The McKinsey study started by affirming as universally-known truth that diversity matters. Hence why it was not very surprising that it circled back to having data confirming that unsubstantiated claim. Very likely a healthy dose of confirmation bias in selecting data and how to calculate the diversity index. Although, to be fair, it also looks like very sparse in terms of substantiated statistical methodology/data sets.
But it seems to me that the main difference between these two approaches is down to how they calculate the diversity index of the S&P 500 companies. So Iâd be curious to see how that difference plays out on the exact same data set.
Still the point about direction of causality is interesting. Iâm not sure why McKinsey study looked at the composition of the boards on a given year and looked at performance in 4-5 preceding years. Were the leadership of all these companies the same over these years? That seems rather unlikely to be the case for all companies. Instead, why not integrate the annual performance over time as a function of diversity index within each company, something Green and Hand also failed to do? Another way to go about it - although still crude - could be to recalculate the diversity indices of all companies for each year of the performance period evaluated and take an average of each companyâs 4-5 indices.
Either way, very good to point out that the correlation is likely questionable - or very dependent on diversity index - and that direction of causality is also suspect.
making DJT great again. A billion here, a billion there, pretty soon you can afford the legal bills to run as a Republican.
Iâm sure the various weird press releases out of the trump media company blaming ânaked shortsâ and talking up the stock has absolutely nothing to do with making sure the price stays above the threshold until tomorrowâs close.
Pretty smart. Theyâd be foolish to deny that DJT is a meme stock so they understand that media manipulation is crucial to keeping the price of the stock up - at least for now.
If it were only down to fundamentals, even accounting for difficult valuation, price would drop to a 10th (or under) of the current price and theyâd miss out on the earnout shares promised in the merger.
Gateway Pundit, a conservative online news site, has filed bankruptcy over lawsuits about their 2020 election coverage.
The plaintiffs say that the website spread misinformation saying that Freeman and Moss conspired to remove poll watchers from the room where they were counting ballots, produced âsecret suitcasesâ filled with illegal ballots and ran those ballots through the vote-counting machines âmultiple times.â
I think some people are finding out now but that model had worked for a while for Alex Jones and clones. You just need to be a bit more careful to avoid costly lawsuits.
But the blueprint for raking money in first saying whatever will get you clicks/sell merch, then as needed apologizing/retracting statements saying you had been taken out of context, misunderstood, you misinterpreted early conflicting reports, now know better, or any similar BS (in other words the bare minimum to keep you out of courts), is still the bread and butter of these sites. Itâs just continually testing the boundaries of how to operate on this model without too high legal costs.
Ended badly tho. he got a $B judgment against him for those fake school shooting claims, so heâs bankrupt and theyâre going to take ~all his money.
Like I said, it worked âfor a whileâ. But he found out that there really are some lines that are not worth crossing no matter how much revenue that can temporarily generate. And he also proved that BK law protections do not protect you from paying all damages.
I suspect their prospects depend a lot on winning, or only losing a small amount, in a voting machine defamation case over the 2020 election. Gotta love the claims by the voting companyâŚ
âSmartmatic did not participate in rigging the 2020 electionâŚ
They sure arenât willing to make any categorical statements about the rigging, just that they claim they werenât involved and shouldnât be tarred with the same brush as Dominion, etc.
Thatâs putting it mildly with their court date scheduled for this month. Since Smartmatic vs. Newsmax suit is filed in the same court that handled the Dominion vs. Fox case, Newsmax may badly need very substantial IPO proceeds if they want to settle for $787M like Fox did.
Although I wonder whatâd happen to the IPO in case they wanted to settle for a confidential amount like OAN did vs Smartmatic. Wouldnât the SEC require that they disclose the terms of such a settlement as part of their financial statement?
I suspect that Fox News has an audience somewhere on the order of 10 times that of Newsmax. I also suspect that a proportional payout would still be difficult for them to absorb.
Only if they didnât completely settle it before publishing their data for the IPO, and that it had no material effect on future assets or liabilities. At least, I think so.
That was my first impression when I saw the headline, but itâs both way too soon with their court case for the IPO proceeds to help, and yes, of course it would have to be disclosed. But if the legal liability looked large enough to put them into bankruptcy, I donât know who will buy the IPO.
That is fair. I donât know how they determine these settlement amounts. But a potential settlement for Newsmax may be closer to that which OAN agreed to.
I think the settlement amount would effectively be disclosed either way. If itâs completely settled by the time the IPO is approved, itâll appear as a large recent write-off on their financial statement. And if they have not yet paid the settlement amount, then itâs a liability that youâd think theyâd be forced to disclose as itâll affect future earnings.
Yeah itâs hard to imagine investing in an IPO knowing your money will go first into a legal settlement effectively decreasing the company value right off the bat.
