Thread by @HindenburgRes

Tonight, CNBC released a bombshell article detailing multiple allegations of sexual abuse perpetrated by Trevor Milton, $NKLA founder, current largest shareholder (with ~24% ownership), recent Executive Chairman and former CEO.

(1/x)

cnbc.com/2020/09/29/two…

In light of the latest, let’s discuss the company’s backers, partners and bankers that have all recently tried to absolve themselves of liability by assuring the market and the public of their extensive due-diligence on $NKLA.

Following our report, which contained details of dozens of material false statements by $NKLA, the company failed to even attempt to answer 43 of 53 questions we raised.

Instead, it addressed roughly 10 questions, largely confirming our findings, and ignored the rest.

Steve Girsky sponsored $NKLA's go-public transaction, brokered the $GM deal and is now Chairman.

Girsky claimed he brought “an army” to diligence Nikola prior to his involvement.

Given everything, one might have expected Girsky to resign. Instead, he’s now IN CHARGE.

Jeff Ubben formerly served as director and key shareholder of Valeant Pharmaceuticals prior to its spectacular collapse. His fund hand-picked Valeant’s CEO, who later settled SEC securities fraud charges...

Ubben now serves as director and Chair of $NKLA's corporate governance committee.

Per a recent interview with Bloomberg, Ubben can’t seem to understand why everyone is skeptical, insisting that Nikola’s partners must have done some due diligence.

Almost 39% of investment bank Cowen’s Q2 operating income was from its investment in $NKLA, according to its quarterly report.

Despite the massive conflict of interest, Cowen has maintained a street high price target of $79/share, insisting it has done its research on management

So which is it—did $NKLA's backers and partners not do any meaningful due diligence?

Or did they all do extensive vetting as they claimed, find the obvious false statements, faked product demos and sexual abuse allegations, then decide to support the company anyways?

$NKLA's brand has gone from tarnished to toxic.

Mary Barra should answer: Will GM put its 112-year brand at risk for $NKLA stock that will likely be worthless by the time $GM can sell, and for cash that likely won’t be there when it comes time to spend?

Additionally, for Bosch, CNH, and $NKLA's other remaining partners, how long are they going to continue to defend the indefensible in order to salvage locked-up shares and reputations? Are they better off on their own?

As to the inevitable retort of “Milton is out therefore this is all in the past”; does anyone actually believe that?

Milton still owns almost a quarter of the company, and $NKLA will be dealing with the aftermath of his “legacy” for years to come.

Per SEC filings:

Furthermore, in Milton’s place now stand a group of executives and directors who either missed everything or willfully ignored all these glaring issues on the promised path to riches.

On a positive note, we want to commend the women who have spoken out. It takes serious courage to share these extremely vulnerable experiences publicly, especially about a powerful billionaire who wishes to suppress them. Bravo