While it shows investors aren't concerned about X ability to pay back its loan term, it isn't a proxy for valuation. Banks usually sell issued debt to investors soon after the debt is issued. In this case it took 2 years.
Ah yes, sold Feb 15 2025[1]...right as the CEO took over running the US government and raided the US treasury department.
I'm sure this is a completely above board sale that definitely does not represent a legal-if-you-don't-look-at-it way to bribe the de facto head of the US government / the expectation of massive corruption (ala: Tesla's stock price rising on the news Elon Musk was running DOGE - weird right? The CEO is apparently going to be too busy to run the company because he's now running the government so the stock price goes up...to be fair, technically that's not a bad bet)
Because we know the new administration definitely wouldn't take bribes in the form of financial instruments[2]. Definitely no history of it[3].
> a legal-if-you-don't-look-at-it way to bribe the de facto head of the US government / the expectation of massive corruption
How does the sale of the debt help Elon Musk or Trump? They don't own that debt, they don't make money off that debt. Do you expect the fund managers to forgive the debt as a bribe? That would clearly be a bribe, but until that happens, it isn't and I don't think it is terribly likely.
There are plenty of real things to be upset over, you don't need to make up imaginary ones. All that does is dilute the real concerns and make your opposition less effective.
I'm saying when you see a lot of smoke coming from a house, the neighbours probably didn't just buy an industrial sized BBQ and suddenly decide to have a huge cook off after some kids threw a bottle through the window.
[3] is an unnecessarily verbose story with practically no substance. In 2017 a $10m cash withdrawal was made to a Research and Studies Center said to have a “relationship with the Egyptian General Intelligence Agency.”
Using those facts, and the fact Trump was friendly with Sisi at a UN event, an entire investigation was launched to see if Trump was the final recipient.
If you look at it with the counter assumption of Trump being innocent, there still seems to be a reasonable motive for all this.
The FBI wanted information about an Egyptian cash withdrawal from one of Egypt’s own banks, subpoenaed them by bringing up presidential relevancy, and punished them $50k a day until the bank sent the documents.
There's a gap between "no you can't see the dragon in my garage, he's invisible, intangible, emits no body heat, and has no gravitational field" and "here's some citations to back up my belief".
Are the citations sufficient? Dunno. Just saying this isn't what you call it.
