Dan Taylor

952 posts

Dan Taylor banner
Dan Taylor

Dan Taylor

@ProfAnalytics

Professor @Wharton; Forensic Analytics; expertise in financial data analysis, SEC filings, accounting fraud, and insider trading.

Katılım Ocak 2020
215 Takip Edilen3.9K Takipçiler
Dan Taylor
Dan Taylor@ProfAnalytics·
John — You might be interested in the work we are doing at the Wharton Forensic Analytics Lab to detect and deter insider trading and white-collar crime. We were able to work with bipartisan groups to pass 2 SEC rules, and 1 Act of Congress. Would love to chat. ai-analytics.wharton.upenn.edu/wharton-forens…
English
0
0
7
176
Dan Taylor retweetledi
John Arnold
John Arnold@johnarnold·
It would take the CFTC about 5 minutes to figure out who this was and whether there was any misconduct, assuming they want to.
John Arnold tweet media
English
70
355
2.5K
244.5K
Dan Taylor
Dan Taylor@ProfAnalytics·
@CodfishJohnny CFTC has Eddie Murphy Rule, the SEC does not. Makes it illegal to trade commodities or futures using misappropriated non-public government information. Sec 746 Dodd Frank.
English
1
0
2
1.7K
Codfish Johnny
Codfish Johnny@CodfishJohnny·
Some people assume the Trump Oil Futures is a case of insider trading. After Blaszczak II, my starting point is that it likely isn’t. Government information isn’t sufficiently “property” to be the subject of a fraud. And insider trading is just fraud under 10(b).
The Writings of BGF@WritingsOfBGF

@CodfishJohnny They get busted by insider trading but White House doesnt

English
1
0
3
1.1K
Dan Taylor
Dan Taylor@ProfAnalytics·
At this point I’d say getting to the bottom of these trades that keep happening is one of the few things that is existential to the CFTC’s credibility. @MichaelSelig @ChairmanSelig
unusual_whales@unusual_whales

BREAKING: Nearly $920 million in crude oil shorts were placed at 3:40 AM ET, about 70 minutes before Axios reported the U.S. and Iran were nearing a “14-point” deal to end the war. Oil then plunged more than 12%, with the position gaining an estimated $125 million. Unusual.

English
1
1
17
2.2K
Hudson Labs
Hudson Labs@HudsonLabs·
Most fraud signals show up in the footnotes, not the financials. We built a model that reads 800K SEC filings a year and scores them. Flagged SMCI in 2019. Flagged Credit Suisse before Archegos. White paper has the methodology and case studies. Reply below and we'll send it over.
Hudson Labs tweet media
English
9
3
13
59K
Dan Taylor retweetledi
Codfish Johnny
Codfish Johnny@CodfishJohnny·
Someone asked Grok about whether Nikola was a huge fraud. Love that of the three frauds Grok picked to compare, one was Steve Burns’s Lordstown Motors, yet another @HindenburgRes report. So lucky to have worked with Nate and his team.
Codfish Johnny tweet media
English
1
1
6
761
Dan Taylor
Dan Taylor@ProfAnalytics·
Can confirm. This settlement is literally $0.01 per $1. This makes it economically rational to violate federal securities law, (and fight the SEC to trial)
footnoted@footnoted

Twitter's former investors lost $150 million and a California jury decided in March that investors were owed $2.1 billion, but the @SECGov decided in its infinite wisdom to let Elon Musk off the hook for $1.5 million over disclosure failures in 2022. sec.gov/enforcement-li…

English
1
1
13
899
Dan Taylor retweetledi
robertjdenault
robertjdenault@robertjdenault·
My first TV appearance ever, talking about insider trading and why Kalshi has been effective at policing fraud! My parents might still not understand exactly what I do, but at least they think it’s important now. Big thank you @Bloomberg for having me.
English
12
22
135
24.5K
Dan Taylor retweetledi
Bloomberg
Bloomberg@business·
Prediction markets are being sold as a lucrative side hustle, but most users lose money while the bulk of profits go to a narrow slice of high-frequency traders, a Bloomberg analysis found bloomberg.com/news/articles/…
English
20
20
83
55.7K
Dan Taylor
Dan Taylor@ProfAnalytics·
@Marc_Fagel How could we distinguish btw the two hypotheses using public data?
English
1
0
1
29
Marc Fagel
Marc Fagel@Marc_Fagel·
@ProfAnalytics While 2025 was a terrible year for an agency decimated by the administration), I disagree with your interpretation. In my experience, insider trading cases are almost never driven by DOJ. I interpret this as the SEC only pushing the most egregious cases, hence parallel DOJ cases.
English
1
0
1
67
Dan Taylor
Dan Taylor@ProfAnalytics·
For those asking, it doesn’t matter whether cash or AWS credits. There is no net cash burn in either case, and circularity is preserved. Net effect on Amazon is +Sales +Investment.
Grok@grok

Yes, both are correct. Dan Taylor's simplified example shows the economic loop—Amazon's investment flows back as AWS revenue, boosting sales without net cash burn. Chanos is spot-on that much of it is structured as AWS credits/prepaids, which hit deferred revenue on Amazon's books rather than pure equity cash outflow. It's a common AI/cloud tactic to convert idle capital into recognized revenue over time.

English
4
2
46
8.7K
Dan Taylor
Dan Taylor@ProfAnalytics·
Just so everyone understands the accounting game in the AI/Cloud-space here is a very *simple* example: 1) Amazon “invests” $50B in OpenAI. Amazon records: - Cash $50B + Investment Asset $50B 2) OpenAI uses $50B to buy AWS services. Amazon records: + Sales $50B + Cash $50B Amazon is net $0 cash, but now has $50B in sales and $50B investment asset. Great deal! Thats why we see all the majors doing it, and at scale. It is a way to convert their dormant cash pile into revenue, which Wall Street loves. Most ppl dont realize what is happening. The revenue of these large tech companies is increasing dependent on them being able to self-fund their own sales.
OpenAI@OpenAI

Today, we closed our latest funding round with $122 billion in committed capital at an $852B post-money valuation. The fastest way to expand AI’s benefits is to put useful intelligence in people’s hands early and let access compound globally. This funding gives us resources to lead at scale. openai.com/index/accelera…

English
81
243
2.1K
264.4K
Dan Taylor
Dan Taylor@ProfAnalytics·
For those of you in my replies, who are in disbelief, and would rather trust AI than a Professor of Accounting at Wharton…
Grok@grok

Yes, that's an accurate simplified representation of the accounting. The investor (e.g., Amazon) books the outflow as an asset (investment), not an expense. When the AI firm spends it back on cloud services, the investor records revenue and gets the cash back—net zero cash change, but boosted sales and a balance-sheet asset. This dynamic explains much of the "self-funded" revenue growth in big tech's AI bets.

English
2
5
108
11.4K
Dan Taylor
Dan Taylor@ProfAnalytics·
@RealJimChanos @BradMunchen Yes. There are many nuances needed to make my simple example a realistic one Note that it doesn’t matter for the analysis because net cash is zero, and circularity is preserved. On net, +Sales +Investment.
English
2
0
21
4.8K
James Chanos
James Chanos@RealJimChanos·
@ProfAnalytics @BradMunchen Much of the $AMZN “investment” is in the form of AWS credits, correct? So an increase in Deferred Revenues not a decrease in Cash.
English
3
1
44
9.3K
Dan Taylor
Dan Taylor@ProfAnalytics·
This is a feature not a bug. Raise $50B cash from Amazon. Turn around use cash to buy $50B in AWS compute. Net, Amazon records $50B in sales and a $50B investment. Net change in Amazon’s cash is $0. The more OpenAI raises, the more their investors reported sales will be juiced. It is a scheme. It doesn’t survive as a business model without the circular nature.
Polymarket@Polymarket

JUST IN: OpenAI’s internal projections reportedly show the $122,000,000,000.00 they raised today gives them as little as 18 months of operational runway before they need to raise again.

English
5
17
120
20.1K

Keşfet

@CodfishJohnny @MichaelSelig @ChairmanSelig @HudsonLabs @HindenburgRes @Bloomberg @VagueM62565 @CEOStockWatcher