MarcusMaximus
Active Member
I also find it interesting that the SEC appears to be arguing that Musk must receive prior approval to certify that statements do not require prior approval.
They say he cannot unilaterally decide what statements need prior approval. That begs the question: who can make that decision?Again, the only reasonable conclusion to the SEC’s logic here is that he should be required to get prior approval before making any statement of any kind.
They argue that Musk’s logic would render the settlement meaningless, but that makes no sense either. The proper way to address the settlement would be to refer to the court any instance where:
1. A statement by Musk appears to cause significant stock movement
2. That statement would reasonably be considered material, given what Musk knew at the time
and
3. Said communication was not approved
That would both fully protect investors(ostensibly the SEC’s mission) and abide by Musk’s understanding of the settlement. And these aren’t unreasonable requirements. #1 allows that Musk might actually know what he’s doing when he thinks something isn’t material, #2 allows that total tangents could end up actually moving the stock and #3 allows him to fall back to a lawyer when he can’t decide.
They say he cannot unilaterally decide what statements need prior approval. That begs the question: who can make that decision?Again, the only reasonable conclusion to the SEC’s logic here is that he should be required to get prior approval before making any statement of any kind.
They argue that Musk’s logic would render the settlement meaningless, but that makes no sense either. The proper way to address the settlement would be to refer to the court any instance where:
1. A statement by Musk appears to cause significant stock movement
2. That statement would reasonably be considered material, given what Musk knew at the time
and
3. Said communication was not approved
That would both fully protect investors(ostensibly the SEC’s mission) and abide by Musk’s understanding of the settlement. And these aren’t unreasonable requirements. #1 allows that Musk might actually know what he’s doing when he thinks something isn’t material, #2 allows that total tangents could end up actually moving the stock and #3 allows him to fall back to a lawyer when he can’t decide.