Is It Primarily Short-Sellers Leading The Anti-Tesla Media Crusade?

JUN 28 2018 BY EVANNEX 76


The ongoing onslaught of anti-Tesla articles in the press surely stems from many sources and yes, some of these are doubtless legitimate journalists who are simply describing the situation as they see it. However, it’s widely believed that much of the mud, especially the (seemingly hourly) articles that focus on financial and stock-market topics, originates with short sellers, who stand to gain serious money if TSLA stock falls.

*This article comes to us courtesy of EVANNEX (which also makes aftermarket Tesla accessories). Authored by Charles Morris. The opinions expressed in these articles are not necessarily our own at InsideEVs.

Above: Tesla’s Model S (Instagram: pdespati)

That’s obviously the belief of Elon Musk, who alternates between taunting the short sellers and vilifying them – he has a personal grudge against those who would sabotage his altruistic mission for financial gain. But are the short sellers really the ones stirring up all the FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt)? A recent series of posts by Tesla Motors Club member jesselivenomore presents compelling evidence that the shorts are following a tried-and-true playbook that they’ve used to attack other companies in the past.

Jesse relays the story (originally chronicled in The Divide by Matt Taibbi) of Canadian insurance company Fairfax Financial, which was listed on the NYSE in 2002. Jim Chanos, an investor well-known in financial circles for exposing Enron, decided to bet against Fairfax. “Chanos evangelized his belief in Fairfax’s shortcomings, and by the end of 2002 a slew of other hedge fund titans followed suit,” jesselivenomore writes. In 2003, a report from investment bank Morgan Keegan asserted that Fairfax was insolvent, and the stock plummeted by 25% the next day.

“Extraordinarily, this report was written by a rookie analyst, John Gwynn, who just came from Trinity, one of the hedge funds who made a huge bet against Fairfax,” writes Jesse. “The collective hedge funds may have initially genuinely believed that Fairfax was corrupt or incompetent, but their even stronger belief was that enough bad press and market momentum would crater the firm. Chanos’s own words: ‘With a financial services company like Fairfax, it can all be self-fulfilling. If the market finally decides the glass isn’t half full anymore, the trouble starts… you can see the stock go into a waterfall.’” In this case, the waterfall didn’t flow. Questions surfaced about the accuracy of the Morgan Keegan report, and Fairfax shortly released a positive financial report that propelled the stock back up.

Over the next three years, Fairfax was dogged by accusations of fraud sent to rating agencies, regulators and business partners. According to jesselivenomore, “Nearly all of these troubles could be traced back to Spyro Contogouris, a man hired by [Chanos and his allies] to ‘bring down Fairfax.’ Contogouris’s strategy would be to sink Fairfax by ‘closing access to the capital markets’ – cutting off its access to funding by undermining its reputation.”

By late July in 2006, Fairfax began to circle the drain – the stock price plummeted as rating agencies, the SEC and even the FBI were knocking at the door. Rather than accept its fate, Fairfax filed a lawsuit, and this ultimately saved the firm, according to Jesse. “The detailed response about all the allegations spooked short investors who [had] jumped on the bandwagon with Chanos and the rest. According to discovery materials, some of these investors were all but assured that Fairfax was about to be busted by authorities at any moment and was sure to go out of business. So when Fairfax was gearing up for a long legal battle instead of just rolling over, it didn’t seem to be the behavior of a guilty company. The short sellers began to cover.”

And where are they now? During its near-death experience in 2006, Fairfax’s share price reached a low of $100. On June 15, 2018, the stock closed at an all-time high of $775.

Above: Author Matt Taibbi chronicled how Fairfax tangled with short sellers in his book, The Divide (Image: Penguin Random House)

A few years later, it seems that Chanos and colleagues employed the same strategy against SolarCity. SolarCity’s original business model didn’t involve manufacturing solar panels – rather, it created a leasing model that made it feasible for homeowners to install solar systems. In essence, it was a financial company: as Jesse puts it, “an arbitrage firm that profited from the difference between their borrow rate and their leasing rate to their customers.”

It wasn’t hard to spin an arcane financial narrative that made this sound like a Ponzi scheme, or “a subprime lender.” When Chanos announced his short position in August 2015, his thesis was that SolarCity’s customers could stop paying their bills at any moment, as Jesse explains. “This [ignored] the fact that SolarCity customers had an average FICO score of 750, compared to below 620 to be considered subprime. Not to mention [that] defaulting on payments to SolarCity would make no financial sense, because reverting back to your utility would cost more.”

SolarCity and the entire solar industry did have real problems at the time, including uncertainty about demand, and about the renewal of the Federal Investment Tax Credit. Jesse concedes that SCTY stock would have gone down with or without short sellers. “But what Chanos was doing was exactly what he described in his own words about Fairfax – he was taking advantage of a bad situation, and using fear to create a ‘crisis of confidence.’”

Following the Fairfax playbook, Gordon Johnson, a solar analyst at Axiom Capital, initiated coverage of SolarCity with a Sell rating and went on to publish a steady stream of pessimistic reports. When SolarCity became part of Tesla, Johnson shifted his bearish gaze thither. According to Jesse, Johnson’s TSLA price target of $99 is the lowest on the Street, and he is “constantly” on CNBC, repeating the popular (and demonstrably false) thesis that Tesla loses money on every car it sells.

According to Jesse, the same “bad actors” who tried to take down Fairfax and SolarCity are now targeting Tesla. He doesn’t object to short selling in principle, but believes that there is something more sinister at work here: ordinarily, speculators take short positions because they legitimately believe a company is in trouble. However, Jesse believes that most of the 40 million shares, or over $12 billion dollars, currently betting against Tesla are controlled by raiders who are out to bring the company down by stirring up FUD and triggering a self-reinforcing downward spiral.

Above: Lyndon Rive and Elon Musk discussing SolarCity (Image: The Drive)

Jesse makes his case with detailed play-by-plays of some of Tesla’s major stock moves over the past few years. The financially inclined can read his posts in their entirety, but to summarize, he points out that, whereas logically short interest should increase when the stock is high, this has not in fact been the case. Major spikes in short interest have coincided with specific events, including the SCTY acquisition, suggesting that there were coordinated attacks.

Predatory short sellers target financial and insurance companies because they depend on the capital markets. Because Tesla is investing so much cash in future prospects – more than it can replenish from sales of Models S and X – it has become much like a financial company and is vulnerable to short sellers and market sentiment (and market sentiment caused by short sellers). In Jesse’s view, the greatest threat to Tesla is not the legacy automakers or delays in Model 3 production. “It is the massive amount of capital betting against him steered by bad actors with malicious intent and an incriminating history.”

However, there’s a way out. If Tesla can start generating profit and positive cash flow, it will be able to finance its operations through earnings and will be much less beholden to capital markets. “The way to break from the short sellers’ influence is by becoming self-sustaining,” writes Jesse. “When you no longer need to sell stock to survive, you don’t care how high or low your stock goes. When you no longer need to raise debt to survive, you don’t care which agencies short sellers can manipulate.”

This could be the reason that Tesla seems to have made achieving profitability a priority. Recent moves such as laying off large numbers of non-production employees and requiring Musk’s personal approval for major capital investments are aimed not just at stanching the flow of red ink, but at turning it black. “If Tesla becomes self-sustaining, the shorts would lose their effect and therefore lose their purpose. It is my hope that once this happens the short interest will disperse and Tesla would be free from these attacks.”

Even if this comes to pass, Tesla will still need massive amounts of capital for the foreseeable future – 10 Gigafactories, the Semi, the Roadster and Model Y aren’t likely to be financed from earnings alone. “The difference is [that] when you are a self-sustaining company, you can raise capital on your own terms.”

Tesla is no ordinary company. Its mission is to accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable energy and transportation, and there are plenty of extremely powerful players who don’t want that to happen. However the battle with the short sellers plays out, Tesla’s history will continue to be one of struggle against long odds.


Written by: Charles Morris; Source: TMC’s @jesselivenomore via The Divide by Matt Taibbi

*Editor’s Note: EVANNEX, which also sells aftermarket gear for Teslas, has kindly allowed us to share some of its content with our readers, free of charge. Our thanks go out to EVANNEX. Check out the site here.

Categories: Tesla

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

76 Comments on "Is It Primarily Short-Sellers Leading The Anti-Tesla Media Crusade?"

newest oldest most voted

From article: “Is It Primarily Short-Sellers Leading The Anti-Tesla Media Crusade?”

Yes … along with UAW.

Anyone else you don’t like?

PragerU ?

I’m with you on this one. The audacity to call themselves a “university”!

Sure, there are others creating and promoting anti-Tesla propaganda and FUD. For example, right-wingnut think tanks promoting Big Oil propaganda. Let’s not forget that Mitt Romney called Tesla one of President Obama’s “failures” during a presidential campaign debate. Do you think Romney came up with the idiotic claim that Tesla is a “failure” on his own? Nope, he was parroting hard-right wingnut talking points.

There are also a lot of people who are almost insanely jealous of Elon Musk; his wealth, his many successes, and his popularity. And at least a few for whom we can remove the word “almost”.

Yes Russian Trolls

More than just trolls. Russia has demonstrated they have the resources to invisibly steer special interests, like the UAW, in the direction they needed.

Enough coordinated efforts like that and Putin wouldn’t even need to ask an oligarch buddy to toss a couple billion into the short pot.

Tesla breaks, all the shorts make money, and SpaceX loses a chunk of future funding.

I can afford to lose my entire investment, and I’ll be damned if I pull out. Doesn’t matter to me.

Anti-EV oil industry folks use Tesla as a proxy to attack the entire EV industry. It is well documented, like right here on Insideev’s:

I’m not surprised at all that the Koch brothers are attacking EVs. I was just put off by the notion that UAW is funding anti-Tesla propaganda. There is absolutely no evidence of this as far as I know.

@prsnep said: “ …I was just put off by the notion that UAW is funding anti-Tesla propaganda. There is absolutely no evidence of this as far as I know.”

“UAW part of anti-Tesla campaign… Such a campaign is currently in full bloom against automaker Tesla, which has been targeted by the United Auto Workers (UAW) union. The UAW spent at least a half-million dollars on its Tesla campaign in 2017…” source: The Detroit News

What’s amusing is something works until it doesn’t. Well the campaign versus Tesla is just not working.
Does it exist, yes. Is it primarily run by Chanos, Einhorn, Hedge Funds, and others, using, colluding with the media to establish and continually reiterate their claims, seemingly at will, and at critical times, that Tesla must fail. Oh and throw in few analysts from big name firms to cast aspersions on their financial viability, and you have your tried and true recipe to hobble a company.

Chanos says Tesla is worthless. I think I have a very different idea of what is worthless. Of course there are things worse than being worthless, you could have been listening to Jim Chanos on Tesla, and lost your ass.

Btw Jesse Livermore, the Boy Plunger, was a famous short-seller. He shorted the 1929 Market, just before it crashed and was known as the most hated man in America, as many felt he caused the Great Depression, which was untrue.
So the jesselivesnomore is a play on his name.

Yes, there are a number of financial measures that show Tesla is on target, disruptive and the future of the auto industry.

Investors in Mr. Chanos’s fund really need to REEVALUATE their placement of money in that fund. Mr. Chanos’s track record and judgement really need to be questioned.

But Evannex is a neutral and objective on server, right?

It’s a bad joke they’re allowed space to discuss this topic.

Evanex didn’t write this. They are just the conduit. What problem do you have with these actual authors:

Written by: Charles Morris; Source: TMC’s @jesselivenomore via The Divide by Matt Taibbi

Seems to me the shorter’s only weapon is FUD disseminated by what ever outlet will publish their BS. But…we live in an age in which Trump got elected despite wall to wall media warnings and despite the avalanche of anti-Tesla FUD Tesla is still trading at stratospheric levels. My take: people have been lied to by the media too often and at this point they don’t take the media all that seriously anymore. This is even more true for childish manipulation websites like Seeking Alpha (the very name is a lie, nobody shares alpha info, the whole point of prime info is to exploit it for yourself) .Since the press doesn’t really control people’s minds anymore I think the shorters are playing a risky game.

So I think Tesla will be fine in an age in which the media no longer control the narrative. Well, maybe people should have taken those bad stories about Trump a bit more seriously, it’s not like the media lie all the time, just most of the time, the trick is to know when…

The problem is that much of the financial media is happy to be lied to, and WILLFULLY republish lies.

1) I’m short (but in a complex way)
2) I fully support EVs & renewable energy & am investing in a plastics recycling business
3) I work in finance and play long and short in oil companies
4) I think dieselgate deserves lengthy jail sentences
This is a weak strawman
Fairfax as a finance company needed constant access to funding hence the activism mattered.
Tesla, if it’s manufacturing was profitable and its CEO didn’t borrow against his holdings, “FUD” wouldn’t matter in the slightest.
I’m concerned that Tesla might be what the shorts think it is and will damage the image of EVs and energy storage businesses as unprofitable subsidy consumers.
I hope he succeeds but my training says it’s absurdly overvalued and needs a big capital infusion hence the capital markets are really really important to the company.
That’s why I’m short.

The financial abyss is I think one of the main arguments against Tesla but….

Model 3 production is taking off now after what in the grand scheme of things was actually just a pretty minor delay on a launch timeline that nobody, including Elon Musk thought was remotely realistic anyway, generating the cash Tesla needs. Tesla is now producing EVs on a scale that’s completely unprecedented.

The delays are irksome but completely compensated by the proven demand for its products. Lack of demand is what kills companies, not these minor production delays. The competition has no answer to Model 3, not even concept cars yet.

..and if all else fails:

Elon Musk is a great fund raiser and with billions of funds hovering above a zero percent base rate market desperately looking for any chance of a decent return he should have no trouble raising more funds if needed.

So good luck with your short position but If people don’t believe the media anymore what chances do you have posting fud in comment sections?

Just remember: it’s only money and if you lose it all in a short squeeze it will still help people like Elon Musk who live for more than just money.

“I hope he succeeds but my training says it’s absurdly overvalued and needs a big capital infusion… That’s why I’m short.”

I get the impression that it’s not the fact that people are “shorting” TSLA that bothers Elon. It’s the fact that so many short sellers are spreading so much FUD (i.e., outright intentional lies and half-truths) all over the internet in a very obvious naked attempt to manipulate the stock price.

I personally have no problem with people “shorting” TSLA. As I understand it, shorting stock is a necessary and healthy part of the stock market.

But I don’t think there is even 10% as much FUD spread around about any other company as Tesla. And most of that FUD originates with a certain kind of TSLA short-seller. Pretty obviously you’re not one of that kind, so I apologize if you’re getting tarred with the same brush. It’s too bad that there are so many FUDster spouting TLSA short-sellers that they have given all TSLA short-sellers a bad name. 🙁

Tesla needs new capital to *grow* — like any other company that grows at a fast rate. Tesla growing fast is important for accelerating the transition to sustainable transport. For that reason, I don’t want Tesla to slow down their growth.

Of course your stance is a self-fulfilling prophecy: if Tesla would actually slow their growth, then indeed it *would* be overvalued, as the valuation is based entirely on growth prospects…

Luckily, serious investors are not so easily dissuaded from trusting in Tesla’s growth potential.

I don’t think it’s just short sellers. Fossil fuel interests have persuaded some conservatives, mainly older ones, that cleantech, renewable energy etc are a threat to their identity. Almost any news article about climate change, renewable energy, EVs etc that allows comments attracts a flood of hateful nonsense.

The Koch-Heads are heavily funding and coordinating a very large-scale campaign against all things Green as well as the radical-right takeover of the government too.

The Koch’s are in the worst carbon position of all. Tar Sand investment was insane the first day they put dollar one into it. It will always be the least profitable carbon play, of all time.

Concur; tell all one’s friends not to be *Koch Suckers*.

True, there’s no one under 50 invested in oil.

As an Accountant, I can tell you that there are A LOT of people over 50 that are!

Yes, there are some who have a lot to lose from the shift away from fossil fuels, such as the Koch brothers. People who short a stock have as much to gain from a fall in the stock price as people who “back” a stock (that is, bet it will go up) have to gain from a rise. The main difference is that when a stock is shorted, you can in theory lose an unlimited amount of money, whereas you can GAIN an unlimited amount of money when betting a stock will go up. This is simply because there’s no theoretical upper limit for the rise of a stock, but it cannot fall more than 100%. So if I sell you ten shares at $100 a piece today that I don’t have, my best case is that the stock falls to zero, so that I can cover the sale for free and pocket the $1000 you paid for the shares. Conversely, if the stock rises to $1,000 I must buy the ten shares to cover my sale, which costs me $10k; I lose $9,000 on my $1,000 sale. If instead I buy a stock for $1,000 it’s the opposite situation… Read more »

“Short of outright sabotage of the business’ operations …”. For companies involved in financial services, that’s EXACTLY what spreading false rumors are. A crisis of confidence dries up funding for the financial services company. And access to funds is part of operating that business. So yes, generating FUD to profit your short-sale is significantly different.

Did you NOT read the article? Or did you just not understand it?

“Short of outright sabotage of the business’ operations I don’t believe short sellers have any more influence over price than long buyers.”

So many words, so little fact-based information or understanding.

I would say it’s likely. You can almost sense the desperation in some of these articles, it’s hilarious.

Are there real, practical reasons for down-voting this comment?

I suspect those who down-voted the comment don’t understand that the phrase “these articles” refers to the sort of anti-Tesla FUD blog posts called “articles” which often appear at Seeking Alpha, mostly written by short-sellers.

Yes meant the negative articles in the media, not this article on

Mass EV adoption will decimate the Russian economy. You can be sure they are running a massive disinformation campaign to slow EV adoption.

The trick is to get people to believe you in this age of almost unlimited source access. For instance: big time Tesla shorter Jim Chanos is a slick talker and CNBC is a willing platform for his FUD but when it comes to Tesla there is always somebody going to make a production out of debunking his lies and manipulations:

No doubt that’s why all his clever tricks haven’t gotten him very far.

Isn’t Russia mostly exporting natural gas rather than oil?

No doubt adoption of renewables puts a damper on that. (Especially once storage eliminates most need for peaker plants…) But I don’t see how EV adoption would affect Russia’s economy?

Or, it could just be those of us worried about inefficient, fossil-fueled cars like Models S, 3, X…

Keep in mind that an IONIQ will deliver twice the miles of a Model S, and do so with less carbon emissions than a Prius.
i3, LEAF and BOLT are, similarly, great choices.

What are you talking about?

Oh wait, am I feeding the trolls? No soup for you! Come back, one week.

I guess “Captain Blood” thought we needed a real live example of Tesla hater FUD… as if there isn’t already too much of that.

Really? No one in a BMW 3 series is going to replace it with an IONIQ. Keep your perspective.

Oh many already have. You’re failing to account for the narrow selection of EVs on the market. In Norway a lot of people have bought an EV that is a very different car to what they’d have chosen if they’d bought an ICE instead. Anyone who regularly use the back seats might have been more likely to get an Ioniq than an i3 (though I’ve seen people praise its rear doors, including the fact they cannot open without the front doors being opened first).

Yeah, I agree- I constantly think about how my solar powered Model S is compared to the 14 mpg Kia Sorento I used to own. Or the 14 mpg Jeep Cherokee I also sold to buy my Volt.

You know what, you’ve convinced me to go back to oil changes, gas pump visits, transmission flushes, timing belt changes, spark plug/wire replacements, smog checks, oil and fuel pump replacements, gasket replacements, hose replacements.. and on.. and on..

Thanks for pointing out how terrible my Tesla is, and now I think I’ll go short their stock, too.

You have connected the dots on clean air

Model 3 is very nearly as efficient (130 MPGe vs. 136 MPGe) as the Ioniq while having much greater range, being larger and having far superior performance.

How do you like them apples?

I like apples. And I also like Model 3’s. So I win twice!

More specifically, the IONIQ is somewhat more efficient in city driving. On the highway, they are equal.

Wrong! The Model S can go twice as far as an Ioniq!

Usually I skip over the EVANNEX articles. As much as I support Tesla, they are simply too fanboi-ish for me (e.g. even here they claim the Elon is “altruistic” – really? I’m sure he is suffering so much as he makes billions off his successful enterprises). It also makes them blind to other great EV options on the market.

All that said, I appreciate this insightful analysis. I was unaware of the Fairfax saga, and now I have a book to add to my reading list.

I used the word “rad” the other day around my two teenage daughters. They told me that word was used by their peers to make fun of ‘oldsters’ like me because the word was so dated.

That’s the same way I feel about the term ‘fan boi..’

Lol! Ok, I’ll embrace my age. Although I’m not old enough to have teenage daughters so…

*Ok, technically I am, but only if I had started having kids in my teens.

Good for you. The word I think of when I see mature men trying to be thirteen is best left unspoken.

They are blatantly promoting Tesla in everything they write. What else can we expect from someone who’s income is generated not by selling journalism to readers, but by selling aftermarket Tesla gear?!?

There is a difference between journalism and opinion pieces. The EVANNEX articles make no secret of which they are. While I find most of these articles too shallow for my taste, I don’t blame them for being openly partial.

Taibbi is a fantastic writer, with a knack for finance.

I remember “short-sharks” and CYOE. I was long, and the same thing happened. Unsubstantiated stories until the media was the message, and stock collapsed.

TSLA is more resilient, and has more aligned against it. I get their issues with WSJ (whose Tim Higgins got an interview with Musk, and glowed about it…finally). It’s how even Bloomberg, and its New Energy Finance team take on views that don’t price-in what Tesla is doing.

I find that BNEF is very conservative in general; their predictions regarding growth of renewables, EVs etc. not really being more optimistic than other analysts not specifically focused on these topics.

I think you underestimate the great personal sacrifices Elon has made in pursuit of his altruistic vision.
It seems safe to say, that most human men would be happy with $1 Billion and a wife named Heard- just sayin.

While I agree about the EVANNEX articles being “fanboi-ish”, I totally disagree about your stance on Musk. Yes, he *is* suffering for his ambitions — in terms of health, personal life etc. What he is doing is totally crazy, and would break pretty much everyone else.

Money is just a means to and end for him: he has shown that he will happily spend it all, on the slimmest of hopes to make his visions come true.

There is no such thing as true altruism; but doing things just because he doesn’t want to be sad when thinking about the future, is about as close to it as anyone will realistically come.

It is nothing short of SATIRE that Evannex is given space to even discuss this topic. They are as far from a neutral unbiased observer as you can get. Elon has a personal grudge with those who speculate in “sabotaging his altruistical [sic] mission”, they tell us. Apart from the grammatical error (mission is a noun, not a verb, and adjectives, not adverbs, describe them; “his altruistic mission”), how does Evannex know ANYTHING whatsoever about Musks motives? Also, they stand to gain from Tesla’s success, to lose from it’s failure, and fail to make any mention of it. So far, the simple fact is that Elon had amassed a personal fortune of about 20 billion USD building a company that has so far spent about as much and have not yet had a profitable year, nor ever paid dividends to any investors. The short sellers meanwhile have lost billions on betting the stock would fall, which in principle is not much different from betting a stock will rise. Short selling was actually banned in the US during the previous financial crises after claims this practice hurt already vulnerable financial institutions. The claims proved completely unfounded; everything we know about this… Read more »

Well Teratroll, despite your constant whining about Evannex, which mainly re-reprints others’ articles, you still read them and then lamely try and carpet-bomb your ridiculous, repetitive FUD against Evannex, Tesla, and Musk.

I suggest that since you don’t like Evannex and Tesla/Musk that you don’t read the articles or at least stop wasting our time by posting the same FUD over and over about them.

This is an EV support site. That is a bias. If you don’t like it, maybe go somewhere else?

I love how haters only show one side against Tesla. Like how much money they burn, Elon Musk’s alleged greed, and how they’re nothing but a sham company. Yet everyone I know that owns a Tesla (myself included) absolutely love their car(s), their products, and their concepts, etc. In this world of oil drilling, slimy, corrupt politics, back-room deals, there’s an American company that pours MASSIVE effort into Supercharging networks, battery storage factories, space travel, human transportation solutions, and oh by the way, appears to poke fun and have a little fun along the way. Yet we still have an army of folks who want to destroy it because it doesn’t fit the norm, it doesn’t follow the normal rules, and doesn’t cater to the normal order of the controllable, mainstream process. God forbid Elon Musk and Tesla end up being right, because the same, hating curmudgeons that have to be forcibly pried from their close-minded, draconian views will end up actually benefiting, along with those who save “Ehf it! Let’s see if this thing can work!” The saddest part is the legions of haters carry the water for only a select few that benefit most from oil, internal combustion,… Read more »

“It is nothing short of SATIRE that Evannex is given space to even discuss this topic.”

Your blindness to the amount of unintentional irony in your comment is astounding.

Try reading with an open mind more — a lot more; and learn that when writing comments, “less is more”. In your case, a lot less. And then perhaps your own comments will be worth reading.

Nobody is ever completely neutral. There would be no media if only neutral parties were allowed to publish.

The problem is when someone *pretends* to be neutral, while actually being biased. Not the case here.

Funny BTW how you call Musk’s stock a “personal fortune”, while the other investors are supposedly losers…

Refreshing read, you understand how these shorts worked and did real research. Shorts on Tesla picked the wrong guy in Elon

“…logically short interest should increase when the stock is high, this has not in fact been the case. Major spikes in short interest have coincided with specific events, including the SCTY acquisition, suggesting that there were coordinated attacks.”

Well of course there are coordinated buy-ins by those shorting Tesla stock. There isn’t any hidden conspiracy; the coordination is all out in the open, and can be seen by anyone bothering to investigate. Visit the Seeking Alpha investor forum on literally any day, and you’ll see scores or hundreds of post by anti-Tesla FUDsters; that is, by those parroting (and a few inventing) talking points of anti-Tesla propaganda. On Seeking Alpha you can see, at any time lots of recent blog posts (so-called “analyst articles”) about Tesla, and something like 75-80% of those contain anti-Tesla FUD. Somebody is reading those, and it’s hardly a surprise that TSLA “short” investments increase when the majority of those FUD blog posts indicate there is some particular reason to do so at a given time.

Let’s not forget that FUD is a disinformation strategy. It’s not just wrong, it’s deliberately false. It’s lies and half-truths invented and cherry-picked to be as damaging as possible to Tesla’s reputation and its future prospects. And it’s not just a haphazard occasional thing; it’s a deliberate strategy designed to bring Tesla’s stock price down as much as possible, and to hurt Tesla’s rep as much as they possibly can.

Tesla-bashing FUDsters spread their cesspool of false claims all over the Internet. Seeking Alpha is the nexus, but those FUDsters post links to their FUD blog posts everywhere on social media.

Not all Tesla bashing posts and “fake news” come from short-selling FUDsters. Some of it comes from those with other motives to be jealous of, or fear, Tesla and/or Elon Musk. Those with political motives, or those whose income depends on Big Oil or on legacy auto makers. But most of the Tesla bashing those people are posting originates with the short-selling FUDsters. Others are “useful idiots” repeating the FUD of the short-sellers.

Now do one on Elizabeth Holmes, founder and former CEO of Theranos,

It’s the short sellers who have caused this company to lose money every year for over a decade, promise unit production goals that would be illegal based on their permits, issue convertible bonds which encourage short selling, cause virtually every executive to bail… I mean the SEC should investigate this right away!!!

If you honestly believe that, then write to the SEC and present them with evidence that Tesla should be investigated. Do it now; don’t wait!

And stop wasting everyone’s time — including yours — by posting Tesla bashing FUD here, where the SEC won’t notice.

Evannex seems to have a Tesla bias.


Musk is “altruistic”? I’m pretty sure he’s making money on this deal. I don’t have a problem with Musk making money – good for him – but the author lost me when he started off this way. Musk is no more an altruist than Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Sergey Brin, et al.

He is making money on some of his ventures; but money isn’t his primary motivation.

There might be another player in this big game of TSLA. And that is the customers themselves, which increases on a daily basis.
Myself ive bought two Model S. For many reasons, but one of them to support Elon Musk in his quest to transition thw world into sustainable energy.

Now if TSLA would need money, had a paypal account, and it was legal, i would forward $1000 at once. And im pretty sure a lot of other customers would do the same.
Being ambassadors for a good and revolutionary product is a wonderful feeling. You shortsellers should try it, and maybe swap to long instead of short and sleep better at night 😉

Holy moly! That’s scary. Would definitely explain the stories and market action today.