596
Judge finds evidence that Tesla, Musk knew about Autopilot defect
(www.reuters.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2023
596 points (97.9% liked)
Technology
60047 readers
1629 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Which means, $20bn in Twitter seemed a better investment than keeping them in Tesla. I don't know what would be funnier, that he was right or that he was wrong with that gamble.
he never intended to buy Twitter though. He just wanted to manipulate the stock by saying that he’s going to buy it and then dump his shares at a higher price. He thought he could get away with that, because the SEC wouldn’t do shit. Like the time he said that he found a buyer for a Tesla. But then Twitter sued him and the judge forced the sale onto him.
From memory I think it still had to go to trial and he had a good chance of weaseling his way out of it. Apparently there was a lot of stuff that would have come out in discovery so what ever was in there was bad enough that he preferred to take a really bad deal than let people find out what ever he’s been up to. For money grub musk that must have been very bad to lose money in favour of maintaining his privacy.
He didn't sell the Tesla stock. He used it as collateral to borrow the money. Rich people rarely sell their things while they are alive. They borrow against their fortune because if they sell, they have to pay capital gains taxes.
Borrowing with stocks as collateral should be taxed at the capital gains rate
He did sell the stock, like $23 billion worth. He entered the agreement to buy Twitter to show that he had another use for that cash, so that Tesla investors didn't get spooked and sell off when they see the biggest shareholder selling (along with the downward price pressure that comes from selling a significant percentage of a company's stock).
There was some speculation at the time that he entered the agreement with Twitter with no intention to close, just to cover his desire to cash out of Tesla at its high. Then the courts actually held him to that.
Technically he had a way out. He could pay 1bn to cancel the contract, but he didn't. Again, very funny if he overpaid so much to make everybody think he's so smart when he dad a "cheap" out
No he didn't. The 1 billion fine was not a "get out of the contract" option.
https://techcrunch.com/2022/04/26/elon-musks-twitter-deal-includes-a-1-billion-termination-fee-on-both-sides/
There is an excerpt of the agreement in there. Seems pretty clear to me, but I'm open to hear your interpretation.
The 1 billion termination fee only applied in very specific circumstances. He couldn't just choose to pay it because he didn't want to go ahead with the purchase.
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/13/elon-musk-cant-just-walk-away-from-twitter-deal-by-paying-1-billion.html
Edit: Well, to be clear he actually he could decide to pay 1 billion and walk away but he would be opening himself up to a multi-billion dollar lawsuit from Twitter for breaking the contract.
See, if he’d done that, he would have looked bad, and he couldn’t have that. He wanted out, but only if he could have the out not look like he was the one backing out. He needed it to be Twitter’s fault, same way as he’s trying to blame anyone by himself for advertisers fleeing.
It’s the big tech version of trumps presidential campaign then, basically.