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

[Roel1994]

Hueston says the SEC pretends to be ``shocked'' that Musk gets to decide what is material, but that is exactly what the order says.​

LOL. Hueston takes no prisoners.

Are you following a liveblog of the trial? Would you mind posting a link! Thanks!

 

[Doggydogworld]

Only a 1% stock rise because of this?? Disappointing.

Maybe half the investors want him out of the CEO spot...

Hueston claims the policy gives Musk discretion to decide what's material. Which is the same as no policy at all. If the judge doesn't question him on this obvious point, her mind may already be made up.

 

[Drax7]

The crooked SEC lawyers , practically invertebrates
looking to get credit for destroying tesla.

 

[Unpilot]

Aww Dana...your so...um....not cute:

Dana Hull:
"One of the big questions has always been: Could the SEC seek, or Judge Nathan rule, that Musk should not be CEO?
So far it doesn't appear that is what's at stake. Crumpton has only mentioned the fines."

 

[mongo]

Are you following a liveblog of the trial? Would you mind posting a link! Thanks!

SEC v Musk live blog

Edit: well, it's where I am but is really slow loading a new tab...

 

[Fact Checking]

There is a not a clear enough standard to use the harsh recourse of contempt, Musk's lawyer says. The SEC should have tried to work things out before bringing this matter to court, he adds.​

Super clever! Even if judge Nathan doesn't rule on constitutionality, she is invited here to define a process where the SEC is barred from filing semi-frivolous contempt motions.

This would be a major win for Tesla shareholders, as the SEC couldn't blackmail via motions anymore.

 

[Roel1994]

SEC v Musk live blog

Edit: well, it's where I am but is really slow loading a new tab...

It took a while to load yes but it works now, thanks a lot!

 

[mongo]

“What the SEC should have done was approach in good faith and try to work things out," Hueston says, adding that he believes the judge should invite the parties to do that.

"My intent is not only to invite it but to order it," Judge Nathan replies, indicating that she'll tell the parties to craft a new agreement that incorporates the SEC's concerns.

SOooo.... SEC is going to actually read it this time???

 

[Fact Checking]

'What the SEC should have done was approach in good faith and try to work things out," Hueston says, adding that he believes the judge should invite the parties to do that.

"My intent is not only to invite it but to order it," Judge Nathan replies,​

Wow - this would be a very positive outcome!

 

[sparcs]

"My intent is not only to invite it but to order it," Judge Nathan replies, indicating that she'll tell the parties to craft a new agreement that incorporates the SEC's concerns.

Sounds like more restrictive language will be added to this new agreement. Don't see that as a positive for Elon on Twitter, but it's a decent enough outcome for investors.

 

[MarcusMaximus]

Sounds like more restrictive language will be added to this new agreement. Don't see that as a postive for Elon on Twitter, but it's a decent enough outcome for investors.

Note that only the quote actually came from the judge. The rest was speculation by the reporter.

 

[Fact Checking]

“What the SEC should have done was approach in good faith and try to work things out," Hueston says, adding that he believes the judge should invite the parties to do that.

"My intent is not only to invite it but to order it," Judge Nathan replies, indicating that she'll tell the parties to craft a new agreement that incorporates the SEC's concerns.

SOooo.... SEC is going to actually read it this time???

Note that the "include the SEC concerns" is Bloomberg's spin, it should say: "include Elon's concerns". The judge replied to Hueston, when he outlined the concern of the SEC jumping the gun.

I don't want to jinx it, but this is looking bad for the SEC so far.

 

[sparcs]

Note that only the quote actually came from the judge. The rest was speculation by the reporter.

Thanks! these reporters are sneaky

 

[mrdoubleb]

It is interesting, that for several minutes now they've stopped summarizing the actual hearing and started adding in their editorial snarks. I imagine Musk's team will also utilize their 45 minutes so they continue to speak...

 

[Nocturnal]

I can’t imagine that’s what the team at Tesla was thinking is the biggest use case when they first imagined ES.

Until my car can park itself, I'd say that's definitely the biggest use case.

 

[Tslynk67]

FYI: These links are to a live blog coming from the hearing. The page is loading rather slowly for me (seems stalled at the moment), but giving a good summary of current testimony and questions from the judge.

Not loading for me, must be in denial of service due to huge interest...

Missed this Elon tweet yesterday - part of #CrowGate

Here's an only-sightly-snarky write-up about it: Sheryl Crow gives Elon Musk Tesla advice on Twitter after she gets stuck in a parking lot

 

[Doggydogworld]

'What the SEC should have done was approach in good faith and try to work things out," Hueston says, adding that he believes the judge should invite the parties to do that.

"My intent is not only to invite it but to order it," Judge Nathan replies,​

Wow - this would be a very positive outcome!

As I indicated earlier, her mind is already made up. She's sending them back to the negotiating table to draft a clearer agreement. Big loss for the SEC, who feels the agreement is clear enough.

Can't imagine these negotiations going anywhere, unless the SEC throws in the towel.

 

[Fact Checking]

Thanks! these reporters are sneaky

Absolutely, about the 4th update where they are actively misreporting and spinning.

Also, the printed the SEC's misleading arguments minute by minute - while only a few arguments from Hueston.

Right now there's zero updates for 12+ minutes from Hueston's arguments which are ongoing, just editorializing ...

The moment it was clear that the judge is critical of the SEC's approach they stopped updating - despite both sides having 45 minutes of arguments.

That's Bloomberg reporting for you ...

 

[MP3Mike]

Sounds like more restrictive language will be added to this new agreement. Don't see that as a positive for Elon on Twitter, but it's a decent enough outcome for investors.

But what happens if the SEC, Tesla, and Elon can't come to an agreement? Does the entire settlement about the "funding secured" tweet get thrown out?

 

[mongo]

Note that the "include the SEC concerns" is Bloomberg's spin, it should say: "include Elon's concerns". The judge replied to Hueston, when he outlined the concern of the SEC jumping the gun.

I don't want to jinx it, but this is looking bad for the SEC so far.

Yah, I was willing to overlook that to make a wise crack at SEC's expense...
Geeze 12 minutes since last real update...

It is interesting, that for several minutes now they've stopped summarizing the actual hearing and started adding in their editorial snarks. I imagine Musk's team will also utilize their 45 minutes so they continue to speak...

Or the mike dropped...