[ad_1]
Keep track of Tesla's auto parts, a revolutionary electric car manufacturer, are tough. But add to that the personality of Elon Musk, his love life, his penchant for Twitter, his struggles with the US Securities and Exchange Commission, and his occasional presence on TMZ, and being a lover of electric vehicles has never been so strange or so trying.
This week, it has become more strange. The judge who oversaw a lawsuit brought in a California federal court against Tesla and Musk by a large group of Tesla shareholders said that yes, of course, plaintiffs' lawyers may well summon the Pop musician to appear Grimes and rapper Azealia Banks. The shareholders say that Musk and Tesla misrepresented the facts regarding the publicly traded company. For Tesla, this means that a large sum can depend on the interactions of its CEO with a handful of celebrities.
What? Why? Help me? Let's describe all the recent events.
The trial
This lawsuit filed by a clbad action investor started with a skinny tweet, a Musk pulled out of his Model S, he said later The New York Times. "Consider taking Tesla privately at $ 420," he wrote on August 7. "Financing badured."
It turns out that the last part was not true. Although Musk had talks with Saudi investors about the privatization of the company, funding had not yet been finalized. (Seventeen days after this tweet, Tesla announced that it would remain public after all.) If Musk was just a guy, using Twitter to distort the truth would be, well, normal. But Musk is at the head of an open society, which means that his public statements about the company, even via Twitter, can be interpreted as communication with investors.
In September, the SEC continued. At the end of the month, Tesla settled the case, after giving up the transaction, and then being back. Musk has stepped down as president of Tesla for at least three years. Tesla and he each paid a $ 20 million fine. Tesla has appointed two new independent members to its board of directors and a new chairman, and the company is now expected to oversee Musk's communications with investors, no matter how they are sent.
However, the agreement did not seem to appease Tesla's multiple investors who filed a clbad action lawsuit after the August tweet. (These lawsuits have since been consolidated into a single clbad action, supervised by Judge Edward Chen in a California federal court.) These investors claim that Musk knew that the funding to privatize the company was not secure and that his statement ( and According to the lawsuit filed this week, "the market for Tesla securities, such as stocks and stock options, causing billions of dollars in damage to its investors," has disrupted the market.
The lawsuit alleges that Musk's "false" tweets were motivated, in part, by his desire to punish those who hold short positions on the Tesla title and make them lose money. (Indeed, the price of Tesla shares has skyrocketed after Musk's "secure financing" tweet, which has financially hurt the short films.) Tesla declined to comment on the ongoing lawsuit. Counsel for the plaintiffs did not respond to maintenance requests.
The connection of Azealia banks
If you still hang on, tighten your grip. This is where it gets weird. In mid-August, while confusion and rumors that Musk had "taken Twitter private Tesla," rapper Azealia Banks went to Instagram to say that she had been at the Tesla CEO during spin off. Banks said in an Instagram story that Musk had panicked when he realized that he might not have the funds to privatize his company and that he would not have the funds to privatize his company. it could come into contact with the SEC. (Banks stated that she had played the involuntary witness to this drama while she was waiting, locked in the billionaire's house while she was waiting for her girlfriend, the Grimes musician, to record with she of the music.) that the couple would have really invited to make a trio? I'm tired.) In a series of Instagram stories, Banks compared the incident to an "episode of Come out."
Musk, meanwhile, said Gizmodo that he has never met Banks in his life. According to the regulation announced by the SEC, he did tell federal investigators that he had tweeted that Tesla would be public at $ 420 per share because he thought the reference would entertain Grimes.
The law
That was in 2018. The clbad action between the shareholders of Musk, Tesla and Tesla dragged on in 2019. According to documents filed in the California federal court, investor lawyers suing Musk believe that Grimes (whose legal name is Claire Elise Boucher) and Banks have important information about Musk's behavior in early August. Grimes, they argue, may have been the last person to speak to Musk before sending the fateful tweet and may have discussed this tweet with the CEO after sending it. "If, as Banks claims, Musk was actively trying to find investors to" cover "the tweet, then Ms. Boucher would probably have observed this behavior or conversations between Musk and Musk and potential investors," according to shareholders " Banks, meanwhile, "reportedly observed Musk trying to" cover "the tweet after it was sent."
The legal team of investors is now authorized to ask these two women as well as the journalists of Business Insider, Gizmodo and The New York Times who spoke to key events stakeholders, keep all documents and communications related to the August incident.
Despite this victory for shareholders, it may be months before the deal is resolved. The supervising judge scheduled a status conference or official "registration" for the affected parties in June. And legal experts say this case is far from being a slam dunk. The plaintiffs will have to prove that Musk intended to manipulate Tesla's course of action, uncovering a paper trail (or text or email) or gathering enough evidence to convince a judge or a CEO of the CEO's Reflection Process during his tweet, John Coffee, Jr., director of the Center on Corporate Governance at Columbia Law School, told WIRED last summer.
Nevertheless, a bad outcome for Musk could prove very costly for Tesla and his CEO, since the lawsuit claims that shareholders have "suffered losses of several million dollars" because of their actions. Meanwhile, the automaker has announced layoffs and other cuts. Players have every reason to settle down, even though Musk is known for his demolition.
Whatever the outcome, there is at least one good lesson here: never tweet.
More great cable stories
Source link
