SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Elon Musk tweet wipes $14bn off Tesla's value:
The tweet also knocked $3bn off Mr Musk's own stake in Tesla as investors promptly bailed out of the company.
"Tesla stock price is too high imo," he said, one of several tweets that included a vow to sell his possessions.
In other tweets, he said his girlfriend was mad at him, while another simply read: "Rage, rage against the dying of the light of consciousness."
In 2018, a tweet about Tesla's future on the New York stock market led to regulators fining him $20m and agreeing to have all further posts on the platform pre-screened by lawyers.
Previously:
(2019-04-27) Elon Musk Reaches Settlement in SEC Tweet Battle
(2018-10-06) Elon Musk Isn't on His Twitter Leash Yet, So He's Taunting the SEC
(2018-09-30) SEC Settlement: Elon Musk Resigns as Chairman of Tesla, Stays as CEO, $40 Million in Fines Paid
(2018-09-28) Elon Musk Accused by SEC of Misleading Investors in August Tweet [Updated]
(Score: 1) by purdy on Saturday May 02 2020, @11:57AM (2 children)
It's pretty hard to argue that this tweet doesn't violate the consent decree with the SEC. Does anybody really think that the Designated Securities Counsel for Tesla (the 'tweet babysitter' required by the consent decree) would have approved this tweet? Not running this tweet by the DSC is a violation of the consent decree as well.
The SEC is already pursuing legal action for contempt because of last year's tweet about production levels for solar panels. If nothing else, this tweet strengthens the SEC's case and may lead to additional counts.
But more to the point, what was the benefit to Musk, Tesla or its shareholders? At best, this tweet creates a needless distraction for Musk and the company. At worst (and this is very, very unlikely) it could put Musk in jail or have him barred from serving as an officer at Tesla.
(Score: 1) by purdy on Saturday May 02 2020, @12:01PM
Can't edit, but I missed that the previous contempt charges were settled. But yesterday's tweet is still a violation of that settlement, which requires preclearance from DSC for any public, written communication containing information about:
Tesla’s financial condition, statements, or results, including earnings or guidance
potential or proposed mergers, acquisitions, dispositions, tender offers, or joint ventures
production, sales, or delivery numbers (actual or estimated) that haven’t been shared, or ones that differ from Tesla’s official guidance
new or proposed lines of business unrelated to Tesla’s existing businesses (defined in the filing as “vehicles, transportation, and sustainable energy products)
changes in the status of Tesla’s securities, credit facilities, or financing / lending arrangements
nonpublic legal or regulatory findings or decisions
anything that would require the filing of an 8-K form with the SEC, including changes in control of the company, or to its executive officers and directors
any other topic that Tesla — or a majority of its independent members of the company’s board of directors — believe needs pre-approval
(Score: 1) by Frosty Piss on Saturday May 02 2020, @06:47PM
So Musk pays a small fine. He’s got a lot more where that came from.