Thread by @JimPGillies

Regarding the present $CLOV and @HindenburgRes "dust-up"...

...for my money it sure looks like Hindenburg's got the goods as they did when they took down Trevor Milton/$NKLA.

1/x

They seem, somewhat refreshingly (snark directed at @CitronResearch) to be able to defend/source every point they make, while similarly ably refuting every counter-point from $CLOV.

2/x

Reading the $CLOV rebuttal to Hindenburg, I'm reminded of $NKLA's original "rebuttal" of the Hindenburg report. Both responses are out of the same playbook: Downplay the assertions that cannot be denied (the Nikola truck rolling down a hill; Clover under DOJ investigation)

3/x

While simultaneously decrying criticism as "false", "misleading", "designed to manipulate the market", "ad-hominem attacks", "sweeping inaccuracies", gross mischaracterizations", et cetera.

All are real assertions from $NKLA and $CLOV responses - which are from which?

4/x

Hint: the ones taken from $CLOV are the ones that SPECIFICALLY could be leveled while trying to maintain credibility after not disclosing an ongoing DOJ investigation. I dunno man...my old ethics profs were pretty rigid on the whole, "Disclose everything, always" thing.

5/x

$CLOV and @chamath - Investors shouldn't be learning such things from a third party short seller. Disclose it. Openly welcome inquiry stemming from that disclosure. If truly immaterial, it will become readily apparent. Instead you chose to downplay, dare I say, hide, it.

6/x

Not a good look.

Similarly, dismissing a "true fact" such as Clover's CEO previously running a hospital that charged the highest ER rates in the country (as per the NYT on 16-May-2013) as an "ad hominem attack" is weak sauce.

7/x

Such "Mischaracterization" (to appropriate a word from the $CLOV rebuttal) suggests that the authors of the Clover response don't actually know the definition of an "ad hominem" attack, but figure if they dismiss it as such, they don't actually have to answer to the point.

8/x

Another criticism from $CLOV:

"Importantly, the short seller firm did not contact Clover, and we had no knowledge of the short seller report prior to it being made publicly available."

Guess what....they don't have to! You are not owed "editorial control".

9/x

To me this is $CLOV trying to control the narrative as if they DO have such editorial rights.

There's a lot more to go through that, well, I'll not add much value beyond encouraging you to read the following:

10/x

The original Hindenburg Report: hindenburgresearch.com/clover/

The Clover Health Response: medium.com/clover-off-the…

The Hindenburg Rebuttal: hindenburgresearch.com/our-response-t…

11/x

I dunno man...sure seems like something is here, and I can't be the only one who finds the $CLOV response lacking.

I'll close with the reminder that Hindenburg's original short report on $NKLA was released on 10-Sep-2020.
hindenburgresearch.com/nikola/

12/x

$NKLA "Set the Record Straight" on the report they deemed "False and Misleading" on 14-Sep-2020.
prnewswire.com/news-releases/…

It was so "False and Misleading" that it prompted founder/Chairman Trevor Milton to resign six days later.
prnewswire.com/news-releases/…

13/x

A week-and-a-half to go from short report to resignation of the founder/Chairman.

I'm reminded of that sequence of events as I read today of Clover confirming the DOJ investigation uncovered by Hindenburg, and of a new SEC investigation into Clover.

I'm sure it's all fine.

/14