Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, Radio News.
Hello and welcome to The Money Stuff Podcast, your weekly podcast where we talk about stuff related to money. Hi'm Matt Levin. I read the Money Stuff column for Bloomberg Opinion.
And I'm Katie Greifeld. I'm a reporter for Bloomberg News and an anchor for Bloomberg Television.
It's the best day of our lives.
It is the best day of our lives, which happens every day on Fridays. We have a lot to talk about today. We have to talk about Elon Musk.
Of course, we had a whole week with that Elon Musk.
I think, I know it was weird that we didn't get to it in the first week. So we'll talk about Elon Musk on that pay package fifty six billion dollars, and of course his issues with Delaware. We're also going to talk about Jane Street versus Millennium. You just published on this.
By the time you heard this podcast, I will published on it roughly twenty four hours ago. Were recording it shortly after I published on it.
It's Thursday right now, and Matt published twenty minutes ago. So this is the one I'm least prepared for. As we're also going to talk about Hunter Brook, the hedge fund that's also a newspaper question mark. Indeed, before we get into this week's topics, it's our second episode.
It's our second episode. We got a lot of feedback on the first episode.
We got a lot of feedback. A lot of it was about all of its comment that I made about the doped Olympics. Surprise, they already exist and they're funded by Peter Teel.
Well, it don't exist, they're like launching.
Yeah, the idea is out there, the enhanced Games that would have no drug testing. So if you didn't want to do it performance enhancing drugs, you could still enter.
You would just lose, yes, or you could do the regular Olympics, which you'll still have drug testing.
Yeah, and you'll probably still lose.
I wonder if, like presumably day one, the best athletes will still do the regular Olympics.
Yeah.
I wonder how long it'll take for the Enhanced Olympics to have faster times and it jumps.
It's a great question because if you're like.
The tenth best track athlete and you do a lot of drugs are better than the best.
You probably there's only one way to find out.
Is going to do?
These games need to happen. The event roster includes individual sports such as athletics meaning track and field, aquatics, gymnastics, strength and combat. I would watch these, but.
What we don't have on that list is drissage.
Trissage Yeah, for the uninitiated, dressage is horse dancing. Effectively, just go on YouTube look it up. It's a ridiculous sport that, for better or worse, I partake in. I'm not sure if when I enter the enhanced games, which I will, whether I take the drugs, the horse takes the drugs. Do we both take the drugs the drugs?
Have you or your horse ever been like offered drugs? Has ever been a controversy at your dressage?
We're not that good maybe in higher levels of the sport, but what we're doing, it's very loosely dressage. Let's talk about the time, moving gracefully along laon Musk. The big news this week is that Tesla came out with their
proxy statement two items of interest. They're going to havesh shareholders to vote again on that twenty eighteen pay package of fifty six billion dollars that was voided by a Delaware judge, and related to that, they're going to vote on whether to move Tesla's state of incorporation from Delaware to Texas. What do you want to start with?
They're inter related, yes, right, he got paid a giant snack of options in about twenty eighteen. Everyone says they're worth fifty six billion dollars. Whatever they're worth, like forty billion dollars, fifty billion dollars, just like a conventional number that people attached to it because you know, go up and down with the stock. But right now they're with forty billion dollars and judge took them away in January. I said that was too much to pay him, and
it wasn't properly approved by the shareholders. And so they're going back to the shareholders to one get it properly approved and two never has to deal with a Delaware judge again because they're going to move to Texas.
Like you said, these are two intimately related issues. But sticking with the pay package, which everyone is saying is fifty six billion dollars, maybe it's forty billion dollars. But the vote is in June. Yeah, are they going to approve it again these shareholders.
I think, so the proxy quits a lot of letters from individual shareholders saying how much they love Elon Musk and how they're going to approve it, and also, by the way, letters from like Trope Price Right big shareholders too. It's interesting if you were a sharelder in like twenty twenty one, or even like December of last year, I think you would say this pay package was worth it.
In twenty eighteen, they said we're going to pay you on Musk fifty six billion dollars if he takes the market cap of Tesla from like sixty billion dollars, like six hundred and fifty billion dollars, And at the time that seemed like a real stretch goal. And then he did it really quickly, and so all the shareholders got rich, like they made a lot of money on Tesla, and I think they felt the real sense of gratitude, and so I think very few shareholders were complaining about his
pay package, but one did ensued. Right, Yes, I think the shareholders were happy with it. But now if you go back to them and say you want to approve it again, they could be like, we already got whatever he did. He did the stuff that made it a six hundred and fifty billion dollar company. So if we can get those past efforts for free, why shouldn't they get it for free? They feel grateful, but do they
feel fifty six billion dollars grateful? But that's it. If you're a Tesla scholder at this point, you're playing a longer game, and rightly or wrongly, I think Tesla sholders assume that Elon Musk and his continued affection are essential to the value of Tesla's stock. And so if they vote down this paypack goods, Like will he quit in a huff? Maybe he's got a lot going on, right, He's got a lot of distractions, so he could quit
in a huff. And although his mercurial stewardship has not been great for the stock price in the last couple of years, he quits in a huff, that's going to take the.
Stock think, Yeah, I mean the stock's already down forty percent year today.
Yeah, Like it's been a rough ride. But still I think they want him there. It's not like if they vote this down, he'll come back and be like, Okay, fine, can you be like two billion dollars? Like I think like, if they vote this down, he's going to be really mad, like really mad.
I guess I have two kind of related points to that to what you're saying, what is the key man risk to Tesla? Like, how much does Tesla need Elon Musk at this point? Is something I think about all the time. This is an established company at this point.
No, I agree with that, it's an established company that could probably operate on its own. It's not like the stock has been continuing to go out from strength to strength. It's been a rough time. I do think that there's probably still a valuation premium for Elon Musk, and I think like it's a somewhat retail heavy stocked a lot of people who like Elon Musk and the stock, and I think if he were to leave, that would be bad.
But I'm not sure of that in the way that I might have been in like twenty twenty one.
Yeah.
I also think, by the way, whatever your sort of economic calculation, I do think that some of the sholders at least are like, we agreed to pay him to these options. We voted on it. A court in a weird technical opinion struck that down, and we don't think that's fair. We think it's like bad for corporate democracy and also bad for like fairness to Elon Musk, and so we're going to give him that fifty six billion
dollars back anyway. I think there's probably some of that going on among some of the including some of the institutional shareholders.
Even if this is approved, we'll just get avoided again. Like how does this work if they approve it again.
It's a fascinating question, I think, and Tesla thinks the answer is that if they approve it again this time, it will stick, right, because what happened last time is they approved it and the judge found that the shaholders were not fully informed of all the conflicts of interest
involved in setting his pay package. Now they're fully informed, in part because, like Tesla went back and gave disclosures, but also they just attached the judge's opinion to the proxy statement to be like anything that the judge found bad here, you can read it, right. So I think
they have to be fully informed. There's no problem with the vote, but the law and this is not super clear, and they say in the proxy statement, we're not totally sure what the effect of this will be I think there's some argument that the disgruntled shareholder can sue again and the judge again gets to decide if the pay package is fair, and we kind of know she thinks it isn't, so it might get stricked down. But the other thing I want to say is that I don't
know what the disgruntl cherold. There's a guy named Richard Tournetto. I don't know what he thinks. I don't know if he wants to do this again. But you know who cares his lawyers who when they won in the dellar A court and they streck down this fifty six billion dollar pay package. They went to the court and they said, we want five point six billion dollars worth of Tesla stock as a fee for this win. Right, And their theory is we saved shareholders all this money by clawing
back the fifty six billion dollars from Elon Musk. If the shareholders give Elon Musk the fifty six billion dollars back, they haven't gotten the fee yet, right, it's still in court. Yeah, if they give the money back, what is their argument that they save the shareholders any money? Like, yeah, they've got a lot of money riding on the argument that Musk's compensation actually got clawed back, so they care.
Yeah, let's talk about the second part of what happened Texas. Are they going to run into this problem again in Texas moving to Texas? What does that do for Tesla?
They say that moving to Texas makes sense because they're big factories in Texas, their headquarters in Texas. Elon lives in Texas, and so they have to bet their incorporation to Texas because that just makes sense. No other company thinks that, right, Like, that's not really a thing. Like every company is incorporated in Delaware, and very few are located in Delaware. But it's what they say. The answer is,
nobody knows. There's a lot of Delaware corporate law and there's not a lot of corporate law anywhere else because most big companies that have big lawsuits are incorporated in Delaware, and so that's where all the cases are. Tesla says, and it's proxy that they think the law in Texas is mostly the same as the law in Delaware. I
think it's probably true. But everyone kind of assumes that if this had all happened in Texas, and if a shareholder had sued Elon Musk in Texas, they get back to the fifty six billion dollars, a Texas judge would have been like, Nah, Elon Musk can keep that money. There's no basis for assuming that nobody knows. It seems that way, and clearly Elon Musk assumes it, because as soon as the Delaware opinion came out, he's like, we're
moving to Texas. By the way, that happened, the opinion came out and he was like, we're moving to says right away, was saying it on Twitter. But Tesla now and it's proxy statement has to explain why it's moving to Texas, and it describes this very thorough process that it did to evaluate moving to Texas. So it formed a special committee of independent directors. There's one person on the committee.
Was his name Elon Musk.
No, No, it's a truly independent director. Her name is Kathleen Wilson Thompson. The special committee met sixteen times for more than twenty six hours, says the proxy, which is like a fun thing to imagine, Like I first imagined it as like I met four hours today with the money stuff committee. Like I was like typing on my computer. I was like, oh, there's a meeting, But in fact she met with like her lawyers, so she did. There were real meetings, but just she was the only director
at the meetings. But they the committee evaluated all fifty states to decide. It was like throwing darts, being like, which state should we move to, and like it just so happens that the best state turned out to be Texas. Coincidentally, the same thing that Elon Musk was treating about like two months ago. It's beautiful, so it worked out nicely.
Yeah, it's good that it turned out that way.
By the way, you asked you if the laws move with I wrote this before there's some small chance of a Delaware judge saying, no, you're not allowed to move to Texas because you're only moving to Texas to pay Elon.
Muskmore and which seems reasonable.
That is like a violation of your pretty shaddies to your Delaware shaholders, so we're going to stop you. I wrote that in like January. I thought that was like some extremely funny theoretical chance of that happening. Since then, there's been like a Delaware court decision that makes it less likely, So I don't think that's going to happen, but it would be really funny.
So I have one point, and I also have a question. I guess I'll start with the point, and that is that there is like a human psychology component to this, because I remember when this happened in January that it was voided this pay package. My suggestion to Elon Musk would be, why don't you just have Tesla do a dividends. Mark Zuckerberg did that with Meta. Now he's going to make like seven hundred million dollars a year. Mark Zuckerberg obviously owns a lot more Meta share, so it makes
more sense there. But you made the point to me that Elon mus isn't trying to make normal extremely wealthy man money. He has like insane aspirations that he needs all this money for.
He owns a minority of Tesla. He's a controlling Cheryl everbody owns like twenty percent of the stock, so a dividend would go mostly to other people, and like they're not so rolling in cash, they could pay it like tens of billions of dollars or dividends. Mark Zuckerwood gets a dividend because he likes to go water skiing or whatever it is that he does, right, hoverboarding, He.
Has cows, right house, Yeah.
Archery, I don't know, all sorts of normal things hobbies, Yeah, like moderately expensive hobbies some of them. But Elon Musk's hobbies are like brain implants, going to Mars, buying Twitter. I'm forgetting a few, but like, he's not like looking to spend money on a nice vacation. He's looking to have tens of billions of dollars to fund going to Mars, and so he needs these giant pay packages every now and then to pursue his next ambition.
You're not going to get that from your dividend checks. And then my question for you is what do you think is the most interesting way that this proxy vote could turn out? What would be the most interesting chain of events for you?
Look, I love the idea of a Delaware court preventing Musk from leaving for Texas. I think that would be extremely funny. But I actually think the simpler answer is funnier, which is, if the shareholders vote this down, that's wild, Like he'll quit it a huff on Twitter like that day. Yeah, it'll be an amazing thread of tweets and it will
be an amazing corporate tobaccle. Whatever time he's devoting to Tesla, he'll go and devote to some other wild thing and that'll be wild, and Tesla will like find its way, as you know, it'll get back that fifty million dollars and find its way as a company not controlled by a wild, wild sequence of events.
Now, in my mind would be the most interesting scenario as well, and then we could truly find out what the Elon Musk premium.
Is the thing about Elon Musk companies is that if you're an investor in Elon Musk companies, like you like Elon Musk, like that's just how it goes, right, Like you're not there because you like the assets but think they're mismanaged, Like you're there because you like Elon Musk. It would be really shocking for the investors in an Elon Musk company to vote against them in such a striking way.
Do you want to talk about Elon Musk for like twenty five more minutes or do you think we should move on?
I saw your look of like I have wrapped this up so nicely. And then Matt comes in with more stuff. I have some more stuff, but I'm gonna wrap it up. Never mind, Stay tuned, Stay tuned. There's always more, love, Katie. You're so impatient to get to James sain Street. Yeah.
I don't really know why not that it's not super interesting set the scene for us, what's going on?
So I wanted to talk you about this because Jane Street sued Millennium. Two Jane Street traders left Jane Street. They went to Millennium, and Jane Street thinks they took a complicated secret trade with them and are now making money for Millennium at the expensive Jane Street, and so they sued. I wanted to talk about it because the complaint is public, but it's heavily redacted because Jane Street is like, we have the secret trading strategy that's being
ruined by someone else copying it. They don't want to say what the strategy is, right, but they have to say what it is. They just have to black it out in the publicly filed version.
Yeah.
So I want to read the complaint and all.
The biopes go for it.
Okay, I'm not really going to read the whole complaint, but they did a trading investigation. They had this idea and they like tested it out, and the results confirmed Jane Street's initial findings, notwithstanding their facial improbability, and revealed that the market was bibe for certain classes of trades in the presence of specific market signals and underline conditions.
Probably we could have, like a podcast producer put a real beep over that, but I think I think I did a pretty pretty good peep.
Yeah, No, that definitely was a beeB anyway.
So, yeah, they have this trade. Yeah, we don't know what it is.
I want to know what it is.
So what we know about it is one that makes money like reliably for like some number of months at least. And two it's weird. Yeah, they really emphasize that it's weird. It's facial improbability, and they say that it was counterintuitive, unexpected, and initially met with significant skepticism and incredulity internally at Jane Street. It's really tantalizing. They're like, we found this
trade that you would not believe. It's so crazy. They like discovered it in like the data and they all sat it on and being like this can't be real. And then they tested it for like a year and they go, wow, it's real.
This is kind of silly. But reading about it and reading that line specifically made me think of like Rudolph the Red Nose reindeer, how everyone made fun of him and then his nose actually lit up and illuminated the night sky and they were like, Wow, this works. It's sort of a similar situation. Yes, something else in the Bloomberg News article, apparently Jane Street saw evidence that one of the traders who left in February he was using
the strategy. They figured it out because Jane Street said that its profits from using the strategy fell by fifty percent in March, a drop, it said, could only be attributable to quote, the entrance of a competitor using the same strategy. What is this trade?
It's apparently a trade where there's like capacity to make editor. I'm going to make up a number, make a million dollars a day, right, And Jane Sat was doing it and making a million dollars a day, right, and then Millennium starts to do it. Now that each make half a million dollars a day.
Right. Yeah, Because it's not like they lost money because someone else started doing it. They're just they're not the only person in this market anymore. Whatever this market is.
It's some sort of options market. It seems clear it's like some sort of options trade. Rumor is that it's not in the United States, but it is.
How does this work? Are we ever going to find out what the trade is? Or is it just a secret?
I'm going to keep asking. One of my favorite things about this complaint is that one of these traders leaves Jane straight from Millennium, and the complaint mentions how much money he's getting, because they're making the point like he's getting paid so much money. It can't be just because yeah, he's like whatever experience, whatever skill, he wouldn't be making that much money. He's getting paid that much money because he's bringing this Chaine Street trade.
To the millign people.
How much he's making, Yeah, the complaint says, based on conversations between shadow Wald and his colleagues at Jane Street, his companies from MILLENNAUMO, but so they don't know. He told his friends at Jane Street and then like Jane Street asked his friends how much he was making. They're like, all right, man, he's getting and then they put that thing complaint.
I can't imagine telling people so casually what I make, especially if it's a lot of money.
I can like, he's leaving, he's leaving a financial firm for another financial firm, and like he goes out to drinks with his friends and they're like, oh man, what are they giving you? And he's like boob right, like like that's why he's leaving, right, Like, it's not like this is a very mercenary business.
I don't know. He should have just bought a huge apartment and let that speak for itself. That is how much I'm making.
Well, he hadn't made it yet. I feel like the day of he's like, oh my, look at how much money I'm making. I also love the best possible amount of money to make is boob right, Like a number is so big that they can't publicize it.
That is pretty amazing. So I guess, yeah, the two things I want to know what the tradear how much this guy is making? Also, is this an unforced error by Jane Street which doesn't have non competes? Like could this all have been avoided had they had a non compete?
There are really like two different things, right, There's a noncompete, which usually it's like time limited. You can't go to another firm for six months, a year or two years. Yes, I think that would avoid that here, because what's it going to be like in a year, Like it seems unlikely. I don't know if the strategy is, but it seems unlikely Jane Street will still be making a lot of money on the strategy in a year because someone will
notice it. Somehow Alpha gets competed away all over the place. Whatever this weird counterintuitive strategy is, Like, probably it'll decay.
I have an idea, what maybe it's uh, this is half a joke. This is a joke. Actually closed end fund arbitrages.
Oh man, you love closed end trying evertise, I'm thinking it's not that, but right, so if you have a non compete and like the guy goes and sits on a beach for a year and then he comes back, whatever he knew a year ago is just not valuable anymore.
It's not as valuable, and so that solves the problem. Now, it doesn't always solve every problem, because you know, you do have like a confidentiality agreement about IP because like there's some stuff that has value longer term, like if you really know how, like Jane Street Systems, there's some chance that two years from now you could sell that to someone and it would be valuable to them. Right. So Jane Street does not have non competes, but they
have confidentiality agreements. That's how you can't use what you learn here somewhere else. You know. They say in the complaint like, well, it's typical for people to take some time off between firms. This guy didn't. It's like, it's not typical. It's not like people just feel like taking some time off. They do. Yeah, I would, but a lot of people don't. It's typical because usually firms have non competes that require them to take time off. Yeah,
and he didn't. And so the impression from the complaint is that he had a real time sensitive trade and he's like I got to start the next day to make as much money as I can from.
This trade, and that's what he did allegedly.
I don't. I think it's interesting because, like the non compete is a really good solution because like it's clear, m you know that whatever the time period is, so let's say it's a year, you know, you can't go work for the competing firm for a year, and then after that you can What's interesting here is Jane Street
is arguing that these guys stole their intellectual property. As of today Thursday, we don't have Millennium's response, but I assume their response be something like, no, we didn't, we didn't steal their intellectual poverty. But there's like this wide overlap where if you work at a financial firm doing closed un fund arbitrage, right, and then you leave and you go to another financial firm, and you're like, I'm going to close in fund.
Arbittrge, I'm going to find closed on funds with huge discounts. Right.
You're not gonna like forget everything you learned at the first firm, right, Like there's some amount of just like general skills and knowledge building and just like market experience that everyone understands is portable and goes with you, Like if you like download the code from your first firm, like that's bad, right, But a lot of stuff it's like the general experiences that you have at one firm are going to inform what you do at the next firm.
And it's I think sort of hard to tease out which is which Sometimes which is why gardening leave is such a good solution, because it's like you do nothing for a year, and then after that it's like we don't have to worry about it. Here, Like Jane Street makes it sound like this is a very complicated, very counterintuitive and weird trade that like is their secret sauce.
But what if it's just like noticing that the price is if some options are like too low, and like clicking on them right like then like kind of weird to say, like you have to forget that you noticed that when you moved to another firm.
My heart always hurts when I'm in a conversation about gardening leave because I've never been on gardening leave. I will never be on gardening leave. It sounds idyllic.
When I left investment banking for deal Breaker, the Great Wall Street comedy blog, I had, I want to say, three months of.
Gardening leave sounds great.
I sat on my catch being terrified. I regret it so much. I really wasted my gardening leave because I was like, I have made this huge career change. I'm getting paid so much less money. This is around the time that like Goldman had that programmer who still code, they had him prosecuted for still encoding. He went to jail for a while, and so I spent some of my time thinking Goldman's going to kill me eventually. Like my last week of gardening leave, I talked to like
a Goldman PR person. He's like, no, this is great, We're excited for you. It was like so worried. But in any case, I spent my gardening leave being nervous and not partying.
Oh I hate that.
Yeah, yeah, it's really a shame. I did get to experience gardening leave once, but I didn't get to really enjoy it.
Gardening leave wasn't that great. Take a big sip of water. Let's get into hunter Brook. This is a meati.
One hunter It's a hedge fund.
Yeah, this is something that you and I have talked.
About a lot in our private conversation.
In our private conversations. Maybe explain what hunter Brook is and we're pronouncing it with vowels.
Yes, the thing is called hunter Brook. Their website is it's h n t rb rka hunter Brook is. I don't know how to describe it. Say it's a headphone. That's also our newspaper. Sometimes I think it's a activist short hedge fund that is very good at getting me to pay attention to it.
Yeah, I don't know if I've seen it anywhere else, but maybe I'm just not looking at this.
No. How to Work is is a media organization that does like investigative reporting around the world to find interesting news, and it funds its reporters by they take their scoops and they give them to its affiliated hedge fund. And if the hedge fund is like this is a market moving scoop, then they trade on it and then they publish the scoop and then the stock goes up or
down or whatever it's about. The market moves, and then the hedge fund makes money, and it gives some of the money to the reporters to pay for the continued reporting. It's not a typical journalistic business model.
True.
All journalistic business models involve some conflicts of interests.
True.
Possibly it maybe involves a little bit more conflict of ventures. Yeah, because like your incentive is to make your story as market moving as possible. If you find some like bad stuff about a company, and then I'll see you find some good stuff about the company, and like also it's like not that bad and like there's some mitigating factors. You're tempted to just be like, this is the worst company in the world, or this is the best company in the world, because you're on the move the stock
price as much as possible. Yeah, So it is a conflict in that way.
I guess the part that feels strange to me is that the hedge fund sees it first before it's published.
And that's the whole part I know, there's no other part. That's how they make money.
Well, in terms of like how they report things out, they don't talk to insiders. They can't talk to insiders.
If you're like a regular journalist at a regular journalistic publication, you can like call an insider at a company and be like, hey, is it doing fraud. If the insiders like, yes, it's doing fraud. Here are some secret documents proving it, you're like, oh my god, this is a great scoop, right, But if you're a Hunter Book and you do that, then you're like, oh, no, this is inside information. We can't trade on it. So they try to stay away from information underli on published sources.
So let's talk about what Hunter Book has done so far. They officially debuted in early April. I believe their first article was on United Wholesale mortgage. Now they've come out with another splashy report that you wrote about. I'm impressed, honestly by the volume so far, because there's a lot of work that goes into investigative journalism of this degree.
Also like into activist short selling, the sort of like well known activist short selling funds. You know, every so often they'll put up a short report, but it's not like a daily news meeting to figure out what's going to go on. The real meeting is like somewhere in between.
Right.
My question when they launched was like, what's it going to look like on the second day, because the first day it launches the big investigation. The second day is that like bumped down the feed so they can do like more local news, and that's there is no kind of looks like a short seller's website where it's like that big report is on top for a week or so.
But now it looks a little bit more like a news organization where like they've had two like big stories in the sense of like kind of short investigations this week, but there's like a spinoff story for one of them. It's like they's the other stuff. So one of the stories this week was like an oil company that has been telling investors it's going to reopen a trilling platform and Hunter Bruk thinks they're not. And it's just like
a very straightforward kind of small short bet. It's like this company is going to have like a little bit worse news than the market expects, you know, So they traded on that. I don't know. That almost feels like something like a hedge finanalyst would come up with and trade on and not bother to publish. It's just not
that interesting a news story, right. But the other one they had was about Pasco, the big Korean like steel company and Conglomberate doing a lot of work with very unpleasant military hunter and Myanmar, and that one they didn't trade on. Yeah, they said they did this big investigation and they said, we're not trading on this, and I
was curious why. And I think the two leading answers are one that it might not be that market moving, which is like you can think of that as being like a depressing story of like complicity and human rights abuses actually doesn't matter to share.
Olders, Cold Embrace of capitalism.
Or you can be like you know, one reader email to be like Posca's involvement in Men war has actually been known for a long time. It's like been on an ESG exclusion list. Like it might not be market moving because like it's news to you, it's news to many people, it's news to many of your general interest readers, but it may not be news to the market.
Right.
The other explanation for why they didn't short Pasco that I find much funnier is that South Korea has banned a short selling.
Maybe like the winner there, it could be.
It could honestly be either because like it's not like it's huge market moving news.
I don't know. It seems like a hard business journalism. Yes, it's bone crushingly hard, but also short selling is super hard too, especially in this market. But also there's the question of like, even if you are right, your thesis is right, there's no guarantee that the stock is going to do what you think it's going to do. And I think that's happened to a lot of short sellers in recent history.
People hate short sellers, Yeah, it is part of it, and in particular, like when you talk about recent history, Like since like the memestock era, if it gets out that you are short a stock, that stock could go to the moon just because people are mad at you, to the point that, like some number of activist short sellers have gotten out of the business or said they'd get out of.
The business, have gone underground.
Gone underground because like it used to be that if you found a company that you thought was a fraud and you published a report saying it's a fraud, people would read it, and if you were right and convincing, then the stock would go down. Now, if you think of company's a fraud and you publish that report, people on Reddit might say, we have to make that stock go up to punish the evil short seller. So it's
just not as worth it. One possible advantage of the Hunter Brick business model is like, to the extent they convince people that they're a media company and not a short seller, you like somewhat avoid that. Instead of instead of being like, ah, this hedge fund is shorting the stock, let's make it go up, you're like, oh, they've published this media company published a report about human rights abuses.
That's bad, right, Like, yeah, there's some chance of you like getting a little bit more of a sympathetic audience.
Well, we'll see if they do take a shot at a stock that has any.
It'd be amazing if they were like game Stop, not a very good company.
I'm gonna say, like, if they come after a company that has any chance of becoming a meme stock, like I think about United Wholesale Mortgage, I don't even think Wall Street Bets could get excited about that one. It just it doesn't have that curb appeal.
That's right. The oil company they went after this week is interesting just because it's like a six hundred million dollar market cut. Like you're not playing in territory where like Ro Street Bets gonna have some fun.
Did you want to talk to you on musk worn.
And that was the Money Stuff Podcast.
I'm Matt Levian and I'm Katie Greifelt.
You can find my work by subscribing to the Money Stuff newsletter on.
And you can find me on Bloomberg TV every day between ten to eleven am Eastern.
We'd love to hear from you. You can send an email to Moneypod at Bloomberg dot net. Ask us a question and we find answer it on air.
You can also subscribe to our show wherever you're listening right now and leave us a review. It helps some more people find the show.
The Money Step Podcast is produced by anim Masaracus and Moses.
And our theme music was composed by Blake Maples.
Brandon Francis Nenham is our executive producer, and.
Sage Bauman is Bloomberg's head of podcast.
Thanks for listening to The Money Stuff Podcast. We'll be back next week with more boo