General Discussion: 2018 Investor Roundtable

[Todd Burch]

This is the CEO of a 60B public company saying that a veteran reporter was too close to a prominent short-seller and, as a result, paid sources to illegally provide insider information

I know you think this “reporter” is all that.

How many times did the “veteran reporter” seek a response/rebuttal from Tesla before publishing her bulls**t?

I never went further in publishing than my high school paper, but even a freshman in high school knows that a good reporter would seek and report both sides of a story.

You claim that she’s the one being attacked unfairly and without cause. If you don’t see the irony in that, I can’t help you.

 

[mongo]

Hmmm, makes one think. He never says Tripp said it, but asks her to deny paying Tripp. It could be an elaborate trap. I'm gonna go with that for the moment.

In the land of technically correct:
If he didn't ask for money, but she gave him money after he gave her the information, is that contradicted by any statements made thus far?

 

[FirebirdAlpha]

Wow, now you're talking about hard evidence?! Have the author of the hit pieces ever cared about evidence?

If you've been following Business Insider's reporting, it seems that yeah, they're using hard evidence. They've been reporting after reviewing "internal documents," which I count as "hard evidence."

It's a courtesy not to release raw documents, but I'm sure if Elon or Tesla denied the veracity, Business Insider would release the original source material.

 

[electracity]

a) That question basically amounts to "Did you break the law? Did you commit corporate espionage?" It's absurd on its face. What answer could you possibly expect? "Oh, you got me"?

No, that "question" is just a thinly veiled accusation that dodges libel. If he knew it was true, he would have said it as factual: "Why did you pay Tripp?"

b) If they have evidence, why aren't they releasing it?

I want actual evidence that there's some nefarious connection between Tripp/Linette/Chanos connection aiming to take down Tesla.

Right now, it's purely "Elon said" vs "They said."

First, Tripp is likely an idiot who has made contradictory statements. Tesla's attorneys probably have some evidence, perhaps hearsay, that he was paid. Musk asking a public, pointed question isn't a bad way to proceed.

What was Tripp trying to accomplish? Monetizing his actions is certainly the first possibility that comes to mind.

 

[Remus]

If you've been following Business Insider's reporting, it seems that yeah, they're using hard evidence. They've been reporting after reviewing "internal documents," which I count as "hard evidence."

It's a courtesy not to release raw documents, but I'm sure if Elon or Tesla denied the veracity, Business Insider would release the original source material.

I guess our little forum has a big enough effect that there are paid trolls here now. Time to celebrate?

 

[Todd Burch]

If you've been following Business Insider's reporting, it seems that yeah, they're using hard evidence. They've been reporting after reviewing "internal documents," which I count as "hard evidence."

It's a courtesy not to release raw documents, but I'm sure if Elon or Tesla denied the veracity, Business Insider would release the original source material.

I have internal documents that say you’re naive.

 

[FirebirdAlpha]

What was Tripp trying to accomplish? Monetizing his actions is certainly the first possibility that comes to mind.

I don't give Tripp an ounce of credibility. I agree that he seems like an idiot.

But I do give Business Insider and Linette credibility. Business Insider isn't a random blog like electrek or insideevs - this is a massive website, one of the most viewed in the world.

And the Editor-in-Chief of Business Insider has put the entire publication's credibility on the line by standing up for Linette.

The idea that a reporter from Business Insider paid a source is just wrong. It's wrong on several levels. Lorette would know better given her background and training at arguably the best undergraduate journalism program. And Business Insider wouldn't allow it.

-------------------------------------------------------

If Tesla actually had evidence that Linette paid Tripp, why haven't they released it? Why don't they just outright state the accusation rather than masking it in questions?

If they don't have evidence, then what the hell is Elon doing on twitter?

 

[defc0n]

Welp looks like we’ve got ourselves a twitter war with the media folks.

 

[Todd Burch]

Business Insider isn't a random blog like electrek or insideevs - this is a massive website, one of the most viewed in the world.

Yes, because big media organizations never do nefarious things.

 

[FirebirdAlpha]

Yes, because big media organizations never do nefarious things.

Do you really believe that "big media organizations" are conspiring to take down Tesla? The WSJ, Business Insider, etc.?

 

[mongo]

If you've been following Business Insider's reporting, it seems that yeah, they're using hard evidence. They've been reporting after reviewing "internal documents," which I count as "hard evidence."

It's a courtesy not to release raw documents, but I'm sure if Elon or Tesla denied the veracity, Business Insider would release the original source material.

Tell you what, here is a snippet from an internal document obtained from an anonymous source:

"Model 3 Gross Margin for Q2 2018 was 30%. Materials used for GA4 were confirmed to be previous expensed. Non-line R&D spending will resume Q4, in the meantime continue the efficiency improvements. Great job team! P.S. no, Bezos does not have as much stock as I do"

 

[Todd Burch]

Do you really believe that "big media organizations" are conspiring to take down Tesla? The WSJ, Business Insider, etc.?

Not on their own, and probably not as a company either, no.

But I absolutely believe that people from outside those organizations (short sellers, big oil) who have interest in taking them down are providing compensation to people within those organizations for hit pieces.

I know because I have 150,000 miles in a Tesla and have been following them closely sonce 2009, and I know when bullsh*t is bullsh*t.

Have you been following Tesla nearly daily for almost a decade?

Didn’t think so.

 

[AZRI11]

Who’s on first.

I don't know

 

[FirebirdAlpha]

Tell you what, here is a snippet from an internal document obtained from an anonymous source:

"Model 3 Gross Margin for Q2 2018 was 30%. Materials used for GA4 were confirmed to be previous expensed. Non-line R&D spending will resume Q4, in the meantime continue the efficiency improvements. Great job team! P.S. no, Bezos does not have as much stock as I do"

So you're saying that Business Insider committed libel then? They printed something factually untrue when they referred to "internal documents"?

And Tesla should sue them, right?

Come on guys...

Starting to seem like this forum is going full-blown conspiracy mode.

 

[Krugerrand]

Do you really believe that "big media organizations" are conspiring to take down Tesla? The WSJ, Business Insider, etc.?

Those organizations get to stay in business because people and companies pay them to advertise on their behalf and say good things about them. Tesla doesn’t pay them a dime, therefore they have no allegiance to Tesla anymore than they have allegiance to the truth.

Money makes even generally good people do things they might not have done otherwise. And until you’ve been tested in that regard, you have no idea how money can motivate people to bend their ethics and morals.

 

[FirebirdAlpha]

Those organizations get to stay in business because people and companies pay them to advertise on their behalf and say good things about them. Tesla doesn’t pay them a dime, therefore they have no allegiance to Tesla anymore than they have allegiance to the truth.

Money makes even generally good people do things they might not have done otherwise. And until you’ve been tested in that regard, you have no idea how money can motivate people to bend their ethics and morals.

I choose to believe that publications like...

• The Wall Street Journal
• Business Insider
• Market Watch
• The New York Times

... don't **** around with money or advertisers getting anywhere close to their journalists.

I mean, the WSJ took down Theranos while the publication's owner had a massive stake in the company.

The idea that there's some grand conspiracy that includes "big media" is just pure Trumpism.

 

[Krugerrand]

I don't know

Silly. That wasn’t a question. It was a statement. (Punctuation)

 

[Krugerrand]

I choose to believe that publications like...

• The Wall Street Journal
• Business Insider
• Market Watch
• The New York Times

... don't **** around with money or advertisers getting anywhere close to their journalists.

I mean, the WSJ took down Theranos while the publication's owner had a massive stake in the company.

The idea that there's some grand conspiracy that includes "big media" is just pure Trumpism.

Broder

 

[AZRI11]

Silly. That wasn’t a question. It was a statement. (Punctuation)

Second base?

 

[Unpilot]

The ignore button works wonders.