A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
Because it's massively over-valued, the board is a bunch of Musky Bro-hoes (also sometimes family...) signing off whatever the fuck Musk says; while it's being led by a Ketamine-addled Nazis with the emotional development of a child.
Why anyone still holds Tesla, is beyond me.
Some people truly believe in Musk and the brand. Those people are dipshits, but if you excluded dipshits from your market predictions, you would always be wrong.
But pension funds have a responsibility to go long, and while Tesla may rise or fall on Musk's digital bowel movements, volatility is the problem.
Musk's digital bowel movements
Even taking them into account, long term likely would never pay off. It's valued way over what they'd be worth if they took over the entire vehicle industry, and that's not going to happen. Sure, for gambling maybe it's worth it to speculate on, but for a long-term investment it's horrible.
There are people like my younger brother who believe that Musk is a pure genius, likes Bezos a lot, and is entirely sold on the idea that billionaire philanthropy is somehow a good and positive thing for regular people.
christians in particular like to imagine that god blesses those who are "good" with wealth, and that therefore wealthy people must be "good" because otherwise they wouldn't be wealthy.
This then gets absorbed into more secular thought with "well they're successful so they must be skilled".
Truth is, his daughter-grooming daddy owned an emerald mine in Apartheid South Africa and got his seed-money from that. So he's neither "good" nor particularly "skilled."
That's funny, because prosperity gospel is just there to indiscriminately wrench away money from the most desperately impoverished people imaginable. To think, it's doing double work by lionizing oligarchs. It's the purest form of evil, if you ask me.
it's not even prosperity gospel- that isn't about being good. Just that god will make you rich if you make Joel Osteen and his ilk rich.
Funny how that doesn't work. (and yes... it's fucking evil.)
christians in particular like to imagine that god blesses those who are "good" with wealth, and that therefore wealthy people must be "good" because otherwise they wouldn't be wealthy.
It's just Calvinism (if you are rich, that means god loves you), and Calvinism is baked into most protestant denominations.
Really Calvin and his beloved "Protestant work ethic" are behind the rise of capitalism. Look it up. Max Weber wrote about it in "The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism"
sold on the idea that billionaire philanthropy is somehow a good and positive thing for regular people.
He's not wrong, but he's judging occasional donations to particular issues as neither ineffective, incomplete, nor completely toxic to direction of research, because he judges them in a vacuum and/or against a fake goal-post of 'no research funding' instead of 'broad research funding based on income tax that rich fucks would have paid in a world before Reagan dropped the bottom out '.
The mating habits of cannabis-injected left-handed greater eastern blue potter's snails will get no money from rich fucks, DESPITE its follow-on application to cancer cure research based on the secretion rate inprovement and or testing options derived from massive population explosions with a kill switch.
A Delaware judge recently invalidated the pay package, citing insufficient shareholder approval.
I don't know if this is the article (its pay walled), or AI since it's a summary, or maybe OP, but this is a terrible reporting of what happened.
The pay package was supposed to be independently created by the board, but it was found out that Elon had a heavy hand in proposing it, including the people helping him craft it. Now, I don't think this is bad per say, but then the board was supposed to independently vet it, but the board wasn't really deemed independent, and who they used had ties to Musk. Further, it wasn't properly disclosed what involvement Musk had in crafting the package in the first place.
The failure to properly disclose all of this made the shareholder vote void. Had they disclosed it, and had it been approved, it would have been okay.
It had nothing to do with not having insufficient shareholder approval.
One more problem was that the various milestones had projections for likelihood and time to completion, but what they presented to the shareholders was different than their internal projections.
So not only did they think some of these milestones were likely, they lied to shareholders about how likely they were to make the package seem more difficult to achieve.
*per se
TIL, thanks.
Paying someone a billion dollars or more at a company should require unanimous shareholder approval. One nay should strike it down. It's egregious and unnecessary.
A billion dollars can buy you a hundred people at 10 million a piece, that's gonna get you a shitload of celebrity involvement and endorsement. The value of the shares in this asshole's pay package is over 100 billion as of early December.
The shareholders chose to do it, it's their company, they can do whatever they want with it (as long as they weren't misled as the judge has ruled they were).
Trying to control what the shareholders do with their company like that is not the way to solve a problem. And if you don't own any voting shares, then you have no reason to complain about what they decide to do.
The payment comes out of their pocket, by the devaluation of their stock, when the options are issued and vested. They went into it knowing they'd make a shit load of money if he pulled it off, and he'd make a shit load of money too. The stock has 25x'd since the package was created.
Edit: Just to be clear here - A better way would be through a high tax bracket that would eat the vast majority of that away forcing him to sell most of the shares (or I guess alternatively sell SpaceX shares, it'd be his choice), but keep in mind it'd be at the rate when each set vests, so it's not a tax bill on 55b, it's a series of tax bills on smaller amounts.
Divested
The only reason to hold Tesla right now is political. Do you believe Musk can continue sucking Trump's dick to profits? It's plausible...
Their cars are trash in the global market. China is owning everyone in the EV market. Domestically, they're not a bad buy used, but for their sticker price there's much more compelling options out there. The cybertruck is one of the worst products in automotive history. It'll be mentioned with the Pinto as far as engineering failures go.
It's not necessarily political, wall street can be very clueless about technology. They all seem to believe they can judge the potential of just about any company, no matter how complex the industry, by merely watching a video of the CEO speaking and judging how smart they sound. Perceived potential can also be self-reinforcing because the more prominent a business figure gets, the more wall street reporters and influencers want to be associated with them - so they're careful to only praise them and not piss them off. So they can easily be duped by an Elizabeth Holmes/Adam Neumann type who has a strong voice and even stronger connections and promises the moon for a small investment.
Musk's key innovation was taking that a step further and promising them Mars.
I sold all my shares 3-4 years ago.
There are just better ways to invest that money.
I am, in my complete nativity, hoping Tesla would fire Musk and just become a normal car manufacturer. But suppose this is a far cry. But one can hope
Board of directors is not going to tank their Tesla stock by removing him. There is a reason Musk appointed people who are indebted to him.
https://www.marketbeat.com/stocks/NASDAQ/TSLA/short-interest/
Short positions are increasing.
At the end of the day Tesla is a bubble that will pop at some point, Musk's latest antics are only going to accelerate that.
A pension fund typically avoids risky investments, so this plus the shorting increase is a pretty strong signal that investors think the pop is imminent.
You might be right, but as someone who used to short, the odds are stacked against you.
First, inflation is always pushing stocks up. Second, it gives TSLA an opportunity to short squeeze. Third, you're tying up your money that could instead go into an always-increasing market.
People have been trying to short Tesla for half a decade. Eventually someone will make money, but it's far from worth it
True, indeed. Although, in terms of whole stock market, the recent ralley has run out of steam. I think it might be a good short opportunity once this downtrend gets confirmation. Dunno about tesla specifically, though.
Can you help me understand the link you posted? Because when I load it it shows a 16% decrease in sold shorts.
Go on Europe!
Remember that for them to sell over half a billion dollars worth of stock, somebody (many people) bought it. Probably it was the other major stockholders that were ok with Musk's pay.
It's not always a good thing when the one sensible voice goes "fuckit. I'm out".
Institutional investors like pension funds selling a stock is kind of a big deal though, as a) there are a lot of them for a stock as "big" as Tesla, b) they are far less risk averse then individual investors, and c) the managers of these funds tend to pay attention to what other funds with similar holdings are doing. If one this big sells, others will wonder if they should get out now as well.
This could, in theory, be the start of a mass selloff of Tesla stock by institutional investors wanting to get out before the bubble bursts and they stop seeing gains from Tesla stock.
They didn't want to be caught holding the hot potato when the music stops.
The fact that someone else is willing to take that risk (or doesn't see that risk) doesn't mean too much in the big picture.
It’s just time to cash. Remember when he bought twitter and the Tesla stock crashed. Yeah they are afraid it will happen again because he’s too busy fucking up the US government.
The Dutch see the writing on the wall. Scroll down...the topic went from Tesla, Musk Digital Bowel Movement to Ketamine...
So someone bought it...
Of course someone bought it... it wouldn't be worth anything if there weren't any buyers.
maybe it's someone like saudi sovereign fund, they like burning piles of cash on overhyped failures like when they gave money to softbank
The opposite of this is exactly what Meta and big tech companies depend on: as long as we are raking in money, the process doesn’t matter.