• subverted_per@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    It was all for show anyway. He got to be the first trillionaire, and his friends got to sell at the high while leaving pension managers and rubes holding the bag. Hell he probably sold a good bit himself to reinvest in some other scheme. It was a pump and dump scam facilitated by the market.

    • pulsewidth
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      7 days ago

      I agree with the gist, and I’m probably dumb but how would he both sell high and sell to himself?

      • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 days ago

        Not “to himself” sold a bit himself.

        But you can actually do that, it’s how the collectible market and other worthless trash like NFTs inflate value.

        Someone buying at the inflated value makes others think it’s actually worth that and might convince them to buy as well. The “sale” is part of the con, as the conman passes money from his right hand to his left and calls it demand.

      • subverted_per@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 days ago

        He didnt buy, he would have sold a portion of his own stock to bag holders. My guess is that he sold a portion of his stock through shell companies if he was at all worried about rules. He knew the whole thing was a scam. He knew the trillionaire thing wouldn’t last, but he knew that the valuation would be high to start, because all big IPOs start overvalued before settling back to something more reasonable. Which is why they relaxed the rules for early investors to be able to sell right away. So again, he sold at the peak, and immediately turned around and bought some other more stable stock.

  • ExtremeDullard@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    7 days ago

    It’s always been pretend wealth anyway.

    Having said that, what “on paper” wealth means is that those ultrarich mofos get to borrow a lot of money from the banks, using their hypothetical wealth as very real collateral, to live their opulent lives without ever paying taxes like the rest of us with a real job.

    • a_non_monotonic_function
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 days ago

      Unfortunately he has enough pretend wealth to alter the results of elections and go on a grant and people killing spree throughout the government.

  • MushuChupacabra@piefed.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    7 days ago

    Normally, performance like that leads to the CEO getting punted.

    Invest in a Fail Upwards billionaire, lose value in your investment.

    Remove Elon Musk from SpaceX, watch your investment grow.

  • moobythegoldensock@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    7 days ago

    According to Bloomberg’s Billionaires Index, Elon Musk’s estimated net worth began the year near $630 billion before the SpaceX IPO frenzy briefly pushed his fortune above $1.3 trillion. As SpaceX retreated, that paper wealth evaporated just as quickly. By Friday, Bloomberg estimated Musk’s fortune at approximately $718.8 billion, representing a decline of roughly $600 billion in about a month.

    Ok but he netted nearly $90 billion. By comparison, if he gifted that to a random American, they’d be the 16th wealthiest person in the US.

    I guess this is news in the sense that the only thing to take from Musk is his precious trillionaire label, but his failure still made him richer by an absurd amount.

  • Abyssian
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    7 days ago

    There’s a serious problem when one man can lose more money in a month than anyone else in history has ever had.

    • DarkSurferZA
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      7 days ago

      No, that’s not a problem. That nazi fuck can lose every fucking cent. The problem is not that he lost that much money, it’s that he had it in the first place. That’s the problem

      • Abyssian
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        7 days ago

        Sorry, I didn’t realize anyone reading would be so very slow that they would read that and not understand that I was already very clearly saying that any one person having that much money more than anyone else is the main issue.

        • DarkSurferZA
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          7 days ago

          Oh FFS, don’t be like that. I can read, and I understand. I know what you meant.

          Now you try reading and understanding that my point was to highlight that I actually enjoy him losing money.

          • Abyssian
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            7 days ago

            It’s ok, buddy, you can wear your bicycle helmet in here. No one will tease you about it. ^^

  • switcheroo
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    Let’s keep the count going down. I want that fucker living out of his mom’s garage before year end.