Just this guy, you know?

  • 0 Posts
  • 186 Comments
Joined 1 年前
cake
Cake day: 2023年6月11日

help-circle
  • It’s all about tone. The original comment was incredibly combative and hyperbolic (“I utterly loathe Mass Effect. I consider it one of the worst pieces of science-fiction ever created.”) so much so that it would easily be mistaken for flamebait given the thread was likely to attract fans of the series.

    It certainly didn’t strike me as the start of an open-minded conversation.

    But in hindsight I should’ve just downvoted and moved on rather than commenting as I did, so that’s on me.



  • zaphod@lemmy.catoGaming@beehaw.orgLet's discuss: Mass Effect
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    5 个月前

    Ahh yes, the old “sticks and stones” defense that completely ignores human nature and basic decency. I use the same logic when I tell other people their babies are ugly. “Look, if you ask me your kid is an eyesore but it’s just my opinion so I don’t know why you’re so mad right now…”







  • zaphod@lemmy.catoA Boring Dystopia@lemmy.worldGet rid of landlords...
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    5 个月前

    My tenants are living in a house that they wouldn’t be able to afford on their own in today’s market.

    Yes, but: why is the market in the state it’s in? It couldn’t be because a large supply of housing is locked up by landlords, thereby artificially curtailing supply and driving up prices…



  • My favourite was this bit:

    Poilievre said many Canadians already have access to drug coverage through workplace plans that may offer better benefits than those the NDP-backed Liberal plan eventually could offer.

    A 2022 Conference Board of Canada report found that about 24.6 million Canadians are already enrolled in private drug plans.

    Disappointed in the CBC here. What they should’ve said is that over 15 million people are not enrolled in a private drug plan, as most people won’t do the math and 24.6M people seems like a big number.

    Moreover, many of the people most in need of drugs–the elderly, disabled, and those dealing with chronic health conditions–are far less likely to be employed and have access to coverage.






  • Shorting before the merger wouldn’t have made any sense: the stock price went from around $17.50 to over $50 within the first week of trading and probably won’t come back to earth for a while. Meanwhile borrowing costs, after that initial spike when the stock was at its highest, were astronomical, so it wasn’t economical to do it right after, either.

    The real 4D chess would be to get that lockup waived, short the stock now (borrowing costs have since fallen back to earth), sell your shares, then close out the short after the price drops (sure, you run the risk that the SEC goes after you for stock manipulation, but I doubt Trump cares).



  • Nope. Unless the lockup is waived or modified by the board, Trump cannot “lend, offer, pledge, hypothecate, encumber, donate, assign, sell, contract to sell … or otherwise transfer or dispose of” his shares (this language is well-tested boilerplate for any lockup agreement). In case it’s not clear, that covers using them to get a leveraged loan.

    Far more likely is the board simply waives the lockup which frees him to do whatever he wants, in which case my bet is he just sells off some or all of his stake 'cuz who gives a shit if one of his cult members catches the falling knife.


  • The board can vote to waive it. That’s… how boards work. They could vote to waive Junior’s and Nunes’ lockups, too, if they wanted to. The only recourse shareholders would have is a lawsuit.

    Edit: And if you don’t want to believe me, maybe you’ll believe a professional financial writer:

    https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2024-03-19/banks-can-get-emissions-off-the-books

    Also, Trump’s shares are subject to a lockup agreement, so he’s not allowed to “lend, offer, pledge, hypothecate, encumber, donate, assign, sell, contract to sell … or otherwise transfer or dispose of” his shares for six months, which presumably covers using them as collateral for a loan (or appeals bond). But the agreement is between Trump and DWAC, and DWAC could just waive it. It is not best practices or anything, as a capital markets matter, to waive the lockup an hour after the merger, but I think it is possible. Ordinarily you don’t do it because shareholders will be mad about additional shares flooding the market, but (1) if he just pledges his shares to a bank, they won’t flood the market, and (2) the shareholders are presumably Trump fans and will be happy to help him fund his legal bills. Probably the stock would go up if they gave him a limited waiver for this.

    Edit 2: This, by the way, is why folks are so critical of the Tesla board and why Elon’s recent pay package was rescinded by a judge, who determined the board did not act in the best interests of the shareholders by approving that package; rather, they concluded the board was too close to, and too beholden to, Elon to be able to effectively negotiate that package.

    Boards are basically the last line of defense when it comes to things like pay packages and so forth, but that doesn’t stop shenanigans from happening, hence shareholder lawsuits, which are basically the final recourse for shareholders to hold boards to account.


  • People keep saying trump wasn’t prevented from selling for 6 months, and I have no idea why.

    So, yes, he’s currently subject to a lockup agreement. But, the board can always waive that agreement, and given the board is made up of Trump acolytes, there’s no reason to take it too seriously (yes, if they did that, it could be subject to a shareholder lawsuit if a sale resulted in a plunge in the share price, based on the claim that the board was failing in its fiduciary duty, but by the time any such trial made its way through the courts, it probably wouldn’t matter).