Twitter re-examines Elon Musk’s bid, may be more receptive to a deal

Re:Twitter re-examines Elon Musk’s bid, may be more receptiv... by hef19898 on Monday April 25, 2022 @08:12AM (#31153379)

This discussion shows how far Musk's anti-SEC propaganda had taken effect. As far as I know (I could be mistaken, and too lazy to investigate that further), but the SEC doesn't have the power to block bank accounts of companies over illegal things shareholders or officers of the company did.

That's how this discussion started: The SEC blackmailed Musk into signing a settlement or otherwise the SEC would block Tesla's accounts. Well, it's either that or Musk, in fact, did lie about the funding to take Tesla private. reasonable people believe the latter, other prefer option one. And then people still wonder were Tesla's evaluation comes from.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Twitter re-examines Elon Musk’s bid, may be more receptiv... by cloutchaser on Monday April 25, 2022 @08:58AM (#31153817)

How did bank accounts come into this? There was never any discussion about bank accounts.

It's about financing of Tesla's debt. That's something that banks do, and banks could deny funding (even of a bank overdraft) for almost any reason really, like an SEC lawsuit.

No-one ever talked about any bank account being blocked. But in a world of debt, where debt is provided by institutions, if you can control who gets loans, you can control a lot.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Twitter re-examines Elon Musk’s bid, may be more receptiv... by hef19898 on Monday April 25, 2022 @09:08AM (#31153973)

>> In his latest TED interview [0], Musk said that he had the funding secured for that Tesla private offering. He said that he needed to settle with the SEC so that they wouldn't freeze Tesla's bank accounts, and as part of the settlement he needed to publicly say that he hadn't secured funding.

Citing from like three levels of comment up-stream.

[ Parent | on HN ]