Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
To futher paraphrase the 26th President of the U.S. Theodore Roosevelt:

"A hobo will steal a ride on a railroad boxcar. A college man will steal the railroad lock, stock and barrel."

Railroads aren't in danger from hobos; it's the drunken 'Frat-Boys' trying to steal the railroad company...

Time to call out the Shore Patrol (SP). IOW, walk softly and carry a Big Stick:

CVN1.TR.Stick.jpg


Word.
 
Last edited:
I think Rob has spoke too quickly. If the Split were complete, wouldn't all "beneficiary owners" of TSLA have their dividend stock by now? Many have not been made whole yet, even though the shares were transmitted on Saturday to "beneficial owners" (only the largest, or institutional shareholders) and "shareholders of record" (most Brokers).

If there is a big drop in the SP over the next couple few days, but before these Blighters "Brokers" deliver these dividend shares, such that rightful TSLA owners miss the opportunity to sell at the ATH, there is going to be the "Mother of All Class Action Lawsuits", Ralph-Nader-esqe in scale.

And the clue is "We haven't received your shares yet from the Transfer Agent". Bee.eSS. You assigned fake shares that you don't own, and now the Transfer Agent is shorting you? That's rich, but you'll soon be poor (or bankrupt).

Word.

Do you have any evidence to back up this theory? It's a pretty wild claim to say that the reason extra shares haven't shown up in accounts at some brokers yet is because these brokers were naked short their clients' assets. This is a really wild theory, that I'm extremely skeptical of.

I have to say that I've lost quite a bit of respect for you over the past few weeks, because of how many theories you've thrown out here with little to no evidence to back them up.

I do appreciate your action reports, and the attention you've brought to likely illegal abuse of naked shorting, but I personally don't think your wild theories with little to no evidence from the past few weeks are helpful.
 
Do you have any evidence to back up this theory? It's a pretty wild claim to say that the reason extra shares haven't shown up in accounts at some brokers yet is because these brokers were naked short their clients' assets. This is a really wild theory, that I'm extremely skeptical of.

I have to say that I've lost quite a bit of respect for you over the past few weeks, because of how many theories you've thrown out here with little to no evidence to back them up.

I do appreciate your action reports, and the attention you've brought to likely illegal abuse of naked shorting, but I personally don't think your wild theories with little to no evidence from the past few weeks are helpful.

I don't really care too much about that. But tell me, how much have you aged this month? ;)

Be honest.

Unless you think my large Canadian Broker got special treatment from Tesla's Transfer Agent on Sat, Aug 29 when all my TSLA Dividend Shares were present and accounted for, but two other large Canadian Brokers have "still have not received their shares from the Transfer Agent"?

Have you even considered that they may be lying?

Be honest.

BTW, your innocence is adorable (but not helpful). Personally.

Word.
 
Last edited:
I don't really care too much about that. But tell me, how much have you aged this month? ;)

Be honest.

Unless you think my large Canadian Broker got special treatment from Tesla's Transfer Agent on Sat, Aug 29 when all my TSLA Dividend Shares were present and accounted for, but two other large Canadian Brokers have "still have not received their shares from the Transfer Agent"?

Have you even considered that they may be lying?

Be honest.

BTW, your innocence is adorable (but not helpful). Personally.

Word.

So what can be done about these brokers not delivering dividends to the shareholders?
First, I assume that my shares have been loaned out to short sellers, even though it was confirmed that they were segregated.
Something definitely needs to be done about this.
 
I read this book last year and at the time my biggest concern was how far can I cut back on living expenses to supercharge my investment.
Now, my concern is whats the best way for a 30 ish year old to get health insurance after quitting his day job. :D
Move to Queensland. The weather is about the same, the people are just as weird and the healthcare is free.
 
Do you have any evidence to back up this theory? It's a pretty wild claim to say that the reason extra shares haven't shown up in accounts at some brokers yet is because these brokers were naked short their clients' assets. This is a really wild theory, that I'm extremely skeptical of.

I have to say that I've lost quite a bit of respect for you over the past few weeks, because of how many theories you've thrown out here with little to no evidence to back them up.

I do appreciate your action reports, and the attention you've brought to likely illegal abuse of naked shorting, but I personally don't think your wild theories with little to no evidence from the past few weeks are helpful.

I have seen enough behind the scenes business and tech processes, functions, and systems in financial institutions that I can say messes are common, even (and perhaps particularly) in larger institutions. Primary reasons are poor systems, non-documented and poorly trained processes, short-cuts (no pun intended), bad communication, lack of follow-up, and non-accountability. Compliance only goes so far and many do as little as possible to remain in business. Outright fraud? Maybe, I would hope not, but really would not surprise me that much. Greed sometimes makes good people do questionable things.
 
I don't really care too much about that. But tell me, how much have you aged this month? ;)

Be honest.

Unless you think my large Canadian Broker got special treatment from Tesla's Transfer Agent on Sat, Aug 29 when all my TSLA Dividend Shares were present and accounted for, but two other large Canadian Brokers have "still have not received their shares from the Transfer Agent"?

Have you even considered that they may be lying?

Be honest.

BTW, your innocence is adorable (but not helpful). Personally.

Word.
Who cares if they're lying? So long as nobody gets cheated, it doesn't much matter what they say.

If they were really dishonest scum, all your money would be gone. Or at least somebody's would. But it's all just fine.
 
Unless you think my large Canadian Broker got special treatment from Tesla's Transfer Agent on Sat, Aug 29 when all my TSLA Dividend Shares were present and accounted for, but two other large Canadian Brokers have "still have not received their shares from the Transfer Agent"?

There are so many other possible explanations. To take this piece of information (I wouldn't even call it evidence) and conclude that all brokers who have not credited the dividend shares yet are all naked short their clients' assets is extremely faulty logic.
  1. If they were naked short some shares before, why wouldn't they just update positions and continue to be naked short those shares?
  2. A number of brokers mentioned weeks ago that it would take longer than the 31st for shares to show up in accounts. If I recall correctly, @Lycanthrope 's Belgian broker told him this a few weeks ago when he inquired about taxes?
  3. Some brokers may not deal in US stocks directly, and therefore may be experiencing delays in confirming everything. I know my Japanese broker, that I used a couple of years ago, had all US stock trades handled by a 3rd party.
  4. Perhaps the brokers in question have received the shares, but their computer systems aren't as good, and it requires more time and effort to update everything on their end. It's not just the # of shares, but also cost bases, P&Ls, options positions, etc. that need to be updated.
  5. Maybe the transfer agent really is very slow and only some brokers have received shares thus far, or maybe only some brokers are comfortable letting their clients trade shares that they will not officially receive until 1-2 days later.
This is similar to a few weeks ago, when you concluded based off of a quickly rising stock price that naked shorts must be getting screwed over by the stock dividend. In my opinion these things can't even be called evidence for the conclusions you're drawing. At best they're pieces of information that make the theories a little more likely.
 
Last edited:
The Naked Short Selling arguments have been enlightening for me, leading me to those independent articles written almost a decade ago about what happened with Lehman back in the day, and how it took several years for the SEC to do anything about it, that I posted upthread earlier today. BTW, the SEC action was far too late to save Lehman, which many rightfully argue would have failed anyway, but that doesn't mean no harm no foul.

OTOH, Occam's Razor would say the simpler explanation of incompetence at some brokerages is a more likely explanation of what's going on. Which I guess is why Hanlon's Razor is: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

I don't know nearly enough to know what's really going on - could even be some of both I guess. Neither explanation if proven would be surprising, right? There's plenty of incompetence in this world and there's far too much fraud going on as well. Can you imagine the balls on Bernie to argue with the SEC and get them to name a new rule in his honor, all the while he is conducting his ponzi scheme? You'd think he'd try to have a low profile or something.
 
Be careful. Lots of choices, prices, and possible rip-offs. If you have a friend that sells health insurance, might be worth a lunch to learn more. I’m in CA and my wife and I have gold PPO, one of the more expensive plans, and it runs $3k/month. I am 59 so I have a few more years of this before medicare. Some sell group plans for an organization you can join and pay dues. Some sell alternative health share plans (not insurance) and claim they are much cheaper. I tried one of these for a very short time before going with a large provider and traditional PPO. Best to do your homework before making a decision. This is my single largest living expense in post traditional 9-5 world.

I bought my PPO Gold from Blue Shield California as an individual (I dont have a job, not through a company based plan) and it costs 1.9k per month for my wife, myself and my son (4 year old). I am 34 and no big medical history. It is about 20% of our family spending every month.