ValueAnalyst

180.1K posts

ValueAnalyst banner
ValueAnalyst

ValueAnalyst

@ValueAnalyst1

When people ask "What do you do" I assume they mean for fun

Katılım Mayıs 2016
2 Takip Edilen39.5K Takipçiler
Sabitlenmiş Tweet
ValueAnalyst
ValueAnalyst@ValueAnalyst1·
Voting for Elon Musk is a tacit admission that we cannot achieve our goals without lying, cheating, and stealing.
ValueAnalyst tweet media
English
92
31
179
160.8K
ValueAnalyst retweetledi
Dr. Dave
Dr. Dave@drdave1999·
A surprising number of people don’t realize that Elon Musk is NOT an engineer— he simply pretends to be one, while taking credit for the work done by the engineers he hires. And— while reasonably smart, he’s not nearly as intelligent as he wants the public to think he is.
English
7
322
1.9K
57.7K
George Noble
George Noble@gnoble79·
Elon Musk is the Ivar Kreuger of our time, and the OpenAI trial is PROVING it in real time. If you don't know who Kreuger was, you should: In the 1920s he was the most admired businessman in the world. The "Match King." He controlled 90% of global match production, lent money to sovereign governments, and his securities were the most widely held in America. But after his death in 1932, auditors spent 5 years untangling over 400 subsidiary companies and discovered the whole thing was held together with fictitious assets, forged bonds, and the unquestioning loyalty of people too dazzled to ask questions. Investors lost $750 million (~$17 billion in today's money). His deficits exceeded Sweden's national debt. Doesn't this sound familiar? The Musk playbook is the most DANGEROUS house of cards I've witnessed in my career. This week in federal court, Musk took the stand to argue that Sam Altman stole a charity. 3 days later he'd contradicted himself under oath so many times that the judge told his lawyers she suspected plenty of people don't want to put the future of humanity in Mr. Musk's hands. OpenAI's attorney asked if Tesla is pursuing AGI. Musk said no. The attorney then pulled up Musk's OWN post from March 4 where he wrote Tesla will be one of the companies to make AGI. His own words entered into evidence against him. BY HIM. Then the attorney asked if xAI used OpenAI's models to train Grok (which violates OpenAI's terms of service). Musk called it a general practice among AI companies. Pressed for a direct answer, he said "partly." Think about that: Musk is in court accusing OpenAI of betrayal while admitting under oath that xAI violated the very same company's terms of service to build Grok. Then came the credibility test: Musk was asked to name his companies that benefit society. He listed Tesla, SpaceX, Neuralink, and X without hesitation. Every one of them is an uncapped for-profit enterprise. Then why did xAI start as a benefit corporation and quietly flip to a for-profit C-corp? No clean answer. This is someone who repeatedly launches entities with noble-sounding charters and converts them into for-profit corporations once the money gets serious. Then his money manager Jared Birchall took the stand: OpenAI's lawyer asked about the donor-advised funds at Vanguard and Fidelity that Musk used to send his $38 million. Did Musk have any legal right to direct where the money went once it entered the DAF? Birchall couldn't answer. Said the legal question was beyond his expertise. The entire lawsuit hinges on that donation creating enforceable obligations. But the man who managed Musk's money just told a federal jury he can't confirm Musk had any enforceable claim over those funds. Now step back... This is a man who promised full autonomy by 2018, a million robotaxis by 2020, and unsupervised FSD by June 2025. EVERY deadline was missed. He claimed he invested $100 million in OpenAI. The real number was $38 million. His defense? His "reputation" made up the difference. Kreuger had 400 subsidiaries and used one entity to prop up another through structures nobody could follow. Musk has Tesla, SpaceX, xAI, Neuralink, the Boring Company, and X. He shifts AI talent from Tesla to xAI, has xAI building the brains for Tesla's Optimus robot, and uses X as a megaphone while the algorithm amplifies his narrative to 200 million followers. Kreuger's investors trusted the man, NOT the math. They loved the confidence. They stopped asking questions because the aura of genius made questioning feel foolish. The same psychology applies to Musk's empire today. Kreuger's reckoning took 5 years of forensic auditing after his death. But Musk is providing his in REAL TIME: contradicting his own posts under oath, admitting to the practices he's suing others for, watching his logic collapse under cross-examination. Different decade. Different industry. Same ending. The truth always catches up.
George Noble tweet media
English
223
1.4K
3.5K
187.1K
ValueAnalyst
ValueAnalyst@ValueAnalyst1·
@SawyerMerritt Demand must be so amazing that $TSLA keeps lowering prices around the world...
English
1
1
5
421
Sawyer Merritt
Sawyer Merritt@SawyerMerritt·
Tesla has launched a new Model 3 lineup in Canada, introducing the Model 3 Premium RWD starting at $39,490 CAD (that converts to just $29,000 USD!). Tesla has also cut the Model 3 Performance price by 17% to $74,990 CAD (from $89,990). The Model 3 Premium RWD trim is about 50% cheaper than the previously lowest-priced Model 3 Long Range ($79,990 CAD) in Canada, which has just been discontinued. The price to get into a Tesla just got a lot more affordable in Canada!
Sawyer Merritt tweet media
English
246
336
3.2K
492.2K
ValueAnalyst
ValueAnalyst@ValueAnalyst1·
@RealJimChanos I don't disagree that the transaction "pulls up S&P 500 EPS estimates," but I note that this is as it should be and disagree with the characterization of "mismatch" or that the accounting overall is misleading.
English
3
1
4
782
James Chanos
James Chanos@RealJimChanos·
@ValueAnalyst1 Please share how you think the 2026 profit accounting works if MSFT purchases an additional $100M of NVDA GPU’s this year, at a 75% gross profit margin.
English
5
2
46
3.6K
Carl CRHome
Carl CRHome@carlousa14·
George Noble@gnoble79

Elon Musk is the Ivar Kreuger of our time, and the OpenAI trial is PROVING it in real time. If you don't know who Kreuger was, you should: In the 1920s he was the most admired businessman in the world. The "Match King." He controlled 90% of global match production, lent money to sovereign governments, and his securities were the most widely held in America. But after his death in 1932, auditors spent 5 years untangling over 400 subsidiary companies and discovered the whole thing was held together with fictitious assets, forged bonds, and the unquestioning loyalty of people too dazzled to ask questions. Investors lost $750 million (~$17 billion in today's money). His deficits exceeded Sweden's national debt. Doesn't this sound familiar? The Musk playbook is the most DANGEROUS house of cards I've witnessed in my career. This week in federal court, Musk took the stand to argue that Sam Altman stole a charity. 3 days later he'd contradicted himself under oath so many times that the judge told his lawyers she suspected plenty of people don't want to put the future of humanity in Mr. Musk's hands. OpenAI's attorney asked if Tesla is pursuing AGI. Musk said no. The attorney then pulled up Musk's OWN post from March 4 where he wrote Tesla will be one of the companies to make AGI. His own words entered into evidence against him. BY HIM. Then the attorney asked if xAI used OpenAI's models to train Grok (which violates OpenAI's terms of service). Musk called it a general practice among AI companies. Pressed for a direct answer, he said "partly." Think about that: Musk is in court accusing OpenAI of betrayal while admitting under oath that xAI violated the very same company's terms of service to build Grok. Then came the credibility test: Musk was asked to name his companies that benefit society. He listed Tesla, SpaceX, Neuralink, and X without hesitation. Every one of them is an uncapped for-profit enterprise. Then why did xAI start as a benefit corporation and quietly flip to a for-profit C-corp? No clean answer. This is someone who repeatedly launches entities with noble-sounding charters and converts them into for-profit corporations once the money gets serious. Then his money manager Jared Birchall took the stand: OpenAI's lawyer asked about the donor-advised funds at Vanguard and Fidelity that Musk used to send his $38 million. Did Musk have any legal right to direct where the money went once it entered the DAF? Birchall couldn't answer. Said the legal question was beyond his expertise. The entire lawsuit hinges on that donation creating enforceable obligations. But the man who managed Musk's money just told a federal jury he can't confirm Musk had any enforceable claim over those funds. Now step back... This is a man who promised full autonomy by 2018, a million robotaxis by 2020, and unsupervised FSD by June 2025. EVERY deadline was missed. He claimed he invested $100 million in OpenAI. The real number was $38 million. His defense? His "reputation" made up the difference. Kreuger had 400 subsidiaries and used one entity to prop up another through structures nobody could follow. Musk has Tesla, SpaceX, xAI, Neuralink, the Boring Company, and X. He shifts AI talent from Tesla to xAI, has xAI building the brains for Tesla's Optimus robot, and uses X as a megaphone while the algorithm amplifies his narrative to 200 million followers. Kreuger's investors trusted the man, NOT the math. They loved the confidence. They stopped asking questions because the aura of genius made questioning feel foolish. The same psychology applies to Musk's empire today. Kreuger's reckoning took 5 years of forensic auditing after his death. But Musk is providing his in REAL TIME: contradicting his own posts under oath, admitting to the practices he's suing others for, watching his logic collapse under cross-examination. Different decade. Different industry. Same ending. The truth always catches up.

QME
1
0
3
406
ValueAnalyst
ValueAnalyst@ValueAnalyst1·
BYD never lied about how many EVs it will make. CATL never lied about how many batteries it will produce. Waymo never lied about how many robotaxis it will have. $TSLA CEO Elon Musk lied about EVs, batteries, robotaxis, and more, and raised TENS OF BILLIONS from retail investors.
English
28
51
281
6.7K
Rory Johnston
Rory Johnston@Rory_Johnston·
We're actually really going to *need* a supply glut after this end to fill in the hole left by Hormuz. Minimum 1 billion barrels lost, requires an *annual* surplus of 2.7 MMbpd to recover. And that assumes Hormuz reopens today, which it isn't so it'll be bigger. 400 million more barrels per month.
English
52
96
755
75.4K
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent
Amid the impact of Economic Fury, Iran’s currency has hit an all-time low. The Iranian people deserve a new era, which the corrupt and shambolic Iranian regime cannot provide. With their oil industry closing and their currency plummeting, it is past time for the Iranian regime to concede that the people of Iran deserve much better than the ruins of their current regime can provide.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent tweet media
English
874
2K
8.1K
480.4K
ValueAnalyst
ValueAnalyst@ValueAnalyst1·
You don’t hate Elon Musk enough.
ValueAnalyst tweet media
English
32
37
199
3.7K
ValueAnalyst retweetledi
Dwayne
Dwayne@CtrlAltDwayne·
Day three of the OpenAI trial. Court hasn't even started and Elon's lawyer Molo is already on his feet trying to bring in an AI extinction expert. Stands up in front of the judge and says extinction risk is a real problem, this is a real risk, we all could die. Judge Gonzalez Rogers wasn't having it. Pointed out the obvious bit where Elon, despite these supposed risks, is currently running his own AI company. Then she dropped the line of the trial. I suspect there are plenty of people who do not want to put the future of humanity in Mr. Musk's hands. The judge dunked on Elon before he'd even been sworn in. Lmao. Then Savitt got up and asked why Elon hasn't started another AI nonprofit since leaving OpenAI's board back in 2018. Elon's answer under oath: why would I start another nonprofit when I already started a nonprofit. You don't have one though. That's the whole trial. He's suing because his nonprofit isn't a nonprofit anymore but in the same breath he's telling the jury he doesn't need to make a new one because he's already got one. Watching the logic eat itself in real time. Then the AGI bit. Elon swears under oath Tesla isn't pursuing AGI. Savitt calmly pulls up his X post from March 4, eight weeks ago, where Elon wrote Tesla will be one of the companies to make AGI and probably the first to make it in humanoid form. Elon had to sit there and watch his own tweet entered into evidence against him. By him. Then distillation. Savitt asks if xAI used OpenAI's models to train Grok via distillation. Distillation is explicitly banned by OpenAI's terms of service. Elon's first answer is well, generally AI companies distill each other. Savitt pushes him for yes or no. Elon goes partly. The guy suing OpenAI for breaking promises just admitted under oath in federal court that his own company broke OpenAI's TOS to build Grok. At this point he's basically a witness for the defence. Then the hypocrisy reel. Is Tesla socially beneficial. Yes. SpaceX. Yes. Neuralink. Yes. X. Yes. All for-profit, none capped. Then why did xAI start as a benefit corporation in March 2023 and quietly flip to a C corp. Elon doesn't have a clean answer. The guy suing over a nonprofit becoming for-profit is himself a serial flipper of nonprofit adjacent stuff into for-profits. Then the Tesla giveaway moment which is honestly my favourite. Savitt goes you were handing out free Teslas to OpenAI staff right when Brockman was pushing the for-profit ramp up, what's that about. Elon panics and clarifies on the stand that to be clear, I paid full price for the Teslas, I didn't get a discount. His emergency defence under oath was that he didn't get a deal on his own cars from his own factory. Lmao. Then Birchall takes the stand and the case actually gets cooked. OpenAI's lawyer asks about the donor advised funds at Vanguard and Fidelity that Elon used to send the money. Asks Birchall whether Elon had any legal right to direct where the money went once it hit the DAF. Birchall says I'm not a lawyer, I don't know precisely. The whole lawsuit hinges on Elon's 38 million creating a charitable trust he can enforce. It went through donor advised funds. DAFs legally don't work like that, once you donate the money it's not yours anymore. His own money manager just told the jury he doesn't actually know if Elon had any rights over that money at all. Letting Elon testify was a mistake. It's not looking good for him and it's only day 3 of active trial, lmao. Trial resumes Monday.
Dwayne tweet media
English
61
163
724
206.9K
ValueAnalyst retweetledi
Glenn Tunes
Glenn Tunes@glenn_tunes·
YEAH RIGTH ASSHOLE 🙄🤡
Glenn Tunes tweet media
English
131
208
1.1K
15.1K