I feel like having twitter upheld as a source of investment knowledge to be absolutely absurd. If it was published in something with known integrity like a newspaper or a corporate memorandum/PR...
I feel like having twitter upheld as a source of investment knowledge to be absolutely absurd. If it was published in something with known integrity like a newspaper or a corporate memorandum/PR release, then sure, it should be actionable, but Musk should be able to say Tesla will make eleventy-squillion cars every Tuesday on Twitter and it should just be accepted anyone using that to justify investment in Tesla stocks is a complete moron.
I'm a huge Musk fan, but to be fair to the non-Musk fans, they did go out of their way to mark Musk's twitter as an official communication venue for Tesla. Like, they filed it with the SEC in 2013...
I'm a huge Musk fan, but to be fair to the non-Musk fans, they did go out of their way to mark Musk's twitter as an official communication venue for Tesla.
Like, they filed it with the SEC in 2013 and everything.
I'm not familiar with that area of law at all (especially in the US), but was that filing a case of 'we want this to be official', or a case of 'we believe this will leave us liable if we don't...
I'm not familiar with that area of law at all (especially in the US), but was that filing a case of 'we want this to be official', or a case of 'we believe this will leave us liable if we don't file it'? Because I don't see any non-liability source of benefit to their doing so.
The president of the United States most common form of communication with the public is Twitter. I think it's entered mainstream collective thought enough to be sufficiently regarded as a means of...
If it was published in something with known integrity like a newspaper
The president of the United States most common form of communication with the public is Twitter. I think it's entered mainstream collective thought enough to be sufficiently regarded as a means of valid (or in the POTUS's case, invalid) information dispersal.
Elon—being the petty child he is—obviously doesn't care.
If a company's CEO makes statements about that company, I don't think people should need to judge every possible communication method individually. It shouldn't matter if he tweets the...
If a company's CEO makes statements about that company, I don't think people should need to judge every possible communication method individually. It shouldn't matter if he tweets the information, writes it in a press release, says it in an interview with Bloomberg, or says it on Joe Rogan's podcast while smoking pot.
Regardless of the manner that the information is released, it has the potential to affect the company's stock price because people believe that the CEO knows what they're talking about, and that's why the SEC is concerned. There's a reason that practically all other significant CEOs are far more careful about their communications.
I feel that places undue pressure on people and enshrines the cult of personality that does so much damage to business in general. The CEO isn't the company, and should really only be considered...
I feel that places undue pressure on people and enshrines the cult of personality that does so much damage to business in general. The CEO isn't the company, and should really only be considered to be speaking for themselves. There's corporate outlets that are readily available (even if it had to be twitter, which I don't necessarily agree with, have it be a Tesla account). That way people are left free to be people, and not be held so brutally accountable for perfectly reasonable mistakes. What benefit is there to have hordes of high-frequency traders overreacting to the slightest typos in such a low-bandwidth form of communication?
The issue is that even if Twitter is an absurd source for investment information, Elon Musk's tweets still significantly affect Tesla stock. This one is obviously not nearly as bad as his tweets...
The issue is that even if Twitter is an absurd source for investment information, Elon Musk's tweets still significantly affect Tesla stock. This one is obviously not nearly as bad as his tweets last year about Tesla going private that resulted in Tesla stock trading being halted.
People talk BS about autonomous vehicles everyday, when has it significantly affected the stock market? And it's not really about any idiot rambling on Twitter. Elon Musk is the CEO of Tesla, and...
So would someone making up bullshit about research into autonomous vehicles
People talk BS about autonomous vehicles everyday, when has it significantly affected the stock market?
And it's not really about any idiot rambling on Twitter. Elon Musk is the CEO of Tesla, and he's said things that are pretty much insider knowledge. It's no secret that he is concerned about the large number of people shorting Tesla and wants that to end. These tweets are trying to make people believe in Tesla stock. So he's basically trying to manipulate the stock market for personal gain. I think the SEC has every right to be up in his business about it.
I feel like having twitter upheld as a source of investment knowledge to be absolutely absurd. If it was published in something with known integrity like a newspaper or a corporate memorandum/PR release, then sure, it should be actionable, but Musk should be able to say Tesla will make eleventy-squillion cars every Tuesday on Twitter and it should just be accepted anyone using that to justify investment in Tesla stocks is a complete moron.
I'm a huge Musk fan, but to be fair to the non-Musk fans, they did go out of their way to mark Musk's twitter as an official communication venue for Tesla.
Like, they filed it with the SEC in 2013 and everything.
I'm not familiar with that area of law at all (especially in the US), but was that filing a case of 'we want this to be official', or a case of 'we believe this will leave us liable if we don't file it'? Because I don't see any non-liability source of benefit to their doing so.
"We want this to be official."
Any motive?
No clue.
The president of the United States most common form of communication with the public is Twitter. I think it's entered mainstream collective thought enough to be sufficiently regarded as a means of valid (or in the POTUS's case, invalid) information dispersal.
Elon—being the petty child he is—obviously doesn't care.
This is a huge problem, made worse by the fact half of what the rusky says is an outright lie.
If a company's CEO makes statements about that company, I don't think people should need to judge every possible communication method individually. It shouldn't matter if he tweets the information, writes it in a press release, says it in an interview with Bloomberg, or says it on Joe Rogan's podcast while smoking pot.
Regardless of the manner that the information is released, it has the potential to affect the company's stock price because people believe that the CEO knows what they're talking about, and that's why the SEC is concerned. There's a reason that practically all other significant CEOs are far more careful about their communications.
I feel that places undue pressure on people and enshrines the cult of personality that does so much damage to business in general. The CEO isn't the company, and should really only be considered to be speaking for themselves. There's corporate outlets that are readily available (even if it had to be twitter, which I don't necessarily agree with, have it be a Tesla account). That way people are left free to be people, and not be held so brutally accountable for perfectly reasonable mistakes. What benefit is there to have hordes of high-frequency traders overreacting to the slightest typos in such a low-bandwidth form of communication?
The issue is that even if Twitter is an absurd source for investment information, Elon Musk's tweets still significantly affect Tesla stock. This one is obviously not nearly as bad as his tweets last year about Tesla going private that resulted in Tesla stock trading being halted.
So would someone making up bullshit about research into autonomous vehicles, but that isn't (and shouldn't be) actionable.
People talk BS about autonomous vehicles everyday, when has it significantly affected the stock market?
And it's not really about any idiot rambling on Twitter. Elon Musk is the CEO of Tesla, and he's said things that are pretty much insider knowledge. It's no secret that he is concerned about the large number of people shorting Tesla and wants that to end. These tweets are trying to make people believe in Tesla stock. So he's basically trying to manipulate the stock market for personal gain. I think the SEC has every right to be up in his business about it.
I'm pretty sure that if Twitter was to be used as a source of official information, then there are a lot more broken promises to sue over.