More from Business
The Mother of All Squeezes
How Volkswagen went from being on the brink of bankruptcy to the most valuable company in the world in two days
/THREAD/
1/ At the peak of the 2008 financial crisis, Volkswagen was considered a very likely candidate for bankruptcy.
Heavily indebted and already financially struggling before 2008, with car sales expected to plummet due to the ongoing global crisis.
2/ With GM and Chrysler filing for bankruptcy in 2009, shorting the VW stock would seem a safe bet.
If you are not familiar with stock shorts and short squeezes check my thread
3/ On October 26, 2008, Porsche announced it had increased its stake at VW from 30% to 74%.
This was a surprise to many who were led to believe that Porsche wasn't planning a takeover of VW, based on the company's announcements.
4/ Before the announcement, the short interest was approximately 13% of the outstanding shares, a number considered relatively low.
Porsche had a 30% stake, the Lower Saxony government fund held 20% of the shares, and another 5% was held by index funds.
How Volkswagen went from being on the brink of bankruptcy to the most valuable company in the world in two days
/THREAD/

1/ At the peak of the 2008 financial crisis, Volkswagen was considered a very likely candidate for bankruptcy.
Heavily indebted and already financially struggling before 2008, with car sales expected to plummet due to the ongoing global crisis.

2/ With GM and Chrysler filing for bankruptcy in 2009, shorting the VW stock would seem a safe bet.
If you are not familiar with stock shorts and short squeezes check my thread
Shorts, Squeezes, and Betting Against Stocks
— Kostas on FIRE \U0001f525 (@itsKostasOnFIRE) January 27, 2021
What is short selling, how is it used and why is it risky?
/THREAD/ pic.twitter.com/PyDd208hFe
3/ On October 26, 2008, Porsche announced it had increased its stake at VW from 30% to 74%.
This was a surprise to many who were led to believe that Porsche wasn't planning a takeover of VW, based on the company's announcements.

4/ Before the announcement, the short interest was approximately 13% of the outstanding shares, a number considered relatively low.
Porsche had a 30% stake, the Lower Saxony government fund held 20% of the shares, and another 5% was held by index funds.

You May Also Like
This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.

Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)

There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.

At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?