lorenfb wrote: lorenfb wrote:
GRA wrote:Sure the fine was a small portion of his wealth (BTW, he owns about 20% of Tesla, not 40%) but the terms of the settlement included:
I consider it unrealistic to expect the SEC to allow Elon to go on as before with just a slap on the wrist, so I fully expect them to monitor future corporate communications closely.
So it's you that feels it's unrealistic
, right? Have you seen specific/enumerated SEC guidelines for Musk, other than what
you've stated? With regard to a new chairman, Musk still has significant influence over that decision and significant influence
over the new chairman's decisions. Besides, the SEC has no control over who the next chairman is. As still CEO, Musk has the all
authority to fully run Tesla based on his strategy and views. So what if Musk no longer communicates about financial decisions
and pro-forma data, he still can communicate, e.g. tweet, about basically everything else about Tesla. The SEC has no control over
what he tweets about his strategy/goals for Tesla as a CEO. Yes Musk has an ego, but it's doubtful that the SEC's ruling has affected
that much and will not significantly curb his modus operandi, i.e. he'll have plenty of wiggle room.
Well, so much for my previous view, i.e. now he's tweeting stupid comments about the SEC. The guy is a joke & HOPELESS!
We in SoCal had a few state facilities for guys like Musk, until they were closed down during the Reagan administration.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/05/tesla-s ... itter.html
Musk sent the tweet referring to the "Shortseller Enrichment Commission" hours after the judge handling his settlement agreement with the SEC ordered both parties to explain why the court should approve it.
Since nothing in these tweets is illegal, it seems more a freedom of speech issue, and thus outside the SEC's purview. Dumb and unnecessary, sure, but not something that requires regulation, unlike making claims about non-existent funding. That's where he really needs to be muzzled, and where he will be (or the SEC won't just give him a relatively small penalty).
Tesla CEO Elon Musk's use of Twitter is dangerous and needs to be controlled by the company's board — but he hasn't done anything to create another problem with the Securities and Exchange Commission, former SEC Chair Harvey Pitt told CNBC on Friday. . . .
"It demonstrates why the SEC was spot on in requiring as part of its settlement with Musk that the board exercise meaningful control over his tweets," Pitt said in an interview with "Power Lunch."
"But this tweet, as silly and obnoxious as it is, does not do anything other than express his erroneous view. It doesn't relate to the securities laws, and it doesn't even relate to his settlement. So he's allowed to express his views . . . ."[/list]
However, the agreement hit a snag on Thursday after the federal judge assigned to approve it asked the parties to justify the settlement.
Pitt said it's entirely possible the judge may ask Tesla attorneys exactly how they intend to control Musk's tweets.
"This is now a real issue for the judge," he said. . . .
Pitt said Musk's latest tweet on the SEC riles up investors and makes them "worry about the rationality of the person who is supposed to be running this company."
"His tweets are precipitous, mercurial and dangerous [but] … it's up to the board to try and figure out how they can cabin these impulses he seems to have while making use of his creative genius," he said.
Musk must be listening to somebody, whether Mark Cuban https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/04/mark-cuban-nudged-elon-musk-to-settle-with-sec.html
or someone else, as they convinced him to take a worse deal from the SEC one day after he'd rejected a better one, and that's with only two directors on the board who can be considered independent. Musk's tantrum about the SEC just reinforces the need for adult supervision, and outside investors will likely be the ones to force it, assuming Tesla can't make its upcoming debt payments without further help.