SEC pursuing a contempt charge for tweet

[JRP3]

500K was previously provided, nothing to correct.

 

[Matt L]

500K was previously provided, nothing to correct.

No it wasn’t.

 

[JRP3]

350-500K was previously mentioned, which obviously includes the number 500K. Simple fact.

 

[gnuarm]

And both would be guidance different than previously provided...and in need of correction.

Except even that is not the issue really. The issue is that Musk has been paying lip service to the SEC agreement and this was the clear proof of it. What Mush tweets is supposed to be reviewed and censored by Tesla. Obviously that isn't happening. Hence the request for a contempt of court ruling.

 

[gnuarm]

350-500K was previously mentioned, which obviously includes the number 500K. Simple fact.

If indeed they were the same, why say it one way at one time and another way another time. Also, if there was nothing wrong with saying 500k, why "correct" it?

 

[JRP3]

Except even that is not the issue really. The issue is that Musk has been paying lip service to the SEC agreement and this was the clear proof of it. What Mush tweets is supposed to be reviewed and censored by Tesla. Obviously that isn't happening. Hence the request for a contempt of court ruling.

Musk is not required to have every tweet reviewed.

 

[JRP3]

If indeed they were the same, why say it one way at one time and another way another time. Also, if there was nothing wrong with saying 500k, why "correct" it?

Probably bad advice from a lawyer, who is now no longer with the company.

 

[Matt L]

350-500K was previously mentioned, which obviously includes the number 500K. Simple fact.

Lol, wow.

Where did the 350k go in the second version? Are you so blind that you can't see the difference?

 

[JRP3]

Please point me to the legal quantitative definition of "around".

 

[gnuarm]

Musk is not required to have every tweet reviewed.

His tweets and all other public communications regarding the company are required to be "censored" or "reviewed" depending on the source.

Musk settled with the SEC in September 2018 in response to a dubious $70 billion privatization claim. He had to step down as Tesla chairman for three years and pay a $20 million fine. Tesla also paid a $20 million fine, and adopted new governance rules, including the addition of a securities expert/Twitter censor to prevent less-than-accurate and potentially market-moving social media statements.

greentechmedia

Musk and Tesla agreed to a settlement that let him keep his CEO job, but he had to resign as chairman. He and the company also paid fines totaling $40 million, added two independent board members and agreed that Musk’s tweets about Tesla would be reviewed before he posted them.

Forbes

So which tweets are you saying don't need to be reviewed first?

I think a lot of misfortunes could be averted by clever management in Tesla. But I think Musk himself is one misfortune that no one seems to be able to do anything about.

If the SEC didn't think they had the goods to move forward on this issue, they wouldn't be doing it. I think Musk is in trouble this time.

 

[JRP3]

So which tweets are you saying don't need to be reviewed first?

Tweets which are not about previously unreleased material information. If it was already public information it need not be reviewed again.
Clearly Elon was simply making general comparisons about where the company was previously and where it is now, it was not material and not market moving, but the SEC witch hunt certainly was. SEC is supposed to protect shareholder value yet they keep doing the opposite. They are corrupt.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Tweets which are not about previously unreleased material information. If it was already public information it need not be reviewed again.
Clearly Elon was simply making general comparisons about where the company was previously and where it is now, it was not material and not market moving, but the SEC witch hunt certainly was. SEC is supposed to protect shareholder value yet they keep doing the opposite. They are corrupt.

It was different to the guidance. He tweeted 500k, guidance gave a range of 350-500k. Essentially his tweet could be taken as an implication that production would be towards the high end of the guided range.

So, I'd say it is material and that's why the SEC jumped on it.

But, I agree that it was clearly not meant to be material. But the SEC agreement is about curbing his carelessness or recklessness, and he was careless. But it was out of hours, and was corrected out of hours so I think he'll just be fined.

 

[gnuarm]

Tweets which are not about previously unreleased material information. If it was already public information it need not be reviewed again.
Clearly Elon was simply making general comparisons about where the company was previously and where it is now, it was not material and not market moving, but the SEC witch hunt certainly was. SEC is supposed to protect shareholder value yet they keep doing the opposite. They are corrupt.

LOL! Of course this can be material and market moving. If a company says a number can be 350k to 500k, then later says it is 500k, that's a HUGE difference! A stock can rise a great deal on removing this degree of uncertainty.

You seem to be delusional about the role of the SEC. Are you actually Musk?

Ok, whatever. It doesn't matter what you and I think. It only matters what Musk did and what the judge says. I don't think this is going to go well, myself. Be prepared for a Muskless Tesla.

 

[JRP3]

LOL! Of course this can be material and market moving. If a company says a number can be 350k to 500k, then later says it is 500k, that's a HUGE difference! A stock can rise a great deal on removing this degree of uncertainty.

"Around" 500K is not saying it's 500K, and the stock "moved" 14 cents after hours.

You seem to be delusional about the role of the SEC. Are you actually Musk?

Ok, whatever. It doesn't matter what you and I think. It only matters what Musk did and what the judge says. I don't think this is going to go well, myself. Be prepared for a Muskless Tesla.

Talk about delusional...

 

[JRP3]

He tweeted 500k

No he didn't. See my above post.

 

[The Rookie]

Written guidance was 360-400k, in the call Elon said 350-500k, if you listen to the recording he seems disinterested and bored and it was widely assumed that he had ‘miss spoke’ with numbers at odds with the written guidance (which of course tallies with the second tweet) so it’s hard to say it wasn’t material, regardless anything that COULD BE material he was meant to be having checked, he agreed to that and it’s admitted it wasn’t happening. Ultimately the Judge will decide but as she has asked Tesla/Elon for a response rather than dismissing the complaint it shows she believes there is a Prima Facie case to answer.

He could be in further trouble for the ‘unoffical’ profit warning on Thursday as well, in fact much worse trouble.

The tweets, sure looks like he tweeted 500,000 for this year.
https://specials-images.forbesimg.com/imageserve/5c748b2431358e35dd273bf7/960x0.jpg?fit=scale

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

No he didn't. See my above post.

"Around 500k" is not "500k plus or minus 150k". That is a lot different from 350k-500k, which couldn't even be described as 425k.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

No he didn't. See my above post.

"Around 500k" is not "500k plus or minus 150k". That is a lot different from 350k-500k, which couldn't even be described as around 425k.

Even if he tweeted 500k, nobody would take that as an exact number.

 

[JRP3]

The tweets, sure looks like he tweeted 500,000 for this year.

"Around 500k" is not "500k plus or minus 150k".

It's also not 500K. What is the correct value to apply to "around"?

 

[gnuarm]

"Around 500k" is not "500k plus or minus 150k". That is a lot different from 350k-500k, which couldn't even be described as around 425k.

Even if he tweeted 500k, nobody would take that as an exact number.

No one other than the SEC perhaps. lol