
The potential profits from Tesla may be higher than those of GM. Revenue isn't profit. GM has a much higher revenue and today, actual profit, but investors are betting on Tesla making lots of profit in the future. GM is just one large increase in gas prices away from bankruptcy.
Or contrarily, if you don't have a good location for pumped hydro,
We already have the technology and infrastructure to transport electricity over long distances. Your pumped hydro doesn't need to be close to the generation site.
Teslas have the equivalent of Windows' "three finger salute": foot on the brake, press and hold the two scroll wheels until the display goes blank and then shows the "T" logo.
Read all the statements about how the target prices for electrolysis have not been met. Look up the efficiency of turning water into compressed H2. It's much more efficient to use that electricity to charge a battery. Then you have all the distribution and storage costs (before the H2 actually gets into a vehicle). Then you have got the fact that hydrogen vehicles still need significant batteries because it's not practical to regenerate energy back into hydrogen in a vehicle.
Then you have the need for a massive infrastructure build-out, that isn't needed for BEVs.
Today, and for the next few years, hydrogen will be produced from fossil fuels.
The concept of the "hydrogen economy" is a con put out by the fossil fuel industry to delay the renewable fuel industry from taking over transportation.
Slashdot Mirror
Ever been in a Tesla Model 3? It's design is minimal. but the screen is not "little".
I have some fine land in Florida to sell you. It's just a bit wet.
Of course short sellers are pissed the price went up. Short sellers haven't cared about Musk's earlier tweets that depressed the stock price. Short sellers also engage in market manipulation. All the short sellers care about is profit -- they don't care how or why.
What's different is that Musk gave them an opening to sue the company. I suspect it is a very small opening and I doubt they will get anywhere, but with billions at stake, why not try?
You are correct that paper ballots do not eliminate the possibility of fraud. However, they do make it significantly more difficult, assuming that there are multiple people with different ideologies watching the storage of the ballots.
Do you vote on 20 or more different races and propositions at once, twice a year?
That's how it works where I vote.
Fill out paper ballot, it is then scanned and kept. I can't audit that my vote was accurately counted, but an audit can be done globally.
Have fun typing that in using the on-screen keyboard of a cellphone.
If Verizon's costs increase, that provides zero leverage to increase their prices or fees. Hence their profits go down, and there is little they can do about it -- assuming Verizon has already maximized total revenue.
If all market participant's costs increase, then Verizon has some leverage to increase prices or fees. Otherwise, no.
$1 may not be enough to turn off current customers, but it may reduce customer acquisition. Over time, it may reduce revenue. I assume that Verizon puts a lot of effort into determining the maximum prices and fees they can charge.
You appear to be assuming that Verizon has not already set their prices (plus taxes and fees) at the point which brings in the maximum revenue.
https://abcnews.go.com/Interna...
Or, we could use cheaper power sources, like wind and solar.
For about 5 seconds, until Cloudfare configure their resolver to appear to be local to where the request originated (if they haven't already done so).
This is just like the behaviour of Google's 8.8.8.8 resolver.
It's shocking.
There were stories at the time of people who contested a foreclosure, pointing out that the bank didn't have the right to foreclose, but judges could not believe that the banks would engage in such corrupt acts, so ruled in favour of the banks.
I wonder if those judges have ever had second thoughts about their decisions, which resulted in taking away people's houses, based on possibly fraudulent statements by banks?
Hah, hah, hah. You actually think this was a "bug" and not designed that way? LOL!
That seems quite high. I think that Tesla's battery costs are about $100/kWh.
Buy yourself some blue light blocking glasses.
Not me. I have never driven a BMW. As proof, I offer the assurance that I always use the indicators on any car I drive.
My local gym has a sauna. Does that make me a wealthy white guy?
I think you will find that should be "She":
https://teslamotorsclub.com/tm...
There are suggestions on the forums that pressing the brake pedal results in a deeper reset. I don't know if this is true.
I don't think you understand the difference between CO2 and CO plus N2O.
GM isn't the greatest example of a well run company.
GM sold its European operations to PSA recently. GM Europe had lost money for a long time. PSA has turned it around and it is now profitable in about a year.
The potential profits from Tesla may be higher than those of GM. Revenue isn't profit. GM has a much higher revenue and today, actual profit, but investors are betting on Tesla making lots of profit in the future. GM is just one large increase in gas prices away from bankruptcy.
We already have the technology and infrastructure to transport electricity over long distances. Your pumped hydro doesn't need to be close to the generation site.
Capital purchases don't have a huge impact on profits in the short term, although they do directly affect cash.
The cost of capital purchases are usually amortized over some period of time.
Teslas have the equivalent of Windows' "three finger salute": foot on the brake, press and hold the two scroll wheels until the display goes blank and then shows the "T" logo.
Read all the statements about how the target prices for electrolysis have not been met. Look up the efficiency of turning water into compressed H2. It's much more efficient to use that electricity to charge a battery. Then you have all the distribution and storage costs (before the H2 actually gets into a vehicle). Then you have got the fact that hydrogen vehicles still need significant batteries because it's not practical to regenerate energy back into hydrogen in a vehicle.
Then you have the need for a massive infrastructure build-out, that isn't needed for BEVs.
Today, and for the next few years, hydrogen will be produced from fossil fuels.
The concept of the "hydrogen economy" is a con put out by the fossil fuel industry to delay the renewable fuel industry from taking over transportation.