Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to johnstevens77,Bhoddhisatva,scotia,Anonymous,Cornytiv34, for Donating to support the site

Musk endeavours

The Big Picture Place
odysseus2000
Lemon Half
Posts: 6362
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:33 pm
Has thanked: 1530 times
Been thanked: 959 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#159092

Postby odysseus2000 » August 12th, 2018, 9:02 pm

Interesting the requirements for needing to file an 8k:

https://www.sec.gov/fast-answers/answersform8khtm.html

If any of the criteria are met in sections 1-6 then filing within 4 business days is required.

Section 7 is about FD (Full Disclosure) which might need a sooner disclosure.

Section 8 though is "other events" with no time scale mentioned.

Musk's tweet was on Monday, which if you don't count the day of the tweet would imply that there should be a 8k on Monday, but does Musk's tweet fit in with the "other events" of section 8, since he only said he was considering and as of yet there has been no material change, just a possibility that this might happen.

Indeed the "considering" and later tweets that this isn't certain as it requires share holder approval all fit in with this not being material at the present time.

If anyone knows I would be interested.

Regards,

BobbyD
Lemon Half
Posts: 7814
Joined: January 22nd, 2017, 2:29 pm
Has thanked: 665 times
Been thanked: 1289 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#159124

Postby BobbyD » August 13th, 2018, 1:18 am

After Tesla Buyout Tweet, Some Investors Wonder: Where Was Nasdaq?
Elon Musk’s ‘financing secured’ buyout tweet last week touched off 80 minutes of frenzied trading before Nasdaq called a halt

...

Typically, exchanges halt trading in a company’s shares when it tells them it is about to release “material news,” or information that could sway investors’ trading decisions. An exchange typically keeps trading halted until a disclosure provides some clarity.

Other investors wondered why the exchange kept the halt in place for more than an hour and a half, and then why it chose to resume trading at 3:45 p.m.

...

Nasdaq rules require listed companies to notify its MarketWatch division, via an electronic disclosure system, at least 10 minutes before publicly releasing “certain material news announcements” between the hours of 7 a.m. and 8 p.m. ET. Typically, the heads-up allows the exchange to coordinate with the company and evaluate whether to halt trading “pending news”—which compliance experts say levels the playing field for investors making trading decisions.

With Tesla, the time lag between Mr. Musk’s tweet and Nasdaq’s decision to halt trading suggests the exchange was blindsided by the CEO’s tweet—which would constitute a violation of Nasdaq rules, several traders and regulatory experts said.


- https://www.wsj.com/articles/after-tesl ... 1534078800

odysseus2000
Lemon Half
Posts: 6362
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:33 pm
Has thanked: 1530 times
Been thanked: 959 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#159239

Postby odysseus2000 » August 13th, 2018, 2:34 pm

Fascinating statement by Musk:

https://www.tesla.com/en_GB/blog/update ... edirect=no

As I read this there is no chance of anyone winning any legal battles with him since he has acted as a private shareholder announcing his intentions to create a level playing field so that the big players he was talking to did not have an advantage.

Regards,

odysseus2000
Lemon Half
Posts: 6362
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:33 pm
Has thanked: 1530 times
Been thanked: 959 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#159242

Postby odysseus2000 » August 13th, 2018, 2:42 pm

Additionally as I read the announcement, I don't believe the tweet from Musk last week can be considered an event for which an 8k is required as the board have not yet come to a recommendation and that would be needed I believe before any shareholder vote. One share holder making a statement does not commit the board to do anything, hence as I see it, no need for an 8K.

Regards,

BobbyD
Lemon Half
Posts: 7814
Joined: January 22nd, 2017, 2:29 pm
Has thanked: 665 times
Been thanked: 1289 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#159243

Postby BobbyD » August 13th, 2018, 2:44 pm

odysseus2000 wrote:Fascinating statement by Musk:

https://www.tesla.com/en_GB/blog/update ... edirect=no

As I read this there is no chance of anyone winning any legal battles with him since he has acted as a private shareholder announcing his intentions to create a level playing field so that the big players he was talking to did not have an advantage.

Regards,



I left the July 31st meeting with no question that a deal with the Saudi sovereign fund could be closed, and that it was just a matter of getting the process moving. This is why I referred to “funding secured” in the August 7th announcement.

onthemove
Lemon Slice
Posts: 540
Joined: June 24th, 2017, 4:03 pm
Has thanked: 722 times
Been thanked: 471 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#159245

Postby onthemove » August 13th, 2018, 2:44 pm

odysseus2000 wrote:Fascinating statement by Musk:

https://www.tesla.com/en_GB/blog/update ... edirect=no

As I read this there is no chance of anyone winning any legal battles with him since he has acted as a private shareholder announcing his intentions to create a level playing field so that the big players he was talking to did not have an advantage.

Regards,


You're kidding, right!

He's toast.

Funding wasn't secured (imho based on that statement).
He didn't have a contractually obligated commitment from the fund to cover whatever percentage chose to take the $420.
He didn't as it transpires, although he seemed to assume otherwise at the time of the tweet, even have a commitment to the partial amount!

"During the meeting, the Managing Director of the fund expressed regret that I had not moved forward previously on a going private transaction with them, and he strongly expressed his support for funding a going private transaction for Tesla at this time. I understood from him that no other decision makers were needed and that they were eager to proceed ...

..I have continued to communicate with the Managing Director of the Saudi fund. He has expressed support for proceeding subject to financial and other due diligence and their internal review process for obtaining approvals. He has also asked for additional details on how the company would be taken private, including any required percentages and any regulatory requirements."


That is quite some way from being "secured" in my book! ... still requires "other due diligence", "internal review process", and details on regulatory requirements before they'd make any commitment!

And now to say he 'he has acted as a private shareholder' after the event, is sheer desperation. How were investors to know that!

BobbyD
Lemon Half
Posts: 7814
Joined: January 22nd, 2017, 2:29 pm
Has thanked: 665 times
Been thanked: 1289 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#159247

Postby BobbyD » August 13th, 2018, 2:47 pm

Manipulation
Manipulation is intentional conduct designed to deceive investors by controlling or artificially affecting the market for a security. Manipulation can involve a number of techniques to affect the supply of, or demand for, a stock. They include: spreading false or misleading information about a company; improperly limiting the number of publicly-available shares; or rigging quotes, prices or trades to create a false or deceptive picture of the demand for a security. Those who engage in manipulation are subject to various civil and criminal sanctions.


- https://www.sec.gov/fast-answers/answer ... ulhtm.html

odysseus2000
Lemon Half
Posts: 6362
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:33 pm
Has thanked: 1530 times
Been thanked: 959 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#159248

Postby odysseus2000 » August 13th, 2018, 2:51 pm

onthemove wrote:
odysseus2000 wrote:F

And now to say he 'he has acted as a private shareholder' after the event, is sheer desperation. How were investors to know that!


If it was a company tweet then it would have been the board and material.

As a private shareholder anyone can say anything, but with out the board and then a shareholder vote it means nothing.

Sure folk have decided that Musk is Tesla, but it ain't the case.

Anyone who has made other assertions, and that includes most of the media and most of the social media, do not understand much about investing.

Folk who argue that Musk is Tesla will get short shrift from the regulators.

Regards,

odysseus2000
Lemon Half
Posts: 6362
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:33 pm
Has thanked: 1530 times
Been thanked: 959 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#159250

Postby odysseus2000 » August 13th, 2018, 2:54 pm

BobbyD wrote:
Manipulation
Manipulation is intentional conduct designed to deceive investors by controlling or artificially affecting the market for a security. Manipulation can involve a number of techniques to affect the supply of, or demand for, a stock. They include: spreading false or misleading information about a company; improperly limiting the number of publicly-available shares; or rigging quotes, prices or trades to create a false or deceptive picture of the demand for a security. Those who engage in manipulation are subject to various civil and criminal sanctions.


- https://www.sec.gov/fast-answers/answer ... ulhtm.html


How exactly can Musk's private tweets be considered to have been manipulations, save for the folk who don't understand how the investment business works and who have lost betting they understood the market better.

Regards,

BobbyD
Lemon Half
Posts: 7814
Joined: January 22nd, 2017, 2:29 pm
Has thanked: 665 times
Been thanked: 1289 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#159251

Postby BobbyD » August 13th, 2018, 2:57 pm

odysseus2000 wrote:As a private shareholder anyone can say anything


You really can't.

onthemove
Lemon Slice
Posts: 540
Joined: June 24th, 2017, 4:03 pm
Has thanked: 722 times
Been thanked: 471 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#159253

Postby onthemove » August 13th, 2018, 3:01 pm

odysseus2000 wrote:How exactly can Musk's private tweets be considered to have been manipulations,


Quite simple...

He said he had secured funding to take Tesla private at $420

Clearly that was going to move the market and burn shorts. Clearly Musk knew that.

It turns out his "Funding Secured" claim, wasn't totally accurate (understatement!)

"spreading false or misleading information about a company"


At best the "Funding Secured" might be termed "misleading".

It wasn't secured, there was no contractual obligation to provide the funds. As Musk has subsequently found, that funding is still subject to much deliberation on the part of the funders before they're anywhere near ready to make it "secure".

odysseus2000
Lemon Half
Posts: 6362
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:33 pm
Has thanked: 1530 times
Been thanked: 959 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#159254

Postby odysseus2000 » August 13th, 2018, 3:02 pm

BobbyD wrote:
odysseus2000 wrote:As a private shareholder anyone can say anything


You really can't.


So what can't you say?

If you said something that wasn't factual then sure there could be a case, but saying something factual or something you believe factual at the time has to be allowed or would violate the US constitutional right to free speech.

Sure folk don't understand that and like most of the media and social media comments, one has utterances from people greatly deluded in their belief that they understand and can predict what will happen in equity markets and that is why most active folk lose money in equities.

Regards,

onthemove
Lemon Slice
Posts: 540
Joined: June 24th, 2017, 4:03 pm
Has thanked: 722 times
Been thanked: 471 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#159256

Postby onthemove » August 13th, 2018, 3:07 pm

odysseus2000 wrote:So what can't you say?

If you said something that wasn't factual then sure there could be a case, but saying something factual or something you believe factual at the time has to be allowed or would violate the US constitutional right to free speech.,


Dear SEC yeh, sorry about that tweet, I really thought I had $70 BILLION dollars in secured funding, so I told the world... but hey, turns out I didn't.

No worries hey?

Only shorters got burned and they're a PITA, so no real harm done.

Call it quits?

I'm just some nobody on the internet, as if anyone would believe I'd secured $70BILLION ! More fool them.

Free speech and all that, I can say what I want, can't I?

---

Yup, let's see how this plays out

8-)

odysseus2000
Lemon Half
Posts: 6362
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:33 pm
Has thanked: 1530 times
Been thanked: 959 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#159258

Postby odysseus2000 » August 13th, 2018, 3:08 pm

onthemove wrote:
odysseus2000 wrote:How exactly can Musk's private tweets be considered to have been manipulations,


Quite simple...

He said he had secured funding to take Tesla private at $420

Clearly that was going to move the market and burn shorts. Clearly Musk knew that.

It turns out his "Funding Secured" claim, wasn't totally accurate (understatement!)

"spreading false or misleading information about a company"


At best the "Funding Secured" might be termed "misleading".

It wasn't secured, there was no contractual obligation to provide the funds. As Musk has subsequently found, that funding is still subject to much deliberation on the part of the funders before they're anywhere near ready to make it "secure".


Do you understand how transactions are made with big investors and CEO's?

Everything operates on word of mouth between the big guys till eventually there are drawn up papers.

Musk, Buffett, presidents, rich and powerful folk can in general can call up more or less anyone and they will take their call. Most of us wouldn't get past the receptionist.

If the a big fund says to anyone that they have the money and are prepared to act, then they are. That is how business at these levels is done, its not like going to your local bank and asking for a mortgage.

Regards,

BobbyD
Lemon Half
Posts: 7814
Joined: January 22nd, 2017, 2:29 pm
Has thanked: 665 times
Been thanked: 1289 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#159259

Postby BobbyD » August 13th, 2018, 3:10 pm

odysseus2000 wrote:
BobbyD wrote:
odysseus2000 wrote:As a private shareholder anyone can say anything


You really can't.


So what can't you say?

If you said something that wasn't factual then sure there could be a case...



...and there you have it!

If Musk didn't have a binding agreement for the funding required to take Tesla private then that is exactly what it would appear has happened.

And could you stop impugning other people's understanding of investing, this has nothing to do with investing nous, it is a matter of law.

odysseus2000
Lemon Half
Posts: 6362
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:33 pm
Has thanked: 1530 times
Been thanked: 959 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#159261

Postby odysseus2000 » August 13th, 2018, 3:23 pm

BobbyD wrote:
odysseus2000 wrote:
BobbyD wrote:
You really can't.


So what can't you say?

If you said something that wasn't factual then sure there could be a case...



...and there you have it!

If Musk didn't have a binding agreement for the funding required to take Tesla private then that is exactly what it would appear has happened.

And could you stop impugning other people's understanding of investing, this has nothing to do with investing nous, it is a matter of law.


Yes, it is a matter of law and most of the comments flying around at the moment also show that folk don't understand the law either.

It is all very well to have lots of folk saying the same things, each supporting the other in some view.

The question comes down to how correct is that view.

Imho Musk has done nothings that would stand up as illegal in a court, most everyone who is posting believe otherwise. Time will tell!

Regards,

odysseus2000
Lemon Half
Posts: 6362
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:33 pm
Has thanked: 1530 times
Been thanked: 959 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#159286

Postby odysseus2000 » August 13th, 2018, 4:16 pm

Interestingly the argument that Musk has deliberately burned shorts doesn't stack up with the stock price.

Several shorts have been posting about how they have made a lot of money shorting the spike after Musk's tweet with the implication that they would
like him to tweet more and give them better entries.

It is a very dangerous game to my way of thinking but it does also undermine the argument that Musk has burned shorts.

Regards,

BobbyD
Lemon Half
Posts: 7814
Joined: January 22nd, 2017, 2:29 pm
Has thanked: 665 times
Been thanked: 1289 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#159307

Postby BobbyD » August 13th, 2018, 5:06 pm

odysseus2000 wrote:It is a very dangerous game to my way of thinking but it does also undermine the argument that Musk has burned shorts.


It is Musk's intent, not his achievement which would be relevant.

johnhemming
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3858
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:13 pm
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 609 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#159309

Postby johnhemming » August 13th, 2018, 5:11 pm

The way I read this is that the situation is unclear. I have a certain amount of knowledge of UK investment law and regulation, but I don't know where the US situation differs. He clearly had a basis upon which he could make some claim. It was not, however, a prospectus or anything as substantial as that.

BobbyD
Lemon Half
Posts: 7814
Joined: January 22nd, 2017, 2:29 pm
Has thanked: 665 times
Been thanked: 1289 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#159310

Postby BobbyD » August 13th, 2018, 5:14 pm

johnhemming wrote:The way I read this is that the situation is unclear. I have a certain amount of knowledge of UK investment law and regulation, but I don't know where the US situation differs. He clearly had a basis upon which he could make some claim. It was not, however, a prospectus or anything as substantial as that.


You're talking about the claim that funding was secured?


Return to “Macro and Global Topics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Newroad and 10 guests