TESLA STOCK CRASHES OVER CRASHING, EXPLODING, CARS AND CORRUPTION INVESTIGATIONS
3 months ago NEWZ SUBMITTERS Comments Off on TESLA STOCK CRASHES OVER CRASHING, EXPLODING, CARS AND CORRUPTION INVESTIGATIONS
TESLA STOCK CRASHES OVER CRASHING, EXPLODING, CARS AND CORRUPTION INVESTIGATIONS
Tesla stock took a dive off the cliff as the U.S. nixed Space X for a $490 Million order for Russian rockets, while the FBI, U.S. Senate and GAO intensified their investigation of Elon Musk taxpayer kick-back schemes and the press zeroed in on the “Musk Mooch” deals to use taxpayer cash to keep his struggling Solar City, Tesla and Space X crony company cash flow alive.
Day Traders charge Tesla and Solyndra with being an Enron-Type Stock Pumping Swindle
– Crooks never believed it was possible for GOP to take back Congress in 2014 Mid-Terms… ooops!
– Now GOP can turn the tables with this case. Felony lock-up potential for some Senators and Senior White House officials.
“Investigators say that, political operatives David Plouffe, Rahm Emanual, Steven Rattner, Bill Daly, David Axelrod and Robert Gibbs arranged with Silicon Valley investors to take over the lithium battery industry in order to monopolize the trillions of dollars of lithium, and related mining deals, in Afghanistan.
They say that they traded federal funding for campaign support assisted by Harry Reid and Dianne Feinstein, who received numerous stock and cash kickbacks in the scheme.
They say they used the money to fund political campaigns. They used the Silicon Valley investors internet companies, (mostly Google), to manipulate voter perceptions and web searches in favor of their agenda. The Silicon Valley investors received: favorable federal laws, tax gifts, free federal loans, stock bumps and other perks.
The Silicon Valley investors companies that used the Afghan minerals: Abound,Solyndra, Fisker, Ener1, Tesla, and many, many more, that received the Department ofEnergy kickback funds, managed by Steven Chu, have all either failed, been raided, been charged with fraud or otherwise turned out to be disasters because they were based on a financial fraud skimming scheme instead of a good business plan.
All of these facts are known, in great detail, by many investigators. Nearly a million pages of evidence exist. A Special Prosecutor is required to perform proper prosecutions. This is organized crime.”
– Using federal funding to hype, pump, skim and dump public stocks and manipulate the stock market. Senators and some regulators implicated in running the cover-up? Big players grabbed billions of dollars up front, for their personal pockets, while workers at the Cleantech “bait companies” lost their jobs and their futures.
– Solyndra, Tesla, Fisker and Abound investors bragged about “pulling a scrape”.
– Vc’s used taxpayer loans to fake stock values and reap massive windfalls off of felony market manipulation violations under Section 9(a)(2) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.”
If you’re puzzled why the U.S. stock market has risen so fast in a slow-growing economy, consider one of its star performers: DirecTV.
The satellite TV provider has done a great job slashing expenses and expanding abroad, and that has helped lift its earnings per share dramatically in five years. But don’t be fooled. The main reason for the EPS gain has nothing to do with how well it runs its business. It’s because it has engaged in a massive stock buyback program, halving the number of its shares in circulation by purchasing them from investors.
Spreading earnings over fewer shares translates into higher EPS — a lot higher in DirecTV’s case. Instead of an 88 percent rise to $2.58, EPS nearly quadrupled to $5.22.
Companies have been spending big on buybacks since the 1990s. What’s new is the way buybacks have exaggerated the health of many companies, suggesting through EPS that they are much better at generating profits than they actually are. The distortion is ironic. Critics say the obsessive focus on buybacks has led companies to put off replacing plant and equipment, funding research and development, and generally doing the kind of spending needed to produce rising EPS for the long run.
“It’s boosted the stock market and flattered earnings, but it’s very short term,” says David Rosenberg, former chief economist at Merrill Lynch, now at money manager Gluskin Sheff. He calls buybacks a “sugar high.”
Over the past five years, 216 companies in the S&P 500 are just like DirecTV: They are getting more of a boost in EPS from slashing share count than from running their underlying business, according to a study by consultancy Fortuna Advisors at the request of The Associated Press. The list of companies cuts across industries, and includes retailer Gap, supermarket chain Kohl’s, railroad operator Norfolk Southern and drug distributor AmerisourceBergen.
The stocks of those four have more than tripled, on average, in the past five years.
Companies insist that their buybacks must be judged case by case.
“The vast majority of our shareholders are sophisticated investors who not only use EPS growth but other important measures to determine the success of our company,” says Darris Gringeri, a spokesman for DirecTV.
But Fortuna CEO Gregory Milano says buybacks are a waste of money for most companies.
“It’s game playing — a legitimate, legal form of manufacturing earnings growth,” says Milano, author of several studies on the impact of buybacks. “A lot of people (focus on) earnings per share growth, but they don’t adequately distinguish the quality of the earnings.”
So powerful is the impact, it has turned what would have been basically flat or falling EPS into a gain at some companies over five years. That list includes Lockheed Martin, the military contractor, Cintas, the country’s largest supplier of work uniforms, WellPoint, an insurer, and Dun and Bradstreet, a credit-rating firm.
It’s not clear investors are worried, or even aware, how much buybacks are exaggerating the underlying strength of companies. On Friday, they pushed the Standard and Poor’s 500 stock index to a record close, up 178 percent from a 12-year low in 2009.
“How much credit should a company get earning from share buybacks rather than organic growth?” asks Brian Rauscher, chief portfolio strategist at Robert W. Baird & Co, an investment company. “I think the quality of earnings has been much lower than what the headlines suggest.”
And it could get worse.
Companies in the S&P 500 have earmarked $1 trillion for buybacks over the next several years. That’s on top of $1.7 trillion they spent on them in the previous five years. The figure is staggering. It is enough money to cut a check worth $5,345 for every man, women and child in the country.
There is nothing necessarily nefarious or wrong about buybacks per se. It doesn’t seem that managements are trying to cover up a poor job of running their businesses. Even without factoring in a drop in share counts, earnings in the S&P 500 would have risen 80 percent since 2009.
The problem is that many investors are pouring money willy-nilly into companies doing buybacks as if they are always a good thing, and at every company.
A fund that tracks companies cutting shares the most, the PowerShares Buyback Achievers Portfolio, attracted $2.2 billion in new investments in the last 12 months. That is nine times what had been invested at the start of that period, according Lipper, which provides data on funds.
For their part, the companies note there are all sorts of reasons to like them besides EPS.
WellPoint points out that it has increased its cash dividend three times since 2011, a big draw for people looking for income. Cintas says that it’s timed its buybacks well, buying at a deep discount to stock price today. And DirecTV says investors judge it also by revenue and cash flow, both of which are up strongly.
What’s more, companies seem to genuinely believe their shares are a bargain and they’d be remiss for not buying, though their record of choosing the right time is poor.
The last time buybacks were running so high was 2007, right before stocks fell by more than half.
There are signs the next $1 trillion in buybacks for S&P 500 companies could also prove ill-timed. Stocks aren’t looking so cheap anymore. After a surge of nearly 30 percent last year, the S&P 500 is trading at 25 times its 10-year average earnings, as calculated by Nobel Prize winning economist Robert Shiller of Yale. That is much more expensive than the long-term average of 16.5.
Many investors assume shrinking shares automatically make remaining shares more valuable. The math is seductive. A company that has $100 in earnings and 100 shares will report $1 in earnings per share. But eliminate half the shares and the same $100 is spread over 50 shares, and EPS doubles to $2.
But that doesn’t make the shares more valuable.
Shares aren’t just a claim on short-term earnings. They are an ownership stake in an entire company, including R&D programs and its capital stock — the plants, equipment and other assets needed to boost productivity long into the future. Critics say the lavish spending on buybacks has “crowded out” spending on such things, which is at its weakest in decades.
“It’s just like your car depreciating or your home depreciating — you have to invest,” says Gluskin Sheff’s Rosenberg, “The corporate sector has barely preventing the capital stock from becoming obsolete.”
One result: U.S. productivity, or output per hour, increased just 0.5 percent last year, a pitiful performance. It has grown by an average 2 percent a year since 1947.
If not reversed, history suggests stocks will suffer. In a 2010 study, Fortuna’s Milano found that stocks of companies that spent the most on buybacks vastly underperformed stocks of those that spent the least on them — at least over five years.
It’s unclear whether the kind of investor who dominates stock trading now cares about the long-term, though. Buybacks are one of the few sure-fire ways to push a stock higher in the short term, and investors these days are very short term.
They “don’t care what happens in three or five years,” laments Rauscher, the Baird strategist. “The market has become less of an investor culture, more of a trading one.”
Follow Bernard Condon on Twitter at http://twitter.com/BernardFCondon.
Thursday, Jun 06 2013 11:00 PM
Credits fueled Tesla stock sale?
By The Bakersfield Californian
Concerning your May 31 editorial (“Some clean energy bets pay off nicely”) on Tesla Motors paying off the government loan:
In 2010, Tesla was awarded a milestone-based loan, requiring matching private capital obtained via public offering, by the Department of Energy as part of the Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing Loan Program. This program was signed into law by President George W. Bush in 2008, and then awarded under the Obama administration in the years that followed.
The loan payment was made using a portion of the approximately $1 billion in funds raised in the previous weeks concurrent offerings of common stock and convertible senior notes.
According to a May 8 USA Today report by James R. Healey and Fred Meier, Tesla made a first-quarter profit of $11 million on revenues of $562 million. But Tesla gets government zero-emission-vehicle (ZEV) credits for each car it builds, credits that can then be auctioned to other automakers to offset their non-zero-emission vehicles. The company income from sales of ZEVs came to about $68 million in the quarter, or 12 percent of revenue.
So, if you take away the ZEVs, Tesla lost $57 million. It sounds to me like the first-quarter profit allowed Tesla to make a stock offering to which the government loan was paid from. The profit was from government money in the way of ZEVs. Would the stock sale have been as good if Tesla had shown a $57 million loss?
It’s interesting how you tied Bush to the failed Solyndra loan and President Obama to the Tesla loan, when in fact the Obama administration made both loans.
GOLDMAN SACHS WAS THE “COORDINATING” LINK IN ALMOST EVERY DEAL UNDER INVESTIGATION:
An extensive number of recordings, by multiple whistle-blowers, and agencies, now exist:
News media have speculated that the actual reason for “the CleanTech Crash” may have to do with a massive embezzlement scheme such as the concept shown in this published diagram:
FEDERAL AND INDUSTRY INVESTIGATORS DISCOVER “PUMP AND DUMP” AND “PUMP AND FLUFF” STOCK SCAMS IN THE CLEANTECH FUNDING PROGRAM:”The use of the media and the internet by a company, or it’s investors, to pump that company’s stocks is a felony. The use, by a company of armies of fake bloggers, paid for by that company to post false praise in order to raise that company’s stocks is a felony.In the United States, this falls under market manipulation and is prohibited under Section 9(a)(2) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.”
The CleanTech stocks that crash and then suddenly recover are getting instantly “pumped” with fake investor buys computer “flashed” to make them look like Day-traders.”Pump and dumps are illegal because you are willfully attempting to manipulate the value of a security. And if you are doing this with other people as well, it’s even worse because that implies it is more of a concentrated effort to do that. An example is if you and a few buddies are looking at a stock that only trades a few thousand shares a day. Between the group of you, you trade the stock so the volume is much, much higher than what it usually is. Others will notice this and think that the stock is going up by its own merits, clueless to the fact that you and your buddies are artificially driving up the price and volume. Others start buying and drive the price further based on the artificial demand you’ve created, and then you sell it off and the price probably tanks to where you started or less. In a sense and your buddies would be guilty of collusion and artificially manipulating the value of the security. That’s why it’s not fair, and understandably, that’s why it’s illegal. Furthermore, pump and dumps are also carried out by people that hack into others trading accounts, sell off their assets, and use the money to buy stocks involved in the pump and dump, which has the same effect of artificially driving up the price. Source: Licensed Stock Broker
Watch the movie Boiler Room
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0181984/“Nothing wrong with buying low and selling high. But willful manipulation of worthless stocks of synthetically created Cleantech facade companies, like Abound, Solyndra, Fisker, Tesla, etc… crosses the legal boundary. When lying hype drives the price of a stock rather than financial performance of the company, the activity becomes criminal. It’s considered fraud because the pumper (AKA: The Tech CEO that just got free federal cash from a kick-back program) is artificially inflating the price of a stock through false and misleading statements.“
ENRON AGAIN: ENERGY INDUSTRY SCAMS – WIKIPEDIA
“Pump and dump” (P&D) is a form of microcap stock fraud that involves artificially inflating the price of an owned stock through false and misleading positive statements, in order to sell the cheaply purchased stock at a higher price. Once the operators of the scheme “dump” their overvalued shares, the price falls and investors lose their money. Stocks that are the subject of pump and dump schemes are sometimes called “chop stocks”.While fraudsters in the past relied on cold calls, the Internet now offers a cheaper and easier way of reaching large numbers of potential investors.Contents [hide]
- 2 Pump and dump spam
- 3 Short and distort
- 4 Regulation
- 5 References
- 6 Further reading
- 7 External links
Pump and dump scenariosPump and dump schemes may take place on the Internet using an e-mail spam campaign, through media channels via a fake press release, or through telemarketing from “boiler room” brokerage houses (for example, see Boiler Room). Often the stock promoter will claim to have “inside” information about impending news. Newsletters may purport to offer unbiased recommendations, then tout a company as a “hot” stock, for their own benefit. Promoters may also post messages in chat rooms or stock message boards urging readers to buy the stock quickly.
If a promoter’s campaign to “pump” a stock is successful, it will entice unwitting investors to purchase shares of the target company. The increased demand, price, and trading volume of the stock may convince more people to believe the hype, and to buy shares as well. When the promoters behind the scheme sell (dump) their shares and stop promoting the stock, the price plummets, and other investors are left holding stock that is worth significantly less than what they paid for it.
Fraudsters frequently use this ploy with small, thinly traded companies—known as “penny stocks,” generally traded over-the-counter (in the United States, this would mean markets such as the OTC Bulletin Board or the Pink Sheets), rather than markets such as the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) or NASDAQ—because it is easier to manipulate a stock when there is little or no independent information available about the company. The same principle applies in the United Kingdom, where target companies are typically small companies on the AIM or OFEX.
A more modern spin on this attack is known as hack, pump and dump. In this form, a person purchases penny stocks in advance and then uses compromised brokerage accounts to purchase large quantities of that stock. The net result is a price increase, which is often pushed further by day traders seeing a quick advance in a stock. The holder of the stock then sells his stock at a premium.
Specific examplesJonathan LebedDuring the dot-com era, when stock-market fever was at its height and many people spent significant amounts of time on stock Internet message boards, a 15-year-old named Jonathan Lebed showed how easy it was to use the Internet to run a successful pump and dump. Lebed bought penny stocks and then promoted them on message boards, pointing at the price increase. When other investors bought the stock, Lebed sold his for a profit, leaving the other investors holding the bag. He came to the attention of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which filed a civil suit against him alleging security manipulation. Lebed settled the charges by paying a fraction of his total gains. He neither admitted nor denied wrongdoing, but promised not to manipulate securities in the future.
EnronAs late as April 2001, before the company’s collapse, Enron executives participated in an elaborate scheme of pump and dump, in addition to other illegal practices that fooled even the most experienced analysts on Wall Street. Studies of the anonymous messages posted on the Yahoo board dedicated to Enron revealed predictive messages that the company was basically a house of cards, and that investors should bail out while the stock was good. After Enron falsely reported profits which inflated the stock price, they covered the real numbers by using questionable accounting practices. 29 Enron executives sold overvalued stock for more than a billion dollars before the company went bankrupt.
Park Financial GroupIn April 2007, the U.S. SEC brought charges against Park Financial Group as a result of an investigation into a pump and dump scheme during 2002-2003 of the Pink Sheet listed stock of Spear & Jackson Inc.
John BabikianJohn Babikian got rich, authorities allege, by what is known in the business as pumping-and-dumping stocks. He was operating ‘AwesomePennyStocks’ website and the 700,000 email push hyping America West.
Langbar InternationalStarted as Crown Corporation, Langbar was the biggest pump and dump fraud on the Alternative Investment Market, part of the London Stock Exchange. The company was at one point valued greater than $1 Billion, based on supposed bank deposits in Brazil which did not exist. None of the chief conspirators were convicted, although their whereabouts is known. A Patsy who made a negligent false statement about the assets was convicted and banned from being a director. The investors who lost as much as £100 million sued one of the fraudsters and recovered £30 million.
Pump and dump spamPump and dump stock scams are prevalent in spam, accounting for about 15% of spam e-mail messages. A survey of 75,000 unsolicited emails sent between January 2004 and July 2005 concluded that spammers could make an average return of 4.29% by using this method, while recipients who act on the spam message typically lose close to 5.5% of their investment within two days. A study by Böhme and Holz shows a similar effect. Stocks targeted by spam are almost always penny stocks, selling for less than $5 per share, not traded on major exchanges, are thinly traded, and are difficult or impossible to sell short. Spammers acquire stock before sending the messages, and sell the day the message is sent.
Pump and dump differs from many other forms of spam (such as advance fee fraud emails and lottery scam messages) in that it does not require the recipient to contact the spammer to collect supposed “winnings,” or to transfer money from supposed bank accounts. This makes tracking the source of pump and dump spam difficult, and has also given rise to “minimalist” spam consisting of a small untraceable image file containing a picture of a stock symbol.
Short and distortMain article: Short and distortA variant of the pump and dump scam, the “short and distort” works in the opposite manner. Instead of first buying the stock, and then artificially raising its price before selling, in a “short and distort” the scammer first short-sells the stock, and then artificially lowers the price, using the same techniques as the pump and dump but using criticism or negative predictions regarding the stock. The scammer then covers his short position when he buys back the stock at a lower price.
RegulationOne method of regulating and restricting pump and dump manipulators is to target the category of stocks most often associated with this scheme. To that end, penny stocks have been the target of heightened enforcement efforts. In the United States, regulators have defined a penny stock as a security that must meet a number of specific standards. The criteria include price, market capitalization, and minimum shareholder equity. Securities traded on a national stock exchange, regardless of price, are exempt from regulatory designation as a penny stock, since it is thought that exchange traded securities are less vulnerable to manipulation. Therefore, CitiGroup (NYSE:C) and other NYSE listed securities which traded below $1.00 during the market downturn of 2008-2009, while properly regarded as “low priced” securities, were not technically “penny stocks”. Although penny stock trading in the United States is now primarily controlled through rules and regulations enforced by the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), the genesis of this control is found in State securities law. The State of Georgia was the first state to codify a comprehensive penny stock securities law. Secretary of State Max Cleland, whose office enforced State securities laws was a principal proponent of the legislation. Representative Chesley V. Morton, the only stockbroker in the Georgia General Assembly at the time, was principal sponsor of the bill in the House of Representatives. Georgia’s penny stock law was subsequently challenged in court. However, the law was eventually upheld in U.S. District Court, and the statute became the template for laws enacted in other states. Shortly thereafter, both FINRA and the SEC enacted comprehensive revisions of their penny stock regulations. These regulations proved effective in either closing or greatly restricting broker/dealers, such as Blinder, Robinson & Company, which specialized in the penny stocks sector. Meyer Blinder was jailed for securities fraud in 1992, after the collapse of his firm. However, sanctions under these specific regulations lack an effective means to address pump and dump schemes perpetrated by unregistered groups and individuals.
- ^ Jump up to: abc“Pump and Dump Schemes”. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. March 12, 2001.
- Jump up ^ NBC News staff and news wires (2012-10-24). “The $400 million buyout hoax that fooled many – Business on”. Nbcnews.com. Retrieved 2012-12-18.
- Jump up ^“Pump&Dump.con: Tips for Avoiding Stock Scams on the Internet”. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. January 11, 2005.
- Jump up ^ Nakashima, Ellen (2007-01-26). “Hack, Pump and Dump”. The Washington Post.
- Jump up ^ Krinklebine, Karlos (2009). Hacking Wall Street: Attacks and Countermeasures. US: Darkwave Press. pp. 83–180. ISBN 1-4414-6363-1.
- Jump up ^ Lewis, Michael (February 25, 2001). “Jonathan Lebed: Stock Manipulator, S.E.C. Nemesis — and 15″. New York Times.
- Jump up ^Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room (DVD). Magnolia Pictures. January 17, 2006. Event occurs at 32:58.
- Jump up ^Morgenson, Gretchen (2002-04-28). “The Bears on This Message Board Had Enron Pegged”. The New York Times. Retrieved 2010-04-25.
- Jump up ^ Dan Chambers.”Enron the Symptom, Not the Disease.” publici.ucimc.org. Retrieved on 2010-04-25.
- Jump up ^ Wall Street Journal, April 12, 2007, pg. C2
- Jump up ^ Mysterious Canadian’s life in the fast lane fuelled by penny stock scam: SEC | http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/03/17/mysterious-canadians-life-in-the-fast-lane-fuelled-by-penny-stock-scam-sec/
- Jump up ^ Frieder, Laura and Zittrain, Jonathan (March 14, 2007). “Spam Works: Evidence from Stock Touts and Corresponding Market Activity”. Berkman Center Research Publication No. 2006-11. SSRN 920553. Results of this study are also discussed in this article:
- “Spammers manipulate stock markets”. BBC News. 25 August 2006.
- Krinklebine, Karlos (2009). Hacking Wall Street: Attacks and Countermeasures. US: Darkwave Press. p. 402. ISBN 978-1-4414-6363-0.
- Robert H. Tillman and Michael L. Indergaard, Pump and Dump: The Rancid Rules of the New Economy (2005, ISBN 0-8135-3680-4).
- Sergey Perminov, Trendocracy and Stock Market Manipulations (2008, ISBN 978-1-4357-5244-3).
- The SEC on Pump and dump stock Schemes in 2005
- The SEC on Pump and dump stock Schemes in 2001
- The movie Boiler Room, a fictional account of a pump and dump company
A Wall Street Journal article quotes an investor in the bankrupt “green energy” boondoggle describing what the half-billion-dollar federal loan guarantee meant: “There was a perceived halo around the loan . . . If we get the loan, then we can definitely go public and cash out.” Ed Lasky at American Thinker explains:
The huge loan would be a selling point in an initial public offering. The company promoters could point out that the loan gave them credibility — that the government had vouched for their viability and prospects. The private investors would cash out and when the loan came due and the company was unable to pay, taxpayers would be the ones left holding the IOUs. Take the money and run.
It was a straight-out scam, in other words, with a major Democratic donor as one of the primary beneficiaries. An environmentally-friendly three-card monte game — burning taxpayers instead of burning CO2.
Solyndra Investor admits: we wanted the loan so we could ‘go public and cash out’
By Ed Lasky
A clearer picture of the underlying insider scheme at Solyndra is beginning to emerge. Yuliya Chernova of the Wall Street Journal writes a superb column today regarding all the business problems that beset the scandal plagued Solyndra. There were a litany of engineering and business problems that were very apparent to everyone except, apparently, the White House politicos that pressured career officials in the government to extend a 500 million dollar loan guarantee. The crony investors were given an unusually low interest rate for such a venture. Solyndra was first in line to get loan guarantees under the Obama program to promote solar energy ventures. Solyndra private investors were given priority in case of bankruptcy that placed their claims above those of taxpayers — a highly unusual occurrence, according to the Wall Street Journal.So who were the type of people granted such favorable treatment? Yes, Obama donors and bundlers. That has been widely publicized. But beyond that, what type of character did they possess?
One investor behind Solyndra blurted out the truth. The loan was needed and needed urgently to fatten up the company and show a going concern (with a factory, etc).Why?From the column:
There was another motivator — Solyndra’s management and investors had an eye on an initial public offering.
“There was a perceived halo around the loan,” said an investor with knowledge of the company. “If we get the loan, then we can definitely go public and cash out.”
The huge loan would be a selling point in an initial public offering. The company promoters could point out that the loan gave them credibility — that the government had vouched for their viability and prospects.
The private investors would cash out and when the loan came due and the company was unable to pay, taxpayers would be the ones left holding the IOUs.
Take the money and run.
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011
“Almost every one of the CleanTech “Winners” under the Steven Chu Department Of Energy, engaged in this kind of felony grade stock manipulation and insider exploitation knowing that all of the federal law enforcement players were controlled by the insiders with a “hands-off ” protection directive. Using newly optimized web techniques called “Flash Boy” stock processing and “blog meat puppets” they could totally manipulate the stock market and laugh in the faces of the few regulators who dared to step up. The bet that they have to make is that the Republicans do not win the majority in the 2014 Mid-Term elections….”
Micheal Lewis best-selling book “Flash Boys” reveals how much of what you think is happening, on the stock market, may be contrived false-hoods created by computerized manipulations and fake coordinated shill bloggers. The White House games the stock market to payback Silicon Valley campaign funding VC’s and the GOP blows up those very games, right afterwards, in a secret dance of stock fraud tricks. They made a mistake, this time around, and the tricks became visible to everybody in the stock market world. This, on top of the Goldman Sachs sting operation recordings, shows that something is deeply wrong in Stock Land!
In the coming mid-term elections we are seeing Barbara Streisand and DNC notables bemoan the reduced budgets they have to work with this year. Privately, the DNC is ringing their core finance base (The Silicon Valley Vc’s) telephones off the hook.
One of the most successful tactics by GOP specialists involves Tesla Motors. Called out by Mitt Romney, and other Republican notables, as White House fronts. Tesla gets strange and illogical bumps in the stock market in spite of massive numbers of lawsuits, consumer complaints, the lowest sales volume for the money invested in a car company in history, and other facts which, in a rational world, would say they should not survive.
In fact, what is happening is that the backers of Tesla, the same Silicon Valley investors who pay for the White House and DNC campaigns, “Pump” the stock from their own bank accounts each time more bad news comes out about Tesla. There are now charges that the White House is even “pumping the TSLA stock”, like it may have done on the supposed October 16, 2014 “Pump” on the overall market, in order to protect Obama’s “brand name”.
This makes the stock chart for TSLA go up but it is not from mom and pop day-traders. It is “Pumping Cash” right out of the Vc’s investment bank fronts to artificially inflate the stock.
While a final Tesla bankruptcy might seem like the dream for GOP PR; allowing them to point and say “Ha, look, another Department of Energy Crony-Kickback deal gone south”, Tesla has provided even greater grist for the GOP strategy meat-hooks.
MUSK GREED AND HUBRIS BLEW THE SECRET:
By forcing the Silicon Valley VC campaign backers to constantly drain their bank accounts in order to keep Tesla looking like it is still alive, the GOP strategists are also draining the life out of the funding for mid-term and 2016 Democratic candidates.
The GOP finally figured out that almost all of the cash and web media manipulation was coming from one tiny spot in California: SandHill Road and the area around Standford University. They decided that to take down the GOP they just had to expose Silicon Valley.
Tesla was a test case and it worked well. The investment banks with auto refills on Tesla stock, running the investment funds for Doerr, Thiel, Westly, Draper and all the rest of the DNC VC’s is running overtime trying to keep the stock pumped as one set of bad news after another gets exposed about Tesla.
One GOP operative claims that every Kleiner Perkins investment has been: “Targeted, tracked and media exposed”…”can you hear that giant sucking sound”, he says “…that’s the sound of DNC VC cash sliding into oblivion…not only are they beating a dead horse but we have infected the very horse they are beating..”
The operative claims that Musk’s carve-outs for Solar, Space and batteries is his gift, by the White House for conduit-ing cash, through those, “fronts” back to DNC candidates. Sierra Nevada Corp is suing Musk’s Space X, claiming similar industry rigging. Tesla has been under investigation by many parties.
People don’t like taking it in the ass unexpectedly. In this case the old adage of “You F**ed me in the ass, so now I’m F***ing you guys in the ass tens times more..” Seems to be the rule of the game.
Thomas Roster- Palo Alto Rev
NY POST PROPOSES STOCK MARKET RIGGED BY WHITE HOUSE TO PROTECT CAMPAIGN BACKERS
By John Crudele
A screen displays news on the Dow Jones industrial average just after the opening bell on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange on Oct. 15. Photo: Reuters
Mysterious forces were trying their best, but they couldn’t keep the stock market from swooning Wednesday.
They failed in the morning, despite massive purchases of stock index futures contracts. Within minutes of the market’s opening, the Dow Jones industrial average was down 350 points. Later in the day — after a lot of shocking ebb and flow — the Dow bottomed out with a decline of 460 points.
It was only in the last hour of trading that the market saviors managed to trim the Dow loss to just 173 points. And they succeeded only after Janet Yellen’s private, upbeat remarks about the economy were leaked.
Welcome to a new kind of stock market — one that the average investor should refuse to be invested in.
Anyone whose investments tightly track the major indices is now losing money since the beginning of 2014. The Dow is down 1.1 percent on the year, with the S&P and Nasdaq up 3 percent for 2014.
Just for the record, I’ve been telling you for years that the stock market was in a bubble and that you should enjoy it while it lasts because bubbles always pop.
Of course, if you could time the end of the bubble, you’d be doing quite well. Miss the end and you are back to where you started. Or worse off in terms of confidence and finances.
Welcome to a new kind of stock market — one that the average investor should refuse to be invested in.
I obviously don’t know whether we are now seeing the end of the current stock market bubble, during which the S&P index has risen 102 percent since October 2008. But there are people like my friend Peter Grandich of Trinity Financial, who has been excellent at predicting market corrections in the past and who thinks this is the end.
I already brought up the sensitive issue of a market crash in a column on Oct. 9 that began: “Is this the month the stock market will crash?”
October is historically a spooky month for stocks, and in that column I rattled off the crashes and major price corrections of 1929, ’78, ’79, ’87, ’89 and 2008 to prove it.
Will 2014 soon be added to that list? That’ll be the cliffhanger in today’s column.
But let me explain about the unknown forces in the market these days. Call it by a nickname — the Plunge Protection Team. Or call it the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets, the official name given to the group when it was formed by President Ronald Reagan after the market turbulence of 1989.
These forces may be working from a script in the “Doomsday Book,” which the US government recently fought to keep secret when it was brought up last week during the AIG trial in Washington.
Here’s the bottom line: Someone tried to rescue the market last Wednesday. And it’s becoming a regular occurrence.
The details of last Wednesday morning are these: At the same time the Dow was off 350 points, the S&P index was down 43.80 points, That was an enormous decline in just 11 minutes of trading and it was an indication that Wall Street was not having a good day.
Then, someone (or something) started buying S&P futures contracts en masse. Twenty-one minutes later, the S&P index had regained 30 of those lost points and was back at 1,861.
Maybe you’ll believe that there was some manipulation going on if you knew that a guy named Robert Heller, who was a member of the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors until 1989, proposed just such a rigging as soon as he left the Fed.
Look it up. Oct. 27, 1989, Wall Street Journal. Headline: “Have Fed Support Stock Market, Too.” By Robert Heller, who had just left the Fed to head up the credit card company Visa.
“It would be inappropriate for the government or the central bank to buy or sell IBM or General Motors shares,” Heller wrote. “Instead, the Fed could buy the broad market composites in the futures market.”
In case you don’t know the lingo, Heller is proposing that the Fed or government purchase stock futures contracts that track — and can influence — the major indices.
These contracts are cheap and a government could turn the whole stock market around quickly — but probably not permanently.
Wow! Doesn’t that seem a lot like what happened Wednesday at 9:41 a.m., when S&P futures contracts were suddenly and mysteriously scooped up?
Let me allow Heller to finish his thought because it’s important to anyone who believes in free and fair markets.
“The Fed’s stock-market role ought not to be very ambitious. It should seek only to maintain the functioning of the markets — not to prop the Dow Jones or the New York Stock Exchange averages at a particular level,” he continued.
But times change and so does thinking. In recent weeks, we’ve discovered that the CME Group, the exchange in Chicago, has an incentive program under which foreign central banks could buy stock market derivatives like the S&P contracts at a discount.
It’s not that these foreign banks need a break on the price of their trading. But it does show that there is a back-door way — through foreign emissaries — for the Fed and the US government to prop up stocks like Heller suggested, and — maybe — not get caught.
How Markets Need $200 Billion Each Quarter From Central Bankers
By Simon Kennedy
St. Louis Fed President James Bullard. Close
The central-bank put lives on.
Policy makers deny its existence, yet investors still reckon that whenever stocks and other risk assets take a tumble, the authorities will be there with calming words or economic stimulus to ensure the losses are limited.
A put option gives investors the right to sell their asset at a set price so the theory goes that central banks will ultimately provide a floor for falling asset markets to ensure they don’t take economies down with them.
Last week as markets swooned again, it was St. Louis Federal Reserve President James Bullard and Bank of England Chief Economist Andrew Haldane who did the trick. Bullard said the Fed should consider delaying the end of its bond-purchase program to halt a decline in inflation expectations, while Haldane said he’s less likely to vote for a U.K. rate increase than three months ago.
“These comments left markets with the impression that the ‘central-bank put’ is still in place,” Morgan Stanley currency strategists led by London-based Hans Redeker told clients in a report yesterday.
Matt King, global head of credit strategy at Citigroup Inc., and colleagues have put a price on how much liquidity central banks need to provide each quarter to stop markets from sliding.
By estimating that zero stimulus would be consistent with a 10 percent quarterly drop in equities, they calculate it takes around $200 billion from central banks each quarter to keep markets from selling off.
With the Fed and counterparts peeling back their net liquidity injections from almost $1 trillion in 2012 toward that magic marker, King’s team said “a negative reaction in markets was long overdue.”
“We think the markets’ weakness owes more to an almost belated reaction to a temporary lull in central bank stimulus than it does to any reduction in the effect of that stimulus in propping up asset prices,” they said in an Oct. 17 report to clients.
Bank of America Merrill Lynch strategists said in a report today that another 10 percent decline in U.S. stocks might spark speculation of a fourth round of quantitative easing from the Fed. That would mimic how the Fed acted following equity declines of 11 percent in 2010 and 16 percent in 2011.
The good news for investors in the eyes of Citigroup is that although the Fed is still reversing and set to end its bond-buying this month, the European Central Bank and Bank of Japan will more than compensate with more stimulus in coming months.
The reason for the support is the fear that a prolonged sell-off in markets would upend the fragile economic outlook central banks are charged with safeguarding, they said.
“With central banks much more concerned about a return to recession than about asset-price bubbles, they have little choice but to step back in,” said Citigroup.
To contact the reporter on this story: Simon Kennedy in London at email@example.com
To contact the editors responsible for this story: Craig Stirling at firstname.lastname@example.org Kevin Costelloe, Eddie Buckle
Posted by Yves Smith
It’s remarkable that this Goldman report, and its writeup on Business Insider, is being treated with a straight face. The short version is current stock price levels are dependent on continued stock buybacks. Key sections of the story:
Goldman Sachs’ David Kostin believes a temporary pullback may explain why the S&P 500 has tumbled from its all-time high of 2,019 on Sept. 19.
“Most companies are precluded from engaging in open-market stock repurchases during the five weeks before releasing earnings,” Kostin notes. “For many firms, the beginning of the blackout period coincided with the S&P 500 peak on September 18. So the sell-off occurred during a time when the single largest source of equity demand was absent. Buybacks dip during earnings reporting months, which have seen 1.2 points higher realized volatility than in other months during the past 25 years.”…
“We expect companies will actively repurchase shares in November and December,” he writes. “Since 2007, an average of 25% of annual buybacks has occurred during the last two months of the year.”
Notice how the bulk of buybacks are concentrated in the fourth quarter, with the obvious intent of goosing prices at year end so as to lead to higher executive pay for “increasing shareholder value”? In fact, these companies are being gradually liquidated. Issuing debt, which public companies have done in copious volumes since the crash, and using it to buy shares is dissipating corporate assets. They are over time shrinking their businesses. That is also reflected in aggressive headcount cuts and cost-saving measures. Even though analysts like to tout the cash that companies have sitting on their balance sheets as a source of potential investment, as we’ve discussed in previous posts, public companies are so terrified of even a quarterly blip in earnings due to incurring expenses relating to long-term investments that they’d rather do nothing, or go the inertial path of cutting costs to show higher profits.
But with borrowing the big source of this corporate munificence to the share-owning classes, this is a self-limiting game. But the end game could be a long time in coming. First, you have economists who believe that the stock market directly drives consumer spending, echoing the Fed’s confidence in the wealth effect. For instance, see this argument from Roger Farmer (hat tip Bruegel blog):
There is a close relationship between changes in the value of the stock market and changes in the unemployment rate one quarter later. My research here, and here shows that a persistent 10% drop in the real value of the stock market is followed by a persistent 3% increase in the unemployment rate. The important word here is persistent. If the market drops 10% on Tuesday and recovers again a week later, (not an unusual movement in a volatile market), there will be no impact on the real economy. For a market panic to have real effects on Main Street it must be sustained for at least three months.
Yves here. The problem is that correlation is not causation. Significant and sustained stock market declines are almost always the result of Fed tightening. The usual lag between an interest rate cycle turn and a stock market peak historically was roughly four months, but in our new normal of seemingly permanent heavy-duty central bank meddling, old rules of thumb are to be used with great caution. Nevertheless, Greenspan was obsessed with what drove stock prices, and the Fed is unduly solicitous of asset price levels, no doubt because people like Janet Yellen have to leave their DC bubble in order to meet actual unemployed people.
Mike Whitney reminds those who manage to miss it that the Fed is so concerned about the actual and psychological impact of stock market prices that it immediately talked investors into getting back into the pool when the market started misbehaving badly last week. From Counterpunch:
For those readers who still think that the Fed doesn’t meddle in the markets: Think again. Friday’s stock surge had nothing to do with productivity, price, earnings, growth or any of the other so called fundamentals. It was all about manipulation; telling people what they want to hear, so they do exactly what you want them to do. The pundits calls this jawboning, and the Fed has turned it into an art-form. All [St. Louis Fed President James] Bullard did was assure investors that the Fed “has their back”, and , sure enough, another wild spending spree ensued. One can only imagine the backslapping and high-fives that broke out at the Central Bank following this latest flimflam….
It’s too bad the Fed can’t put in a good word for the real economy while they’re at it. But, oh, I forgot that the real economy is stuffed with working stiffs who don’t warrant the same kind of treatment as the esteemed supermen who trade stocks for a living. Besides, the Fed doesn’t give a rip about the real economy. If it did, it would have loaded up on infrastructure bonds instead of funky mortgage backed securities (MBS). The difference between the two is pretty stark: Infrastructure bonds put people to work, circulate money, boost economic activity, and strengthen growth. In contrast, MBS purchases help to fatten the bank accounts of the fraudsters who created the financial crisis while doing bupkis for the economy. Guess who the Fed chose to help out?
Do you really want to know why the Fed isn’t going to end QE? Here’s how Nomura’s chief economist Bob Janjuah summed it up:
“I want to remind readers of a message that may be buried in the past: When QE1 ended, the S&P 500 fell just under 20% in a roughly three-month period before the QE2 recovery.
When the QE2 ended, the S&P 500 fell about 20% in a three-month period before the next Fed-inspired bounce (aided by the ECB). QE3 is ending this month…”
Is that why the Fed started jawboning QE4, to avoid the inevitable 20 percent correction?
Whitney continues with one of our favorite tropes: that all QE has done is elevate asset prices. That has not led to a recovery in anything much beyond the balance sheets of the top cohorts and the income of the top 1%. Even worse, it has provide cover for the Administration falling in with investor-favoring austerity, in the form of reducing deficit spending when it ought to be increasing it to take up the considerable and costly slack in the economy.
It’s not surprising to see the Fed double down on a failed strategy. The central bank had apparently finally recognized in 2013 that QE was not helping the real economy, and they needed to exit the policy to reduce the resulting economic distortions. But they lost their nerve during last summer’s taper tantrum, and turned cowardly again in response to a mere stock market hissy fit.
The Fed believes that what is good for the wealthy is good for the US, and that when they are in danger of suffering financially, the central bank should break glass and administer monetary relief. Even though the Fed may think it is serious about ending QE and eventually raising rates, as they say in Venezuela, “They have changed their minds, but they have not changed their hearts.”
In the last few months, I have had a strange and interesting experience. In early April, I found myself the main character in Michael Lewis’s book “Flash Boys.”
Already a Bloomberg.com user? Sign in with the same account. Don’t have an account? Sign up. Help! I can’t access my account.
The total link site for the news and information junkie: Libertarianism. Property Rights. Government Corruption. Chicago Mob. Struggle Against Socialism.
“Flash Boys” and the Speed of Lies . Here is the opening of this informative column by Brad Katsuyama for Bloomberg: In the last few months, I have had a strange and interesting experience.
In the last few months, I have had a strange and interesting experience. In early April, I found myself the main character in Michael Lewis’s book Flash Boys. It told the story of a quest I’ve been on, with my colleagues, to expose and to prevent a lot of outrageous behaviour in the US stock market
FSN: Europe’s Tough New Regime For Banks Fails First Test In Portugal; Forex Trading Alert: EUR/USD – Time for Rebound? DoJ Subpoenas GM Over Subprime Auto Loans
In the last few months, I have had a strange and interesting experience. In early April, I found myself the main character in Michael Lewis’s book “Flash Boys.” It told the story of a quest I’ve been on, with my colleagues, to expose and to prevent a lot of outrageous behavior in the U.S. stock
Aug. 4 (Bloomberg) — On “Morning Must Read,” Bloomberg’s Tom Keene recaps the op-ed pieces and analyst notes that provide insight into today’s headlines.
reddit: the front page of the internet … use the following search parameters to narrow your results: subreddit:subreddit
San Jose, California: President Barack Obama warned tech leaders on Thursday to dig deep in their wallets to fund Democratic candidates and feel a sense of urgency about congressional elections in November or risk further gridlock in Washington and a failure to move on their priorities. Obama was
Rand Paul Opening Silicon Valley Office to Fund Expected Presidential Run. 1,417. … “There’s a lot of smart people in Silicon Valley, … wealthy”—one political analyst told the Chronicle that the Bay Area is now home to some of “the least loyal Democrats” in the country, …
In the 1970s and 1980s the politics of Silicon Valley’s leaders tended more to … They also tend to have progressive views on gay marriage and climate change that align with the gospel of the Obama Democratic Party. In the … The Democrats are the party of the rich and have …
… an upstart candidate backed by some of tech’s biggest names, is looking to take Silicon Valley’s transformational vision to Washington. SET … The financial muscle of Silicon Valley Democrats, … An advocacy group backed by hedge fund tycoon Tom Steyer is set to unleash a …
Silicon Valley funds group aiming to register five million new conservative Christians for 2012 election. … Democratic organizers also attest to the potential, which has prompted religious advocates on the left to expand their organizing efforts.
Answer 1 of 1: The democratic party does accept funds from corporations. Suggest you look here: … Silicon Valley: What does Silicon Valley get from support for the Democratic party? How do political parties raise funds for campaigning and to pay staff?
Silicon Valley may be 3,000 miles away from Washington, … If there is a Democratic bent in Silicon Valley, … which has disbursed funds to candidates in both parties. Zuckerberg was friendly with Obama on the campaign trail, …
Silicon Valley Democrats Neck and Neck After Massive Fundraising Haul for House Primary. Print article Send a Tip. … now that he and Singh have roughly the same amount of funds to spend on advertising and outreach. …
One of the most closely watched Congressional races in the nation is happening right here in Silicon Valley. … Silicon Valley Democrats At Odds Over … “People know the kinds of results I brought in. Things that brought in funds that created jobs like the BART to …
The GOP Plan to Crush Silicon Valley What will become … House Republicans are seeking far greater cuts in non-defense spending than Senate Democrats, … to happen when Congress reconvenes is that Democrats and Republicans will agree on a continuing resolution that will fund the government …
Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg surprised everyone today by agreeing to host a fund-raiser for New Jersey governor Chris Christie, … People often assume that because Silicon Valley tech companies are filled with hip, … Both Democrats and Republicans Are Trying to Politicize Ebola.
If Republicans Are So Great For Business, Why Does Silicon Valley Support Democrats? By Henry Blodget February 16, … A partner at Silicon Valley venture capital firm Greylock, Reid has invested in Facebook, Zynga, and many other companies.
Former Obama official already amassing funds, … Longtime Silicon Valley Democrat wrangler Wade Randlett, … House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi was at one of Khanna’s fundraisers but “supports Pete Stark,” said Jennifer Crider, …
… President Barack Obama on Thursday stopped in Silicon Valley for the one thing this high … he sought funds for the Democratic National Committee. Advertisement “It’s an extraordinary honor to host the … Obama’s stop in the Bay Area scored big money for the Democrats, …
How Silicon Valley made Barack Obama this year’s hottest start-up. … The Amazing Money Machine. … By November, North and Gorenberg were among the top Democratic fund-raisers nationwide. On election night, …
The term of choice in political giving these days is straight out of the world of finance: donors have become “investors.” Now, liberal California venture capitalists have come up with the natural corollary: political “mutual funds.” The new venture, being launched Monday, is the work of Andy and
… How Silicon Valley’s $50 Million Bet on Immigration … who helped bankroll the project and personally helped convince an elite mix of Silicon Valley CEOs and investors to fund the … But after mulling how taking action might affect the prospects for Democrats in …
12,000 MISSING TESLA ELECTRIC CARS! WANING DEMAND, TESLA PUMPING STOCK, COOKING THE BOOKS???
– Many have charged that Tesla’s own shareholders are the buyers of Tesla’s in order to make demand look better.
– Bad reputation from Tesla and fraud lawsuits against Elon Musk taking their toll
– GOP Congress in January to investigate Fed and White House “stock Pumping” with “fine tooth comb”
– GOP Senator: “If we find out the White House is helping Tesla “pump stock” in order to protect Tesla’s, and the White House’s, mutual cross-investment, then that could mean felony jail time for somebody..”
FROM THE CANTECH LETTER:
The Mystery of 12,000 Missing Teslas: Overseas Boom or Waning U.S. Demand?
I have to be very careful what I say here, however, as a general rule, declining demand in the early adopter market is not a promising development for a technology company, or, in the case of Tesla, an automobile manufacturer. As with other remarkable observations regarding Tesla (fires, Trabant level reliability, etc.) no doubt a positive spin will be placed on this or, alternatively, aspersions will be cast on the data themselves. Nonetheless, as I said, declining demand in your early adopter market, especially when it is the US, is never a good sign. Never, ever, ever, a good sign.
“Tesla Motors (TSLA) is slowly ramping up production. Demand for its electric sedans allegedly remains high. Yet far fewer of the vehicles are making their way onto U.S. roads this year. In the first nine months of 2014, the number of U.S. registrations of Tesla vehicles fell by one-third to 9,331, according to an analysis of public records by Hedges & Co., an Ohio-based market-research firm. In the same period, however, Tesla said it delivered 21,821 cars—a 40 percent increase from a year earlier. What happened to the other 12,490 cars?”
About Brian Piccioni
Brian is a Partner at J Capital Partners, a new breed of investment bank focused on non resource growth companies with special emphasis on technology companies. He has been part of the technology industry for a third of a century. For 13 years he was an electronics designer and software developer. He designed early generation PCs, mobile phones (including cell phones) and a number of embedded systems which are still in use today. He then became a sell-side research analyst for the next 20 years, where he was ranked the #1 tech analyst in Canada for six consecutive years, named one of the best in the world, and won a number of awards for stock-picking and estimating.
He started writing the Geek’s Reading List about 10 years ago. In addition to the company specific research notes he was publishing almost every day, the Geek’s Reading List was a weekly list of articles he found interesting – usually provocative, new, and counter-consensus. The sorts of things he wasn’t seeing being written anywhere else.
They were not intended, at the time, to be taken as investment advice, nor should they today. But, investors need to understand crucial trends and developments in the industries in which they invest. Therefore, these comments may actually help investors with a longer time horizon. Not to mention they might come in handy for consumers, CEOs, IT managers … or just about anybody, come to think of it. Technology isn’t just a niche area of interest to geeks these days: it impacts almost every part of our economy. In a way, we are all geeks now.
TESLA MOTORS – ANOTHER WALL STREET SCAM – James Quinn …Your browser indicates if you’ve visited this link
There’s one story in cleantech today: Tesla Motors’ public sale. The electric car maker just raised the bar on its IPO, slated for tomorrow, increasing the number of shares for sale from 11.1 million to 13.3 million.
Even FORBES admits Tesla is a Scam! | PUBLIC CRIME INVESTIGATIONSYour browser indicates if you’ve visited this link
hot articles. elon musk under investigation; gawker media skewered; the questions tesla motors refuses to answer: the crime of the century; ebola can wipe out 70% of america!
The Fine Print in Tesla’s IPO: No Profit, No Product, No Problem By SAM GUSTIN Posted 5:00 PM 02/03/10 So what if Tesla Motors, the luxury electric-car maker, lost $31 million in the first nine months of last year and $236 million since its inception.
Is Tesla Motors’ Revived Competitor a Legitimate Threat? (TSLA)Your browser indicates if you’ve visited this link
Tesla Motors (NASDAQ: TSLA ) has been on a stock price roller-coaster ride over the last year, … Tesla is building out its Supercharger station infrastructure in order to provide convenient power for its electric vehicles.
Tesla Motors. Home > Automotive > Auto Manufacturers. Are you this business? Learn about … On May 15, 2008, I received an email from Tesla stating that Tesla had established a comprehensive warranty of 3 years/36,000 miles, …
… the public forum is flooded with all caps complaints about the car, while there is little such action in the private forum…Odd, at best. michael1800 … Copyright © 2014 Tesla Motors, Inc. All rights reserved. Legal & Privacy; First Responders; Choose Region; MY TESLA | Contact | Sign In;
Posts about is tesla a scam written by Syed … Tesla Motors has never been a company which has been able to back up their rhetoric with a product as advertised, market or sell anything other than a rebodied Lotus Elise with a bunch of batteries in it, OR bring anything to the market as they …
Another Tesla Roadster Scam on cars.com – Tesla Motors Club …Your browser indicates if you’ve visited this link
Yes $24,590 has to be a scam. While on the low side the I can believe the $73,300 bid on ebay.
Transcript 1. Tesla Secret Review- Does Tesla Secret Really Work? Tesla Secret is a guide to build your own generator.
Tesla’s Elon Musk & NY Times: Disturbing Discrepancies On …Your browser indicates if you’ve visited this link
Musk promised a blog post from Tesla Motors, with further details from the car’s data log, would be “coming soon.” Data logging, he noted, has to be approved by customers, but it’s always turned on for journalists.
Tesla Motors Scam Related Information; Model S Reviews | Tesla Motors. Consumer Reports is calling the Tesla Model S the best car it has ever tested.
Tesla doesn’t actually have management training like most other corporations. Control spending habits of store managers and service managers. … Glassdoor has 165 Tesla Motors reviews submitted anonymously by Tesla Motors employees.
Tesla Motors and the ‘Great American Jobs Scam’ | JSTOR DailyYour browser indicates if you’ve visited this link
Earlier this month, electric car maker Tesla Motors announced it would build a huge battery factory in Nevada. In return, the state will give it $1.25 billion in tax breaks, electricity discounts, and other perks over the next 20 years.
Consumer complaints for Tesla Motors – Serving the Silicon …Your browser indicates if you’ve visited this link
BBB’s Consumer Complaints for Tesla Motors. … Scam Source; Programs & Services. … Tesla Motors has reached an agreement with *** ***** and we believe this matter is now closed. 01/01/2014: Delivery Issues | Read Complaint Details. X. Complaint
Tesla Motors (TSLA): ZEV Carbon Credits, Subsidies and the …Your browser indicates if you’ve visited this link
An article posted on InsiderMonkey about just how Tesla Motors Inc (NASDAQ: TSLA) … such modeling would be much harder to do because there is no way of knowing how many one percenters would not buy a Tesla roadster or whatever if it weren’t for a generous subsidy or tax break of …
California Car Dealers File Complaint Over Tesla Motors …Your browser indicates if you’ve visited this link
And that’s a fact that I am sure Tesla Motors has already figured out. Image of Tesla Model Scourtesy of Tesla Motors … Global Oil Scam.” California is a victim of this scam. To avoid the gasoline price, rip-off, plug your Tesla S, electric car into your household, …
Is Tesla Motors considering licensing their proprietary technology to other manufacturers such as Honda or Toyota? … Ramirez’s foes claimed they were trying to protect the public from a “scam artist” who didn’t have a viable business. And by the time they were done, …
How Tesla Motors Really Makes Money… From Taxpayers …Your browser indicates if you’ve visited this link
How Tesla Motors Really Makes Money… From Taxpayers. … Tesla didn’t generate a profit by selling sexy cars, … yes, unicorn beams, which are the same things that are used for the ‘carbon credits’ scam – everyone who thinks there’s a meal for free is either eating on someone else’s …
Of course, CEO Elon Musk has a long ways to take Tesla before it truly becomes a permanent player in the automotive world. It not only has to hit this year’s sales target, but keep the momentum going into next year.
Timothée Rischmann, spécialiste produits chez Tesla Motors, … My Personal/ Review/Come Up From Mca Motor Club Of America Scam in 2014; Home; Get Your Video Blog Now © 2014 Switch2Freedom. All Rights Reserved. · Setup Video Blog · ·
… 1975) is part of the founding team and the Chief Technical Officer of Tesla Motors, an electric car company based in Palo Alto, California At Tesla, Straubel oversees the technical and engineering design of the vehicles.
TeslaMotors Reviews – Consumer Reviews of Teslamotors.com …Your browser indicates if you’ve visited this link
Online Business Reviews: Find Trustworthy Sites, Avoid Scams. SiteJabber was developed in part with a grant from the US Government’s NSF. SiteJabber for Business. Home; Write a Review; Consumer Tips; Best of 2014; Index; Press; Log in; Sign up; TeslaMotors reviews
Tag Archives: Tesla Motors. Don’t Let The Sun Go Down On Me. Posted on May 4, 2012 by Richard Billies. With sincere apologies to Sir Elton John, this must be the song that Barack Obama is singing.
U.S. Dealer Group Seeks Tesla Meeting on Retail Plans …Your browser indicates if you’ve visited this link
… , said it’s seeking to meet with electric-car maker Tesla Motors Inc. about its retail network plans. Sign in with Facebook Or use your Businessweek account. … Tesla, which is using using … ‘Outright Scam’
Tesla Model S interior + See all 30. Along the top is a sort of status bar, showing the outdoor temperature, a simple representation of the battery life for the car, the name of the currently loaded driver profile, …
As you know, the initial product of Tesla Motors is a high performance electric sports car called the Tesla Roadster. I have been trying to follow that subject for a number of years, but they will no longer talk to me, Was that a Scam?
Venmar Motor Replacement. There is no doubt Nikola Tesla was a brilliant man but there is no evidence that he ever discovered This scam is very similar to Earth for Energy in that it is an e-book of plans that is sold through a network of affiliates who receive generous 75% commissions on sales.
Free Tesla Power Device Scam? tesla perpetual motion car. tesla ametek permanent magnet motor generator. tesla free energy magnetic motors plans. tesla how to wire a magnetic motor starter. Standard Gibbs Energy Difference.
Download Tesla Generator Blueprints Free. Tesla Motors History. Best Plans Teslas Fuelless Generator. Permanent Magnets Power. 20314 – PERPETUUM MOBILE – Eslas Fuelless Generator Scam.
Tesla Motors — американская автомобильная компания из Кремниевой долины, ориентированная на производство электромобилей. Названа в честь всемирно известного электротехника и физика Николы Теслы.
On Thursday, Elon Musk tweeted out what looked like a partial unveiling of the Tesla Motors D and a hint that he may be unveiling something else in next week’s Tesla Motors announcement.
App Authentication Flaw Creates Tesla Motors Hack Concern. Your Tesla can spy on you and drive you off the road on command. NATIONAL REVIEW AND OTHERS, say: “Khorasan is A Scam“.
A case study in pay-to-play cronyism
By Dan Epstein
News flash: Government subsidies and special-interest favors go hand in hand.
The latest example comes from a federal green-energy loan program. Last month, the DC District Court ruled that Cause of Action, where I am executive director, can proceed with a lawsuitagainst the Department of Energy. We’re suing the federal government for the blatant political favoritism in its $25 billion “Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing Loan Program.”
In principle, this taxpayer-funded program was supposed to support the manufacture of energy-efficient cars. In practice, it rewarded a select few well-connected companies.
Since the program was created in 2008, numerous businesses have applied for its taxpayer-backed financial support. Yet only a small number were approved. Among the lucky few were two electric car manufacturers: Teslaand Fisker.
Both companies’ political connections run deep, especially Tesla’s. The company’s founder, Elon Musk, was a max donor for President Obama. One of its board members, Steven Westly, was appointed to a Department of Energy advisory board. And another Obama bundler, Tesla investor and adviser Steven Spinner, secured employment in the department’s Loan Program Office—the very office that gave the company a taxpayer-backed loan.
Fisker also has friends in high places. The company, which has since gone bankrupt, was backed by a San Francisco venture capital firm whose senior partners donated millions to the 2008 Obama campaign and other Democrat causes. One partner, John Doerr, parlayed his support into a seat on the President’s Council of Jobs and Competitiveness.
Such connections can allow a company to exert political pressure to enrich itself. Unsurprisingly, Department of Energy emails show that such pressure was rampant in its loan programs.
There’s no shortage of examples. The department’s leaders—including then-Secretary of Energy Steven Chu—repeatedly promised to deliver results to politicians like Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) and Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.). One emails reads, “DOE has made a political commitment” to approve a company’s loan. Another says the “pressure is on real heavy” from none other than Vice President Joe Biden. And still another shows an employee asking, “what’s another billion anyhow?”
Unsurprisingly, the Obama administration gave Tesla and Fisker preferential treatment, and then some.
The Department of Energy revised its review process in order finish the companies’ applications faster. The government gave them extraordinary access to its staff and facilities—even to the point of having government employees personally walk them through the loan application and approval process. The department ignored its own lending rules in order to approve the companies’ loans. And it renegotiated the terms of some loans after the companies could not keep their original commitments or were experiencing financial difficulties. Tellingly, Fisker has since gone out of business, despite receiving over a billion dollars in loans through this federal program.
Now contrast this preferential treatment with what happened to XP Vehicles and Limnia, neither of which have the same political connections. (My organization is suing the Department of Energy on their behalf). The two companies partnered to manufacture an energy-efficient sport utility vehicle that would have competed with Tesla and Fisker’s cars. They applied for loans in 2008 and 2009 under the same loan program.
The department refused them both—and it used bogus reasons to do so.
For starters, the department made claims that were laughably false. To take one example: It rejected XPV’s application because its vehicle was powered by hydrogen. It was an electric SUV. It also raised objections that it didn’t raise with other companies whose applications were approved. For instance: The bureaucracy criticized the proposed all-electric vehicle for not using a specific type of gasoline. Yet Tesla and Fisker received the loans despite producing similar all-electric cars.
In light of these obvious problems and hypocrisy, both companies presented the Department of Energy with detailed rebuttals. Yet the government failed to respond. To this day, both XPV and Limnia are awaiting a satisfactory reply. In the meantime, XPV has gone out of business, unable to compete against its politically connected—and subsidized—rivals.
This casts the Department of Energy’s loan program in a new light. It was sold to the American public as a means of promoting energy-efficient vehicles. Instead, it was used to benefit a select few well-connected companies. It was a blatant crony handout, paid for by the U.S. taxpayer.
Sadly, similar examples are widespread in Washington. That’s no surprise considering the feds spend roughly $100 billion a year in taxpayer-funded handouts to businesses. This breeds the sort of government-business collusion Americans think is rampant in Washington. In fact, over two-thirds of likely voters think the federal government helps businesses that hire the most lobbyists, shake the right hands, and pad the right pockets. They’re right.
This points to a simple conclusion: Politicians and bureaucrats shouldn’t use the public’s money to pad private companies’ bottom lines. As the Department of Energy’s green-vehicle loan program shows, the capacity for corruption is immense—and inevitable.
Epstein is executive director of Cause of Action, a government watchdog.
” A cartel rigged a U.S. Government funding program to exclusively benefit themselves financially and politically. It back-fired on them!
A large number of applicant’s were targeted and terminated by Steven Chu and his staff, at the request of campaign investors. The same set of tactics was used in every case. In every case, the applicants had a technology which competed with, and in most cases was better than, those campaign investors competing products.
This was a clear cut case of kickbacks and coordinated industrial market sabotage. Historical records have proven that ONLY campaign investors companies were funded; and that EVERY single non-campaign investor applicant was blockaded and manipulated into shut-down. The actions undertaken by Steven Chu, and his associates, constitute a felony violation of a number of laws and ethics standards.
The applicants are now seeking justice against the associated parties who assisted in the attacks.
The incident involves rigging energy industry minerals and supplies to benefit a select handful of billionaires who had taken control of the market for batteries and raw materials used by Tesla, Fisker, Solyndra and other notorious companies from this scandal.
Lithium ion batteries, when they burn, cause brain cancer, liver cancer and other, potentially lethal, toxic poisoning. Certain regulators are told to “ignore these issues” because certain lithium ion investors donated cash to certain campaigns. The chemicals for lithium ion batteries come from countries which needed to be invaded in order to monopolize the mining of those chemicals. Certain politicians are told to “ignore these issues” because certain lithium ion investors engaged in war profiteering in order to control those minerals.
The FAA has issued numerous warnings and videos showing that lithium ion batteries do spontaneously self-ignite and crash airplanes. Numerous people have been killed in lithium ion plane crashes. Certain regulators are told to “ignore these issues” because certain lithium ion investors donated cash to certain campaigns. Flight MH370 was carrying tons of lithium ion batteries in it’s cargo hold.
Lithium ion batteries have self-ignited and set numerous children and senior citizens on fire. They have set homes on fire. They have set offices on fire. They have set Apple Stores on fire. You constantly hear about passenger airlines being forced to land because passengers “smell smoke in the cabin”. This is almost always a lithium ion battery going off in the cabin and exposing all of the passengers to it’s carcinogenic ignition vapors. There have been multiple recalls of Tesla for fires including the battery charger cord setting homes on fire and the need for an entire titanium add-on plate to cover the whole underside of the Tesla. Tesla’s have now been involved in many deaths.
Silicon Valley investors took over the lithium ion battery market, along with Goldman Sachs (recently called before Congress for this very same “commodity manipulation”), because they knew they were getting large government hand-outs from the Department of Energy in exchange for campaign contributions.
Lithium ion batteries lose their power and memory over a relatively short time. Lithium ion batteries blow up when they get wet or bumped. Fisker Motors went out of business when millions of dollars of Fisker cars, using lithium ion batteries, got wet and all blew up. Tesla battery packs have blown up, on multiple occasions, from simply hitting bumps in the road. Manufacturing these kinds of batteries is so toxic that even China, a country known for the most minimal regulations, has closed a huge number of battery factories because of the massive numbers of deaths they caused to workers and nearby residents.
Journalists have published a glut of articles exposing cover-ups about the dangers and corruption involved with lithium ion batteries. The U.S. Government and numerous groups have filed charges against Panasonic, and similar battery companies for bribery, corruption, dumping, price fixing and other unethical tactics.
Every key investor in lithium ion was also a campaign donor who also received huge federal cash from the Department of Energy in the same funding cycle in which they paid campaign contributions. By driving a Tesla, in addition to the common public perception that it is a “douche-bag car”, there is something far worse about driving it. You are making a public statement to the world that you support organized crime by driving this car. Here is why: Investigators say that, political operatives David Plouffe, Rahm Emanual, Steven Rattner, Dan Pfeiffer, Bill Daly, David Axelrod and Robert Gibbs arranged with Silicon Valley investors to take over the lithium battery industry in order to monopolize the trillions of dollars of lithium, and related mining deals, in Afghanistan. The Afghan war has now cost American’s over 6 trillion dollars, with almost nothing to show for it.
They say that they traded federal funding for campaign support assisted by Harry Reid and Dianne Feinstein, who received numerous stock and cash kickbacks in the scheme. They say they used the money to fund political campaigns. They used the Silicon Valley investors internet companies, (mostly Google), to manipulate voter perceptions and web searches in favor of their personal agenda and profits. The Silicon Valley investors received favorable federal laws, tax gifts, free federal loans, stock bumps and other perks. The Silicon Valley investors companies that used the Afghan minerals: Abound, Solyndra, Fisker, Ener1, Tesla, and many, many more, that received the Department of Energy kickback funds, managed by Steven Chu, have all either failed, been raided, been charged with fraud or otherwise turned out to be disasters because they were based on a financial fraud skimming scheme instead of a good business plan. Anyone who spoke out about details of the scam, particularly journalists, had a character assassination hit-job ordered on them by Axelrod, Gibbs and Carney; using tabloid fronts that they controlled.
All of these facts are known, in great detail, by many investigators. Nearly a million pages of evidence exist. A Special Prosecutor is required to perform proper prosecutions. No matter what political party you belong to: This is organized crime against the taxpayers.
All of this information can now be validated, and confirmed, on any law enforcement, or investigative news, database.”
We are most interested in having Elon Musk answer these questions in front of the U.S. Congress during a live broadcast:
– Has your company, or anyone associated with your company, ever hired multitudes of fake bloggers to post fake positive reviews about Tesla motors in order to simulate interest?
– Has Tesla Motors ever compensated a publisher, or industrial rating company, for positive reviews or ratings?
– Does Tesla Motors believe that the coordinated manipulation of the public perception of a company, trading on the stock market, via the dissemination of inaccurate data by the companies spokespeople is not stock fraud and a violation of SEC laws?
– What percentage of Tesla Motors do Google’s investors, staff and
executives own cumulatively?
– How much money did those Tesla/Google investors contribute to election campaigns from 2007 to today? Which campaigns? Did the winners in any of those campaigns award U.S. taxpayer funds to the portfolio companies of those investors? How much money?
– When Tesla Motors applied for the Department of Energy funds Elon Musk stated that Tesla was in exceptional financial health, yet now Elon Musk, and his senior staff, have been recorded stating that the company was nearly bankrupt then. In light of these more recent revelations, is that not a felony violation of the federal “Section 136 Law” which states that ‘a company cannot be on the verge of bankruptcy or it shall not receive Department of Energy funds’? New disclosures show that Tesla stated information in it’s federal application which Tesla’s founders and staff have stated they knew was false at the time. Should Tesla be prosecuted
– Did Deloitte, under contract to Tesla, arrange false accounting via the Tesla Wells Fargo bank account while Deloitte was also acting, in conflict of interest, as the Department of Energy reviewer of applicants?
– Does Tesla Motors have a confidential relationship with a national group of reporters, from different publications, who have agreed to release Tesla-positive news spin stories on a synchronized basis, at the same time, in order to coverup Tesla investigation disclosures and artificially accelerate stock market vales? Has Tesla Motors arranged with Google to have negative Tesla Motors stories down-ranked while having positive Tesla stories up-ranked? Would that be considered stock fraud?
– How many Senators and their families, that you are aware of, own stock in Tesla Motors?
– Was Elon Musk promised any NASA contracts, in advance of the closure of a portion of NASA, in exchange for campaign funding from Tesla and Google investors?
– How many Senators, their families and Google-related investors, that you are aware of, hold stock in lithium-ion battery related companies?
– Has Steven Chu, the former head of the Department of Energy, ever had a personal relationship with any Tesla staff or investors?
– Has Senator Dianne Feinstein, or her family, ever had a personal
relationship with any Tesla staff or investors?
– Why are Tesla and Solyndra on the same physical plot of land?
– Has anyone from Senator Dianne Feinstein’s office also worked for Tesla Motors and/or Solyndra?
– Has anyone associated with Senator Dianne Feinstein’s family, named Herb, ever supplied staffing services to Tesla?
– Has anyone associated with Senator Dianne Feinstein’s family had any relationship with the real estate transactions involving Tesla and/or Solyndra real estate?
– Panasonic, your battery partner, has been charged with organized crime, dumping, price fixing, the deaths of thousands of battery workers from toxic poisoning and with building lethal battery factories that destroyed all of the towns near them. Is that a problem?
– Do your battery packs release toxic and/or cancer causing fumes when they burn?
– What was your relationship with Eric Strickland, the head of the
National Highway Transportation safety agency who quit his job 48 hours after being notified that the toxic Tesla report he knew about was going public?
– Did you falsify lithium-ion safety reports?
– Bernard Tse, your battery program director, and 7 other senior staff, provided your company with numerous severely concerning lithium-ion safety reports which were never presented to the Department of Energy. Were these reports covered up because the Senators and Investors of Google and Tesla all have ownership interest in the lithium-ion industry?
– Has Elon Musk ever spied on his own employees and competitors?
– Has Elon Musk ever undertaken sabotage programs against his competitors?
– Did your SEC filings use tax credits from the White House to make Tesla look like it had profits?
– What was Tesla’s debt ratio at the time that Tesla applied for the DOE loan? Why do you think Tesla had the worse debt ratio of any applicant yet Tesla was awarded funds with almost no review?
– Why has Tesla spent billions, and a decade, to only sell a few cars when all of your competitors have done 20 times better on less money and in less time? Why are over 200 technical problems with the car documented online by Tesla owners yet you say nothing about those problems? Why are you being sued for fraud under the Federal “Lemon Law”?
– Why were your cars $100,000.00 over budget PER CAR, at the time of your Department of Energy loan application, yet nobody at the DOE commented about that in their review notes?
– Did Steven Chu’s senior staff: Matt Rogers and Steven Spinner have any relationship with Tesla-related investors prior to Chu hiring them at the DOE? Was it coincidental that McKinsey Consulting, the company they worked for, produced all of the pitch documents for the White House and Congress, which were used to steer the Federal funds to Tesla Motors?
– Was Tesla Motors funded as a gift to campaign investors?
– Are you trying to build a battery factory not far from Mexico in order to take advantage of Mexican workers? Are you concerned that most battery factory workers in China were poisoned with toxins? Are you concerned that your battery factory will ENCOURAGE immigration abuse and devastate our border?
– The founders ex-partners, investors, buyers, suppliers, employees and ex wives have sued Elon Musk for fraud? What does that say about Mr. Musk?
– How many of your employees have been burned alive at your factories? Has OSHA ever fined you?
– Did California State Officials, in Sacramento, California, ever manipulate tax laws and decisions to exclusively benefit Tesla Motors in exchange for perks?
– What percentage of your buyers have killed members of the public with their Tesla Vehicles? Why is that number, in relative terms, higher than any other car company?
– Have White House staff agreed to protect Tesla, at all costs, in order to keep Mitt Romney’s prediction from coming true and to cover campaign billionaires?
– Do your VC investors pump the stock market rating by buying their own Tesla stock when bad news comes out about Tesla in order to create a synthetic cover-story short term stock rise?
Any reporter who can get a legitimate set of responses to these very important questions, is encouraged to post those responses
“Are Chinese Hackers Making Tesla Motors Electric Cars Kill People?
A shocking number of Tesla’s have now suddenly swerved off cliffs and killed the drivers in fireballs of burning death, or swerved into oncoming traffic and killed innocents in on-coming lanes, or swerved into pedestrians and cyclists and killed… again and again.
Why would a car with such low sales volume have such a huge number of deaths and accidents involved with it?
For a time, the media, and the public has just assumed that Tesla owners are all just rich douche-bags . The assumption was that they are always partying, getting drunk and crashing their Tesla’s, because they are just dicks.
Something more sinister may actually be happening.
In a recent 60 Minutes episode, the ability to take over a car remotely, by hackers, was fully demonstrated.
A vast number of articles has anointed Tesla as the most hackable car in the world.
A Chinese university held a contest to see who could remote hack a Tesla first. Multiple teams got it done.
Now the Chinese have hacked most of Washington, DC so we know they have the hardware.
News about how easy the Tesla is to hack has been around for a few years but no recalls for this ever took place. With the media openly acknowledging that Elon Musk is a federal Mooch protected by the White House, it is no wonder.
With the increasing numbers of deaths, fires, explosions and unexplained swerving’s in the land of Tesla Motors, shouldn’t a recall be demanded?
When Erick Strickland, the head of the NHTSA was confronted about these issues, he just quit the agency.
Some may have thought it was OK that the Tesla douche-bags were getting wiped out but now the deaths include many innocents. How many deaths will it take before action is taken? The Tesla cover-ups are wearing thin.”